Smartphones arrived just before the US fertility rate plunged. This study says it’s a direct cause
A new working paper by Caitlin Myers of Middlebury College and the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests the early spread of smartphones caused between a third and a half of the U.S. fertility rate decline from 2007 to 2011, particularly among teenagers in counties with broad network access.
Researchers tracked AT&T mobile broadband, the initial exclusive network for the iPhone, to compare fertility changes. In counties where more than 90% of residents had early access, the birth rate among 15- to 19-year-olds dropped about 26% between 2007 and 2011. In counties with less than 10% coverage, that same group saw a 14% drop, according to the paper co-authored by Ezekiel Hooper.
The decline extended to other age groups. For women in their 20s, the birth rate fell 15% in broad-access counties compared to a 10% drop in limited-access areas. Among women in their 30s, the birth rate rose in limited-access counties but fell slightly in those with broad smartphone access.
Why did smartphones impact birth rates?
The researchers theorize that smartphones shifted human time and attention, reducing the likelihood of physical sex and pregnancy. Ezekiel Hooper stated that the technology may have become a “substitute” for in-person interaction.
Hooper suggested that instead of physical interactions with peers, individuals might look to online pornography or communicate through screens. These digital interactions, he noted, create “no chance of having a kid.”
What other factors influence the fertility decline?
Some experts argue the 2007 dip is part of a much longer trend. Dr. Sarah Hayford, director of the Institute for Population Research at The Ohio State University, noted that teen birth rates have been falling since the 1950s.
Hayford pointed to the expanded access to injectable contraception and IUDs for young people during this period as a more direct cause of fewer unintended pregnancies. She also cited historical precedents where radio and television exposed people to ideals regarding smaller families.
Dr. Alison Gemmill of the UCLA School of Public Health added that smartphones exist alongside major shifts in labor markets, education, gender norms, and housing costs. Gemmill noted that the early period studied largely predates the widespread use of dating apps and addictive scrolling features.
How could this affect future policy?
Caitlin Myers stated that understanding these drivers is policy-relevant if the goal is to raise fertility rates, though she noted there is no ready prescription for a “phones story.” She clarified that she is not suggesting the government should take away phones.
A pronatalist movement has gained momentum under the Trump administration through policies encouraging more children. Hooper suggested that instead of financial incentives, policymakers could focus on ways to foster face-to-face human interaction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the specific impact on teen birth rates?
In counties with broad smartphone access, the birth rate for 15- to 19-year-olds fell by approximately 26% between 2007 and 2011, compared to a 14% drop in counties with limited access.
Did the study find that smartphones are the only cause of declining fertility?
No. Caitlin Myers stated that while it is a “major factor,” the researchers do not claim it is the only reason for the decline.
What alternative explanations do other researchers provide?
Dr. Sarah Hayford cited the expanded availability of IUDs and injectable contraception, while Dr. Alison Gemmill pointed to housing costs, labor markets, and changing gender norms.
Do you think digital interaction has fundamentally changed how your generation approaches relationships?