Investigating whether AI can strengthen human agency online.
Six workstreams spanning behavioral science, human–computer interaction, privacy-preserving machine learning, ethics, and mobile operating-system design.
“How can AI-enabled mobile devices help people exercise meaningful control over their own connectivity during periods when their immediate impulses may conflict with their previously stated intentions?”
Six streams of inquiry
01 · Digital Vulnerability
Understand when and why individuals experience difficulty maintaining intended digital boundaries.
02 · Existing Digital Controls
Study blockers, filters, screen-time systems, parental controls, and other interventions.
03 · Behavioral Pre-Commitment
Study whether decisions made before vulnerability are more durable than decisions made during it.
04 · AI Personalization
Explore how privacy-preserving AI can recommend useful boundaries without invasive data collection.
05 · Ethics & Human Agency
Study consent, autonomy, coercion, privacy, accessibility, bias, and potential misuse.
06 · Responsible OS Integration
Study technical requirements for implementing voluntary connectivity controls at the mobile OS level.
Research Questions
These are the questions the program exists to answer. None of them is settled.
- 01When do people experience difficulty maintaining self-selected digital boundaries?
- 02Why do users disable or circumvent existing blockers?
- 03How effective is voluntary digital pre-commitment?
- 04What level of restriction do users consider acceptable?
- 05Can AI identify recurring risk windows without invasive surveillance?
- 06Which behavioral signals are appropriate to use?
- 07Which signals should never be collected?
- 08Can AI recommendations improve schedule selection?
- 09How should recommendations be explained?
- 10What happens when AI makes an incorrect prediction?
- 11Should users always be able to override SafeTime?
- 12Should overrides have cooldown periods?
- 13What emergency exceptions are necessary?
- 14What should remain available during full SafeTime?
- 15How should SafeTime work differently for adults and adolescents?
- 16What risks arise from OS-level restrictions?
- 17Could this technology be misused?
- 18What safeguards would prevent coercive use?
- 19How should SafeTime measure effectiveness?
- 20Can SafeTime work across different cultures?
- 21Could pre-commitment improve users' perceived digital agency?
SafeTime Digital Agency Study 2026
Goal: understand how individuals currently manage unwanted online behaviors and whether voluntary pre-commitment could improve digital agency.
Topics covered
- Internet habits
- Unwanted digital behavior
- Times of vulnerability
- Existing blocker use
- Why blockers are disabled
- User attitudes toward pre-commitment
- Preferred restriction levels
- Cooldown preferences
- Trust in AI
- Privacy concerns
- Emergency exceptions
- Attitudes toward OS integration
100–300
Initial exploratory sample
500–1,000+
Future expanded study
These are planned targets, not achieved recruitment figures.
Nothing About Users Without Users.
People affected by unwanted digital behavior should participate in designing the tools intended to help them.
Interviews
One-to-one conversations about real digital boundaries.
Surveys
Structured, anonymous, and privacy-respecting.
Focus groups
Group discussion of trade-offs and acceptability.
Prototype testing
Hands-on evaluation of scheduling and cool-off design.
Participatory design workshops
Co-designing features with the people who would use them.
Community advisory sessions
Ongoing guidance from affected communities.
What Would Success Look Like?
Proposed evaluation indicators for future studies.
These are proposed evaluation indicators and should not be interpreted as demonstrated SafeTime outcomes.
Research outputs
Research publications forthcoming.
- We publish findings that do not support our hypothesis as readily as those that do.
- Study protocols will be shared before results where feasible.