Author/Title	Region	Results	Effects	n
Domain: General cognitive performance
Boila, V. C., Kwong, T. E., and Hintz, J. E. (2017) [18]	North America	The group with a cell phone present outperformed the group without a cell phone in all subtests (sentence comprehension, spelling, and math subtest).	Sentence comprehension subtest: phone present (M = 100.45, SD = 10.17) phone absent (M = 98.18, SD = 12.96), t(42) = 0.65, p = 0.52, g = 0.19, 95% CI (−4.82, 9.36) Spelling subtest: phone present (M = 106.71, SD = 6.80) phone absent (M = 102.35, SD = 8.09), t(39) = 1.87, p = 0.07, g = 0.58, 95% CI (−0.35, 9.08) Mathematics subtest: phone present (M = 92.64, SD = 9.05), phone absent (M = 88.32, SD = 8.49), t(42) = 1.63, p = 0.11, g = 0.49, 95% CI (−1.02, 9.66)	45
Stone, J. (2020) [8]	North America	Cell phone presence inhibited performance. Cell phone visibility reduces cognitive performance.	Fluid intelligence: desk condition (M = 63.28, SD = 9.10, n = 19) other room (M = 51.55, SD = 12.13, n = 18) t(35) = 3.312, p = 0.002	37
Toader, J. F. et al. (2022) [29]	Europe	The data presented show that distraction by phone calls decreases the performance level of medical students during an OSCE station.	OSCE I (students with both stations n = 13 each): not distracted by phone calls (M = 8.48, SD = 0.89) distracted by telephone calls (M = 7.39, SD = 0.91) OSCE II (students with both wards, n = 101 each): not distracted by phone calls (M = 7.61, SD = 1.16) distracted by telephone calls (M = 6.92, SD = 1.23)	308
Domain: Memory
Nakagawa, N. et al. (2022) [23]	Asia	The presence of the smartphone did not affect electroencephalography results or working memory.	g = −0.25, 95% CI = −0.58, 0.09	36
Stone, J. (2020) [8]	North America	Results showed that cell phone presence inhibited performance. Cell phone visibility reduces cognitive performance.	Working memory capacity: other room (M = 64.24, SD = 6.05, n = 18) desk condition (M = 57.80, SD = 7.08, n = 19); t(35) = 2.965, p = 0.005	37
Quanbrough, J. (2018) [25]	Europe	The results showed that smartphone presence impaired the participants’ cognitive performance.	Working memory capacity: smartphones present (n = 51, M = 10.43, M = 11.00, SD = 3.00) smartphones absent (n = 48, M = 11.66, M = 12.00, SD = 2.89) (W = 1464.5, p = 0.03, r = −0.22, g = 0.42)	99
Tanil, C. T. and Yong, M. H. (2020) [27]	North America	Presence of a smartphone and high phone awareness negatively affect memory learning and recall.	Presence (HS) or absence (LS) of smartphone. LS (M = 14.21, SD = 2.61), HS (M = 13.08, SD = 2.53), t(117) = 2.38, p = 0.02, g = 0.44	119
Hartmann, M., Martarelli, C. S., Reber, T. P., and Rothen, N. (2020) [20]	Europe	No overall effect of smartphone presence on short-term and perspective memory performance. Better performance in participants with low smartphone dependence when smartphone was not present.	F(1, 300) = 0.17, p = 0.676	302
Hartanto, A. and Yang, H. (2016) [21]	Asia	Smartphone absence leads to reduction in working memory capacity. Impairment of mental shifting independent of the extent of smartphone addiction.	Stroop task (assesses inhibitory-control processing): effect of smartphone separation: B = 47.23, p = 0.028 Rotation span test (working-memory capacity): effect of smartphone separation: t(60) = 1.98, p = 0.052, g = 0.52	70
Ward, A. F., Duke, K., Gneezy, A., and Bos, M. W. (2017) [3]	North America	The mere presence of smartphones can negatively affect the available capacity of working memory.	Effect 1: g = −0.17, 95% CI = −0.47, 0.12 Effect 2: g = −0.25, 95% CI = −0.58, 0.09	521
Niu, G. et al. (2022) [24]	Asia	The presence of smartphones has a negative impact on cognitive functions.	g = −0.29, 95% CI = −0.68, 0.10	100
Canale, N., Vieno, A., Doro, M., Rosa Mineo, E., Marino, C., and Billieux, J. (2019) [22]	Europe	Turned-on devices had a detrimental effect on subjects’ task performance.	Effect 1: g = −0.29, 95% CI = −0.73, 0.15 Effect 2: g = −0.19, 95% CI = −0.25, 0.63	159
Ruiz Pardo, A., and Minda, J. (2022) [18]	North America	The mere presence of the smartphone is not enough to affect cognitive performance.	Effect 1: g = −0.17, 95% CI = −0.52, 0.19 Effect 2: g = −0.08, 95% CI = −0.42, 0.25 Effect 3: g = −0.03, 95% CI = −0.38, 0.33 Effect 4: g = 0.14, 95% CI = −0.21, 0.49	511
Domain: Attention
Aguila, B. (2019) [31]	North America	Presence of a cell phone led to poorer performance among participants with smartphones in close proximity.	g = −0.71, 95% CI = −1.30, −0.12	57
Ruiz Pardo, A., and Minda, J. (2022) [18]	North America	The mere presence of the smartphone is not enough to affect cognitive performance.	Effect 5: g = 0.00, 95% CI = −0.33, 0.33 Effect 6: g = 0.00, 95% CI = −0.35, 0.35 Effect 7: g = 0.13, 95% CI = −0.22, 0.49 Effect 8: g = 0.13, 95% CI = −0.22, 0.49	511
Moshiri, J. (2018) [17]	North America	Smartphone presence had no significant effect on cognitive performance.	Effect 1: g = 0.05, 95% CI = −0.35, 0.45 Effect 2: g = 0.16, 95% CI = −0.24, 0.56	192
Ward, A. F., Duke, K., Gneezy, A. and Bos, M. W. (2017) [3]	North America	Presence of smartphone can tax cognitive resources, leaving fewer resources available for other tasks and impairing cognitive performance.	Effect 3: g = 0.07, 95% CI = −0.22, 0.36 Effect 4: g = 0.07, 95% CI = −0.22, 0.37	361
Koessmeier, C. and Büttner, O. (2022) [19]	Europe	Presence of the smartphone without influence on task performance.	g = 0.10, 95% CI = −0.32, 0.53	86
Lyngs, U. (2017) [15]	Europe	Presence of smartphone without influence on task performance.	g = 0.20, 95% CI = −0.34, 0.74	53
Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., and Rollins, E. (2014) [30]	North America	Mere presence of a cell phone sufficiently distracting to lead to decreased attention and deficits in task performance, especially in tasks with higher attentional and cognitive demands.	Digit cancellations: cell phone present (experimental group, M = 21.29) no cell phone present (M = 26.17) F(1, 45) = 5.80, p < 0.05, g2 p = 0.11 Trail making tests: more difficult Part B: phone present (M = 14.50) phone not present (M = 16.91) F(1, 45) = 4.05, p = 0.05, g2 p = 0.08	54
Gutierrez-Puertas et al. (2020) [26]	Europe	More attentive in class without access to cell phones.	Mindful attention awareness scale: smartphone absent (M = 54.17, SD = 14.30, n = 63) smartphone present, M = 48.27, SD = 12.71, n = 61)	124
Mahsud, M., Khaaf, A. J. M., Mahsud, Z., Afzal, A., Afzal, F. (2021) [9]	Asia/Europe	Concentration disturbed by smartphones. Asian concentrate better without smartphones. European students became restless without smartphones.	European students (n = 18): without smartphone: M = 4.7, SD = 3.34 with smartphone: M = 8.25, SD = 1.92 Asian students (n = 22): without smartphone: M = 5, SD = 2.44 with smartphone: M = 5.25, SD = 8.02	40
Stavrum, M. (2020) [16]	North America	No statistically significant effect of smartphone availability on performance.	Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices: smartphone present (M = 27.45, SD = 1.78) smartphone absent (M = 27.15, SD = 1.88) Spanboard Test: smartphone present (M = 6.6, SD = 1.78) smartphone absent (M = 6.5, SD = 1.39)	40
Mendoza, J. S., Pody, B. C., Lee, S., Kim, M., and McDonough, I. M. (2018) [28]	North America	Participants distracted by the smartphone performed worse in the test than those who were not distracted.	Main effect of group was found: F(1158) = 7.51, MSE = 0.029, p = 0.007, h2p = 0.05 Quiz performance: cellphones removed (M = 0.65, SD = 0.17) cellphones retained (M = 0.57, SD = 0.16)	160
Note. n = number of observations.