The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
However, it degraded their ability to remember auditory information. So what this means is that when we take a picture of something, or a person, we are stamping down a visual memory of that thing. And that makes sense, it's a photograph after all. But we are actually inhibiting our ability to remember the auditory, the sound component of that visual scene or what the person was saying.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.