back to ctrl

Research and science

We read the studies. Here is what actually holds.

Every claim on this site has to earn its place. This page keeps the receipts. Only published findings, always with year and source. Correlation is never dressed up as causation. When new research lands, this library gets updated. When a claim does not survive, it gets retired.

The ctrl key resting on a desk next to a stack of books

Pillar 01 · Time

Where the hours actually go.

The baseline numbers for Germany. Measured where possible, and clearly marked when people report about themselves.

180min

a day on the smartphone. That is what adults in Germany report about themselves, and the trend points up, from 150 minutes in 2024 to 180 today. People aged 16 to 29 report 216 minutes.

Bitkom (2026)1

245min

a day, measured in the logs of 625 Android users in Germany, along with 58 pickups. Over 90 percent of sessions last under 7 minutes. The day rarely disappears in one sitting. It disappears in fragments.

Tóth et al. (2025)2

84%

of 18 to 24 year olds in Germany say their own use is too high, and 93 percent of that group report negative side effects. Across all adults, 46 percent check the phone right after waking.

Deloitte Deutschland (2024)3

Logs beat memory.

Ask people, then check the devices, and the reported numbers sit lower. Adults in Germany report about 180 minutes while measured logs record 245. Different samples, same lesson. That is why this page prefers measured data wherever it exists.

Bitkom (2026)1 · Tóth et al. (2025)2

Pillar 02 · Focus

Your attention is intact. It is just under fire.

What field studies say about interruptions, and the one randomized trial that shows attention recovering when the pull pauses.

90.7%

of participants improved in at least one of three outcomes when mobile internet was blocked on their phones for two weeks. Wellbeing rose, mental health improved, and sustained attention got objectively better. It is the only randomized trial of its kind so far, and the strongest single result in this library.

Castelo et al., PNAS Nexus (2025)4

No decline.

A meta-analysis of the d2 test of attention pooled 287 samples from 32 countries, about 21,000 people. It found no drop in attention performance in children and moderate gains in adults. Your focus is not broken. Your environment got noisier.

Andrzejewski et al. (2024)5

Faster, but heavier.

Interrupted work often still gets finished on time. People compensate by speeding up, and pay with significantly more stress, frustration, time pressure and effort. The cost was measurable after just 20 minutes of interrupted work.

Mark, Gudith and Klocke (2008)6

Attention residue.

When a task stays mentally open, part of your attention stays behind with it and performance on the next task drops. A short note on where to resume eases the effect. Closed loops are not a luxury. They are how focus works.

Leroy (2009) · Leroy and Glomb (2018)7

Pillar 03 · Sleep

The best documented case for a quiet night.

Nowhere is the picture more consistent than around sleep. It is still largely correlational, and we treat it that way.

A consistent link.

Meta-analyses keep finding the same association. More electronic media use is linked with poorer sleep quality and more sleep problems. Sleep is the best documented area in this whole field, which is why evenings are where ctrl earns its keep.

Han et al. (2024) · Ahmed et al. (2024)8

30%

of teenagers in Germany say they are often tired in the morning because they were on their phone late at night. Not a lab finding, a yearly national survey, and one of the clearest everyday signals in the German data.

JIM-Studie, mpfs (2025)9

Linked is not caused.

People who sleep badly may also reach for the phone more, so most sleep findings run in both directions. We phrase every sleep claim on this site as an association, and we would rather lose a headline than your trust.

Our reading rule

Pillar 04 · Presence and what works

What actually helps, honestly framed.

The evidence behind ctrl itself. Friction, commitment, plans made in advance, and why software alone rarely holds.

How, not how much.

Patterns of use that feel out of your control show stronger links with depression, anxiety, sleep problems and lower wellbeing than sheer duration does. Not every minute is equal. That is why ctrl aims at control, not at zero.

Huang (2022) · Shannon et al. (2022)10

57%

fewer actual app openings after six weeks of added friction, in a field experiment with 280 people. This is the honest case for a key that adds one deliberate step. Friction works, measurably, and the effect is moderate rather than magic.

Grüning, Riedel and Lorenz-Spreen, PNAS (2023)11

70%

of self-control and digital health apps are abandoned within the first 100 days, the median across studies. Willpower wrapped in software rarely holds. It is the strongest argument we know for a physical object that sits in the room with you.

JMIR Scoping Review (2024)12

~66days

is how long new habits took to form in everyday life, on average and with a wide personal range. Anyone promising transformation in three weeks is selling something. We design for the long, quiet middle.

Lally et al., UCL (2009) · Singh et al. (2024)13

d = 0.31

is the meta-analytic edge of if-then plans over vague intentions. And decisions made before the moment of temptation win far more often than decisions made inside it, which is exactly what commitment devices are for. A ctrl session is set up in advance and ends on your terms, not in the scroll.

Bélanger-Gravel et al. (2013)14 · Ariely and Wertenbroch (2002)15

Honesty first

What we do not claim.

Some popular claims sell well and do not survive contact with the research. You will not find them anywhere on this site.

You may have heard “Your attention span is now shorter than a goldfish’s.”

A marketing meme from 2015. No study ever measured the famous 8 seconds, in humans or in goldfish. We only quote research that exists.

You may have heard “Every swipe gives you a hit of dopamine.”

The vending machine picture of the brain is a story, not a finding. We leave neurochemistry to the people who measure it and talk about behavior instead.

You may have heard “It takes 21 days to build a new habit.”

The research says about 66 days on average, with a wide personal range.13 We would rather set an honest expectation than a catchy one.

You may have heard “Phones are proven to be as addictive as heroin.”

No such diagnosis exists for phones or social media. Formal diagnoses of that kind cover only gambling and gaming, which is why that word never appears in our writing about phones.

You may have heard “One glance at your phone in the morning ruins your whole day.”

The evidence about mornings is thin. The strong evidence is about screens late at night. We build for what holds, not for what frightens.

A living page

This page grows.

Research moves, and so does this library. New studies are added regularly, numbers get updated, and weak claims get retired. When something important lands, we write about it.

Blog and News
Sources
  1. Bitkom (2026): Smartphone-Studie Deutschland. Self-reported daily smartphone use of adults in Germany, 180 minutes on average, 216 minutes among 16 to 29 year olds, up from 150 minutes in 2024 and 155 in 2025. Source↗
  2. Tóth et al. (2025): Objective smartphone log study of 625 Android users in Germany. 245 minutes and 58 pickups per day on average, over 90 percent of sessions shorter than 7 minutes. Source↗
  3. Deloitte Deutschland (2024): Smartphone survey Germany. 84 percent of 18 to 24 year olds rate their own use as too high and 93 percent of this group report negative side effects. 46 percent of adults check the phone right after waking, and about 49 percent overall consider their use too high.
  4. Castelo et al. (2025): Randomized controlled trial, PNAS Nexus. Two weeks without mobile internet on the smartphone improved subjective wellbeing, mental health and objectively measured sustained attention. 90.7 percent of participants improved in at least one of the three outcomes. Source↗
  5. Andrzejewski et al. (2024): Meta-analysis of the d2 test of attention. 287 samples from 32 countries with about 21,000 people found no decline in attention performance in children and moderate gains in adults.
  6. Mark, Gudith and Klocke (2008): The cost of interrupted work, more speed and stress. Interrupted work is completed faster but with significantly more stress, frustration, time pressure and effort. Source↗
  7. Leroy (2009): Why is it so hard to do my work? The challenge of attention residue when switching between work tasks. Leroy and Glomb (2018) on easing the effect with a ready-to-resume note. Source↗
  8. Han et al. (2024): Updated systematic review and meta-analysis on electronic media use and sleep. Consistent association with poorer sleep quality and more sleep problems. Supported by Ahmed et al. (2024).
  9. Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (2025): JIM-Studie. About 30 percent of teenagers in Germany say they are often tired in the morning because they were on their phone late at night. Source↗
  10. Huang (2022) and Shannon et al. (2022): Meta-analyses on problematic smartphone and social media use. Problematic patterns of use show stronger links with depression, anxiety, sleep problems and lower wellbeing than duration of use does.
  11. Grüning, Riedel and Lorenz-Spreen (2023): Field experiment, PNAS. Added friction before app openings reduced actual openings by 57 percent over six weeks, n = 280. Source↗
  12. JMIR Scoping Review (2024): Across self-control and digital health apps, a median of 70 percent of users abandon them within the first 100 days. Source↗
  13. Lally et al., University College London (2009): How are habits formed. Modelling habit formation in the real world. New habits took about 66 days on average, with a wide individual range. Supported by Singh et al. (2024). Source↗
  14. Bélanger-Gravel et al. (2013): Meta-analysis of implementation intentions. If-then plans outperform vague intentions with an effect size of d = 0.31. A more conservative lower bound of d = 0.14 is reported by Sheeran et al. (2024). Source↗
  15. Ariely and Wertenbroch (2002): Procrastination, deadlines and performance. Self-imposed commitment devices improve behavior across many domains. Source↗

Where research is correlational we write linked with, not caused by. We do not round numbers in our favor, and when the honest answer is that an effect is moderate, we say moderate.

Pre-order the Key · from 49 €

Secure payment · 30 day money back

back to ctrl.

Or just stay in the loop for now:

No spam. Just the launch.