Smartphone Exposure and Executive Function in Adolescents: A Systematic Review of Attention, Working Memory, and Cognitive Control

Abstract

Background: Executive function comprises attentional selection, maintenance and updating of information in working memory, inhibitory control and flexible goal-directed behaviour. Smartphones may affect these functions through interruption, reward-driven checking and media multitasking, but measurement methods differ widely.

Objective: To assess adolescent evidence linking smartphone-related exposure to attention, working memory and cognitive control, with emphasis on performance-based measures, longitudinal directionality and the distinction between smartphone-specific and broader social-media exposure.

Methods: An evidence-focused systematic synthesis of identifiable primary reports available through July 2026 was conducted. Original studies involving adolescents or age-transition cohorts were grouped by exposure construct and cognitive outcome. Distinct longitudinal, experimental, behavioural-rating and computerised-task findings were narratively compared. No effect-size pooling was performed.

Results: In a 2025 comparison of 110 adolescents, problematic smartphone users differed on parent-rated executive functioning but not on performance-based tests. A school-hour study of 79 youths linked phone checking to lower go/no-go discrimination (F[1,28] = 4.8, p = 0.04), despite a mean 2.22 hours of school-time use. A three-wave cohort of 9,747 participants found a small prospective association between social-media browsing and subsequent cognitive control (β = −0.06, p = 0.020). A longitudinal imaging analysis of 9,931 adolescents reported screen-activity associations with working-memory neural signatures that varied by sex and family context. A 609-student cohort observed poorer later divergent thinking with greater media multitasking (β = −0.10).

Conclusion: Executive outcomes are exposure- and instrument-specific. Repeated checking and problematic engagement are associated with some behavioural and cognitive measures, whereas direct evidence for generalized working-memory impairment remains limited. Most findings do not establish causality.