ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Smartphones in the classroom: power tool or source of distraction? Evidence from a cross-lagged panel study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The widespread use of mobile devices in educational settings suggests that smartphones may function both as learning tools and as potential sources of distraction. Existing cross-sectional studies have been unable to adequately explain the dynamic causal relationships among technology acceptance, digital distraction, and academic engagement. Objective: This study aims to examine the reciprocal relationships among these three variables using a longitudinal design, thereby providing empirical evidence for the integration of educational technology. Methods: A three-wave longitudinal survey (conducted at six-month intervals) was administered to an initial sample of 1,200 high school students from three public secondary schools in eastern China; 1,020 participants (retention rate: 85.0%) were retained through all three waves and included in the final analysis (attrition confirmed as non-systematic via Little's MCAR test, Results: (1) Technology acceptance positively predicted subsequent digital distraction ( Conclusion: The role of mobile phones in education is neither a fixed "power tool" nor an inevitable "distractor," but rather depends on the dynamic interaction among technological perceptions, behavioral regulation, and learning contexts. The educational value of technology adoption should undergo a transformative process of "assessment," in which digital distraction serves as a critical gatekeeper. Educational practice should transcend the binary dilemma of "prohibition" versus "overuse" and focus on cultivating students' self-regulation skills and critical literacy in technology use, thereby advancing an educational philosophy of "teaching according to individual aptitude" in the digital age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.