Proximity matters, not only active use
Research suggests that a phone can affect cognitive performance even when it is silent and not actively used.
Schools · Resource
Studies & facts.
What research says about phones in the classroom, attention, academic performance, mental health, and analog learning. Key public sources are listed below.
The scientific view
The research behind phone-free school policies.
The debate around phones in schools is often emotional. Research from institutions including LSE, OECD, Stanford, and others helps clarify what device availability may mean for attention, learning, and student well-being. Below, we summarize the evidence in four chapters and provide a public source list for the key studies cited.
Attention & performance
Attention and performance: the “Brain Drain” effect.
Simply asking students to put phones away may not remove their cognitive pull. Research suggests that proximity alone can affect attention and working memory, even when the phone is not in use.
The Ward et al. study (UT Austin, 2017) tested 800 participants across three conditions: phone on the desk, phone in a bag, and phone in another room. In the experiment, working-memory performance improved as the physical distance to the phone increased, a result the researchers described as brain drain.
The LSE study (Beland & Murphy, 2015) examined 91 UK schools and 130,000 students. Following phone bans, average exam results increased by 6.4% of a standard deviation, with the largest gains among lower-performing students. The findings suggest that consistent restrictions may help reduce performance gaps.
OECD PISA 2022 surveyed around 600,000 students across 81 countries about digital distraction. About three in five reported being distracted by devices during lessons, and higher reported distraction was associated with lower mathematics performance.
Performance & attention
Three findings on the learning day.
Higher exam performance after phone bans
Exam performance improved after phone bans, with the largest gains among lower-performing students. Beland & Murphy, LSE, 2015 · 91 schools, 130,000 students.
Brain Drain
In the experiment, the presence of a phone was associated with lower working-memory performance, even when it was not in use. Ward et al., UT Austin, 2017 · 800 participants.
3 in 5 distracted
Three in five students reported device distraction during lessons, which was associated with lower mathematics performance. PISA 2022 · around 600,000 students.
Mental health & social interaction
Mental health and social life during breaks.
Some of the most important effects of school phone policies may appear outside lessons: in social interaction, bullying, and how students spend their breaks.
The Norway study (Abrahamsson, 2024) examined 422 middle schools that introduced strict phone bans. The study reported a reduction of roughly 43–46% in cyberbullying, along with improved mental-health indicators for girls and fewer related visits to general practitioners.
The Twenge et al. analysis (2018) documented a sharp rise in depression and self-reported loneliness among US teenagers beginning around 2010, alongside widespread smartphone adoption. The analysis identifies an association, not proof of causation.
Sapien Labs (2023) surveyed 27,000 young adults across more than 40 countries. Earlier access to a first smartphone was associated with lower self-reported mental well-being in adulthood, with the strongest association reported among women.
Mental health & bullying
Three findings on student well-being.
43–46% less cyberbullying
The study reported less cyberbullying after phone bans, along with improved mental-health indicators for girls. Abrahamsson, Norway, 2024 · 422 middle schools.
Depression and loneliness increased
Depression and loneliness rose among US teenagers alongside widespread smartphone adoption; the study reports an association, not causation. Twenge et al., 2018.
40+ countries
Earlier access to a first smartphone was associated with lower reported mental well-being in adulthood. Sapien Labs, 2023 · 27,000 young adults.
Analog vs digital
Analog learning still matters.
Digital tools can support learning, but they do not automatically replace the benefits associated with handwriting, sustained reading, and direct interaction.
Handwriting versus typing. An EEG study published in Frontiers in Psychology reported more complex patterns of neural connectivity during handwriting than during typing on a keyboard. The findings suggest that forming letters by hand may support learning processes differently.
Reading on paper versus on screen. Research comparing reading formats has often found an advantage for paper with informational texts, though not with narrative ones, and outcomes depend on the task and context.
UNESCO's Technology in Education report (2023) cautions against adopting technology without clear educational value. It emphasizes that technology should support teaching and human interaction rather than replace them.
The Swiss context
The Swiss context: how schools are responding.
The research is international, while implementation in Switzerland varies by canton, municipality, and school. Several authorities have introduced or announced tighter rules on smartphone use during the school day.
Parent and teacher initiatives such as Smartphonefreie Schulen and the Swiss Elterninitiative Digitale Balance advocate clearer boundaries for smartphones during the school day. Their central idea is simple: fewer devices in daily school life, with more space for learning and direct interaction.
Research helps explain why schools are reconsidering phone access. LOKD offers one practical way to implement a phone policy consistently while students keep their own devices and staff avoid collecting and storing them.
Studies in detail
Sources and further reading.
Public sources for the key studies cited on this page, plus additional reports consulted during preparation.
-
Ward et al., Brain Drain (UT Austin, 2017)
In the experiment, phone proximity was associated with lower working-memory performance. 800 participants, three conditions: desk, bag, or another room.
Source -
Beland & Murphy, Phone bans in UK schools (LSE, 2015)
91 UK schools, 130,000 students. Average exam performance increased by 6.4% of a standard deviation, with the largest gains among lower-performing students.
Source -
OECD PISA 2022, Volume V
Around 600,000 students in 81 countries. Three in five reported device distraction, which was associated with lower mathematics performance.
Source -
Abrahamsson, Norway school phone bans (2024)
422 middle schools. The study reported roughly 43–46% less cyberbullying and improved mental-health indicators among girls.
Source -
Twenge et al., Smartphones and adolescent depression (2018)
Depression, self-harm, and loneliness among US teenagers rose sharply from around 2010, alongside widespread smartphone adoption. The study reports an association, not causation.
Source -
Sapien Labs, Age of first smartphone (2023)
27,000 young adults across more than 40 countries. Earlier smartphone access was associated with lower reported mental well-being in adulthood, with the strongest association among women.
Source -
Ophir, Nass & Wagner, Media multitasking (Stanford, 2009)
In the study, heavy media multitaskers performed worse on several tests of cognitive control than light media multitaskers.
Source -
JIM-Studie 2024 (mpfs, Germany)
Survey of 1,200 teenagers in Germany covering smartphone ownership, daily use, and broader media habits.
Source -
KIM-Studie 2024 (mpfs, Germany)
Survey of 1,200 children ages 6–13 in Germany, covering smartphone ownership and media use across primary and lower-secondary ages.
Source -
Van der Weel & Van der Meer, Handwriting vs. typewriting (NTNU, 2024)
High-density EEG with 36 university students. Handwriting produced more widespread brain connectivity than typing on a keyboard. A commentary in the same journal (2025) questions parts of the interpretation, and the participants were adults rather than schoolchildren.
Source -
UNESCO, Technology in Education (2023)
UNESCO's global report calls for evidence-based use of education technology and emphasizes that it should support, not replace, human interaction.
Source -
DAK & UKE, Mediensucht 2023/24
German longitudinal study of 1,200 parent-child pairs. Around 24.5% of minors showed risky social-media use, while screen use remained elevated after the pandemic.
Source
From research to the classroom
Four practical takeaways for schools.
Lower-performing students may benefit most
In the LSE study, lower-performing students showed the largest improvement after phone bans were introduced.
Physical separation creates a clearer boundary
A physical process can be easier to apply consistently than relying on individual software settings alone.
The impact extends beyond lessons
The Norway study suggests that phone policies may also affect social interaction, cyberbullying, and student well-being outside lessons.
How the mechanism works
A simple three-step process.
A clear physical process helps schools turn a phone policy into a consistent daily routine.
Phone goes in
Everyone puts their own phone into a pouch.
Lock
One press on the stud locks the pouch. It stays with its owner, in hand, pocket or bag, and cannot be opened by hand.
Unlock
Hold the pouch against a LOKD Opener and it releases in one motion.
From research to implementation
Tell us about your school and rollout plans.
Share your school type, canton, number of students or classes, and whether you are considering a pilot, exam-period use, or a full-year rollout. We will respond with a recommended setup and pricing. Samples and on-site support are available depending on the project.
Ready to explore a phone-free school routine?
See how implementation works in daily school life and how to begin with a pilot involving one or two classes.
Pouches for Schools →