It is out of control. Recorded screen times of children yielded an average of over 2 hours and 45 minutes. Studies portray it as only going up from here. Parents beware, a clear correlation between growing screen time and the rise of short-form content is apparent. Youth’s newfound love of short-form content is no secret. Is it love, or addiction? Herald (2023) describes short-form content as videos ranging from 15 seconds to 3 minutes long; their main goal is to hold attention, showing information in bite-sized pieces. TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts are popular short-form content-sharing applications. TikTok is taking over the world right below guardians’ noses. The site has around 750 million new users monthly, mostly under 25 (Duarte, 2025). Why is it bad for children? Are schools not using short-form content for education? Should parents intervene?
Some argue that short-form content harms youths’ attention spans and learning drive. While others contend it could be utilised as a powerful tool in educating youth in an engaging, succinct manner. Younger people, especially, are like fingerprints; everyone is different. However, suppose children excessively interact with short-form snackable content. In that case, it will reduce attention spans and dopamine levels, impacting their ability to focus and drive to learn new content to an extent. Parents, you have been warned.
The matter is complex and not all doom and gloom. Some officials argue that short-form content can be positive for youth. These officials suggest that academic libraries should produce short-form content to increase engagement with younger students. Data found that videos shorter than 3 minutes have increased engagement, and viewers watched at least 75% of the video’s duration. They highlighted, “the rise in popularity of short-form content allows libraries to engage with a new generation of students who are born digital natives and have different learning needs”. However, would children still watch TikTok if it covered what their teachers had been ranting about? The drawback of these studies is the limited reach. When research is obtained, it only focuses on using short-form library content. The potential increased engagement and drive to use educational content are overly romanticised and do not reflect children’s habits and core issues. (Bates, 2024).
Again, are schools not using short-form content for education? Researchers found a similar conclusion that short-form content can be positive for youth education, but not without its flaws. A study tested over 150 third-year medical students on test results while watching standard lecture content versus educational short-form content. The study concluded, “demonstrates proof that short social media videos can enhance education, at least in the short term”. Students commented that the 90-second videos increased engagement, increasing “basic fact retention to higher-order thinking” before tests. However, these positives seemed to be pulled out of thin air again. Come on, “At least in the short term”, the ‘expert’ doesn’t even sound sure of himself. Hypothetically, would you want your child to do better in a one-off test or an important final exam? The study found the same increase in results was not seen in the final exam. (Faiz et al., 2025).
Parents, get hold of your children, as opposed to these findings, experts argue that high short-form content usage negatively impacts students’ academic performance. A study followed over 1000 elementary students in China. The case found that attention span drops drastically when short-form content exposure increases. highlight “Attention plays a mediating role between short video usage and academic achievement, indicating that increased short video use can impair attention, which reduces academic performance.” I do not understand why people thought mindlessly scrolling away on girls dancing to a trending song for hours would be a good thing. The one limitation of the study is that the collected data is collected simultaneously, and no insight into long-lasting effects is visible. Although that statement has a sense of naivety, do you expect Italian brain rot to pull through suddenly in the long term? The researchers stated, “Short video usage had a significant negative predictive effect on students’ academic achievement.” (Gong & Tao, 2024).
Think about this: if a magic pill were created that made children look at the back of their hands for 2 hours while lowering attention spans, would parents use it? An artist, Eric Pickersgill, had this thought and created a haunting collection.
Children now have more advanced technology at school, and the same at home. However, schools have restrictions that good parents must incorporate. The study “Should educators be concerned? The impact of short videos on rational thinking and learning: A comparative analysis. Computers & Education” backs up the idea that short-form video negatively affects youth, which the school system understands. The study examined two ways short video use (SVU) can impact learning function: the correlation between SVU and rational thinking. Second is the difference between being educated by a short video and text and attempting a simple questionnaire. Roughly, participants with larger habits in SVU saw lower rational thinking. When looking at whether learning through short videos or text, students, on average, achieved better results learning from text. The study concludes that overactivity in short video usage causes decreased rational thinking and brain function. However, no number of studies should change parents’ minds. Children will be children; they do not know what is good for them. Parents must take pride in their parenting, find out what children do on iPads, and set restrictions instead of using them as a dinner table distraction.
What studies do not mention is the key concept that must be understood. You should go back to school, parents. First piece of homework: What is the difference between short-form and ‘snackable’ content? InAppStory (2024) defines short-form content as “Content that is concise, clear, and under 1,000 words (if written)” and snackable content as “A subset of short-form content that is highly visual, engaging, and designed for instant consumption.” Both are similar, but their objective defines their effect on youth. Short-form content allows valuable information to be effectively digested, which can be effective for youth. Snackable content is engagement overload, with no purpose or impact. Parents, if you do not know what Bombardino Crocodilo is, you are in a separate world from your child. Short-form content examples include the BBC’s “BiteSize” educational short-form website. The site includes quizzes, short videos, and much more, and I could not recommend it more. On the contrary, snackable content examples include TikTok, where content has no proactive or positive goal. However, maybe 67 will finally be helpful in a maths equation. I hope my lesson has been helpful, or did 67 confuse you? Parents, educate yourself on the field, as it is your responsibility. The matter is no walk in the park; there is a fine line between engaging short-form content and snackable content. Still, negative results were found when students used similar educational short-form content versus written text. Conveying that snackable and potentially short-form content can harm youths’ academic and learning abilities.
When focusing on how short-form content affects youth psychologically, short-form content negatively affects youths’ ability to learn. When describing why people constantly stream short-form content, experts say the algorithm feeds pointless and less engaging videos or ‘neutral stimuli. Then, it occasionally hits the brain with a frate dopamine train with an exciting video that piques children’s interest, called ‘positive stimulus. An everlasting loop of excitement is created, holding children hostage to their devices while lowering attention spans. If you want real-world researchers, Petrillo (2021) highlights how short-form content fuels dopamine release. This dopamine release dulls the effect of dopamine on the drive to learn. Highlighted by the quote “dopamine release is a key part of the positive feedback loop that drives reward-based learning. Children need all the attention span they can get to maintain academic strength. For young people, the drive to learn depletes with overexposure to short-form content. These concepts link back to the previous studies, which highlight that when children use short content to study or watch snackable content, their academic and learning abilities significantly drop. Parents, set clear boundaries, or even delete apps altogether, because short-form snackable content affects dopamine levels, impacting children’s ability to focus. (Burhan & Moradzadeh, 2020)
Hu (2023) says, “In 2004, people spent an average of 2.5 minutes on any screen before switching to another. In today’s era of multitasking, scrolling, and rabbit holes, we are down to a mere 47 seconds.” I do not know about you, but personally, that is terrifying. Like other neurological aspects, attention span greatly affects youths’ learning ability. Data suggests an almost 70 per cent decrease in users’ attention spans (Hu, 2023). Young people will struggle to concentrate and learn new knowledge without longer attention spans. Researchers provided evidence that attention plays a strong role in academic achievement. Out of the around 1000 participants, the students who were shown more short-form videos scored around 20% lower academically. These results suggest that attention levels decrease as short video usage increases to a high level of correlation. This leads to the belief that increased exposure to short-form content negatively affects students’ and young people’s learning ability through loss of attention span. Think about it now: parents and some children struggle to watch a full movie or YouTube video, as their brains are not stimulated every 10 seconds. How do you think they will go in school classes?
So, what should parents do? Undoubtedly, the shorter, attention-grabbing style of short-form or snackable content is engaging, but it is up to the content within that drives its usefulness. Short-form content must change to build a strong future of strong, academic, attention-filled youth. The benefit of short-form content is its ability to portray positive content in a quick, succinct format, allowing for quick learning. On the contrary, its additive design can easily become excessively used, making content snackable. Children should not be watching the latest ‘brain rot’ or TikTok dance, as it is unproductive and lowers attention spans. Linking to all the real-world studies, ideas of how short-form video platforms occasionally produce positive stimulus that gives users a dopamine rush to continue scrolling, turning content harmful for youth. Neurologically, short-form content negatively impacts the youth’s ability to learn. Petrillo (2021) clarifies, “An addiction to short-form media is essentially an addiction to the constant influx of information presented in the attractive content made available by apps like TikTok.” Attention spans play an extremely important role in academia. Short video usage and academic achievement are hand in hand with negative consequences. Many provide evidence that short-form content provides short-term memory retention, but the correlation is low, and long-term retention does not pay off. As short-form content usage increases, young people’s attention spans and dopamine levels decrease, affecting their ability to focus and drive to learn new content. It is time to act before it is too late. Parents, if your children use TikTok or other related sites, take control. Experts suggest setting screen times and having fun family rules. Allow your child to be bored; boredom fuels creativity. Most importantly, lead by example.
To conclude, short-form content has exploded in popularity in the last decade. Its engaging style can be a powerful tool for learning among youth. Why is it so bad? What can you do? Others believe it is harmful because it affects young people’s ability to focus and learn. Really, anyone who thinks watching TikTok for over two hours is living under a rock. Understanding the difference between short-form and snackable content is essential. I still believe excessive interaction with short-form snackable content reduces young people’s attention spans and dopamine levels, impacting their ability to focus and drive to learn new content to an extent. InAppStory (2024) highlights that the purpose of short form is to transfer knowledge quickly, compared to snackable, holding attention. Parents go all in on education if that works for your children, but overconsumption of ‘brain rot,’ well, it is in the name. There is strong evidence that dopamine release through short-form content reduces attention spans. In short, short form negatively affects the youths’ ability to learn. The suggestions for compacting the power of these sites include setting screen times. Another is engaging in fun family rules, such as tech-free zones like the dinner table or bedrooms, and if caught, do ten push-ups. Engage with what children do online, learn the positives and negatives, because it is the parents’ responsibility. Lastly, lead by example, model positive behaviour.
References
Bates, M. (2024). Creating short-form content for academic libraries: a workflow. Reference Services Review, 52(3), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-07-2024-0037
BBC. (2023). BBC Bitesize. BBC Bitesize. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize
Burhan, R., & Moradzadeh, J. (2020). Neurotransmitter Dopamine (DA) and Its Role in the Development of Social Media Addiction Corresponding Author*. Journal of Neurology & Neurophysiology, 2020(7), 507. https://www.iomcworld.org/open-access/neurotransmitter-dopamine-da-and-its-role-in-the-development-of-social-media-addiction.pdf
Duarte, F. (25 July 2025). TikTok User age, gender, & Demographics (2025). Exploding Topics. https://explodingtopics.com/blog/tiktok-demographics
Faiz, J., Grock, A., & Warren, J. (2025). Social Media Video for Education—Is Bite-Size Content Enough for Long-Term Gain? JAMA Network Open, 8(9), e2533977. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.33977
Gong, Q., & Tao, T. (2024). The relationship between short video usage and academic achievement among elementary school students: The mediating effect of attention and the moderating effect of parental short video usage. PLOS ONE, 19(11), e0309899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0309899
Herald, T. (24 May 2023). The Rise of Short Form Content. Medium: TLMUN Herald. https://medium.com/tlmun-herald/the-rise-of-short-form-content-bbd7a47b0d6d#
Hu, E. (6 April 2023). Regain Control of Your Focus and Attention with Researcher Gloria Mark. Www.microsoft.com. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/worklab/podcast/regain-control-of-your-focus-and-attention-with-researcher-gloria-mark
InAppStory, K. (23 September 2024). Why Short-Form Video Content is Hard to Resist – And How It Can Work for You. InAppStory. https://inappstory.com/blog/short-form-content
Petrillo, S. (13 December 2021). What Makes TikTok so Addictive?: An Analysis of the Mechanisms Underlying the World’s Latest Social Media Craze. Brown Undergraduate Journal of Public Health; Brown University School of Public Health. https://sites.brown.edu/publichealthjournal/2021/12/13/tiktok/
Qi, J., Yan, Y., & Yin, H. (2023). Screen time among school-aged children aged 6–14: A systematic review. Global Health Research and Policy, 8(12). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-023-00297-z
Sammy Tassone 
Monique B 
digginspaige