> Working it backward, you'd see the bad effects before being considered an "addict", the extreme case. You can see the bad effects on people on their way to e

> Working it backward, you'd see the bad effects before being considered an "addict", the extreme case. You can see the bad effects on people on their way to extreme addiction. There is a difference between that and the vast majority of ordinary users of the internet. It's like the difference between someone who plays the lotto once in a while or drinks on special occasions vs people on their way to gambling or alcohol addiction. > I'm just saying the title isn't completely click-baity. The title is clickbait. Sciencedaily is well known for doing that as they take science press releases and fluff it up in order to get traffic. I guess in this tough media environment, you can't blame them since everyone clickbaits. The internet doesn't reduce study skills. Problematic internet use does. So the title is absolutely clickbait since most people who use the internet aren't affected.