̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - Mental health

Harmful effects of digital tech – the science ‘needs fixing’, experts argue

fpjl2 — Thu, 10 Apr 2025 18:01:05 +0000

Scientific research on the harms of digital technology is stuck in a ‘failing cycle’ that moves too slowly to allow governments and society to hold tech companies to account, according to two leading researchers in a new report published in the journal Science.

Dr Amy Orben from the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and Dr J Nathan Matias from Cornell ̽��ֱ�� say the pace at which new technology is deployed to billions of people has put unbearable strain on the scientific systems trying to evaluate its effects.

They argue that big tech companies effectively outsource research on the safety of their products to independent scientists at universities and charities who work with a fraction of the resources – while firms also obstruct access to essential data and information. This is in contrast to other industries where safety testing is largely done ‘in house’.

Orben and Matias call for an overhaul of ‘evidence production’ assessing the impact of technology on everything from mental health to discrimination.

Their recommendations include accelerating the research process, so that policy interventions and safer designs are tested in parallel with initial evidence gathering, and creating registries of tech-related harms informed by the public.

“Big technology companies increasingly act with perceived impunity, while trust in their regard for public safety is fading,” said Orben, of Cambridge’s MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit. “Policymakers and the public are turning to independent scientists as arbiters of technology safety.”

“Scientists like ourselves are committed to the public good, but we are asked to hold to account a billion-dollar industry without appropriate support for our research or the basic tools to produce good quality evidence quickly.”

“We must urgently fix this science and policy ecosystem so we can better understand and manage the potential risks posed by our evolving digital society,” said Orben.

'Negative feedback cycle'

In the latest Science paper, the researchers point out that technology companies often follow policies of rapidly deploying products first and then looking to ‘debug’ potential harms afterwards. This includes distributing generative AI products to millions before completing basic safety tests, for example.

When tasked with understanding potential harms of new technologies, researchers rely on ‘routine science’ which – having driven societal progress for decades – now lags the rate of technological change to the extent that it is becoming at times ‘unusable’.

With many citizens pressuring politicians to act on digital safety, Orben and Matias argue that technology companies use the slow pace of science and lack of hard evidence to resist policy interventions and “minimize their own responsibility”.

Even if research gets appropriately resourced, they note that researchers will be faced with understanding products that evolve at an unprecedented rate.

“Technology products change on a daily or weekly basis, and adapt to individuals. Even company staff may not fully understand the product at any one time, and scientific research can be out of date by the time it is completed, let alone published,” said Matias, who leads Cornell’s Citizens and Technology (CAT) Lab.

“At the same time, claims about the inadequacy of science can become a source of delay in technology safety when science plays the role of gatekeeper to policy interventions,” Matias said.

“Just as oil and chemical industries have leveraged the slow pace of science to deflect the evidence that informs responsibility, executives in technology companies have followed a similar pattern. Some have even allegedly refused to commit substantial resources to safety research without certain kinds of causal evidence, which they also decline to fund.”

̽��ֱ��researchers lay out the current ‘negative feedback cycle’:

Tech companies do not adequately resource safety research, shifting the burden to independent scientists who lack data and funding. This means high-quality causal evidence is not produced in required timeframes, which weakens government’s ability to regulate – further disincentivising safety research, as companies are let off the hook.

Orben and Matias argue that this cycle must be redesigned, and offer ways to do it.

Reporting digital harms

To speed up the identification of harms caused by online technologies, policymakers or civil society could construct registries for incident reporting, and encourage the public to contribute evidence when they experience harms.

Similar methods are already used in fields such as environmental toxicology where the public reports on polluted waterways, or vehicle crash reporting programs that inform automotive safety, for example.

“We gain nothing when people are told to mistrust their lived experience due to an absence of evidence when that evidence is not being compiled,” said Matias.

Existing registries, from mortality records to domestic violence databases, could also be augmented to include information on the involvement of digital technologies such as AI.

̽��ֱ��paper’s authors also outline a ‘minimum viable evidence’ system, in which policymakers and researchers adjust the ‘evidence threshold’ required to show potential technological harms before starting to test interventions.

These evidence thresholds could be set by panels made up of affected communities, the public, or ‘science courts’: expert groups assembled to make rapid assessments.

“Causal evidence of technological harms is often required before designers and scientists are allowed to test interventions to build a safer digital society,” said Orben.

“Yet intervention testing can be used to scope ways to help individuals and society, and pinpoint potential harms in the process. We need to move from a sequential system to an agile, parallelised one.”

Under a minimum viable evidence system, if a company obstructs or fails to support independent research, and is not transparent about their own internal safety testing, the amount of evidence needed to start testing potential interventions would be decreased.

Orben and Matias also suggest learning from the success of ‘Green Chemistry’, which sees an independent body hold lists of chemical products ranked by potential for harm, to help incentivise markets to develop safer alternatives.

“ ̽��ֱ��scientific methods and resources we have for evidence creation at the moment simply cannot deal with the pace of digital technology development,” Orben said.

“Scientists and policymakers must acknowledge the failures of this system and help craft a better one before the age of AI further exposes society to the risks of unchecked technological change.”

Added Matias: “When science about the impacts of new technologies is too slow, everyone loses.”

From social media to AI, online technologies are changing too fast for the scientific infrastructure used to gauge their public health harms, say two leaders in the field.

̽��ֱ��scientific methods and resources we have for evidence creation at the moment simply cannot deal with the pace of digital technology development

Dr Amy Orben

Nuthawut Somsuk via Getty

Illustration representing potential online harms

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

AI can be good for our health and wellbeing

cjb250 — Mon, 07 Apr 2025 08:00:08 +0000

Cambridge researchers are looking at ways that AI can transform everything from drug discovery to Alzheimer's diagnoses to GP consultations.

Psychedelic medicine could revolutionise how we treat mental illness

lkm37 — Wed, 02 Apr 2025 08:26:40 +0000

Dr. Ayla Selamoglu is an expert on psychedelic medicine. Her work shows how nature’s most mysterious compounds provide new ways to combat mental illness.

Researchers celebrated at the Cambridge Awards for Research Impact and Engagement

zs332 — Tue, 04 Feb 2025 08:09:41 +0000

̽��ֱ��Cambridge Awards for Research Impact and Engagement, formerly the Vice-Chancellor's Award, are held annually to recognise exceptional achievement, innovation, and creativity in developing research engagement and impact plans with significant economic, social, and cultural potential. Awarded in 3 categories, the winners for 2024 are:

Established Academic

Winner: Professor Sander van der Linden (Department of Psychology, School of Biological Sciences and Churchill College) and his team at the Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab (Team application)

Project: A psychological vaccine against misinformation

Professor Sander van der Linden and team have developed a novel approach to countering the spread of harmful misinformation. This ‘psychological vaccine’ resulted in award-winning public impact tools that have shown millions of people how to spot fake news online. These games have been adopted by the World Health Organization, United Nations, UK Government and Google, and led to key policy changes in the EU Digital Services Act.

Early Career Researcher

Winner: Dr Gabriel Okello (Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, School of Technology)

Project: Applying multidisciplinary, collaborative approaches to tackle air pollution in rapidly urbanising African cities

̽��ֱ��project catalysed Uganda’s first-ever air quality standards, advancing policy and public health. It drove transformative growth in the e-mobility sector and battery-swapping stations. ̽��ֱ��Clean Air Network was established as a multi-regional community of practice for air quality management across Africa. ̽��ֱ��platform now provides real-time air quality data enabling evidence-based decision-making in Uganda and 8 other African countries.

Collaboration Award

Winner:

Lead: Professor Paul Fletcher (Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Medicine, Clare College), Dr Dervila Glynn (Cambridge Neuroscience IRC), Dominic Matthews (Ninja Theory Ltd), Sharon Gilfoyle (Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust)

Project: Representing psychosis in video games: communicating clinical science and tackling stigma

This work draws together expertise in video game design and clinical neuroscience, with lived experience of mental illness to co-produce two award-winning video games vividly conveying the nature of altered experience of reality in a character with psychosis. Within conversations around mental health, psychosis is neglected and highly stigmatised.

In creating a powerful character and telling her story through gameplay, the project has enabled sensitive and thoughtful conversations about psychosis, and mental illness in general. It has had a measurably positive impact on stigma.

More about the Cambridge Awards for Research Impact and Engagement

Find out more about the winning projects and meet our runners-up.

From helping to inoculate the public against misinformation to tackling air pollution in rapidly urbanising African cities, researchers from across the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge were honoured at the Cambridge Awards on 3 February.

Yes

Collaboration Award 2024

zs332 — Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:55:33 +0000

̽��ֱ��2024 Collaboration Award winner is Representing psychosis in video games: Communicating clinical science and tackling stigma, a project led by Prof Paul Fletcher Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Medicine, Clare College.

Cambridge leads governmental project to understand impact of smartphones and social media on young people

cjb250 — Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:01:37 +0000

̽��ֱ��work has been commissioned by the UK government’s Department for Science, Innovation and Technology after a review by the UK Chief Medical Officer in 2019 found the evidence base around the links to children’s mental health were insufficient to provide strong conclusions suitable to inform policy.

̽��ֱ��project – led by a team at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, in collaboration with researchers at several leading UK universities – is aimed at improving policymakers’ understanding of the relationship between children’s wellbeing and smartphone use, including social media and messaging. It will help direct future government action in this area.

Project lead Dr Amy Orben from the Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (MRC CBU) at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge said: “There is huge concern about the impact of smartphone use on children's health, but the evidence base remains fairly limited. While the government is under substantial time pressure to make decisions, these will undoubtedly be better if based on improved evidence.

“This is a complex and rapidly evolving issue, with both potential harms and benefits associated with smartphone use. Technology is changing by the day, and scientific evidence creation needs to evolve and innovate to keep up.

“Our focus will be on deepening our causal understanding of the effects of new technologies, particularly over short timescales, to ensure that decisions are informed, timely and evidence-based.”

Dr Orben will lead a Project Delivery Team, with Consortium Members from the universities of Bath, Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow, Manchester, Nottingham, Oxford and York and the London School of Economics. It will aim to identify which research methods and data sources will be most effective at identifying potential causal relationships between social media, smartphones, and the health and development of children and young people

Deputy project lead Dr Amrit Kaur Purba, also from the MRC CBU at Cambridge, said: “ ̽��ֱ��impact of social media on young people is a pressing issue, and our project will ensure the research community is in a strong position to provide policymakers with the causal and high-quality insights they need. While we don’t expect this to be straightforward, our research will leverage diverse expertise from across the UK to deliver a comprehensive and informed response to make recommendations for how research in this area should be supported in future.”

̽��ֱ��researchers will review and summarise existing research on the impact of smartphones and social media on children and young people’s mental health, wellbeing, physical health, lifestyle and health behaviours, and educational attainment. ̽��ֱ��review will recognise the diversity of perspectives that exist in this area and consider where further research could add valuable new insights to the evidence base.

They will assess the various methods and data available to understand the causal impacts, including recognising that online habits and emerging technologies are changing at a rapid pace, and considering how the experiences of vulnerable children and young people – for example, LGBTQ+ young people and those with special needs or mental health issues – can be captured in future research projects.

This will allow the team to recommend and outline how future research studies could deliver robust and causal evidence on the impact of smartphones and social media on child development factors in the next two to three years.

Technology Secretary Peter Kyle, said: " ̽��ֱ��online world offers immense opportunities for young people to connect and learn. Ensuring they can do so in an environment which puts their safety first is my priority and will guide this government’s action on online safety.

“That’s why we have launched new research, led by the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge with support from other top UK universities, to better understand the complex relationship between technology and young people's wellbeing.

“This vital research will build a trusted evidence base for future action, helping us to protect and empower the next generation towards a safer and more positive digital future."

Cambridge researchers are leading the first phase of a new research project that will lay the groundwork for future studies into the impact on children of smartphone and social media use.

This is a complex and rapidly evolving issue, with both potential harms and benefits associated with smartphone use. Technology is changing by the day, and scientific evidence creation needs to evolve and innovate to keep up

Amy Orben

Owen Franken

Teenager holding a smartphone

Yes

AI-deas: Using AI to tackle society's biggest challenges

lw355 — Thu, 09 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000

Aspirations for the ability of AI to transform society couldn’t be higher. Realising this potential will require bridging the gap between AI development and public value. Cambridge's AI-deas initiative aims to do just that.

Loneliness linked to higher risk of heart disease and stroke and susceptibility to infection

cjb250 — Fri, 03 Jan 2025 10:00:00 +0000

Researchers from the UK and China drew this conclusion after studying proteins from blood samples taken from over 42,000 adults recruited to the UK Biobank. Their findings are published today in the journal Nature Human Behaviour.

Social relationships play an important role in our wellbeing. Evidence increasingly demonstrates that both social isolation and loneliness are linked to poorer health and an early death. Despite this evidence, however, the underlying mechanisms through which social relationships impact health remain elusive.

One way to explore biological mechanisms is to look at proteins circulating in the blood. Proteins are molecules produced by our genes and are essential for helping our bodies function properly. They can also serve as useful drug targets, allowing researchers to develop new treatments to tackle diseases.

A team led by scientists at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, UK, and Fudan ̽��ֱ��, China, examined the ‘proteomes’ – the suite of proteins – in blood samples donated by over 42,000 adults aged 40-69 years who are taking part in the UK Biobank. This allowed them to see which proteins were present in higher levels among people who were socially isolated or lonely, and how these proteins were connected to poorer health.

̽��ֱ��team calculated social isolation and loneliness scores for individuals. Social isolation is an objective measure based on, for example, whether someone lives alone, how frequently they have contact with others socially, and whether they take part in social activities. Loneliness, on the other hand, is a subjective measure based on whether an individual feels lonely.

When they analysed the proteomes and adjusted for factors such as age, sex and socioeconomic background, the team found 175 proteins associated with social isolation and 26 proteins associated with loneliness (though there was substantial overlap, with approximately 85% of the proteins associated with loneliness being shared with social isolation). Many of these proteins are produced in response to inflammation, viral infection and as part of our immune responses, as well as having been linked to cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, stroke, and early death.

̽��ֱ��team then used a statistical technique known as Mendelian randomization to explore the causal relationship between social isolation and loneliness on the one hand, and proteins on the other. Using this approach, they identified five proteins whose abundance was caused by loneliness.

Dr Chun Shen from the Department of Clinical Neurosciences at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and the Institute of Science and Technology for Brain-Inspired Intelligence, Fudan ̽��ֱ��, said: “We know that social isolation and loneliness are linked to poorer health, but we’ve never understood why. Our work has highlighted a number of proteins that appear to play a key role in this relationship, with levels of some proteins in particular increasing as a direct consequence of loneliness.

Professor Jianfeng Feng from the ̽��ֱ�� of Warwick said: "There are more than 100,000 proteins and many of their variants in the human body. AI and high throughput proteomics can help us pinpoint some key proteins in prevention, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis in many human diseases and revolutionise the traditional view of human health.

" ̽��ֱ��proteins we’ve identified give us clues to the biology underpinning poor health among people who are socially isolated or lonely, highlighting why social relationships play such an important part in keeping us healthy.”

One of the proteins produced in higher levels as a result of loneliness was ADM. Previous studies have shown that this protein plays a role in responding to stress and in regulating stress hormones and social hormones such as oxytocin – the so-called ‘love hormone’ – which can reduce stress and improve mood.

̽��ֱ��team found a strong association between ADM and the volume of the insula, a brain hub for interoception, our ability to sense what's happening inside our body – the greater the ADM levels, the smaller the volume of this region. Higher ADM levels were also linked to lower volume of the left caudate, a region involved in emotional, reward, and social processes. In addition, higher levels of ADM were linked to increased risk of early death.

Another of the proteins, ASGR1, is associated with higher cholesterol and an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, while other identified proteins play roles in the development of insulin resistance, atherosclerosis (‘furring’ of the arteries) and cancer progression, for example.

Professor Barbara Sahakian from the Department of Psychiatry at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge said: “These findings drive home the importance of social contact in keeping us well. More and more people of all ages are reporting feeling lonely. That’s why the World Health Organization has described social isolation and loneliness as a ‘global public health concern’. We need to find ways to tackle this growing problem and keep people connected to help them stay healthy.”

̽��ֱ��research was supported by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, Shanghai Rising-Star Program, National Key R&D Program of China, Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Major Project, 111 Project, Shanghai Center for Brain Science and Brain-Inspired Technology, and Zhangjiang Lab.

Reference
Shen, C et al. Plasma proteomic signatures of social isolation and loneliness associated with morbidity and mortality. Nat Hum Behav; 3 Jan 2025; DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-02078-1

Interactions with friends and family may keep us healthy because they boost our immune system and reduce our risk of diseases such as heart disease, stroke and type 2 diabetes, new research suggests.

More and more people of all ages are reporting feeling lonely. We need to find ways to tackle this growing problem and keep people connected to help them stay healthy

Barbara Sahakian

Noah Silliman

Person looking out through window

Yes

Licence type:

Public Domain