Monday on RMC-BFMTV, the Minister of Health mentioned several addictions against which he wants to fight, including that concerning screens. However, the notion of “screen addiction” is not the subject of a scientific consensus.
Losing yourself for hours on TikTok, mechanically checking your phone, spending many hours on the computer… All these behaviors are often described, in common parlance, as an “addiction” to screens or social networks. A term also used on Monday by the Minister of Health and Prevention, François Braun.
Invited on RMC-BFMTV, he declared that “prevention is a major issue for our society, which is insufficiently developed”.
“Compared to all these addictions, of course there are campaigns, against tobacco, alcohol, drug use (…), against screens”, he continued.
“But what matters to me is to fight against the roots of this evil: why a young person today falls into any addiction,” added the minister.
This is not the first time that the government has brought up the concept of screen addiction. In a video posted online at the end of February, Sarah El Haïry, Secretary of State in charge of Youth and Universal National Service, thus warned against the “danger” of “screen addiction” and referred to the platform of government information dedicated to parenting and digital.
A concept not recognized internationally
However, the concept of “screen addiction” is not the subject of a scientific consensus for the moment. It does not appear in the “Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental disorders”, published by the American Psychiatric Association (AAP). This manual, used by health professionals around the world, lists addictions classified according to specific criteria.
In 2019the WHO has incorporated into its classification of recognized diseases and health problems the “gambling disorder, primarily online”. It is characterized by the following phenomena: altered control over gambling (over its frequency or duration, for example), priority given to gambling “to the point that it takes precedence over other aspects of life and daily activities” and negative consequences such as “significant impairment” socially, which do not prevent the practice from continuing. The notion of “screen addiction” does not appear in this catalogue.
The Interministerial Mission for the Fight against Drugs and Addictive Behavior (Mildeca) defines on his site addictions as “cerebral pathologies defined by a dependency on a substance or an activity, with deleterious consequences”.
“Screens”, a broad concept
The expression “screen addiction” is controversial because the phenomenon is relatively new, which means that the scientific community does not have much perspective on its supposed effects, explains to BFMTV.com the psychiatrist and addictologist Marc Auriacombe.
“‘Screens’ is a broad concept, some say it’s like talking about a glass addiction as part of alcohol,” he adds. And what exactly are we talking about, screens in general, the smartphone, social networks?
With a team of researchers, Professor Auriacombe wanted to quantify this phenomenon. In a study published in July 2022 in the medical journal Journal of medical Internet researchthe researchers examined the report on the screens of 300 users.
They had to meet at least five out of nine criteria to be diagnosed with screen addiction. Among ces conditionswe find spending a lot of time thinking about screens, even when we are not using them, feeling anxious, irritable, sad during reduced use or even not being able to reduce his screen time.
Less than 5% of users affected
Only 1.7% of respondents responded positively to five criteria. “There is a discrepancy between the impression that everyone is addicted to screens and the reality, which is that less than 5% of users are concerned”, underlines Marc Auriacombe.
“What can be addictive with the Internet in particular is that everything you can do there leads to a response right away”, adds the professor from the University of Bordeaux, comparing this mechanism with that of gambling. .
He judges that it is “not absurd” to think that the concept could be recognized in the coming years. In a report published in 2019, the National Academy of Medicine, the Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Technologies believe, however, that “the concept must be approached with caution”.
It “responds to a precise medical definition, reserved for particularly serious pathologies”, and behavioral addictions “are often associated with comorbid psychiatric disorders such as depression, anxiety, phobias or personality disorders”, add the authors of the report.
A “problematic use of screens”
If the question of addiction makes skeptics, there is a consensus on the deleterious effects that screens can have. The Mildeca parle then of a “problematic use of screens”. The study co-signed by Marc Auriacombe shows that encountering “problems” related to screens is rather widespread. 44.7% of respondents responded positively to at least one of the nine criteria, the most common being loss of control.
With regard to social networks, for example, the National Academy of Medicine, the Academy of Sciences and the Academy of Technologies emphasize that “they are a source of concern for adolescents, in particular because of the risks of disinhibition of communication and harassment”.
Their report also highlights “network strategies” which aim to “hold the attention of users” and the sleep disturbances that nighttime use of screens can cause.
“Indisputable” beneficial effects
The three learned societies affirm that these risks “should not hide the fact that, properly used, screens, and the information they allow to be exchanged, constitute tools of knowledge and openness to the world whose interest is indisputable.”
They deplore “alarmist campaigns focused indiscriminately on ‘the dangers of screens'” which risk “making parents and educators ignore the potential benefits of digital technologies” and “overshadowing the real determinants of mental health and the importance of social problems”.
Marc Auriacombe also judges that “we must be careful not to trivialize, nor to demonize the screens”: he pleads for an “education” in the use of digital, a kind of “instructions for use” .
