Thompson argues smartphones drive fertility drops below replacement levels
Alex Imas#1331
Is it the phones?
A new paper uses AT&T's 2007–2011 iPhone monopoly as a natural experiment and finds that iPhone access sharply reduced births, especially among younger women.
Smartphones may explain 33–52% of the post-2007 decline in U.S. fertility.
Users find the study's claim that iPhones explain much of the US fertility decline since 2007 believable from seeing less socializing, though others question the methods or blame the 2008 recession.
Earlier this year, I was very skeptical of the claim that smartphones reduced birthrates, because fertility declined so, so long before the arrival of smartphones.
But @JesusFerna7026 changed my mind, and studies like this have confirmed that my mind should stay changed.
The way I think about now is something like this:
One set of factors best describes why birthrates declined toward 2 around the world in the last few decades—modernization, contraception, women's education and social freedom, etc.
But another set of factors seems to better describe why birthrates have fallen toward 1 and below one in many places and among many groups. And smartphones belong in the second category.
Earlier this year, I was very skeptical of the claim that smartphones reduced birthrates, because fertility declined so, so long before the arrival of smartphones.
But @JesusFerna7026 changed my mind, and studies like this have confirmed that my mind should stay changed.
The way I think about now is something like this:
One set of factors best describes why birthrates declined toward 2 around the world in the last few decades—modernization, contraception, women's education and social freedom, etc.
But another set of factors seems to better describe why birthrates have fallen toward 1 and below one in many places and among many groups. And smartphones belong in the second category.
Listened to Derek's podcast episode on fertility decline, with smartphones as one significant, late factor; interesting and worth a listen.
I might disagree with others' views re: policy implications, though there seems no doubt that there will be significant policy implications
Earlier this year, I was very skeptical of the claim that smartphones reduced birthrates, because fertility declined so, so long before the arrival of smartphones.
But @JesusFerna7026 changed my mind, and studies like this have confirmed that my mind should stay changed.
The way I think about now is something like this:
One set of factors best describes why birthrates declined toward 2 around the world in the last few decades—modernization, contraception, women's education and social freedom, etc.
But another set of factors seems to better describe why birthrates have fallen toward 1 and below one in many places and among many groups. And smartphones belong in the second category.
@florianederer This doesn't seem possible, but retweeting because it would be funny if true
@florianederer I look forward to their nuanced coverage of synthetic controls
@paulnovosad There's going to be a lot of press coverage of this paper.
@annastansbury @florianederer If it delayed dating & marriage, the true effect would be larger, since the paper outcome is year-on-year birth rates.
@florianederer That or the worst recession since the Great Depression made people rethink the economic viability of having children.
New NBER working paper https://www.nber.org/papers/w35310
@DKThomp @JesusFerna7026 It’s very clear to me that a world without smartphones would have a higher birthrate.
Without something to fill the time, you have to find things to do. Some of those things to do lead to doing things with people, which may lead to a partner, sex, children.
We need phones that brick if you don't socialize frequently enough based on proximity to other phones in your social graph.
Could pair it with a wearable that detects sexual activity from your heart rate etc. to unlock extra screen time.
@florianederer Dude
@karjalainenjjj @annastansbury @florianederer They look good for the older cohorts though. And the synth diff-in-diff looks much better.
But I never quite trust synth control since it eliminates pretrends mechanically.
I'd rather see Jonathan Roth's honest DiDs which can accommodate pre-trends: https://www.jonathandroth.com/assets/files/HonestParallelTrends_Main.pdf
@paulnovosad @florianederer Isn’t much of the fertility decline bc of later marriages so would have to argue iPhone delayed marriage?
@DKThomp @JesusFerna7026 What is the mechanism? The illusion of choice from infinite options on swipe apps?
@DKThomp @JesusFerna7026 You change your mind in light of evidence? Weird.
Fertility declining long before the smart phone should have only make you think smartphones explained some proportion of the reduction in fertility, and on a historically contingent basis.
So I hope you do not now overcorrect and start discounting factors like long education delays and social/economic roles for women changing sexual and marital expectations.
@KeithNHumphreys @JesusFerna7026 yes, but only in response to podcast interviews whose downloads outperform the mean. i let the masses think for me.
@BeatrixdeSol @florianederer
@paulnovosad @annastansbury @florianederer Those pre-trends look awful.
Thompson argues smartphones drive fertility drops below replacement levels
Alex Imas#1331Is it the phones?
A new paper uses AT&T's 2007–2011 iPhone monopoly as a natural experiment and finds that iPhone access sharply reduced births, especially among younger women.
Smartphones may explain 33–52% of the post-2007 decline in U.S. fertility.
