technology

Why You Can't Put Down Your Phone — And What It's Doing to Your Mind

You pick up your phone to check one thing. Twenty minutes later, you are still there. Nothing of particular value has happened. You are not happier or more informed in any meaningful way. And yet something kept you.

That feeling — that your phone has a kind of superglue on it — is not a failure of willpower. It is the intended outcome of a design process that has been refined over decades specifically to produce it. Understanding how it works is the first step toward having a different relationship with your device. And for a significant number of people, it is also the first step toward understanding something more personal: why a habit that feels compulsive does not yield easily to ordinary self-discipline.

The Gambling Industry Did This First

The features that make social media apps difficult to put down did not originate in Silicon Valley. They were developed, iteratively and methodically, in the casinos of Las Vegas — beginning in the 1980s, when the casino industry replaced mechanical slot machines and physical card tables with digital versions.

The motivation was initially economic: digital machines were cheaper to maintain. But they also allowed casinos to add features — lights, sounds, animations — and more importantly, to run continuous large-scale experiments on millions of gamblers each year. Tweak the machine, measure how long people stay on it, keep the changes that increase engagement, repeat for decades.

The result, according to anthropologist Natasha Dow Schull, who spent 15 years researching machine gambling, was the most addictive form of gambling ever created. Some users stayed at machines for 24 or 48 hours without stopping. Schull documented casino workers reporting that machines had to be cleaned nightly after users — in the grip of what she called the "machine zone" — refused to leave even to use a bathroom.

This is not a metaphor. It is a description of what happens when a carefully engineered system successfully overrides the normal regulatory mechanisms of human attention and bodily awareness. And when tech companies built social media platforms, Schull found that they had, whether by design or by parallel discovery, replicated the same four features that produce this state.

The Four Features — and What They Do to Your Brain

Science journalist Michaeleen Doucleff, in her new book Dopamine Kids, breaks down what she calls the "superglue recipe": the four features that, combined, are most effective at producing what researchers call "dark flow" — a trance-like state of absorption that is distinct from healthy engagement and consistently leaves people feeling worse rather than better after.

1. Solitude. You use the app alone. There are no other people physically present to provide social cues — cues that, in ordinary life, help regulate behavior. When we are around other people, we pick up feedback about whether what we are doing seems normal, enjoyable, or excessive. That feedback is absent when we scroll alone in a bedroom or on a couch. Research has found that children who use screens alone are more likely to remain on an app even when it interferes with sleep or homework. The same principle applies to adults: physical solitude removes one of the most natural brakes on behavior.

2. Bottomlessness. There is no end to the content. No final page, no closing credits, no natural stopping point. Infinite scroll, autoplay, and algorithmically generated feeds ensure that something new always appears the moment the previous thing ends. As Schull describes it, there is no natural stopping point — and in the absence of one, the ordinary thought "maybe I should stop now" is immediately preempted by the next item appearing before the thought can complete itself. When social media companies introduced infinite scroll in the 2010s, time-on-app increased dramatically.

3. Speed. The faster the interaction, the longer people stay engaged. The gambling industry discovered this with slot machines — at peak speed, a player can run through more than a thousand games per hour, one every three seconds. The same principle operates in scrolling: the smoother and faster the content flows, the harder it becomes to locate a natural moment of pause. Speed, Schull suggests, contributes to a blurring of the boundary between self and screen — a sense of merger that is a hallmark of the machine zone state.

4. Personalized teasing. This is perhaps the most psychologically sophisticated feature, and the one that AI has dramatically amplified. The algorithm does not give you what you want. It gives you something close to what you want — and then, a few interactions later, something a little closer. Full satisfaction would end the session. The goal is not to satisfy but to sustain the feeling of being on the verge of satisfaction.

Neuroscientist Mateusz Gola at UC San Diego explains the mechanism: when people feel they are making progress toward a goal, dopamine release intensifies their motivation to continue. The feeling of getting closer — even when the goal is receding — activates the same neurochemical drive as actual progress. The app generates the sensation of approaching satisfaction without ever delivering it. That gap is where the hours disappear.

Dark Flow Is Not the Same as Healthy Absorption

It is worth pausing on a distinction that NPR's coverage of this research highlights, because it matters for how we evaluate our own relationship with screens.

Psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi described "flow" as a highly positive state of complete absorption in a challenging, meaningful task — playing an instrument, writing, solving a difficult problem, physical exertion at the edge of one's capacity. This kind of flow is associated with a sense of aliveness and competence, and it leaves people feeling satisfied and energized afterward.

Dark flow is structurally similar but experientially and neurologically different. It is produced by easy, repetitive, low-stakes interaction with an optimized system — not by genuine engagement with something demanding. And where healthy flow tends to leave people feeling good, dark flow consistently leaves people feeling flat, lethargic, and sometimes genuinely worse than before they began.

This distinction is clinically important, because people often experience both states as a kind of absorption and may not clearly distinguish between them in the moment. The question worth asking is not "was I engaged" but "how did I feel when I stopped, and did I stop because I chose to?"

What This Has to Do With Anxiety and Mental Health

The connection between heavy phone use and mental health struggles — particularly anxiety and depression — is well-documented, though the mechanisms are still being studied and the relationship is almost certainly bidirectional.

What the four-feature framework clarifies is one important pathway: the phone is not simply a distraction from anxiety. For many people, it has become a primary avoidance mechanism. Unpleasant emotions — boredom, loneliness, low-grade stress, the approach of a difficult task — reliably trigger phone use in a way that is functionally similar to other avoidance behaviors. The phone offers immediate relief from the discomfort of unstructured attention. And like other avoidance strategies, it works in the short term while maintaining and often deepening the underlying discomfort over time.

In clinical work, I often find that the question is not just how much someone is using their phone, but what they are using it instead of. What feelings are being interrupted? What gets picked up as soon as there is a pause — a moment in an elevator, a minute between tasks, the first quiet moment before sleep? The pattern of when phone use occurs is often more clinically revealing than the raw quantity.

The solitude feature is particularly worth noting in this context. The most psychologically costly phone use — the kind most strongly associated with worse mental health outcomes — tends to happen in the absence of other people, often late at night. This is the same time when, as I have written elsewhere on this blog, the brain's capacity for rational self-regulation is at its lowest and the default mode network has the most room to amplify worry. The phone, in this context, is not just distracting — it is feeding a system that is already primed toward rumination.

What You Can Actually Do

Knowing the mechanism does not automatically change behavior, but it changes the frame — and that matters. Struggling to put down your phone is not a character flaw. It is a reasonable response to a system that has been deliberately optimized to prevent you from putting it down. Naming it as such reduces the self-criticism that tends to accompany failed attempts at self-regulation and makes it easier to approach the problem practically.

A few things that research and clinical experience suggest are genuinely useful:

Add friction. The superglue recipe works by removing every obstacle between you and the next piece of content. Reversing this means deliberately adding obstacles back in. Paying per video rather than subscribing to unlimited streaming is one version of this. Keeping your phone in a drawer when you are home, and requiring yourself to go to the drawer to use it, is another. These feel cumbersome precisely because they are working against a design that has removed all friction. That friction is the point.

Use the phone around other people. The solitude feature is real. Physical presence of other people disrupts the conditions for dark flow. This does not mean you need to socialize every time you use your phone — it means that phone use in a coffee shop or a shared room is meaningfully different, neurologically, from phone use alone at 11pm.

Identify your trigger moments. Most compulsive phone use is not random. It is reliably preceded by specific emotional states — boredom, low-grade stress, the approach of something difficult, loneliness. Noticing your own pattern is the beginning of having a choice. Therapy is well-suited for this kind of pattern-mapping, particularly when the underlying feelings that are being avoided are worth examining in their own right.

Treat this as a systemic problem, not a willpower problem. If someone consistently struggles to disengage from a system that has been engineered to resist disengagement, the solution is to change the system — the physical availability of the phone, the subscription structures, the app configuration — rather than to rely on willpower to override it.

A Note on Children

Doucleff's book, and the research it draws on, is primarily oriented toward children and adolescents. This is appropriate: the developmental implications of early, heavy exposure to dark-flow-optimized systems are significant and warrant serious attention from parents and clinicians alike.

But the same mechanisms operate in adults. Two landmark legal cases in California in 2026 found that tech companies including Meta and Google had deliberately designed their apps to be addictive for younger users. The appeal process is ongoing, but the underlying science — the four features, the dark flow state, the gambling industry origins — is not in dispute. These systems were designed for maximum engagement without reference to user wellbeing. Adults are not immune to that design.

If you are an adult who recognizes your own phone use in this description — and most people reading this will — the same principles apply. The phone has superglue on it. That is not an accident. And acknowledging that is not surrender to it. It is the beginning of a more honest, and more effective, relationship with it.

Citations

Doucleff, M. (2026). Dopamine kids. [Publisher TK].

Gola, M., Wordecha, M., Sescousse, G., Lew-Starowicz, M., Kossowski, B., Wypych, M., Makeig, S., Potenza, M. N., & Marchewka, A. (2017). Can pornography be addictive? An fMRI study of men seeking treatment for problematic pornography use. Neuropsychopharmacology, 42(10), 2021–2031. https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2017.78

Schull, N. D. (2012). Addiction by design: Machine gambling in Las Vegas. Princeton University Press.

Twenge, J. M., Joiner, T. E., Rogers, M. L., & Martin, G. N. (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among U.S. adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702617723376

Doucleff, M. (2026, June 1). How your phone keeps you scrolling — even when you want to stop. NPR Short Wave. https://www.npr.org/2026/06/01/nx-s1-5823736/phone-social-media-addiction-tech

What AI Is Doing to How We Feel About Work — and Ourselves

The conversation about AI and work tends to organize itself around a single, concrete question: will my job still exist?

It is a reasonable question. But in the therapy room, that question is rarely the whole story. What I hear more often is something less concrete and harder to name: a background unease that has been building for months, a sense that the ground beneath a professional identity has quietly shifted, a worry not just about whether a job will disappear but about what it would mean if the work that defines you became something a machine could do.

That is a different kind of question. And it is the one I want to address here.

The Numbers Tell Part of the Story

The economic data on AI and work is genuinely uncertain. A comprehensive analysis of three independent labor datasets found no detectable rise in aggregate unemployment for workers in AI-exposed occupations since late 2022. What the same data did show, however, was a closing door for younger workers — a nearly 20% drop in young developer employment from 2024 peaks, and roughly one in three organizations expecting AI-driven workforce reductions in the near term. Notably, the disruption is beginning at the top of the skill ladder, not the bottom — the workers most exposed to AI today are the highest-paid and most-educated. ScienceDirectScienceDirect

This is clinically significant. The people most likely to have organized their identity, self-worth, and life structure around professional achievement are now among those most directly in AI's first wave.

What the Research Says About AI and Meaning at Work

Beyond job displacement, there is a subtler but equally important story about what AI is doing to the experience of work itself.

A 2026 study in Scientific Reports found that passively relying on AI — copying AI-generated content rather than engaging with the task directly — reduced self-efficacy, sense of ownership, and the meaning workers perceived in their work. Workers who collaborated actively with AI, drafting first and then refining with AI assistance, showed less erosion of these psychological dimensions. KOSU

The distinction matters. What damages the psychological experience of work is not AI use per se, but AI use that removes the worker from genuine engagement with the task. Classic perspectives emphasize that work is not merely a means of production but a central source of human identity and meaning — and that meaningful work emerges when individuals experience a sense of agency and purpose. Strip those out — not by taking the job but by making the job no longer require what is distinctively human — and you have a mental health problem even in the absence of unemployment. KOSU

Work, Identity, and What Happens When the Ground Shifts

For most working adults, work is not simply a source of income. It is a primary source of identity. It structures time, provides social belonging, confers status, and supplies the daily evidence that one is competent, valued, and needed.

The APA's 2025 Work in America Survey found that 54% of U.S. workers reported that job insecurity had a significant impact on their stress levels. Research published in JAMA Network Open found that greater job security was associated with meaningfully better mental health outcomes. Connecticut Public

AI-related insecurity introduces something distinct from ordinary job insecurity. Ordinary insecurity says: I might lose this position. AI-related insecurity says something more fundamental: the things I am good at might not matter in the way I thought they did. The expertise I spent years developing might be replicable by a tool that costs a few dollars a month.

That is an identity challenge, not merely an economic one. And identity challenges tend to produce anxiety, depression, and an existential disorientation that does not respond well to reassurance about aggregate job numbers.

The Particular Burden on High Achievers

High-achieving professionals — people who have organized significant portions of their identity and self-worth around competence and accomplishment — are often among those hit hardest by this shift, not because their jobs are most threatened, but because their relationship to their work is most psychologically loaded.

When your sense of self is built substantially on being very good at something, and the thing you are very good at becomes something a machine can replicate, the threat is not just professional. It raises questions that go far beneath the employment contract: What am I for? What makes me valuable — not as a worker, but as a person? What remains that is distinctively mine?

These are reasonable responses to a genuinely disorienting shift. But they are also, without support and reflection, the questions most likely to produce sustained anxiety and loss of meaning that erode wellbeing over time.

What Uncertainty Does to the Mind and Body

Even for people whose jobs are not immediately at risk, the ambient uncertainty of this period carries its own weight. Decades of research have shown that job insecurity negatively impacts workers' mental and physical health as well as job satisfaction, commitment, and trust. The mind's threat-detection system is designed to respond to identifiable dangers. It is less well-equipped to handle prolonged, ambiguous threat — a landscape shifting in ways that are difficult to predict or prepare for. The result is a persistent background activation of the stress response: disrupted sleep, reduced cognitive flexibility, and the kind of sustained low-level hypervigilance that depletes the emotional resources needed to engage creatively with change. Connecticut Public

This is not catastrophizing. It is a nervous system responding, with the architecture it has, to a situation that is genuinely uncertain and genuinely consequential.

What Actually Helps

I want to be careful not to offer easy reassurance, because the situation does not warrant it. AI is changing work, the pace is accelerating, and the disruption is real. What I can offer is an honest account of what tends to support people through genuine identity disruption.

Separating who you are from what you do. The capacity to hold a stable sense of self that is not entirely contingent on professional achievement is one of the most robust protections against the psychological damage of career disruption. This is a capacity that can be developed — and one therapy is well-positioned to support.

Engaging actively rather than passively. The research suggests the psychological risk is not in using AI but in ceding agency to it. Workers who use AI as a collaborator — thinking first, then augmenting — preserve more of the psychological dimensions of meaningful work.

Naming the identity questions directly. The anxiety that surfaces around AI and work is often not primarily about the job. It is about the self. Bringing those questions into explicit awareness is more useful than managing them through distraction or reassurance-seeking.

Attending to what remains distinctively human. Judgment. Relationship. Context. Ethical reasoning. Creative synthesis. Embodied experience. These are not consolation prizes. They are the things that have always mattered most in the work that matters most to people.

A Note on When to Seek Support

If anxiety about AI and work is disrupting your sleep, your concentration, your relationships, or your sense of purpose — if the uncertainty is settling into something that feels less like concern and more like despair — that is worth taking seriously.

Navigating major identity disruption is a legitimate clinical concern. It does not require a formal diagnosis. It requires a space to think carefully about who you are, what you value, and what a meaningful life looks like when the structures that once organized it are shifting.

I work with adults in New York City navigating anxiety, career disruption, identity questions, and the intersection of professional life and psychological wellbeing. [Reach out here] if you would like to explore what support might look like.

APA Citations:

Brand, J. E. (2015). The far-reaching impact of job loss and unemployment. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043237

Nguyen, T., Weinhardt, J. M., & Campbell, E. (2026). Relying on AI at work reduces self-efficacy, ownership, and meaning while active collaboration mitigates the effects. Scientific Reports, 16, 13583. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42312-6

The New York Times Magazine. (2026, June 9). Who will actually thrive in the hybrid A.I.-human work force. The New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/09/magazine/ai-jobs-workforce-labor.html

Weir, K. (2026). Workers are facing an age of uncertainty. Monitor on Psychology, 57(1), 76. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2026/01-02/trends-work-uncertainty