A new meta-study and essay has revealed the extent to which researchers torture data to give the outcomes they are looking for, a kind of academically-approved confirmation bias.
In the case of youth wellbeing, the boogeyman of 'screen time' has been particularly examined. A massive study with trillions of data points has been the basis for many reports that screens lead to poor mental health.
Unfortunately, while technically correct, because these results are painstakingly extracted from massive data sets they are actually statistically insignificant. Or to put it another way, the impact on mental well-being that can be attributed to using screens is equivalent to the amount that can be attributed to eating potatoes.
Dive deeper into this rabbit hole here: