Clinical research initiative

Is problematic smartphone use a distinct disorder?

An ongoing research program evaluating whether a set of diagnostic criteria for problematic smartphone use in adults has clinical validity distinct from anxiety, depression, and ADHD — aiming to contribute evidence toward its eventual formal recognition.

Current phase: protocol design, pre-IRB
This is not a diagnosis or a self-assessment tool. "Problematic smartphone use" is not, as of today, a disorder recognized by the DSM-5-TR or the ICD-11. The criteria shown on this page are a research draft under validation, not clinical guidance. If you're concerned about your relationship with your phone, or someone else's, please consult a mental health professional — this page does not replace that consultation.

The problem we're investigating

There is consistent evidence that a subgroup of adults develops a pattern of smartphone use associated with significant clinical distress: loss of control, interference with work and relationships, and marked discomfort when the device isn't accessible. However, the current scientific evidence has two central limitations that kept a comparable condition — Internet Gaming Disorder — from becoming a formal DSM-5 diagnosis:

Insufficient discriminant validity Few studies measure problematic smartphone use alongside the conditions it overlaps with (anxiety, depression, ADHD), so it's unclear whether it's a distinct disorder or a symptom of something else.
Lack of longitudinal evidence in adults Nearly all available research is cross-sectional and drawn from university samples — long-term follow-up in the general adult population is missing.

Proposed diagnostic criteria (draft)

First draft, adapted from the nine-criterion model used for already-studied behavioral addictions (Gambling Disorder, Internet Gaming Disorder). Subject to clinical review and empirical validation before use in any real-world context.

  1. PreoccupationFrequently thinking about the phone or the next opportunity to use it, even during unrelated activities.
  2. WithdrawalIrritability, anxiety, or marked distress when the phone isn't accessible.
  3. ToleranceNeeding increasing amounts of time on the phone to achieve the same sense of satisfaction or relief.
  4. Unsuccessful attempts to cut downRepeated, unsuccessful efforts to control or reduce use.
  5. Loss of interest in other activitiesGiving up hobbies, physical activity, or in-person relationships previously valued.
  6. Continued use despite negative consequencesContinuing the pattern despite knowing it causes conflict, sleep problems, or impaired performance.
  7. Deception about actual useMinimizing to others the real amount of time or type of use of the phone.
  8. Use to regulate negative moodTurning to the phone specifically to escape sadness, anxiety, guilt, boredom, or loneliness.
  9. Jeopardizing significant opportunitiesRisking or losing a relationship, job, or educational opportunity because of the pattern of use.

Threshold proposed for discussion: 5 of 9 criteria present over 12 months, plus clinically significant functional impairment — and an explicit exclusion criterion requiring that the pattern not be better explained by another disorder (anxiety, depression, ADHD). Per the literature reviewed, this last point is most likely to determine whether this proposal has real clinical viability.

Study design

Update: an early literature check turned up a nationally representative US adult study finding that clinically significant PSU — using a definition that requires real functional impairment — affects only about 0.75–1.2% of adults, far below the 15–30% figures often quoted (which usually don't require impairment). That single finding forced a redesign: a plain random sample of a few hundred adults would only turn up a handful of true cases, not enough to validate anything. So Phase 1 now runs in two stages.

Stage 1 — Broad screening A brief questionnaire goes out to a large general-adult sample to flag likely cases, sized using a small pilot that first measures how many flagged people actually turn out to meet full criteria.
Stage 2 — Confirmation (target ≥150 confirmed cases) Everyone flagged, plus a comparison group of people who weren't, completes the full battery and a structured clinical interview — sorting participants into problematic use, heavy-but-fine use, and normative use.

Phase 2 follows a subset of Stage 2 participants at 6, 12, and 24 months. At every assessment, symptoms of anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), adult ADHD (ASRS), and global functional impairment (WHODAS 2.0) are measured together with the smartphone-use instrument and objective screen-time data — to estimate how much unique variance smartphone use contributes beyond those already-known conditions.

A realistic path toward formal recognition

A single study, however well designed, doesn't change the DSM on its own. Here's how we understand the real path:

01
This studyValidation + longitudinal follow-up, ~24–30 months.
02
Peer-reviewed publicationIn a psychiatry or clinical psychology journal with external review.
03
Independent replicationBy another research team — a necessary condition before any formal consideration.
04
Institutional submissionTo the APA's nomenclature committee (DSM) and, in parallel, evaluation of the WHO route (ICD-11), which accepted a comparable criterion for gaming with a different evidentiary threshold.
05
Editorial review cycleOf the relevant body — measured in years, not months.

What's still open