The Consequences of Cellphone Restrictions in Classrooms
Lower secondary (grades 7–9) Upper secondary Attention and memory Analog vs digital
Links to claims
Limits (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C6 | Chile classroom-level teacher restrictions (working paper): null on standardised scores (rule out ~0.03–0.06 SD); modest grade-8 recreational-use drop; small capability drop. C6 weakened 2026-10-09 (classroom-restriction bound). |
Challenges (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C36 | Chile classroom-level teacher restrictions (preprint): test scores near zero; no systematic differential effects by prior achievement, gender or socioeconomic background. The prior-achievement split (above vs below median) is shown only in a figure, without printed estimates. Full text checked 2026-11-13. |
Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.
Source note
Syntes: Shi & Villarroel (2026) — classroom phone restrictions in Chile: null on test scores (working paper)
Källa: Shi, Y., & Villarroel, F. (2026). The Consequences of Cellphone Restrictions in Classrooms. EdWorkingPaper 26-1413. https://doi.org/10.26300/5w3c-ea57 — also IZA Discussion Paper 18426. Working paper, not peer reviewed when used (2026-10-09).
Verified numbers (full EdWorkingPaper PDF, February 2026 version, read 2026-10-09)
- Design: Chile pre-pandemic; teacher discretion → classroom-level variation. Two strategies: (i) within-teacher policy shifts across cohorts; (ii) within-student, cross-subject variation. Grade 8 (2017, 2019) and grade 10 (2017, 2018). Linked administrative test scores with student/teacher survey items on phone policy, in-class recreational use, and subject capability.
- Phone use: restricting access cut grade-8 in-class recreational phone use by about 3 percentage points (~4% of the sample mean); no behavioural response among tenth graders. Larger when the outcome is “strongly disagree” to using phones for entertainment.
- Test scores (Table 3): estimates close to zero under both designs. Pooled “Never Allow or Allow a Few Times” vs often/always: grade 8 teacher-FE 0.007 (SE 0.026), grade 10 −0.003 (0.027); grade 8 student-FE −0.012 (0.018), grade 10 0.005 (0.016). Authors: can rule out gains of about 0.03–0.06 SD. N ≈ 148k–200k depending on column.
- Capability (Table 4): grade 8 “quite/very capable” −0.023 (teacher FE, p < .10) / −0.022 (student FE, p < .05) — over 2 percentage points, ~3% of the mean; weaker among tenth graders.
- Authors’ scope: best extrapolates to decentralised / unevenly enforced within-school restrictions; many Chilean teachers treat phones as pedagogical tools (50–65%).
Role for C6
Limits (weaken, 2026-10-09): a within-teacher / within-student study in which classroom-level restrictions (vs freer teacher policy) left standardised scores unchanged while only modestly cutting recreational use among eighth graders. Adds a classroom-level null beside Kessel (Sweden, school bans) and Allcott (US pouches). Not a kill: England, Norway (girls), Florida (Figlio & Özek 2025) and Rio (Lichand et al. 2026) still show school-level gains; enforcement uneven; working paper. Preprint: recheck when published.
Metadata as recorded
- ID
- ATTN-009
- Tier
- quasi/DiD
- Closed-book follow-up
- n/a (standardised subject test scores)
- Preprint
- yes — EdWorkingPaper 26-1413 / IZA DP 18426 (February 2026); not peer reviewed when used (2026-10-09)
- Titel
- The Consequences of Cellphone Restrictions in Classrooms
- Författare
- Shi, Y.; Villarroel, F.
- År
- 2026 (EdWorkingPaper 26-1413; also IZA Discussion Paper 18426)
- Källa/DOI
- https://doi.org/10.26300/5w3c-ea57
- URL
- https://edworkingpapers.com/ai26-1413 ; https://docs.iza.org/dp18426.pdf
- Typ
- within-teacher and within-student cross-subject designs; classroom-level teacher phone restrictions in Chile; grade 8 (2017, 2019) and grade 10 (2017, 2018); administrative test scores + student/teacher surveys
- Åldersgrupp
- grundskola-hog; gymnasium (Chile grade 8 and 10)
- Teman
- uppmarksamhet-och-minne;analogt-vs-digitalt
- Hämtad
- 2026-10-09
- Paywall
- open (EdWorkingPapers / IZA)
- Full text (fetched 2026-10-16, legal open-access copy, private)
- fulltext.pdf + — via metadata-link: https://docs.iza.org/dp18426.pdf
The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.