People are increasingly bored in our digital age

Abstract

In an era where entertainment is effortlessly at our fingertips, one would assume that people are less bored than ever. Yet, reports of boredom are higher now than compared to the past. This rising trend is concerning because chronic boredom can undermine well-being, learning, and behaviour. Understanding why this is happening is crucial to prevent further negative impacts. In this Perspective, we explore one possible reason—digital media use makes people more bored. We propose that digital media increases boredom through dividing attention, elevating desired level of engagement, reducing sense of meaning, heightening opportunity costs, and serving as an ineffective boredom coping strategy.

In recent years, there has been an increase in both reports of boredom and greater use of digital media. Digital media may exacerbate boredom via multiple pathways including dividing attention and reducing sense of meaning.

Introduction

It has never been easier to access stimulation. Just a few decades ago, we had to wait in front of the television for weekly broadcasts, turn to books or sluggish Internet browsers on clunky desktops for information, and rely on landline telephones for chatting with friends. Today, digital devices let us entertain, work, socialize, and access information anywhere, anytime. Technology has propelled us into an era of constant digital engagement. With endless rewarding stimulation a fingertip away, one would assume that boredom has become a rare experience. Yet, the reverse has happened: there had been a concerning rise in boredom among young people from 2009 to 2020, as revealed by nationally representative surveys¹ and a meta-analysis of birth cohort changes². People are becoming increasingly bored.

The question of why is pressing because chronic boredom can undermine well-being, learning, and behaviour. For example, it is associated with mental health issues like depressive symptoms and anxiety³, undesirable learning outcomes like poorer academic performance⁴, as well as problematic behaviours like sadistic aggression⁵. Exploring the reasons is critical to curb the trend and mitigate its adverse effects.

In this Perspective, we synthesize emerging findings and theories to propose a possible reason for the heightening boredom over the past decade: digital media use. We review empirical evidence on digital media use intensifying boredom. We then explore the underlying mechanisms through which digital media might contribute to increased boredom, including how it shifts attention, desire, sense of meaning, opportunity costs, and boredom coping. We begin, however, by discussing boredom and its rise over the years.

What is boredom?

It is unpleasant to be bored^6,7. When state boredom (hereafter referred to as boredom) strikes, time appears to pass slowly^8,9, while a range of negative emotions, such as sadness, loneliness, tiredness, restlessness, anxiety, anger, and frustration, may descend^10–14. Defined as “an aversive state of wanting to, but being unable to, engage in satisfying activities” (p. 483)¹⁵, boredom is intricately tied to attention^16–20. It is characterized by a feedback loop of attentional shifts, triggered by a gap between how engaged one wants to be and how engaged one is²⁰. For example, situations lacking novelty^21,22, meaning^{7,11,13,18,23}, autonomy²⁴, sense of agency^25–27, and optimal challenge^13,14,28 tend to provoke the feeling of boredom.

Despite its unpleasant experience, boredom serves an important self-regulatory function: it informs people that the current situation lacks meaning and fulfillment, motivating them to do something about it^13,29. It can promote prosocial intention²³, retrieval of nostalgic memories³⁰, self-reflection³¹, and search for meaningful engagement^23,30,32. Some people recognize these functions, indicating that boredom drives them to make changes, train their patience, as well as help them better discern what is truly meaningful or interesting to them³³.

Dysfunction of this regulatory feedback loop, in which people repeatedly fail to attain fulfilling engagement, may prolong the experience of boredom^20,34. Boredom proneness has been referred to as “trait boredom”^27,35, “chronic boredom”^20,36, “the tendency toward experiencing boredom” (p.14)³⁷, and “the average intensity of boredom in response to a set of representative events over a defined period of time” (p. 204)³⁸. Despite recurring criticisms over its conceptual ambiguity^{27,34,38–40}, the importance of this construct is evident for its associations with well-being and at-risk behaviours^3,5,41,42. Here, we refer to boredom proneness as chronic boredom—the long-term experience of boredom—given that it is characterized by the frequency and intensity of boredom, as well as a general perception of life as being boring³⁹.

Chronic boredom can undermine mental health, learning, and behaviour. It is associated with depressive symptoms, anxiety, stress, apathy, anhedonia, and lower life satisfaction^{3,39,41,43,44}. Academic boredom results in lower motivations to learn, poorer grades, and reduced academic effort and interest^45–52. Behaviourally, momentary experiences of boredom can trigger sadistic aggression^5,53, unhealthy snacking^54,55, risk-taking⁴², ingroup favouritism, outgroup devaluation⁵⁶, political polarization³², self-administering electric shocks^54,57,58, as well as self-administering aversive sounds despite the presence of a positive alternative⁵⁹. Chronic experience of it is linked to poorer self-control^60,61, binge drinking⁶², and rule-breaking^63,64.

Rising trends in boredom

Research reveals a historical population-level increase in boredom over the past decade. One study identifies a rising trend in boredom frequency from 2010 to 2017 using multicohort, nationally representative samples of U.S. secondary school students (Fig. 1)¹. Another study reports a similar increase in boredom proneness from 2009 to 2020 through a cross-temporal meta-analysis of 64 studies involving Chinese college students².

Fig. 1. A historical trend in boredom from 2008 to 2017 in multicohort nationally representative samples of U.S. secondary school students.

Reprinted from Weybright, E. H. et al.¹, Copyright (2020), with permission from Elsevier. The y-axis represents boredom, measured by a single item “I am often bored,” rated on a 5-point scale (1 = disagree, 5 = agree).

In the first study, Weybright and colleagues analysed data from annual surveys of nationally representative samples of 8th, 10th, and 12th graders across approximately 400 public and private high schools in the 48 contiguous U.S. states (N = 106,784)¹. They observed a historical increase in frequency of boredom, measured by a single item “I am often bored,” rated on a 5-point scale (1 = disagree, 5 = agree). Using joinpoint regression, they found a non-significant decrease in boredom by 1.17% per year from 2008 to 2010, followed by a significant increase of 1.14% per year from 2010 to 2017 (see Fig. 1). Boredom levels were higher for boys by 1.6% per year from 2014 to 2017 and for girls by 1.7% per year from 2010 to 2017. While the slopes for each sex were significantly different, higher levels were evident across both.

The authors used an item with a 5-point scale, which has limitations in capturing variations in boredom due to its narrow range¹. However, because the scale is narrow, even small absolute changes can reflect meaningful shifts in boredom. In terms of annual percent change, other studies using joinpoint regression have shown changes of such magnitude that are meaningful. For example, the prevalence of depression among U.S. adults increased by an average of 1.12% per year from 2013 to 2022⁶⁵. The global incidence of anxiety disorders among males increased by 0.35% per year from 2014 to 2019, while the increase among females was 0.25% per year from 2015 to 2019⁶⁶. Social isolation among Americans aged over 15 increased by 0.32% per year from 2003 to 2018, with a sharp rise of 5.65% per year from 2018 to 2020⁶⁷. These changes might appear small, but they carry significant implications as their effects could accumulate over time⁶⁸.

In the second study, Gu and colleagues analysed data from 64 studies involving college students from mainland China (N = 28,269)². They identified higher scores in later assessments in boredom proneness, measured by the Boredom Proneness Scale³⁷—the most widely used measure for boredom⁴⁰. Higher boredom proneness reflects higher frequency and intensity of boredom, as well as a holistic perception of life being boring³⁹. In their cross-temporal meta-analysis, the authors found that the mean boredom proneness score of Chinese college students was higher in 2020 at 118.75 compared to 104.49 in 2009. The effect size of this increase, expressed in terms of Cohen’s d, was 1.57. When interpreted in terms of percentiles, if the mean in 2009 was at the 50th percentile, the mean in 2020 would be close to the 94th percentile of a normal distribution.

Both studies focused on student samples but did not assess boredom specifically within school settings^1,2. Their findings, therefore, reflect broader experiences of boredom in daily life. Further research is needed to assess how they generalize to other age groups, cultural contexts, and educational backgrounds. Since the studies did not track boredom levels of the same individuals over time, future longitudinal research should explore within-person changes in boredom. Despite these limitations, both studies reported statistically significant higher levels of boredom in more recent reports, operationalized as boredom frequency and boredom proneness, with magnitudes comparable to other trends, such as rises in depression, anxiety and social isolation^65–67, or demonstrating a large effect size².

Our goal is not to create a moral panic, but rather to highlight a potentially concerning trend. Seemingly small effects of a psychological construct—consider how often it occurs in a day, week, or year—can accumulate over time and impact major life outcomes⁶⁸. Feeling bored may seem trivial, but it can lead to negative mental health, learning, and behavioral outcomes. People are feeling bored more often. While more research on this increase is urgently needed before drawing any firm conclusions, we believe it is essential to explore the underlying reasons.

Digital media use makes people more bored

To explore the reasons for this increase, one must ask: What significant changes occurred worldwide during this time? While a lot had happened, one notable place to look is the advancement of digital technology. Both groups of researchers who identified the rising trend in boredom speculated that digital media played some role^1,2. Indices of digital media use in China, including weekly internet usage per capita, internet penetration rate and mobile phone penetration rate, positively predicted boredom proneness levels from 2009 to 2020².

Over the past two decades, there has been a widespread proliferation of smartphones. The first Apple iPhone was introduced in 2007, and global smartphone sales surged from 122 million in 2007 to over 1.35 billion in 2020⁶⁹. Meanwhile, popular social media platforms emerged, including Facebook in 2004, YouTube in 2005, X (formerly Twitter) in 2006, WhatsApp in 2009, Instagram in 2010, and TikTok in 2016. Over 5 billion people worldwide are using social media in 2024, spending an average of 151 minutes per day on it—up from 40 min in 2015⁷⁰. Furthermore, video consumption gradually shifted from traditional television broadcasts to streaming services like Netflix, YouTube, and Prime Video. In the U.S., streaming video consumption surpassed cable TV viewing in 2022⁷¹. Research on global trends indicates that daily screen time across devices, including computers, laptops, tablets, mobile phones, televisions, and game consoles, increased from 9 h in 2012 to 11 h in 2019, with time spent on mobile phones increasing by around 2 h⁷².

The advent of smartphones, along with the rise of social media and streaming platforms, have revolutionized people’s lives. They have amplified the quantity and diversity of information individuals encounter, granting instant access to news updates, insights into others’ lives and opinions via social media, and an abundance of entertainment options. They have reshaped how people access stimulation, making it easier, more convenient, and effortlessly accessible from any time at any location where WIFI or data connection permits. Entertainment⁷³, relaxation⁷⁴, information seeking⁷⁵, and boredom relief^75–77 are major motivations for digital media use. At the slightest hint of boredom, people can instantly pull out their phones for all aspects of stimulation.

Considering this, one might expect that digital media would reduce boredom. After all, some scholars have suggested that digital technologies leave little room for boredom, and people might even begin to feel nostalgic for times when they were bored⁷⁸. Why, then, do we observe not only a rising trend in boredom^1,2 but also a consistent positive relationship between boredom and digital media use⁷⁹? Boredom is positively associated with problematic smartphone use^80–85, social media use^86–90, Internet use^91,92, short video use⁹³, as well as phubbing, the behaviour of ignoring a companion in favor of smartphone use^94,95. A meta-analysis of 59 empirical studies demonstrates that boredom had a small-to-medium positive association with digital media use, and a medium-to-large association with problematic digital media use⁷⁹.

Of course, a positive relationship can indicate that boredom drives digital media use, but it can also suggest that digital media use intensifies boredom. Accumulating evidence shows that digital media use, rather than reducing boredom, causally increases it. In one experiment, smartphone use intensified boredom in social interactions⁹⁶. In another, engaging with social media via smartphone heightened boredom over time⁹⁷. Moreover, boredom drove people to fast-forward or skip online videos, but this behaviour intensified boredom⁹⁸. In an experience-sampling study that tracked hourly boredom levels and smartphone use at work, participants were more likely to use their smartphones when bored but reported increased boredom after using them⁹⁹. In another experience-sampling study using a representative sample, X (formerly Twitter) use was associated with within-person increase in boredom¹⁰⁰. Furthermore, a longitudinal study shows a bidirectional association between chronic boredom and problematic smartphone use, with problematic smartphone use being a stronger predictor of chronic boredom than the reverse⁸². Taken together, emerging research using diverse methodologies converges to suggest that digital media use causes people to become more bored. It is therefore plausible that digital media had contributed to the rising trend in boredom over the past decade.

Despite making a causal claim, we emphasize the need for further investigation to fully understand these relationships. Concerns about new technologies have been raised for centuries, such as Socrates’s worries about how writing might undermine memory¹⁰¹, and Neil Postman’s concerns about the effects of television on critical thinking¹⁰². While some of these fears are exaggerated, they might also contain a kernel of truth. The challenges of adapting to new technologies and understanding their effects on emotion, cognition, and well-being continue to evolve. Although we are concerned about the role of digital media in rising boredom, we are not suggesting it is the sole cause. We focus on digital media because, as outlined below, it is one plausible contributor based on existing theoretical and empirical evidence.

How does digital media increase boredom?

We suggest that digital media makes people more bored through dividing attention, elevating desired level of engagement, diminishing sense of meaning, raising opportunity costs, as well as serving as an ineffective boredom coping strategy.

Digital devices divide attention

Digital devices intensify boredom by disrupting attention. Inattention is a defining characteristic of boredom according to multiple theoretical models^{15,18,20,103–105}. It distinguishes boredom from many other negative emotions⁷. Correlational^16,44,106, experimental¹⁸, psychophysiological¹⁰⁷, neuropsychological^17,19, and intervention¹⁰⁸ findings consistently suggest a robust relationship between inattention and boredom.

Whereas people feel bored when they fail to stay focused, digital devices bombard people with distracting signals and notifications throughout a day. It is reported that, on a typical day, young people receive a median of 237 notifications on their phones¹⁰⁹. These notifications disrupt attention, slow reaction times, worsen task performance^110,111, and prompt people to turn away from their current activities to check their phones¹¹². Several experiments illustrate that the mere presence of a phone is sufficient to diminish attention and increase errors in cognitive tasks^111,113,114. Smartphone use increases inattention, simultaneously intensifying boredom^96,97.

While digital devices are distracting, the way people interact with them further impedes attention. Media multitasking describes the behaviour of engaging in multiple media activities, consuming separate media simultaneously, or performing various media tasks, each with its own objective¹¹⁵. It is common in many aspects of modern life, be it at work^116–118, at school^119,120, or in daily life¹²¹. This multitasking behaviour increases attentional failures^122–124 and reduces enjoyment^123,125. Switching between digital content, such as fast-forwarding and skipping videos, further reduces attention and intensifies boredom⁹⁸. A network analysis reveals interlocking relationships between problematic short video use, state boredom, boredom proneness, and attention control⁹³.

People’s habitual urge to check smartphones also disrupts daily activities. A study analysing first-person video recordings of daily smartphone behaviours reports that 89% of interactions were initiated by users, not the devices¹²⁶. People engaged with their phones for approximately 10 min each hour, in a pattern of 1 min every 5 min. Smartphone checking predicted daily cognitive failures including higher distractibility¹²⁷. In sum, digital media makes it harder for people to maintain focus on daily activities and reduces their intention to stay focused, thus increasing boredom.

Digital media elevates desired level of engagement

Digital media might also push up one’s desired level of engagement, rendering previously engaging activities boring. Boredom stems from a gap between actual and subjectively desired levels of attentional engagement²⁰. In other words, even when people are engaged, boredom can still arise if they crave more engaging experiences. Theoretically, this desire, or say, the standard of what is sufficiently engaging, can be elevated by chronic exposure to rewarding stimulation²⁰. According to research on affective habituation, repeated exposures to pleasurable stimuli reduce people’s sensitivity to them^128,129. Digital media provides a regular stream of rewarding stimulation, including connection, social rewards, entertainment, and information^{73,74,130,131}. It is thus possible that digital media heightens one’s desired level of attentional engagement, making activities that are less stimulating experienced as more boring.

How digital media influences desired engagement requires additional empirical study. For now, there are traces of such heightened desire in people. Over years, social media platforms have gradually shifted their content priorities to maintain user engagement, transitioning from text-based content to pictures, from pictures to videos, and now from longer videos to short-form videos¹³². This reflects a trend towards shorter, faster, more visually and auditorily stimulating content to capture attention. Shorter videos, for example, tend to receive more likes, comments, and shares¹³³. During leisure, doing one activity at a time is no longer engaging enough so that many people now prefer to perform multiple activities at the same time. It is common for people to use a digital device while watching TV, a behaviour known as second screening¹³⁴. An experience-sampling study suggests that media multitasking fulfills perceived emotional needs, such as the desire for entertainment or pleasure, but only when those needs are low¹³⁵. It seems that some people have come to rely on multiple sources of stimulation for adequate engagement, reflecting an increased desire. With this heightened desire, people might readily find activities insufficiently engaging and become more prone to boredom.

Online information induces meaninglessness

Digital media potentially reduces sense of meaning and intensifies boredom by presenting an overwhelming amount of information that lacks coherence. Other than inattention, lack of meaning is another defining characteristic of boredom^13,18,136 that differentiates it from other emotions⁷. The interlocking relationship between meaninglessness and boredom is evident in experimental^{13,23,32,41,56} and experience-sampling^11,137 studies. Meaning emerges from a sense of coherence, that things make sense^138–143. It is “the web of connections, understandings, and interpretations that help us comprehend our experience and formulate plans directing our energies to the achievement of our desired future” (p. 165)¹⁴⁰. Sense of meaning thus partly hinges on the perception of coherence and reliable patterns^139,140,142.

In the past, people primarily received information through traditional media channels like television, radio, newspapers, and books, where content was usually presented in a coherent, narrative format. Today, digital media not only offers an unparalleled amount and variety of information but also delivers it in a much more fragmented manner. For example, how does an Instagram post about pizza relate to a tweet about space exploration? And how do they relate to oneself? Processing the relationships between various pieces of online information can be challenging, if not impossible. Even simple experimental manipulation, such as presenting multiple videos or articles, can increase feelings of meaninglessness and boredom⁹⁸. Online information tends to be far more incoherent than these experimental stimuli. From a sociological perspective, boredom occurs both with too little and too much information: too little leads to redundancy and monotony that little meaning can be derived from, while too much information is chaotic and noisy for effective meaning making^144,145. It is plausible that digital media increases boredom by undermining people’s sense of meaning through its presentation of vast, disjointed information.

Digital devices raise opportunity costs

Digital devices offer countless options for stimulation, potentially raising the opportunity costs of other forms of engagement and thereby giving rise to boredom. Opportunity costs of a chosen activity are the forgone values of alternative activities. Experimental findings suggest that awareness of alternative activities increases the opportunity costs of the current activity, and when the freedom to switch to those alternatives is restricted, boredom arises^98,146. For example, participants placed in a room filled with potential activities but instructed to occupy themselves solely with their thoughts experienced greater boredom than those in an empty room¹⁴⁶.

Opportunity cost highlights the trade-offs in decision-making. It is related to, but distinct from, desired level of engagement, which refers to how engaged one wants to be²⁰. For example, people might choose an activity with low opportunity costs, like watching a movie during free time, but still wish it was more engaging. Conversely, even if people did an activity with high opportunity costs, like studying instead of playing games, they might still find their engagement level in studying met their desired level. Also, people might have a high desire for engagement in situations where they gave up many interesting activities. These two constructs are interrelated.

While boredom is theorized to be intertwined with opportunity costs^147,148, smartphones might readily amplify the opportunity costs of other daily activities by offering numerous entertaining alternatives. Before smartphones, the next best options to a given task included activities like daydreaming, observing the environment, or self-reflection—activities that, while less engaging, were readily available. However, smartphones, being portable and accessible anywhere, provide a variety of more engaging alternatives, such as chatting with friends or watching videos. This raises the opportunity costs of other activities, as smartphone use presents more attractive alternatives. Not to mention they regularly send notifications, like messages, social media updates, or latest podcast episodes, that remind users of the enjoyable activities they have forgone. This might be especially pronounced in environments like the workplace and school, where people are required to focus on other commitments. Taken together, digital devices might increase the opportunity costs of everyday activities, leading to the experience of boredom.

Using digital media to cope with boredom

Thus far, we have reviewed evidence on digital media use intensifying boredom, followed by its potential underlying mechanisms. This might seem counter-intuitive because people often turn to digital media as they believe it will relieve their boredom. Boredom relief is a primary motivation for using smartphone^75–77 and social media⁷⁵. However, using a digital device does not provide relief from boredom but often exacerbates it^96,97,99. Boredom drives people to switch between digital content, yet this behaviour exacerbates boredom⁹⁸.

In other words, people use digital media to avoid boredom, but this coping strategy is ineffective as it intensifies boredom rather than alleviating it. This might form a feedback loop that prolongs the bored experience, potentially leading to chronic boredom. Excessive smartphone use predicts chronic boredom, as shown in correlational, longitudinal, and meta-analytic studies^79–85. Increased time spent on digital media^72,149 might also reduce the relative time available for other meaningful leisure activities, thereby increasing boredom. People feel more bored using smartphones for entertainment compared to activities like exercising and socializing with others face-to-face¹¹, but longer screen time is associated with less physical activity and outdoor time¹⁴⁹.

From a predictive processing perspective, avoiding boredom may cause people to miss important information that this emotion provides¹⁵⁰. For example, if people constantly use smartphones to escape boredom, they might overlook its crucial signals such as a lack of purposes or challenges in their lives. This short-term distraction could prevent them from making better long-term decisions to alleviate boredom effectively. Empirical evidence supports the notion that avoidance is ineffective for coping with boredom. People who tend to avoid boredom are more prone to boredom¹⁵¹. Students who adopt behavioral avoidance strategies to cope with boredom experience it more frequently and report lower enjoyment, interest, and effort in class^152–154. In contrast, those who tend to use cognitive approach strategies, such as refocusing on the lesson, are less frequently bored^153,154. With significant changes in technology and lifestyles over the past decade, people might not have adapted well to handling boredom, contributing to the rising trend in this emotion.

Outlook

Why are people more bored in this digital age? We suggest that digital media might have contributed to the increase in boredom through dividing attention, elevating desired level of engagement, reducing sense of meaning, raising opportunity costs, as well as serving as an ineffective boredom coping strategy. Based on these factors, the trend of rising boredom is likely to persist. People’s habits of interacting with digital media, coupled with their increasingly insatiable desire for stimulation, might result in spirals of boredom. This could gradually render once-enjoyable activities mundane and bring downstream negative learning, behavioral, and mental health consequences. To counter this trend and lessen its detrimental impacts, further research is vital. Here, we underscore several outstanding questions.

By no means are we suggesting that digital media is the only factor contributing to the increasing trend in boredom. Cultural shifts may also play a role, as many aspects of life, such as politics^155–157 and religion¹⁵⁸, have been subjected to the demands of entertainment¹⁰². Other possible factors include economic development² and changes in social behaviours⁶⁷. For future investigations, panel study would be helpful in exploring both interpersonal and intrapersonal factors that vary boredom levels over time and across developmental stages. Studying boredom from a population and societal perspective, which is currently lacking in the literature, would also provide valuable insights.

Digital media has irreversibly become an integral part of our lives. The challenge then is not to eliminate digital devices, but to explore how to best use them without exacerbating boredom. Investigations on time use and boredom can offer valuable insights into leading a more meaningful and engaging life. Research should also explore effective and adaptive strategies for coping with boredom, providing alternatives to digital media for individuals seeking relief. Emerging research highlights the link between boredom and sense of agency^25–27, which is the perception that one initiates and controls one’s own actions¹⁵⁹; future studies could examine how they relate to digital media use.

Given the paramount role of attention in boredom^15,20 and evidence that attention training can reduce both state boredom and boredom proneness¹⁰⁸, further investigations into strategies for sustaining focus and fostering motivation to stay focused, not only at work or school but also during entertainment, are essential. Research on desired level of engagement, including its determinants and impacts, is also needed. For instance, does frequent consumption of short-form videos impede engagement with longer videos, texts, or educational content? With easy access to stimulation and a heightened desire for engagement, could people become intolerant of even the possibility of feeling bored? Not everything in life is inherently and constantly interesting. There are, for example, stages in learning and practices that are tedious yet essential for personal growth. If people prioritize interestingness when deciding where to focus their attention, serious and important matters that lack immediate stimulation might struggle to hold their attention. In this digital age, learning to navigate mundane moments is more critical than ever.

Author contributions

Katy Tam: conceptualization, writing – original draft, review & editing. Michael Inzlicht: conceptualization, review & editing, supervision.

Peer review

Peer review information

Communications psychology thanks James Danckert and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Jennifer Bellingtier. A peer review file is available.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s44271-024-00155-9.