Jonathan Haidt\u2019s<\/strong> The Anxious Generation<\/strong> examines the recent rise in youth mental illness, attributing it to increased smartphone and social media use alongside the decline of unsupervised play. While it shares valuable insights into this pressing issue, Haidt\u2019s inconsistent evidence base and reliance on generalisations and metaphor make for a somewhat frustrating book, writes Judith Glaesser<\/strong>.<\/em><\/p>\n The Anxious Generation: How t<\/em>he Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness.<\/em> Jonathan Haidt. Penguin. 2025 (paperback); 2024 (hardback).<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Jonathan Haidt\u2019s The Anxious Generation<\/em><\/a> is firmly in the former camp. He describes an apparent rise of mental illness in young people having occurred since roughly the 2010s, and he identifies the increase of smartphone and social media use by adolescents and the decline of unsupervised play since the 1970s as plausible causes. To support these claims, he draws on a wealth of academic research as well as anecdotes and personal views, resulting in a book which is partly a popular science book and partly a parenting manual. Haidt is a social psychologist (the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership at\u00a0New York University\u2019s Stern School of Business<\/a>) rather than a clinical psychologist or a childhood or media researcher, and accordingly the original research he draws upon was mostly conducted by other scholars. However, together with his research assistant Zach Rausch he has expertly collected and reviewed<\/a> a huge body of literature which provides him with evidence for his claims.<\/p>\n Social media companies such as Facebook\/Meta have knowingly drawn on relevant psychological research to create addictive products<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The book is strongest where it proposes the rise of social media use as an explanation for the increasing numbers of young people reporting mental illness, especially anxiety and depression. Haidt draws on numerous observational and experimental studies, and he describes plausible mechanisms which, taken together, suggest that the joint appearance of smartphones and the rise in psychological ill-health is more than a coincidence. In support of his argument, he also suggests that social media companies such as Facebook\/Meta have knowingly drawn on relevant psychological research to create addictive products, as reported<\/a> by the whistleblower Frances Haugen (133). Throughout, he acknowledges gaps and uncertainties in the research; factual errors<\/a> which emerged following publication of the book and responses<\/a> to some of his critics\u2019 points can be found online.<\/p>\n Girls more likely to use social media and boys more likely to consume pornography and to play video games. The rise in anxiety and depression is more pronounced in girls.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Haidt notes differences both in the way girls and boys use smartphones and in their mental health outcomes, with girls more likely to use social media and boys more likely to consume pornography and to play video games. The rise in anxiety and depression is more pronounced in girls. Problems experienced by boys seem to have started before the widespread use of smartphones, with one potential reason being that gaming was possible before their arrival.<\/p>\n While the rise in smartphone and social media use is unlikely to be the only cause of the rise in mental illness, it is not obvious why Haidt focuses on just one additional potential explanation: the decrease of opportunities for unsupervised play and other activities in childhood, a topic explored in his earlier book<\/a> with Greg Lukianoff. The timing makes this a less likely candidate for the explanation of the rise in mental illness, given that children and adolescents\u2019 opportunities for unsupervised activities began to decline in the 1970s.<\/p>\n Haidt makes it sound as though rules for bringing up children today can be directly deduced from evolution, even though humankind has evolved over millennia in greatly differing and changing environments.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n This is partly why the evidence base is much less convincing here. In the chapters discussing the loss of unsupervised play and related developments, Haidt makes much more use of metaphors and rhetorical questions rather than drawing on scientific evidence. It is plausible that there is cause for concern given the developments he describes, but there is a certain mental leap required to believe that, for example, because young trees require wind to grow resiliently, young children require exposure to stress in order to grow up healthily (72). Haidt makes it sound as though rules for bringing up children today can be directly deduced from evolution, even though humankind has evolved over millennia in greatly differing and changing environments. In addition, developments such as the loss of unsupervised activities for children are most pronounced in the US, as Haidt himself acknowledges, but he suggests that the rise in mental illness is a global phenomenon, making these developments less suitable as an explanation.<\/p>\n As well as analysing possible causes for the rise in mental illness, Haidt offers suggestions for remedial action. Relating to smartphone use and social media, his proposed remedies include not giving smartphones to children and young adolescents, enforcing age restrictions on social media use, keeping schools phone-free, and designing social media to make them less addictive. Addressing his second proposed cause, he suggests offering more opportunities for unsupervised activities and encouraging independence in children and young people. Again, the evidence base for the former issue seems more secure. Some of the recommendations concerning the latter are fairly US-centric and\/or only relevant for a particular group (that described in the UK as middle-class). The cases he references of parents finding themselves in conflict with the law for not supervising their children closely enough all happened in the US, and suggestions such as embarking on a \u201cgap year\u201d before college (284) will not be realistic or relevant for everyone. The evidence base seems even less secure for the suggestions made in the chapter entitled \u201cSpiritual Elevation and Degradation\u201d which contains a mix of personal anecdote, descriptions of religious and spiritual rituals as well as some research on spiritual practices such as shared sacredness, embodiment and finding awe in nature, ie, topics which are only loosely linked to the rest of the book.<\/p>\n It is also simplistic largely to ignore the great differences between adolescents, some or even many of whom interact with smartphones and social media with apparently no ill effects.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n In terms of style, some of the terminology Haidt coins seems almost sensationalist: the \u201cfour foundational harms\u201d (Social Deprivation, Sleep Deprivation, Attention Fragmentation, and Addiction, 113), or indeed the \u201cGreat Rewiring of childhood\u201d and \u201can epidemic of mental illness\u201d mentioned in the book\u2019s title. In addition, there are some passages which simplify and overgeneralise. For example, Haidt employs simple binaries such as \u201cplay-based\u201d vs. \u201cphone-based\u201d childhoods or \u201cdiscover mode\u201d vs. \u201cdefend mode\u201d when the reality is likely to be more nuanced. It is also simplistic largely to ignore the great differences between adolescents, some or even many of whom interact with smartphones and social media with apparently no ill effects. To this point, he notes that around seven percent of boys have \u201cproblematic\u201d gaming behaviour (191). This is of course a problem to be taken seriously, but it concerns only a minority of adolescents despite most of them having access to video games.<\/p>\n All of this makes for a somewhat frustrating book. Both the rise in youth mental illness and the effects of smartphones and social media are critical topics to analyse, and the book\u2019s weaknesses mean that it may be too easy to dismiss the valid concerns parents and society at large hold around them. However, not everyone will agree on what constitutes weaknesses, and Haidt\u2019s narrative arc from evolution via spirituality and play-based childhoods to the effects of social media may appeal to many. In sum, the book contains much to interest a wide range of readers, both from within academia and beyond, contributing to one of the key debates of our time.<\/p>\n Note:<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0This review gives the views of the author and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.<\/em><\/p>\n Image: <\/em><\/strong>BearFotos<\/a>\u00a0<\/em>on Shutterstock.<\/em><\/p>\n Enjoyed this post?\u00a0<\/em>Subscribe to our newsletter<\/em><\/a>\u00a0for a round-up of the latest reviews sent straight to your inbox every other Tuesday.<\/em><\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/blogsmedia.lse.ac.uk\/blogs.dir\/30\/files\/2025\/02\/The-Anxious-Generation-196x300.jpg\")
<\/a>The growing use of social media and smartphones in recent years has given rise to the question of whether this has led to, or at least been accompanied by, an increase in mental illness especially among young people. There is a large, though by no means unequivocal, body of research on the topic, with some scholars such as Jean Twenge<\/a> strongly suggesting that there is such a link, while others, eg Amy Orben<\/a>, see no clear evidence for it (see also, for example, here<\/a> and here<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"Print](\"https:\/\/cdn.printfriendly.com\/buttons\/printfriendly-button.png\")
<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"