arxiv: 2604.19424 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 💻 cs.HC · cs.CY

Seeing Your Mindless Face: How Viewing One's Live Self Interrupts Mindless Short-Form Video Scrolling

Kyungjin Kim , Minjeong Kim , Soobeen Jeong , Jiyeon So , Hayeon Song This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 01:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC cs.CY

keywords self-awarenessmindless scrollingshort-form videoself-controlmobile interventionmedia overuseuser behavior

0 comments

The pith

Periodic self-related cues like a live camera view disrupt mindless short-form video scrolling and increase voluntary stopping.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines whether brief interruptions showing users images of themselves can break the cycle of automatic short-video consumption. An app was built to insert self-cues at intervals, including live camera, selfie photo, typed name, or black screen. In a controlled test with 84 participants, these cues led to more frequent decisions to stop viewing compared with uninterrupted scrolling. Follow-up interviews revealed that the plain black screen was rated highest for continued use because it felt less intrusive than an explicit face image. The results point to self-reflection as a built-in mechanism that can restore user control without external rules or timers.

Core claim

Self-related cues serve as an intrinsic, self-reflective strategy that enhances self-control over short-form video overuse. When an app periodically displayed live camera, selfie, name text, or black screen cues, participants showed greater disruption of mindless viewing and higher rates of voluntary stopping. The black screen, included as a control, produced the strongest stated intention to adopt the app, with users describing it as a subtler prompt for reflection than an explicit self-image.

What carries the argument

A mobile app that periodically overlays self-related visual or textual cues onto the video stream to create momentary self-awareness and interrupt immersive scrolling.

If this is right

Video platforms can add optional self-cue features to help users regain control during sessions.
Subtler cues such as a black screen may outperform explicit self-images in user acceptance.
Real-time anchoring of cues to the current viewing context increases their interrupting power.
Designers should test multiple cue modalities rather than assuming one form works universally.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Similar self-cue interruptions could be adapted for other compulsive mobile behaviors such as social media or gaming.
Device-level integration with existing screen-time tools might make the effect more persistent than a standalone app.
Habituation could reduce effectiveness over months, requiring studies that track changes beyond a single lab visit.

Load-bearing premise

That brief lab sessions with 84 participants will produce lasting reductions in real-world short-video use on personal devices.

What would settle it

A multi-week field deployment on users' own phones showing no measurable drop in total daily short-video viewing time or session length.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19424 by Hayeon Song, Jiyeon So, Kyungjin Kim, Minjeong Kim, Soobeen Jeong.

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Mean self-reported ratings of user experiences [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Mean number of Shorts watched across the four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: (a) The environment setup, including a partition, a soft-glow floor lamp, a cozy blanket, a huggable cushion, earphones, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The widespread, addictive consumption of short-form videos, which allegedly causes "brain rot," has become an urgent public concern. This study proposes that self-related cues serve as an intrinsic, self-reflective strategy that enhances self-control over media overuse. We developed an app that de-immerses users by periodically displaying different self-related cues (live camera, selfie, name in text, and black screen) and tested their effects in a laboratory experiment (N=84). Overall, findings show that self-related cues effectively disrupt mindless viewing, enabling users to voluntarily stop short-form video consumption. Interestingly, the black screen, intended as a control, elicited the greatest intention to use the app: Participants noted in the follow-up interview that they preferred the subtler reflection on a black screen over the explicit image from a live camera. The findings offer practical design guidelines for implementing self-awareness interventions in mobile contexts, including which modalities work best and how real-time contextual anchoring enhances effectiveness.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Lab study shows self-cues can interrupt short-video scrolling but the black-screen control beats explicit self-views and the real-world stopping claim lacks follow-up data.

read the letter

The key takeaway is that showing self-related cues on a phone can interrupt mindless short-form video scrolling in a lab setting, with the plain black screen surprisingly coming out ahead of live camera or selfie views. They built a custom app that inserts these cues at intervals during video playback and ran it with 84 participants. The work does a decent job laying out the different modalities and collecting both behavioral disruption measures and interview feedback on preferences. The black screen preference is a solid, counterintuitive result that could inform subtler designs. Where it gets thin is the leap to real-world use. This is a single controlled session with no data on whether people install the app on their own phones or keep using it after the study. The claims about enabling voluntary stopping of consumption rest on immediate effects and stated intentions, not on logged behavior over time. It also undercuts the self-related mechanism a bit when the non-self black screen wins on intention. This paper is aimed at researchers in human-computer interaction who study attention, self-control, or mobile app interventions for media habits. A reader working on similar cue-based tools would find the implementation and the preference data worth looking at. I would recommend sending it for peer review. The experiment is concrete and the design choices are transparent enough that referees can evaluate the contribution without much trouble.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops a mobile app that periodically inserts self-related cues (live camera feed, selfie, text name, or black screen) during short-form video playback and reports results from a lab study (N=84) claiming that these cues disrupt mindless scrolling and increase users' intention to stop voluntarily. The black-screen condition, intended as a control, produced the strongest post-session intention to adopt the app, and qualitative interviews suggested users preferred its subtler reflection.

Significance. If the core empirical pattern holds, the work supplies concrete, testable design guidelines for embedding lightweight self-awareness prompts into mobile video interfaces to counter addictive consumption patterns. The counter-intuitive superiority of the black-screen cue and the use of both quantitative intention measures and follow-up interviews are strengths that could inform future intervention studies.

major comments (3)

[Abstract and §5 (Results)] Abstract and §5 (Results): The manuscript states that self-related cues 'effectively disrupt mindless viewing' and enable voluntary stopping, yet the provided abstract contains no statistical tests, p-values, effect sizes, baseline mindless-scrolling rates, or exclusion criteria; without these, the magnitude and reliability of the disruption effect cannot be evaluated.
[§6 (Discussion)] §6 (Discussion): The central claim that self-related cues enable sustained voluntary stopping is load-bearing, but the study consists of a single short lab session with no field deployment, usage logs, or follow-up retention measures; the leap from immediate lab interruption to real-world behavior change therefore remains unsupported.
[§5 and §6] §5 and §6: The black-screen control elicited the highest intention to use the app, yet the paper continues to attribute the overall effect to self-reflection mechanisms; this internal tension requires explicit reconciliation rather than post-hoc reinterpretation of the control condition.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract introduces the colloquial phrase 'brain rot' without a supporting citation or definition; a brief reference to prior literature on the term would improve precision.
[§4 (Method)] Participant demographics, exact video stimuli, and the precise timing/frequency of cue insertion are described only at a high level; adding these details would aid replication.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback. We have revised the manuscript to strengthen the reporting of statistical results, clarify the scope of our claims, and explicitly reconcile the black-screen findings with our proposed mechanisms. Point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and §5 (Results)] Abstract and §5 (Results): The manuscript states that self-related cues 'effectively disrupt mindless viewing' and enable voluntary stopping, yet the provided abstract contains no statistical tests, p-values, effect sizes, baseline mindless-scrolling rates, or exclusion criteria; without these, the magnitude and reliability of the disruption effect cannot be evaluated.

Authors: We agree that the abstract should enable readers to evaluate the effect size and reliability directly. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the abstract to report the key statistical results (main effect of cue condition on interruption rate, F-statistic, p-value, and partial eta-squared), baseline mindless-scrolling rates observed in the no-cue control, and the exclusion criteria applied. These details were already present in §5; they are now also summarized in the abstract. revision: yes
Referee: [§6 (Discussion)] §6 (Discussion): The central claim that self-related cues enable sustained voluntary stopping is load-bearing, but the study consists of a single short lab session with no field deployment, usage logs, or follow-up retention measures; the leap from immediate lab interruption to real-world behavior change therefore remains unsupported.

Authors: We accept that a single lab session cannot demonstrate sustained real-world behavior change. Our core empirical claim is limited to immediate disruption of mindless scrolling and elevated post-session intention to stop, both of which are directly measured. We have revised §6 to (a) state explicitly that the study does not provide evidence for long-term retention or field behavior, (b) add a dedicated limitations paragraph, and (c) outline the need for future longitudinal and in-situ deployments. The language around “enabling voluntary stopping” has been qualified to refer to the session-level measures. revision: partial
Referee: [§5 and §6] §5 and §6: The black-screen control elicited the highest intention to use the app, yet the paper continues to attribute the overall effect to self-reflection mechanisms; this internal tension requires explicit reconciliation rather than post-hoc reinterpretation of the control condition.

Authors: We have revised both §5 and §6 to address this point directly. The quantitative results show that all four self-related cues increased interruption relative to baseline, yet the black-screen condition produced the highest adoption intention. The follow-up interviews indicate that participants experienced the black screen as a minimal, non-intrusive prompt that still triggered momentary self-awareness of their device use. We now present self-reflection as operating along a continuum of cue salience rather than requiring an explicit visual self-image. This framing integrates the black-screen result as evidence that subtler cues can be particularly effective, rather than treating it as an anomalous control. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical lab study with no derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The paper reports results from a controlled laboratory experiment (N=84) measuring immediate effects of self-related cues on video scrolling behavior and post-session intentions. No mathematical models, equations, parameter fitting, or 'predictions' appear anywhere in the text. Claims rest directly on observed data and participant interviews rather than any self-referential construction or reduction to inputs. Self-citations, if present, are not load-bearing for the central empirical findings. This is a standard non-circular user study design.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Empirical HCI study with no mathematical model, free parameters, or new postulated entities; relies on standard experimental assumptions about self-report validity and lab-to-real-world transfer.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5485 in / 960 out tokens · 44352 ms · 2026-05-10T01:42:07.488629+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

[1]

Debashree Roy Bhattacharjee, Debasis Pradhan, Abhisek Kuanr, and Neeru Mal- hotra. 2025. Perfectly Imperfect: How Body-Positive Advertisements in Social Media Foster Consumer Engagement.Journal of Advertising54, 1 (2025), 79–98. doi:10.1080/00913367.2024.2306422

work page doi:10.1080/00913367.2024.2306422 2025
[2]

Carmody and Michael Lewis

Dennis P. Carmody and Michael Lewis. 2006. Brain activation when hearing one’s own and others’ names.Brain Research1116, 1 (2006), 153–158. doi:10. 1016/j.brainres.2006.07.121

2006
[3]

Francesco Chiossi, Luke Haliburton, Changkun Ou, Andreas Martin Butz, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2023. Short-Form Videos Degrade Our Capacity to Retain Intentions: Effect of Context Switching On Prospective Memory. InProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Hamburg, Germany)(CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New...

work page doi:10.1145/3544548.3580778 2023
[4]

Cox, Sandy J.J

Anna L. Cox, Sandy J.J. Gould, Marta E. Cecchinato, Ioanna Iacovides, and Ian Renfree. 2016. Design Frictions for Mindful Interactions: The Case for Mi- croboundaries. InProceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems(San Jose, California, USA)(CHI EA ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, ...

work page doi:10.1145/2851581.2892410 2016
[5]

2025.YouTube Shorts Statistics (2025)

DemandSage. 2025.YouTube Shorts Statistics (2025). Accessed: 2025-09-09

2025
[6]

Shelley Duval, Virginia Duval, and Robert Neely. 1979. Self-focus, felt responsi- bility, and helping behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology37 (10 1979), 1769–1778. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1769

work page doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1769 1979
[7]

Shelley Duval and Robert A

T. Shelley Duval and Robert A. Wicklund. 1972.A Theory of Objective Self- A wareness. Academic Press, New York, NY, USA

1972
[8]

Nancy A Federoff and John H Harvey. 1976. Focus of attention, self-esteem, and the attribution of causality.Journal of Research in Personality10, 3 (1976), 336–345. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(76)90023-4

work page doi:10.1016/0092-6566(76)90023-4 1976
[9]

Govern and Lisa A

John M. Govern and Lisa A. Marsch. 2001. Development and Validation of the Situational Self-Awareness Scale.Consciousness and Cognition10, 3 (2001), 366–378. doi:10.1006/ccog.2001.0506

work page doi:10.1006/ccog.2001.0506 2001
[10]

Grüning, Frederik Riedel, and Philipp Lorenz-Spreen

David J. Grüning, Frederik Riedel, and Philipp Lorenz-Spreen. 2023. Directing smartphone use through the self-nudge app one sec.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences120, 8 (2023), e2213114120. doi:10.1073/pnas.2213114120

work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2213114120 2023
[11]

Luke Haliburton, David Joachim Grüning, Frederik Riedel, Albrecht Schmidt, and Nađa Terzimehić. 2024. A Longitudinal In-the-Wild Investigation of Design Frictions to Prevent Smartphone Overuse. InProceedings of the 2024 CHI Con- ference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, US...

work page doi:10.1145/3613904.3642370 2024
[12]

Alexis Hiniker, Sungsoo (Ray) Hong, Tadayoshi Kohno, and Julie A. Kientz. 2016. MyTime: Designing and Evaluating an Intervention for Smartphone Non-Use. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA)(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4746–4757. doi:10.1145/2858036.2858403

work page doi:10.1145/2858036.2858403 2016
[13]

Wicklund, and C.Brian Ferris

William John Ickes, Robert A. Wicklund, and C.Brian Ferris. 1973. Objective self awareness and self esteem.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology9, 3 (1973), 202–219. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(73)90010-3

work page doi:10.1016/0022-1031(73)90010-3 1973
[14]

Jaejeung Kim, Hayoung Jung, Minsam Ko, and Uichin Lee. 2019. GoalKeeper: Exploring Interaction Lockout Mechanisms for Regulating Smartphone Use.Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol.3, 1, Article 16 (March 2019), 29 pages. doi:10.1145/3314403

work page doi:10.1145/3314403 2019
[15]

Jieun Kim and Hayeon Song. 2024. My Voice as a Daily Reminder: Self-Voice Alarm for Daily Goal Achievement. InProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 716, 16 pages. doi:10. 1145/3613904.3641932

work page arXiv 2024
[16]

I Love It

Junyun Liao, Siying He, Wenting Feng, and Raffaele Filieri. 2024. “I Love It” Versus “I Recommend It”: The Impact of Implicit and Explicit Endorsement Styles on Electronic Word-of-Mouth Persuasiveness.Journal of Travel Research63, 4 (2024), 779–795. doi:10.1177/00472875231175083

work page doi:10.1177/00472875231175083 2024
[17]

Ulrik Lyngs, Kai Lukoff, Petr Slovak, William Seymour, Helena Webb, Marina Jirotka, Jun Zhao, Max Van Kleek, and Nigel Shadbolt. 2020. ’I Just Want to Hack Myself to Not Get Distracted’: Evaluating Design Interventions for Self-Control on Facebook. InProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(CHI ’20). ...

work page doi:10.1145/3313831.3376672 2020
[18]

Tanabe, Akihiro T

Tomoyo Morita, Hiroki C. Tanabe, Akihiro T. Sasaki, Koji Shimada, Ryusuke Kakigi, and Norihiro Sadato. 2013. The anterior insular and anterior cingulate cortices in emotional processing for self-face recognition.Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience9, 5 (03 2013), 570–579. doi:10.1093/scan/nst011

work page doi:10.1093/scan/nst011 2013
[19]

Murray, Martin Debbané, Peter T

Ryan J. Murray, Martin Debbané, Peter T. Fox, Danilo Bzdok, and Simon B. Eickhoff. 2015. Functional connectivity mapping of regions associated with self- and other-processing.Human Brain Mapping36, 4 (2015), 1304–1324. doi:10. 1002/hbm.22703

2015
[20]

2024.’Brain rot’ named Oxford Word of the Year 2024

Oxford University Press. 2024.’Brain rot’ named Oxford Word of the Year 2024. Retrieved September 10, 2025 from https://corp.oup.com/news/brain-rot-named- oxford-word-of-the-year-2024/

2024
[21]

Eunil Park. 2024. Examining metaverse game platform adoption: Insights from innovation, behavior, and coolness.Technology in Society77 (2024), 102594. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102594

work page doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102594 2024
[22]

Why were you speeding?

Angèle Picco, Arjan Stuiver, Joost De Winter, and Dick De Waard. 2025. “Why were you speeding?”: A self-confrontation study on awareness and reasons for speed behaviour.Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 109 (2025), 421–438. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2024.12.015

work page doi:10.1016/j.trf.2024.12.015 2025
[23]

Pengmin Qin and Georg Northoff. 2011. How is our self related to midline regions and the default-mode network?NeuroImage57, 3 (2011), 1221–1233. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.028 Special Issue: Educational Neuroscience. CHI EA ’26, April 13–17, 2026, Barcelona, Spain Kim et al

work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.028 2011
[24]

Ralf Schwarzer and Britta Renner. 2009. Health-Specific Self-Efficacy Scales. (01 2009)

2009
[25]

Silvia and T

Paul J. Silvia and T. Shelley Duval. 2001. Objective Self-Awareness Theory: Recent Progress and Enduring Problems.Personality and Social Psychology Review5, 3 (2001), 230–241. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_4

work page doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0503_4 2001
[26]

Viswanath Venkatesh and Fred D. Davis. 2000. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies.Management Science46, 2 (2000), 186–204. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

work page doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 2000
[27]

KIM WITTE. 1996. Predicting Risk Behaviors: Development and Validation of a Diagnostic Scale.Journal of Health Communication1, 4 (1996), 317–342. doi:10.1080/108107396127988

work page doi:10.1080/108107396127988 1996
[28]

Wixom and Peter A

Barbara H. Wixom and Peter A. Todd. 2005. A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance.Information Systems Research16, 1 (2005), 85–102. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23015766

work page arXiv 2005
[29]

Ruolan Wu, Chun Yu, Xiaole Pan, Yujia Liu, Ningning Zhang, Yue Fu, Yuhan Wang, Zhi Zheng, Li Chen, Qiaolei Jiang, Xuhai Xu, and Yuanchun Shi. 2024. MindShift: Leveraging Large Language Models for Mental-States-Based Prob- lematic Smartphone Use Intervention. InProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Honolulu, HI, USA)(...

work page doi:10.1145/3613904.3642790 2024
[30]

2025.Neal Mohan at Cannes Lions 2025: What 20 years of YouTube reveals about creativity’s future

YouTube Official Blog. 2025.Neal Mohan at Cannes Lions 2025: What 20 years of YouTube reveals about creativity’s future. Retrieved Accessed: 2025-09-10 from https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/neal-mohan-cannes-2025/

2025
[31]

Xing Zhang, You Wu, and Shan Liu. 2019. Exploring short-form video appli- cation addiction: Socio-technical and attachment perspectives.Telematics and Informatics42 (2019), 101243. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2019.101243 Seeing Your Mindless Face: How Viewing One’s Live Self Interrupts Mindless Short-Form Video Scrolling CHI EA ’26, April 13–17, 2026, Barcelona, S...

work page doi:10.1016/j.tele.2019.101243 2019