Reexamining the “brain drain” effect: A replication of Ward et al. (2017)
Adults / lifelong learning Attention and memory Analog vs digital
Links to claims
Limits (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C6 | Preregistered direct replication of Ward et al. 2017 Experiment 2 (N = 383): no effect of smartphone location on OSpan, F(2, 377) = 0.10, p = .91, or on go/no-go performance. The mere-presence mechanism cited in C6's Bounds did not replicate. Laboratory undergraduates, not school lessons. |
Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.
Source note
Syntes: Ruiz Pardo & Minda 2022 — failed replication of Ward et al. 2017 (ATTN-014)
Källa: Ruiz Pardo, A. C., & Minda, J. P. (2022). Reexamining the “brain drain” effect: A replication of Ward et al. (2017). Acta Psychologica, 230, 103717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103717 — peer reviewed, CC BY 4.0.
Full text: publisher PDF stored 2026-11-12 from Western University Scholarship@Western / Scholaris; Crossref DOI checked the same day.
Metadata
- ID:
ATTN-014 - Tier: experiment
- N / design: preregistered direct replication of Ward et al. 2017 Experiment 2; 3 locations × 2 power; final N = 383 after exclusions from 453 recruited
- Population: vuxen-livslangt (undergraduate research pool, Western University)
- Subject: Reexamining the “brain drain” effect: A replication of Ward et al. (2017)
Finding (+ comparator)
Comparator: smartphone on the desk vs in pocket/bag vs outside the room, powered on or off (six cells). No significant main effect of location on OSpan absolute score, F(2, 377) = 0.10, p = .91, η²G = 0.001; no main effect of power, F(1, 377) = 0.21, p = .65; no location × power interaction, F(2, 377) = 1.19, p = .31. On the Cue-Dependent Go/No-Go task there was a location × cue-type interaction, F(2, 377) = 3.19, p = .04, η²G = 0.005, but simple main effects for “go” and “no-go” were not significant (p = .49 and .55). Average reaction time showed no location or power effect. Attachment and dependency did not reliably moderate OSpan (overall models not significant). The authors conclude that the mere presence of one's smartphone may not be enough to affect cognitive performance.
Mechanism
The original Ward et al. 2017 claim was that merely having one's phone nearby drains working-memory capacity. This preregistered replication did not find that effect under the same tasks and location conditions.
Limits
- Laboratory undergraduates, not school lessons and not test results.
- Does not test school phone bans, and does not split by prior achievement.
- Ward et al. 2017 (ATTN-003) remains on file as the original finding; this study is the failed replication.
Role for C6 and C36
Limits C6's laboratory mechanism sentence about mere presence (Ward et al. 2017). Not a test of C36.
Links
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103717
- OSF preregistration: https://osf.io/5fq4r
- Relaterade: ATTN-003, ATTN-002
Metadata as recorded
- ID
- ATTN-014
- Tier
- experiment
- Closed-book follow-up
- n/a (laboratory working-memory and go/no-go tasks, not a later school test)
- Titel
- Reexamining the “brain drain” effect: A replication of Ward et al. (2017)
- Författare
- Ruiz Pardo, A. C.; Minda, J. P.
- År
- 2022 (Acta Psychologica 230, 103717; published online 22 August 2022; issue date October 2022)
- Källa/DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103717
- URL
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691822002323
- Författar-PDF
- https://uwo.scholaris.ca/items/1c130bb2-4b4f-4ba0-9b87-ea6a154bfe1e
- Typ
- preregistered direct replication of Ward et al. 2017 Experiment 2 (OSF https://osf.io/5fq4r); 3 smartphone locations (desk, pocket/bag, outside the room) × 2 power (on, off); automated OSpan and Cue-Dependent Go/No-Go; university students, Western University; final N = 383
- Åldersgrupp
- vuxen-livslangt (laboratory; undergraduate research pool)
- Teman
- uppmarksamhet-och-minne;analogt-vs-digitalt
- Hämtad
- 2026-11-12
- Paywall
- none (CC BY 4.0); DOI and Crossref verified 2026-11-12
- Obs
- Failed to replicate Ward et al. 2017's mere-presence “brain drain” on OSpan (location F(2, 377) = 0.10, p = .91). Mechanism evidence for C6, not a test of school phone bans or of C36's lower-achiever pattern.
The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.