The Psychology of Doomscrolling: Why We Are Addicted to Bad News

In the modern digital age, the term "doomscrolling" has become a ubiquitous part of our daily lives. As defined in the BBC Learning English podcast, doomscrolling refers to the habit of spending excessive time on mobile phones or computer screens specifically to consume negative news stories—stories full of "doom." While it may feel like a modern ailment exacerbated by the "24-7 non-stop cycle of news reporting," researchers suggest that the roots of this behavior are far more ancient than our current technological landscape.

The Evolutionary Roots of Negativity Bias

Why are humans seemingly hardwired to seek out distressing information? Anthropologist Ella Alshamahi suggests that the answer lies in human evolution. In the prehistoric era, when humans lived in caves, the environment was fraught with lethal dangers, from "wild animals to eating the wrong mushroom." Consequently, survival depended on being hyper-aware of threats. This survival mechanism has evolved into what Alshamahi calls "negativity bias," an inherent tendency for humans to pay more attention to negative stimuli than positive ones. We are effectively conditioned to believe that negative experiences are more significant or formative than joyous ones.

The Impact of "News on Tap"

Today, the internet provides us with "news on tap"—a state where information is "easily available so that you can have as much of it as you want, whenever you want." Unlike our ancestors, who only needed to be concerned about the "bad news from that particular mountain" or their local vicinity, modern humans are bombarded with global tragedies instantaneously.

This constant influx of disturbing content often leaves us feeling "ick"—an informal American phrase describing the feeling of being "sick, often because of something disgusting or disturbing." As Alshamahi and presenter Clara Amfo note, the sheer volume of negative information is overwhelming, and the sparse amount of positive news simply does not "make up for" (or compensate for) the relentless stream of negativity.

Romanticizing Trauma and Resilience

Clara Amfo raises a compelling point about how society interacts with this cycle: we have "romanticized" bad, traumatic news, talking about it in a way that makes it seem more profound or meaningful than it actually is. This is often tied to the common adage, "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger." This cultural sentiment suggests that enduring difficult experiences builds "strength and resilience for the future." However, the podcast cautions that this perspective may be used to justify our unhealthy fixation on global crises, leading us to believe that witnessing trauma is a necessary or noble endeavor rather than a source of unnecessary distress.

Conclusion

While the 24-7 news cycle makes doomscrolling possible, it is our deep-seated evolutionary instincts that make it so difficult to break. We are biologically programmed to monitor threats, but in an era where global disasters are accessible at the touch of a screen, this instinct has become maladaptive. Recognizing that we are "conditioned to believe that negative experiences shape us" is the first step toward breaking the cycle. Perhaps, as the hosts suggest, it is time to stop doomscrolling altogether and intentionally seek out more positive narratives to balance our mental well-being.