While the UK bucked the trend, results on the continent continued a slide that began in 2018. In France, Germany, the Netherlands and Finland, the proportion of 15-year-olds lacking basic functional literacy and maths skills rose to nearly one in three.
Compounding it all, incessant smartphone use has dramatically reduced attention spans, replacing “deep reading” with scrolling, and pupil motivation has collapsed.
Citations needed, this is an argument based on a lazy moral panic and this quoted sentence is doing a criminal amount of work here.
For one, attention span does not exist meaningfully when abstracted from motivation and context.
However, teachers’ unions and literacy advocates reacted with frustration. The AOb teachers’ union argued reading levels would never improve as long as “classes are routinely cancelled, non-qualified staff are filling gaps, and the workload is driving experienced educators out of the profession.”
The reading advocacy group Stichting Lezen added that the failure lay “not with pupils, but with an approach that has turned reading into a set of mechanical comprehension tricks rather than fostering deep reading habits”.
The real reason is the above one, kids these days are given far less of a future than they used to be and are no longer seen as anything but a burden by neoliberalism.
Have you seen evidence to the contrary re attention spans? There are quite a few studies pointing this direction specifically relating to short form video use.
Given that the trend downward is somewhat globally universal (at least in math and reading, non-OECD countries had more stable scores in science) I have a hard time believing it’s due to curriculum, funding, or teacher policies which differ significantly across the geographies covered. This isn’t a random one off assessment it’s carefully repeated and led by an international collaboration.
I agree the guardian’s coverage is a bit lazy, but that’s par for the course for a news org. covering a scientific study.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1383913 https://doi.org/10.32604/ijmhp.2025.059929 https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.70656 https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30648764 (review) https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2026.2623337 (review) https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14050559 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1856148 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1774030
Have you seen evidence to the contrary re attention spans?
Yes, lots, see this post where I lay it out in detail.
https://lemmy.ca/post/70915284
Have you seen evidence the concept “attention span” abstracted from context and motivation exists as a scientifically and rigorously defined concept? In a way that is falsifiable and not just narratively connecting correlations into something that gestures vaguely at something we believe is intuitive?
-----Literally ALL of the studies you linked indicate correlation not causation.------
https://www.techscience.com/IJMHP/v27n3/60240/html
Although this study confirms the negative effects associated with frequent use of short video platforms, there are several limitations. First, while the study identified a relationship between the duration of short video usage, addiction to short videos, and the phenomenon of TikTok brain, along with decreased attention control, the cross-sectional design of the research prevents the establishment of causal relationships between the variables.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.70656
Finally, the cross-sectional, questionnaire-based design limited the ability to infer causal relationships or explore underlying mechanisms.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1383913/full
Correlation analyses revealed a significant negative relationship between MPSVATQ and self-control, in addition, a significant negative correlation was also found between MPSVATQ and the theta power difference under incongruent minus neutral target condition of the ANT, suggesting that individuals with a proclivity for mobile phone short video addiction may encounter challenges related to executive control and self-control abilities.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.70656
Short-form video media use was significantly associated with higher inattentive behaviors. The association was stronger among younger participants. No significant associations were found with hyperactive–impulsive or oppositional-defiant behaviors, although total screen time remained significantly associated with these outcomes.
Although current research methods have their limitations, the evidence suggests that frequent short-video use is associated with poorer cognitive functioning.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02673843.2026.2623337
SVA is significantly associated with reduced attentional control, as demonstrated by studies conducted by Xie et al. (Citation2023), Ye et al. (Citation2025), Zhou et al. (Citation2024), and Singh and Prusty (Citation2025). The correlations were low to moderate in strength (r = −0.23, p < .01; r = −0.56, p < .01; β = 0.43, p < .001; r = −0.209, p = .006).
…
Variations in measurement tools for SVA and cognitive outcomes may also limit comparability, while reliance on self-reported video usage can introduce reporting inaccuracies.
https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/14/5/559
Second, due to the cross-sectional survey design, it was not possible to determine causal relationships between SVA, IA, and negative emotions.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1856148/full
Given the cross-sectional design of this study, the findings should be interpreted as associative rather than strictly causal relationships.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1774030/full
The potential harmful consequences of frequent use of short-video platforms are revealed in this study. However, the relevant conclusions have the following limitations. Firstly, due to the cross-sectional design employed, the directionality of the associations between variables and the causal mechanisms cannot be ultimately determined.
That’s a lot of information, I will take a closer look when I have time. I’m not convinced by the op layman article linked but I’ll take a look at the studies you outline too. I do believe motivation and attention are closely linked so motivation is likely a factor in the decline we’re seeing in attention capacity, but that doesn’t erase the decline. There is evidence of impact on the brain in a couple of the studies I linked. I haven’t seen any research claiming it’s permanent by the way. Most scientific categories (motivation and attention span included) aren’t rigorously distinct phenomena, they’re just useful for imperfectly generalizing/modeling things we’ve identified as important. Being able to give things your sustained attention is important for a lot of things that we value. Things that limit our ability to do so are worrying (including lack of motivation).
I do believe motivation and attention are closely linked so motivation is likely a factor in the decline we’re seeing in attention capacity
You misunderstand this, the link to motivation has to do with how salient a particular thing is to you overrides any abstracted idea of attention span not that people “aren’t motivated enough” in general which is nonsense moralizing.