Screen Time Exposure and Domain-Specific Working Memory in Young Adults.

Introduction With technology advancing across all fields, the utility of digital screens is increasing among all age groups for various purposes. Research indicates that while digital technology presents clear advantages, prolonged exposure can have detrimental effects on various aspects of health, behavior, emotions, and cognitive functions like attention and working memory. A crucial cognitive process for learning and information processing which is working memory, can be affected by factors including screen time. Studies have found that the impact of screen time on working memory can be negative, positive, or show no discernible relationship. However, earlier investigations are limited to smartphone use as screen time exposure and further to only active screen time. As there is a dearth of studies in the Indian context and young adults are more exposed to screen time, it is important to investigate along these lines. Hence, the present study aimed to investigate the impact of active and passive screen time exposure on modality-specific working memory in young adults. Methods Seventy-seven neurotypical individuals aged between 18 and 22 years were recruited. The study utilized auditory and visual reverse digit span tasks and the Corsi-backward task to measure working memory span. Screen time data of the participants were collected through a self-administered 18-item questionnaire covering active and background screen time domains. Results and discussion The present study concluded that only active screen time has a significant effect on visual reverse digit span and supports the notion of the visual superiority effect against an auditory superior effect as suggested by earlier findings. The preliminary findings of correlation observed exclusively within the visual domain in this study could be attributed to the potential impact of screen time exposure (active screen time and textual content). Screen usage demands effective switching between various visual stimuli and ongoing updates of information in memory. Nonetheless, interpreting this explanation and generalization requires caution, given the low ecological validity of the task employed in the study. Future investigations should aim to collect screen time exposure data more objectively, perhaps through online tracking techniques. Furthermore, it would be prudent to expand the correlation analysis to include other cognitive processes and populations.