Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40792094›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Regulating addictive algorithms and designs: protecting older adults from digital exploitation beyond a youth-centric approach.

Yu Yao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yu YaoSchool of Law, China Jiliang University, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As digital technologies evolve, addictive algorithms and designs (aADs) have become a significant public health concern, particularly for older adults, a demographic often overlooked in digital addiction (DA) discourse. Compared to younger users, some older adults may face increased susceptibility to aADs due to factors such as cognitive changes, social isolation, physical comorbidities, or limited digital literacy. These designs, which exploit features like infinite scrolling, are associated with higher risk of compulsive use and may correlate with long-term impacts on cognitive health, social functioning, and quality of life for certain subgroups of older adults. Existing regulatory frameworks predominantly focus on protecting minors, often neglecting the distinct needs and vulnerabilities within aging populations. This paper advances a pluralistic governance framework that recognizes the diversity among older adults. Recommended measures include behaviorally informed disclosures, algorithmic transparency, tailored digital literacy programs, culturally responsive safeguards, and antitrust actions against exploitative design. Age-inclusive regulation is urgently needed to address potential risks of digital dependency, mental health concerns, and social inequalities among aging populations. Addressing these challenges requires collaboration across sectors to ensure digital environments support autonomy and well-being at all ages.

Indexed as

addictive algorithms and designsdigital addictiondigital exploitationdigital vulnerabilitymental healtholder adultsphysical health

Identifiers

PMID40792094
PMCPMC12336170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.