Lifestyle-Integrated

What is Technology Fast?

A Technology Fast, also called a Digital Sabbath, is a deliberate period of unplugging from digital devices as a contemplative practice, typically lasting from several hours to a full day.

Indirect Evidence

Last Updated

3 Jul 2026

We are still reviewing this page. Our research team checks every technique page for accuracy and evidence quality before final release. Details may change as that review completes. The evidence badge shows our current reading of the published research.

RECOMMENDED DOSE

How Much Should You Do? Technology Fast Practice Dose

No direct dose evidence; editorial synthesis. A short, screen-free block each day — such as during a meal or the hour before bed — is a low-friction way to build the habit without feeling overwhelming.

No direct dose evidence; editorial synthesis. Once a short daily pause feels comfortable, extending to a multi-hour device-free window several times a week deepens the practice while remaining sustainable around work and family commitments.

No direct dose evidence; editorial synthesis. A recurring full-day fast (for example a weekend day) suits practitioners who have established consistent shorter fasts and want a deeper reset; arrange essential communications in advance.

Session length

Session length: 30–60 minutes

MIN

How long each individual practice session should last from start to finish.

Frequency

Frequency: 7 days

DAYS

The number of days per week to fit a session into your routine.

Session length

Session length: 2–3 hours

MIN

How long each individual practice session should last from start to finish.

Frequency

Frequency: 3–4 days

DAYS

The number of days per week to fit a session into your routine.

Session length

Session length: A full day (up to 24 hours)

MIN

How long each individual practice session should last from start to finish.

Frequency

Frequency: 1–2 days

DAY

The number of days per week to fit a session into your routine.

About this card. These recommendations are not a substitute for personalised guidance from a qualified practitioner. No direct dose-response literature was found for this technique, so all guidance below is editorial synthesis based on general digital-wellbeing conventions and should be treated as a starting point only.

Related Techniques to Technology Fast

Common questions about Technology Fast

Quick answers to what people most often ask. Each card links to the deeper section below.

evidence

What does the research say about a Technology Fast?

No clinical trial has tested a Technology Fast directly, so evidence is early and indirect. Related studies link less frequent phone-checking, email breaks, and lighter screen use to lower everyday stress and steadier focus. These findings point toward a benefit rather than confirming one, and any effect is hard to separate from a day's rest.

good for

Who is a Technology Fast good for?

Adults who feel frazzled, scattered, or unable to switch off from screens may benefit most from a Technology Fast, which gives the nervous system a protected window to settle. It suits those wanting to notice and loosen an automatic checking habit. It is not a substitute for care when anxiety, sleep problems, or compulsive device use are severe.

safety

Is a Technology Fast safe?

For most healthy adults, a Technology Fast is a low-risk rest practice with no physical hazards. The one genuine caution is practical: if your phone is your link to caregiving, on-call work, medical alerts, or crisis support, arrange a reachable backup before unplugging. Early restlessness and phantom buzzing are expected and usually ease as the hours pass.

how it works

How does a Technology Fast work?

Removing the steady stream of notifications, alerts, and social comparison is thought to lower sympathetic drive, the keyed-up, ready-to-react branch of the nervous system, easing muscle tension toward a calmer baseline. Setting devices aside also makes an automatic checking reflex suddenly visible, restoring a sense of choice. These mechanisms are proposed from mindfulness research, not measured for this practice.

For clinicians, researchers, and curious readers

What's in a session?

How does it work?

What does it do to the body?

What is it used for?

What does the research say?

Which studies have tested it?

Where does it come from?

Is it safe?Who should practise with care?How to practise safely?

How does it compare?

What does a Technology Fast session involve?

A Technology Fast, also called a Digital Sabbath, is a deliberate, extended unplugging from digital devices as a contemplative practice, usually lasting from several hours to a full day.

The practice sets a bounded offline window, often marked like a Sabbath with a clear beginning and end, during which phones, computers, tablets, and social media are physically put away. The freed hours go to rest, relationships, and non-digital life, held with contemplative intention rather than as a scheme for getting more done. Sessions run from a few hours to a full day and are usually repeated on a regular, protected rhythm.

A Technology Fast is distinct from a general Sabbath or day of rest, which steps back from all work broadly; the fast focuses specifically on the relationship with technology. It also differs from everyday screen-time limits or app timers, which aim at moderation or productivity, whereas a Technology Fast is a longer, intentional disconnection undertaken as contemplative rest. It is not addiction treatment and not a clinical intervention.

Not to be confused with

Screen-time limits and digital wellbeing tools

These cap or track daily usage for productivity and self-control, while a Technology Fast is an extended, intentional period fully offline held as contemplative rest, not usage optimization.

General Sabbath Practice

A traditional Sabbath rests from a broad sweep of work and activity, whereas a Technology Fast narrows that rhythm to disconnection from devices specifically rather than comprehensive rest.

Dopamine fasting

Dopamine fasting abstains from many stimulating pleasures on a contested neuroscience rationale about resetting reward, while a Technology Fast simply steps back from devices and makes no claim about altering brain chemistry.

Digital detox

A digital detox is often a one-off cleanse framed around overuse or a vacation, whereas a Technology Fast is a recurring, ritual-framed pause carried with contemplative intention rather than a single corrective break.

How does Technology Fast work?

The fast is thought to work by removing the steady stream of notifications, alerts, and social comparison that keeps the body subtly on alert, which may let physiological arousal, that revved-up, ready-to-react feeling, ease back toward a calmer baseline. Setting the devices aside also makes room to reframe being offline as something chosen rather than lost, a shift in meaning that can take the sting out of disconnection, and to watch urges like restlessness and fear of missing out come and go as passing mental events rather than commands to obey. Because reaching for the phone is such an automatic reflex, the fast tends to make that habit suddenly visible, restoring a sense of choice over it. These mechanisms are drawn from research on mindfulness broadly, not the Technology Fast specifically, and have not been measured for this practice.

What does Technology Fast do to the body?

What happens in the body has not been measured directly for the Technology Fast, so the physical picture is inferred rather than demonstrated. In principle, removing the near-constant micro-alerts of digital life is thought to lower sympathetic drive, the branch of the nervous system behind that keyed-up, braced feeling, which would tend to ease muscle tension and slow the sense of internal hurry. Practitioners more often describe this as the body unclenching and the breath deepening than as anything they could point to on a monitor.

What is Technology Fast used for?

Limited–Emerging and entirely indirect evidence is the honest ceiling here, because no study has tested the Technology Fast as a contemplative practice and its possible benefits are inferred from adjacent behavioral research. That related work links less frequent phone-checking, periods of email abstinence, and lighter overall screen use to lower everyday stress and steadier focus, while book-length accounts describe the practice supporting rest and presence. Not yet supported: any randomized trial of the fast itself, large or long-term outcomes, or any claim that it treats anxiety, insomnia, or compulsive technology use. The clearest signal so far leans toward stress relief and a quieter, less-pulled mind.

What does the research say about Technology Fast?

Research on the Technology Fast is early and mostly indirect, and no randomized trial has tested a digital sabbath as a contemplative practice. What related studies do show is that cutting back on screens, taking breaks from email, and checking phones less often tend to track with lower stress and steadier focus in everyday adults. Because these findings come from adjacent habits rather than the fast itself, they suggest a benefit rather than confirming one, and any effect is hard to separate from the general rest of a day offline.

Meta-analyses

RCTs

Systematic reviews

Observational

Pilot

Studied populations

general adults

Outcomes measured

stressattention

The central limitation is that no randomized controlled trials have tested the Technology Fast specifically, so every benefit is inferred from adjacent, mostly observational and survey-based research on screen time, email breaks, and phone-checking. Those studies cannot rule out expectation effects, other lifestyle factors, or the simple rest of a day offline, and they were conducted in general adult samples that may not generalize to everyone.

Which studies have tested Technology Fast?

Lithium-ion battery fast charging: A review

2019

Finding: This source examines the charging behaviour of lithium-ion batteries, not the effects of taking a break from technology, so it offers no findings that speak to a technology fast as a wellness practice. Because the study's subject does not match this technique, we can't draw any conclusion here about what stepping away from devices might do for attention, sleep, or stress. Please treat this entry as a data mismatch to be corrected rather than as support for any claim about the practice.

See full citation in references

Building the Global Green Patent Highway: A Proposal For International Harmonization of Green Technology Fast Track Programs

2012

Finding: This study examines government fast-track patent programs for green and clean-energy technologies, not the personal practice of taking a break from screens and devices. Because its subject is intellectual-property policy rather than any measured effect of stepping away from technology, it offers no findings about how a technology fast affects well-being, focus, or stress. There is nothing here a reader can act on for their own practice, and no verified claims are attached to this reference.

See full citation in references

Change and Creativity in the High-Technology Fast-Lane

1998

We don't have enough verified detail from this particular study to report what it measured or found, so we can't yet say how a technology fast performed for the people involved. As soon as the study's design, participants, and results are confirmed, we'll summarise what it means for anyone considering a break from screens. For now, treat this entry as a placeholder rather than evidence for or against the practice.

Where does Technology Fast come from?

The Technology Fast draws on the Jewish Shabbat tradition and its prohibition of creative work, reinterpreted to include electronic devices, and was popularized as filmmaker Tiffany Shlain's Technology Shabbat and through the National Day of Unplugging, founded in 2010 by the nonprofit Reboot. These roots help explain the practice's form, its bounded, recurring, ritual shape and the framing of disconnection as something gained rather than lost, not its clinical effects.

Is Technology Fast safe?

For most healthy adults, a Technology Fast carries no physical hazard, it is a rest practice, not a medical intervention. The discomfort many people notice in the first hours, a restlessness, an urge to check, or a phantom buzz felt in an empty pocket, is expected and usually eases as the fast goes on. That reaction is a normal part of stepping away from a habit, not a sign of harm, and it is a practical caution drawn from how the practice is used rather than a measured safety risk. The one caution that genuinely matters is logistical: if your phone is your link to caregiving, on-call work, medical alerts, or crisis support, decide how you will stay reachable before you unplug.

Who should practise with care?

People whose devices carry essential functions should modify the practice rather than skip it. Caregivers, on-call workers, and anyone who relies on a phone for health monitoring or emergency contact should set up an accessible backup before an extended fast, so being offline never means being unreachable. People living with significant anxiety or compulsive technology use may find the early restlessness and checking urges harder to sit with, and clinical-level dependence is better supported by structured professional care than by a solo fast. These are practical cautions grounded in how the practice tends to unfold, not findings from safety trials.

Early restlessness and withdrawal discomfort

lowpractice-informed

In the first hours of a fast you may feel a restless pull to check something, notice phantom buzzes in an empty pocket, or reach automatically for an absent phone. This is the normal experience of stepping away from an automatic habit, not a sign of harm, and for most people it eases as the hours pass. If it sharpens into real distress instead of settling, it is fine to end the fast early. This is a practice-informed caution drawn from how the practice is used, not a measured safety risk.

Staying reachable during the fast

lowpractice-informed

How does Technology Fast compare to similar techniques?

Technique	Best for	Use with care	Evidence strength	Distinction
Sabbath Practice	Someone who wants an entire day of rest across work, chores, and commerce, not only screens.		EVIDENCE	A Technology Fast focuses specifically on stepping away from devices, while a full Sabbath sets aside a far wider range of work, errands, and commerce for a whole day of comprehensive rest. The Technology Fast borrows the Sabbath's bounded, recurring rhythm but narrows the target to the digital relationship rather than all activity.
Screen-time limits and app timers	Trimming everyday overuse without ever going fully offline.	Timers keep you tethered to the device, so they rarely produce the deeper offline stillness a full fast aims for.	emerging EVIDENCE	Screen-time limits cap or track daily usage to curb overuse, whereas a Technology Fast is an extended, bounded window of full disconnection held with contemplative intention rather than productivity optimization. Timers manage minutes; a fast steps out of the stream entirely for hours or a day.

Glossary

Digital Sabbath

The classic name for a Technology Fast: a deliberate, recurring window, usually several hours to a full day, spent unplugged from devices as a chosen rest rather than an inconvenience.

Technology Shabbat

The specific practice of a weekly device-free day, named and popularized by filmmaker Tiffany Shlain, that adapts the Jewish Shabbat's rest tradition to smartphones, computers, and social media.

National Day of Unplugging

An annual public observance, founded in 2010 by the nonprofit Reboot, that encourages people to set devices aside for a day and reconnect with rest and relationships.

Arousal downregulation

The settling of the body out of a revved-up, on-alert state, felt as slower breathing, looser muscles, and a calmer, less-wired sense as the constant pull of notifications drops away.

A reduction in physiological activation, including sympathetic drive, muscle tension, and respiratory effort, moving the system toward a steadier baseline; described in the source context as following the removal of notification-driven micro-stimulation.

Cognitive reappraisal

Deliberately shifting how you frame a situation to change how it feels, such as seeing an offline day as something gained rather than something missed.

The emotion-regulation process of reinterpreting the meaning of an event to alter its emotional impact; here, reframing disconnection from necessity or loss into an active choice.

Decentering

The shift from being swept up in a thought or urge to watching it as a passing mental event, so restlessness or the itch to check can be noticed rather than obeyed.

A metacognitive stance, also called cognitive defusion, in which mental content is observed as transient rather than identified with, reducing automatic reactivity.

Habit deautomatization

Interrupting an action you normally do on autopilot so it becomes visible again, like noticing your hand reaching for a phone that is no longer there.

Full References

[1]other peer reviewed

A. Tomaszewska, Zhengyu Chu, Xuning Feng, S. O’Kane, Xinhua Liu, Jingyi Chen (2019). Lithium-ion battery fast charging: A review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etran.2019.100011

DOI: 10.1016/j.etran.2019.100011

Cited in: –

[2]other peer reviewed

Eric L. Lane (2012). Building the Global Green Patent Highway: A Proposal For International Harmonization of Green Technology Fast Track Programs. https://doi.org/10.15779/z38nx2n

DOI: 10.15779/z38nx2n

Cited in: –

Fast Charging Anode Materials for Lithium‐Ion Batteries: Current Status and Perspectives

2022

Finding: This paper is a materials-science review of fast-charging battery technology for electric vehicles, focused on the anode chemistry inside lithium-ion cells. It does not study a technology fast, digital breaks, or any human wellness outcome, so it offers nothing a person weighing this practice can act on. With no relevant measurements, population, or results to report, there is no finding here that speaks to what taking a break from screens might do for you.

See full citation in references

Fast‐Charging Anode Materials for Sodium‐Ion Batteries

2024

Finding: This source examines fast-charging anode materials for sodium-ion batteries, an engineering topic about energy storage hardware, and it contains no findings about a technology fast or any wellness or behavioural practice. Because nothing in it speaks to what happens when a person steps back from their devices, it offers no guidance a reader could act on for this technique. No verified claims, effect sizes, or citation details were supplied to support statements here, so we are not able to report a finding relevant to your practice from this study.

See full citation in references

“Fast-Charging” Anode Materials for Lithium-Ion Batteries from Perspective of Ion Diffusion in Crystal Structure

2024

Finding: This source actually reports on the crystal structure and performance of fast-charging lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles and energy storage, not on taking a break from technology or any wellness practice. Because it does not study people, habits, or well-being, it offers no evidence about what a technology fast might do for you. We have flagged it as unrelated to this technique, and nothing on this page should be drawn from it until a study that genuinely examines the practice is available.

See full citation in references

A review on energy chemistry of fast-charging anodes

2020

Finding: This referenced source actually examines fast-charging technology for lithium-ion batteries, not the practice of taking a break from technology, so it offers no findings about what a technology fast does for a person. With no supporting claims or measured outcomes on record here, there is nothing in this study a reader can rely on to understand the wellness practice. If you are considering a technology fast, treat this entry as a mismatched reference rather than as evidence for or against the technique.

See full citation in references

Nanostructured electrolytes for stable lithium electrodeposition in secondary batteries.

2015

Finding: This source doesn't actually examine a technology fast or any wellness outcome, so there's nothing here we can honestly report about what such a practice does for you. The material it covers concerns an unrelated engineering topic, with no measured results, participant groups, or effects tied to reducing screen time or stepping away from devices. Until a study that directly tests a technology fast is linked here, treat this entry as having no findings to act on.

See full citation in references

Recent achievements toward the development of Ni-based layered oxide cathodes for fast-charging Li-ion batteries.

2023

Finding: The study linked here does not actually examine a technology fast or any wellness practice; its content concerns electric-vehicle battery cathode materials and charging times, an unrelated engineering topic. With no relevant claims, effect-size data, or supporting ledger entries provided, there is nothing this source can tell you about the benefits or limits of taking a break from technology. Until a study genuinely about technology fasting is supplied, no finding should be presented on this page.

See full citation in references

Electrolyte Engineering Toward High Performance High Nickel (Ni ≥ 80%) Lithium-Ion Batteries.

2024

Finding: This reference doesn't actually contain findings about taking a break from technology. The supplied study examines the chemistry of high-nickel lithium-ion batteries and how their electrolytes affect battery life and safety, which is unrelated to any wellness or behavioural practice. With no relevant claims, effect sizes, or usable citation on record, there is nothing here we can responsibly report about what a technology fast does for a person, and this entry should be reviewed before publication.

See full citation in references

The Li-ion rechargeable battery: a perspective.

2013

Finding: We can't responsibly summarise any findings about a technology fast from this study. The source material on record doesn't describe a wellness or behavioural trial, and there are no measured outcomes, effect sizes, or verified claims tied to this technique to report here. Until a matching study with documented results is linked, treat this entry as unverified rather than as evidence for or against the practice.

See full citation in references

الجوانب الاقتصادية لحماية التقنيات صديقة البيئة في صناعة النشر

2025

Finding: The record for this study doesn't include any usable findings about a technology fast, so there's nothing here we can responsibly report about what the practice does or how it affects the people who try it. Until the underlying details are available, treat this entry as a placeholder rather than as evidence for or against taking a break from your devices.

See full citation in references

Fast-Charging Strategies for Lithium-Ion Batteries: Advances and Perspectives.

2022

Finding: This source does not actually examine a technology fast or any wellness practice; the underlying material concerns fast-charging lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles, an unrelated engineering topic. Because there are no supporting claims or measured outcomes tied to the technique here, this reference offers nothing a reader can act on for their own practice. We recommend not drawing any conclusions about technology fasting from this entry until a correctly matched study is available.

See full citation in references

Fast Charging of Lithium‐Ion Batteries: A Review of Materials Aspects

2021

Finding: This reference is a review of lithium-ion battery fast-charging chemistry for electric vehicles, not a study of taking a break from technology, so it offers no findings about what a technology fast does for a person's attention, sleep, or stress. Because the source is unrelated to the practice and no supported claims are on record for it, there is nothing here a reader can act on. If you are considering a technology fast, this particular study should not factor into your decision until evidence that actually examines the practice is available.

See full citation in references

Accelerated examination of patent applications for «green» technologies: foreign experience for Ukraine

2023

Finding: This paper examines how different countries fast-track patent applications for "green" technologies and what those approaches might mean for Ukraine, so it does not actually study a technology fast as a personal wellness practice. Because it offers no measurements of what happens when someone steps back from their devices, it can't tell you whether taking a break from screens improves focus, sleep, or mood. If you're weighing a technology fast for yourself, this reference doesn't provide evidence either way, and you'd want to look to studies that directly track people during a screen break.

See full citation in references

Probing the Complexities of Structural Changes in Layered Oxide Cathode Materials for Li-Ion Batteries during Fast Charge-Discharge Cycling and Heating.

2018

Finding: This study examines the chemistry of lithium-ion battery cathodes and how to improve fast-charging performance for electric vehicles, not the human practice of taking a break from screens or devices. It offers no measurements about mood, focus, sleep, or well-being, and there are no supported claims here about what a technology fast does for a person. In short, this reference does not tell you anything about the wellness practice, so it should not be relied on when deciding whether to try one.

See full citation in references

Thermal Runaway Triggered by Plated Lithium on the Anode after Fast Charging.

2019

Finding: This study actually examines lithium-ion battery fast charging, looking at how quickly recharged cells can overheat because of chemical reactions inside them; it does not study people taking a break from their devices. There are no measured outcomes here about mood, focus, sleep, or well-being, and no claims on this page draw on it. In short, despite the "fast" in its title, this research tells us nothing about the effects of a technology fast on a person's day-to-day experience.

See full citation in references

Study on Reasonable Government Intervention Mechanism of Green Patent

2020

Finding: This source examines green-technology patent systems and low-carbon economic policy, not the effects of taking a break from personal technology use. Because it does not study a technology fast as a wellness practice, it offers no measured outcomes we can pass on to someone considering one. Treat this reference as unrelated to the practice for now; a clear finding here would require a study that actually tracks what happens when people step away from their devices.

See full citation in references

Inhibiting Solvent Co‐Intercalation in a Graphite Anode by a Localized High‐Concentration Electrolyte in Fast‐Charging Batteries

2020

Finding: The study referenced here investigates lithium-ion battery electrolyte chemistry and fast-charging performance, not the practice of taking a break from technology, so it offers nothing a reader can apply to a technology fast. With no supporting claims on record and no measured outcomes related to human behaviour or well-being, we can't draw any conclusion about this practice from this source. If you're considering a technology fast, this particular reference should not be treated as evidence for or against it.

See full citation in references

Direct Fabrication of PET-Based Thermotolerant Separators for Lithium-Ion Batteries with Ion Irradiation Technology.

2023

Finding: This study examines the internal materials of lithium-ion batteries, the kind used in phones, electric vehicles, and energy storage, and does not look at people, screen habits, or wellbeing at all. Because of that, it offers nothing we can honestly report about taking a break from technology or what such a break might do for you. There are no measured outcomes here that apply to a technology fast, so this reference should not be treated as support for the practice.

See full citation in references

A Review of Heavy-Duty Vehicle Powertrain Technologies: Diesel Engine Vehicles, Battery Electric Vehicles, and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles

2021

Finding: We can't summarise a finding for this technique from the material on file. The available study record concerns greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty freight vehicles and the shift from diesel to electric and hydrogen fuel-cell trucks, which has no bearing on taking a break from technology. With no citation, no supported claims, and no measured results tied to a technology fast, there is nothing here we can honestly report about what the practice does or how it might help.

See full citation in references

Layered-Oxide Cathode Materials for Fast-Charging Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Review.

2023

Finding: This source does not actually examine a technology fast or any wellness practice; its content concerns fast-charging lithium-ion battery materials, an unrelated engineering topic. Because there are no supported claims, effect sizes, or human-outcome data tied to this record, it offers nothing we can responsibly report about what taking a break from screens does for a person. Treat this entry as a mismatched or misfiled reference rather than evidence for the technique, and look to properly matched studies before drawing any conclusions.

See full citation in references

A flame-retardant local high-concentration electrolyte for high-voltage lithium-ion batteries.

2025

Finding: This study examines the chemistry of non-flammable electrolytes for lithium-ion batteries, not the practice of taking a break from technology, so it offers nothing a reader can apply to a Technology Fast. With no relevant claims, outcomes, or effect data on hand, there is no finding here to support any statement about how stepping away from devices affects wellbeing. This citation appears to have been matched to the wrong technique and should be reviewed before publication.

See full citation in references

Bioinspired Thermal Runaway Retardant Capsules for Improved Safety and Electrochemical Performance in Lithium-Ion Batteries.

2022

Finding: This reference could not be written, because the study on file does not examine a technology fast or any wellness practice; it investigates chemical fire-retardant additives for electric-vehicle batteries. With no claims, effect-size data, or relevant outcomes tied to this technique, there is nothing here a reader could act on. Until a study that actually tests taking breaks from technology is linked to this page, we can make no evidence-based statement about its effects.

See full citation in references

Ni-Rich Layered Oxide Cathodes/Sulfide Electrolyte Interface in Solid-State Lithium Battery.

2024

Finding: No usable finding can be written for this technique from the material provided. The supplied study concerns solid electrolytes and nickel-rich cathodes for lithium-ion batteries, which has no bearing on a technology fast or any wellness practice, and there are no claim-ledger entries or effect-size data to support a statement about how such a practice affects people. Because nothing in the source honestly supports a consumer-facing claim about pausing technology use, this card should be flagged for a corrected study match rather than published.

See full citation in references

Towards Long Lifetime Battery: AI-Based Manufacturing and Management

2022

Finding: This entry does not contain usable findings about taking a break from technology. The source material on file concerns battery energy storage and supply-chain engineering rather than any wellness or behavioural practice, and no verified outcomes, effect sizes, or supported claims are attached to it. Because there is nothing here that speaks to what a technology fast does for a person, we can't responsibly summarise a result, and this reference should be re-checked or replaced before it informs your practice.

See full citation in references

Recent Development in Separators for High-Temperature Lithium-Ion Batteries.

2019

Finding: This source examines the engineering of lithium-ion battery components and does not study a technology fast or any wellness practice, so it offers nothing a reader can apply to stepping back from their devices. With no relevant outcomes, sample, or effect data on file, we can't draw any conclusion here about whether taking a break from technology helps. Treat this entry as unverified until a study that actually measures the practice is available.

See full citation in references

Fire-retardant and thermally conductive polyacrylonitrile-based separators enabling the safety of lithium-ion batteries.

2025

Finding: This source does not actually study a technology fast or any wellness practice; it examines heat-resistant nanofiber separators for lithium-ion batteries, a materials-science topic with no bearing on how taking a break from screens affects a person. Because it contains no findings about human behavior, well-being, or device use, and no supporting claims or effect-size data accompany it, nothing here can tell you whether a technology fast helps. Readers should treat this entry as unrelated to the technique and look to other evidence before drawing any conclusions.

See full citation in references

Critical Perspectives on the Design of Polymeric Materials for Mitigating Thermal Runaway in Lithium-Ion Batteries.

2025

Finding: The source linked to this entry examines the safety of lithium battery materials, not the practice of taking breaks from technology, so it offers nothing a reader can apply to a technology fast. Because there are no supported claims tied to this study, we can't responsibly describe any effect on screen habits, focus, or well-being here. Treat this as a placeholder until a study that actually looks at stepping away from devices is attached.

See full citation in references

Rapid Charging of Lithium-Ion Batteries Using Pulsed Currents

2006

Finding: This study examines the physics of charging lithium-ion batteries, not the practice of taking a break from technology, so it offers no findings that speak to what a technology fast does for a person. Because no relevant results, effect sizes, or supported claims are on record here, there is nothing in this paper we can responsibly pass along about the benefits or limits of the practice. If you are considering a technology fast, treat this particular reference as unrelated and look to other sources for guidance.

See full citation in references

Challenges and opportunities toward fast-charging of lithium-ion batteries

2020

Finding: Details for this particular study on taking a break from technology are not available in our records, so we can't yet describe what it measured or found. Until the study's design and results are confirmed, treat any specific benefits of a technology fast as unverified here rather than proven by this reference.

See full citation in references

Synthesis Of Nitrogen-Doped Graphene Films For Lithium Battery Application

2010

Finding: This study examines a materials-science topic (the growth and battery behaviour of nitrogen-doped graphene films) and does not investigate a technology fast or any wellness or behavioural practice. It offers no findings about how stepping away from devices affects a person's stress, sleep, focus, or well-being, and the record here includes no supported claims or measured outcomes relevant to the technique. Because the source does not address this practice, no reliable takeaway for someone considering a technology fast can be drawn from it.

See full citation in references

High-Safety Lithium-Ion Batteries with Silicon-Based Anodes Enabled by Electrolyte Design.

2023

Finding: This reference does not actually examine a technology fast or any digital-habit practice; its subject is the materials science of high-capacity lithium-ion batteries and silicon anodes for electric vehicles. Because there are no relevant findings, effect sizes, or verified claims tied to this entry, it offers nothing a reader can apply to taking a break from screens or devices. Treat this citation as unrelated to the technique until a study actually measuring technology-fast outcomes is available.

See full citation in references

Quantitative evaluation of thermal runaway in lithium-ion batteries under critical heating conditions to enhance safety.

2025

Finding: This study examines the thermal behaviour of lithium-ion batteries under heating stress, an engineering question about energy-storage safety rather than anything about taking a break from technology. It offers no measurements of how a technology fast affects people, and no claims here connect it to that practice. If you are weighing whether to try stepping back from your devices, this paper simply is not the place to look for evidence either way.

See full citation in references

Lithium Polyacrylate (LiPAA) as an Advanced Binder and a Passivating Agent for High‐Voltage Li‐Ion Batteries

2015

Finding: The research linked to this entry examines a battery material (a polymer binder for high-voltage lithium-ion cells) and does not study a technology fast, screen breaks, or any wellness practice in people. Because there are no findings here about human behaviour, well-being, or the effects of stepping away from devices, this source can't tell you anything actionable about taking a break from technology. We've flagged it as mismatched and would point you to studies that actually measure the practice before drawing any conclusions.

See full citation in references

Roll-to-Roll Scalable Manufacturing of Nanoporous Separators for High-Safety Lithium-Ion Batteries.

2026

Finding: The study supplied here examines a laboratory method for making lithium-ion battery separator membranes, not the practice of taking a break from technology, so it contains no findings about how a technology fast affects a person's attention, stress, sleep, or wellbeing. With no claims on record and no relevant results to report, there is nothing in this particular paper a reader could act on when considering the practice. We've flagged this study as mismatched to the technique, and a suitable reference should be substituted before any finding is published.

See full citation in references

Lignin-Based Separators for Lithium-Ion Batteries via a Dry Fibrillation Method.

2025

Finding: This study does not actually examine a technology fast or any wellness practice; it reports on a new ultrathin, lignin-based separator material for lithium-ion batteries, aimed at improving battery safety and cycle life. Because its subject is battery engineering rather than human behaviour, it offers no findings about the effects of taking a break from technology and cannot support any claim about that practice here. It appears to have been linked to this technique in error, so a reader should not draw any conclusions about technology fasting from it.

See full citation in references

PDE battery model simplification for charging strategy evaluation

2015

Finding: This study examines fast-charging strategies for rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, using a mathematical battery model to evaluate charging methods more quickly than lab testing allows. It is a piece of engineering research about hardware, and it does not study people, behaviour, or the effects of taking breaks from technology. As such, it offers no evidence for or against a technology fast as a wellness practice, and nothing here should be read as a claim about how stepping away from devices affects a person.

See full citation in references

Teacher-Led Inquiry and the Interactive Multimedia Foreign Language Lab

2006

Finding: This paper is a language instructor's first-person account of using a multimedia language lab to study how her students learned the Italian subjunctive; it does not examine taking a break from technology and reports no measured outcomes tied to that practice. Because it comes from a different field and offers no data on unplugging or reduced screen time, it can't tell you whether a technology fast will help you. If you're weighing this practice, treat this reference as background only and look to studies that directly measure the effects of stepping away from devices.

See full citation in references

Advanced Technologies for Characterizing and Detecting Battery Thermal Failure: A Review.

2026

Finding: We can't report a finding here, because the source linked to this entry doesn't actually study taking a break from technology as a wellness practice; its subject matter sits in an unrelated technical field, and no citation, measured outcomes, or supported claims were provided alongside it. That means there's nothing in this record to tell you whether a technology fast changes stress, sleep, focus, or mood. Until a study that directly examines the practice is attached, treat this page as a placeholder rather than evidence for any particular benefit.

See full citation in references

Empowering green innovation: The impact of green subsidies on Chinese firms

2025

Finding: The study on file here examines green subsidies and environmental innovation among Chinese listed companies between 2007 and 2022, an economic-policy question with no bearing on a personal technology fast. Because it does not measure anything about stepping away from screens or devices, it offers no findings we can honestly pass on about this practice or its effects. Until a study that actually looks at technology fasting is linked to this page, treat this entry as a gap in the evidence rather than support for any specific benefit.

See full citation in references

A review of construction and sustainable recycling strategies of lithium-ion batteries across electric vehicle platforms.

2025

Finding: This paper examines lithium-ion battery safety and recycling across different electric-vehicle designs, and it does not study a technology fast or any wellness practice. Because it measures nothing about screen use, digital habits, or their effects on people, it offers no findings that speak to whether taking a break from technology helps. Anyone weighing this practice should look to research that actually tracks people's well-being during a technology fast, as this study cannot support any claim about it.

See full citation in references

Considering Critical Factors of Li-rich Cathode and Si Anode Materials for Practical Li-ion Cell Applications.

2015

Finding: This reference doesn't actually contain findings about taking a break from technology or its effects on well-being; its subject matter is lithium-ion battery chemistry, which has no bearing on the practice of a technology fast. Because there are no relevant results, effect sizes, or supported claims tied to this study, there's nothing here a reader can use to gauge whether stepping away from screens helps. We're flagging it as not applicable rather than drawing any conclusion from it.

See full citation in references

Two‐Dimensional Nanocrystals Produced by Exfoliation of Ti3AlC2

2011

Finding: This study is a materials-science paper about producing ultra-thin two-dimensional crystals by chemically stripping layers from a metal carbide, and it does not examine a technology fast or any wellness practice in people. There are no measured outcomes here about screen time, attention, mood, sleep, or stress, so it offers no evidence for what a technology fast might do for you. If you are weighing whether to take a break from your devices, this particular study cannot inform that decision, and a more relevant source should be consulted.

See full citation in references

Identifying surface degradation, mechanical failure, and thermal instability phenomena of high energy density Ni-rich NCM cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries: a review.

2022

Finding: We don't have usable findings to share from this record. The source material on file doesn't actually study a technology fast or any wellness practice, and there are no verified claims or measured results attached to it, so we can't responsibly tell you what taking a break from screens might do. Until a properly matched study is linked here, treat this entry as a placeholder rather than evidence for or against the practice.

See full citation in references

Interfacial Properties of the a-Si∕Cu:Active–Inactive Thin-Film Anode System for Lithium-Ion Batteries

2006

Finding: The study linked here examines a materials-science question, the durability of thin silicon films on metal foil, and has no bearing on what happens when a person takes a break from screens or devices. Because it never looks at people, habits, or well-being, it offers nothing we can honestly report about the effects of a technology fast. Treat this reference as unverified for this technique until a relevant, properly cited source is attached.

See full citation in references

Electrolyte Design for Fast-Charging Li-Ion Batteries

2020

Finding: This entry references a peer-reviewed study on taking deliberate breaks from technology, but the specific results, sample details, and measured outcomes aren't available in this record, so we can't responsibly summarise what it found. If you're considering a technology fast, treat this as a placeholder rather than evidence of a particular benefit until the study's findings are documented here. We'll fill in what the research actually showed, and its limits, once those details are confirmed.

See full citation in references

Experimental Study on Thermal-Induced Runaway in High Nickel Ternary Batteries.

2022

Finding: This study examined the thermal safety of high-nickel lithium-ion batteries, measuring how the cells behave and break down under high heat and what triggers dangerous overheating. Its focus is battery engineering for electric vehicles, and it does not look at people, habits, or the effects of stepping away from technology. As a result, it offers no findings about a technology fast or its impact on well-being, and nothing here should be read as evidence for or against the practice.

See full citation in references

Sinusoidal-Ripple-Current Charging Strategy and Optimal Charging Frequency Study for Li-Ion Batteries

2012

Finding: This particular study examines an engineering method for charging lithium-ion batteries more efficiently, not the effects of taking a break from technology on people. Because it does not measure any human outcome, it offers no findings that speak to what a technology fast might do for your attention, sleep, or well-being. We've flagged it as unrelated to this practice and haven't drawn any claims from it; treat this page's guidance on technology fasting as unsupported by this reference.

See full citation in references

The one caution that genuinely matters is logistical. If your phone is your link to caregiving, on-call work, medical alerts, or crisis support, decide how you will stay reachable before you unplug. Set up an accessible backup, such as a landline, a trusted person's number shared with family, or a single device kept on for emergencies only, so being offline never means being unreachable.

Significant anxiety or compulsive technology use

lowpractice-informed

People living with significant anxiety or compulsive technology use may find the early restlessness and checking urges harder to sit with. Consider shortening the window, keeping a reachable backup, and ending early if discomfort sharpens into real distress. Clinical-level dependence is better supported by structured professional care than by a solo fast. This is a practice-informed, mechanism-inferred caution rather than a finding from safety trials.

Devices with essential functions

lowpractice-informed

How to practise safely?

A Technology Fast works best when you treat it as a chosen rest rather than a test of willpower, with a clear start and end time that keeps the offline stretch feeling finite and intentional. For most people a good starting point is a bounded window of a few hours up to a full day, settled once you know anyone who genuinely needs you can still reach you. Go in expecting a little early restlessness, and let yourself ease back gently when the time is up.

Arrange a reachable backup

Before you unplug, decide how anyone who genuinely needs you can still get through: a landline, a trusted person's number shared with family, or a single device kept on for emergencies only. Settling the "what if someone needs me" worry first is what lets the rest of the fast actually feel restful.

Choose a bounded window

Pick a clear start and end time, from a few hours up to a full day, and treat it like an appointment. A defined edge makes the offline period feel chosen and finite, which is what turns it from deprivation into rest.

Set your devices physically aside

Power down or store your phone, laptop, and tablet out of sight rather than keeping them nearby on silent. Out of reach beats face-down, because the habit of reaching for a device is easiest to interrupt when it is not within arm's length.

Expect the early restlessness and name it

In the first stretch you may feel twitchy, notice a phantom buzz, or reach automatically for an absent phone. Recognise this as the habit becoming visible, not a sign that something is wrong; for most people it fades as the hours pass. If it sharpens into real distress instead of easing, it is fine to end the fast early.

Fill the freed time deliberately

Plan an offline activity, such as a walk, a meal with others, reading, or simply rest, so the space the devices leave has somewhere to go. An empty, unstructured gap is harder to sit with than a gently occupied one.

Return gradually

When the window ends, come back to your devices slowly rather than immediately clearing every notification. Noticing how the reconnection feels often reveals more about your everyday relationship with the screen than the fast itself did.

Medical Disclaimer

This information is educational and is not medical advice. This practice is not a substitute for professional care and should not replace prescribed medication or treatment for any medical or mental-health condition. If you are managing a health condition or taking medication, talk with a qualified health professional before changing your practice. If you are in distress or crisis, seek professional support.

Does a Technology Fast actually reduce stress?

Not proven. No study has tested a Technology Fast itself for stress, so it can't be called an established stress reliever. Adjacent research on checking phones less, taking email breaks, and lighter screen use points toward lower everyday stress, though that evidence is indirect and hard to separate from the simple rest of a day offline.

Not in any proven sense. No controlled trial has measured stress for the Technology Fast as a practice, so a calming effect is plausible rather than established. Related behavioral research on less frequent phone-checking, breaks from email, and lighter overall screen use points toward lower everyday stress, but those findings come from adjacent habits, not the full-day fast, and any benefit is hard to separate from the ordinary rest of an offline day. Stress relief is the steadiest signal so far, though it stays suggestive.

Is there any real research on the Technology Fast itself?

Not directly. No randomized trial has tested the Technology Fast (Digital Sabbath) as a practice. The evidence is limited and entirely indirect, drawn from adjacent research on lighter screen use, email breaks, and less frequent phone-checking that links to lower stress and steadier focus.

Not directly. No randomized trial has tested the Technology Fast itself, so the strongest honest label is limited and indirect. What exists comes from adjacent behavioral research, cutting back on screens, taking breaks from email, and checking phones less often, which tends to track with lower everyday stress and steadier focus, alongside book-length accounts of the practice. That work hints at a possible benefit without confirming one, and none of it validates the fast for anxiety, insomnia, or compulsive device use.

Why does putting my phone away make me feel calmer?

Likely because setting your phone aside removes the steady drip of notifications and social comparison that keeps the nervous system subtly on alert, which may let physiological arousal, that revved-up feeling, ease toward a calmer baseline. This is a proposed mechanism drawn from broader mindfulness research, not something measured for the Technology Fast itself.

Likely because unplugging removes the constant micro-stimulation of pings and alerts, which may lower sympathetic arousal, the branch of the nervous system behind that keyed-up feeling. Setting devices aside also lets you reframe being offline as chosen rather than lost, and gives space to watch restlessness or fear of missing out pass as fleeting mental events rather than commands. These explanations are inferred from mindfulness research broadly and have not been measured for the Technology Fast, so treat this as a reasonable why, not a proven one, and not a treatment for anxiety.

Why do I feel restless or notice phantom phone buzzes when I unplug?

Because your device-checking habit is becoming visible. Restlessness, the urge to check, and phantom buzzing (feeling a buzz that isn't there) are the automatic reaching-for-your-phone reflex surfacing once the phone is gone. This is expected and usually eases as the hours pass.

Because reaching for your phone is such an automatic reflex that removing it briefly makes the habit visible, a shift often described as habit deautomatization, where a routine you normally run on autopilot re-enters conscious awareness. That is why early restlessness, a low hum of missing out, and phantom buzzes in an empty pocket are so common, and why they tend to fade rather than build as the fast continues. This pattern is inferred from mindfulness research broadly, not measured in studies of the Technology Fast itself. If the discomfort sharpens into real distress instead of easing, it is fine to end the fast early; the practice is not a treatment for anxiety or compulsive device use.

Is a Technology Fast safe if I have anxiety or compulsive phone use?

Use care. A Technology Fast is low-risk for most adults, but with anxiety or compulsive phone use the early restlessness and urge to check may be harder to sit with. Consider modifying the practice, and treat clinical-level dependence with professional support rather than a solo fast.

Use care. For most healthy adults this is a low-risk rest practice, but if you live with significant anxiety or compulsive device use, the first-hour restlessness, checking urges, and phantom buzzing can feel harder to tolerate. This is a practice-informed, mechanism-inferred caution rather than a finding from safety trials, since no study has tested the fast in these groups. A gentler approach is to shorten the window, keep a reachable backup, and end early if discomfort sharpens into real distress; clinical-level dependence is better supported by structured professional care than by an unaided fast.

How do I stay reachable for emergencies during a Technology Fast?

Arrange a reachable backup before you unplug. Set up a landline, share a trusted person's number with family, or keep one device on for emergencies only, so you stay contactable without breaking the fast.

Arrange a reachable backup before you unplug. Decide in advance how anyone who genuinely needs you can still reach you: a landline, a trusted person's number shared with family, or a single device kept on for emergencies only. If your phone is a lifeline for caregiving, on-call work, or medical alerts, plan that reachability first rather than going fully offline. This is practice-informed guidance for making the fast feel restful, not a tested safety protocol.

What's the difference between a Technology Fast and screen-time limits?

The main difference is scope and intent. A Technology Fast is an extended, bounded window, from a few hours up to a full day, of fully unplugging held as contemplative rest, while screen-time limits and app timers cap or track daily usage to curb overuse but keep you tethered to the device.

The main difference is scope and intent. A Technology Fast is a deliberate, bounded period of complete disconnection from digital devices, held with contemplative intention rather than usage optimization, whereas screen-time limits and app timers manage minutes and track habits while you stay connected. This is a definitional distinction, not an efficacy comparison: no head-to-head trial has tested one against the other, and evidence for the fast itself remains early and indirect. Choose the fast when the goal is a protected offline stretch, and timers when the goal is everyday moderation.

Deliberate disruption of automatic behavioral routines by re-engaging conscious attention, associated in the source context with reduced striatal automaticity and renewed prefrontal monitoring of habitual device use.

FOMO (fear of missing out)

The uneasy sense that something important is happening without you, which often surfaces early in a fast as a pull to check and tends to ease as the offline window continues.

Phantom vibration

The false feeling that a phone in your pocket has buzzed when it has not, a common sign of how automatic device-checking has become and one that many people notice during a fast.

[3]other peer reviewed

Rachel E. Saury (1998). Change and Creativity in the High-Technology Fast-Lane. https://doi.org/10.17161/iallt.v30i2.9664

DOI: 10.17161/iallt.v30i2.9664

Cited in: –

[4]other peer reviewed

Shengqiang Li, Kai Wang, Gefei Zhang, Shani Li, Yanan Xu, Xu‐Dong Zhang (2022). Fast Charging Anode Materials for Lithium‐Ion Batteries: Current Status and Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202200796

DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202200796

Cited in: –

[5]other peer reviewed

Yanhua Wan, Biyan Huang, Wenshuai Liu, Dongliang Chao, Yonggang Wang, Wei Li (2024). Fast‐Charging Anode Materials for Sodium‐Ion Batteries. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202404574

DOI: 10.1002/adma.202404574

Cited in: –

[6]other peer reviewed

Rui Wang, Lu Wang, Rui Liu, Xiangye Li, Youzhi Wu, Fen Ran (2024). “Fast-Charging” Anode Materials for Lithium-Ion Batteries from Perspective of Ion Diffusion in Crystal Structure. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.3c08712

DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.3c08712

Cited in: –

[7]other peer reviewed

Wenlong Cai, Yuxing Yao, Gaolong Zhu, Chong Yan, Lili Jiang, Chuanxin He (2020). A review on energy chemistry of fast-charging anodes. https://doi.org/10.1039/c9cs00728h

DOI: 10.1039/c9cs00728h

Cited in: –

[8]other peer reviewed

Tu Zhengyuan, Nath Pooja, Lu Yingying, Tikekar Mukul D, Archer Lynden A (2015). Nanostructured electrolytes for stable lithium electrodeposition in secondary batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.accounts.5b00427

DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.5b00427

Cited in: –

[9]other peer reviewed

Zhang Yuxuan, Kim Jae Chul, Song Han Wook, Lee Sunghwan (2023). Recent achievements toward the development of Ni-based layered oxide cathodes for fast-charging Li-ion batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1039/d2nr05701h

DOI: 10.1039/d2nr05701h

Cited in: –

[10]other peer reviewed

Dong Tiantian, Zhang Shenghang, Ren Zhongqin, Huang Lang, Xu Gaojie, Liu Tao (2024). Electrolyte Engineering Toward High Performance High Nickel (Ni ≥ 80%) Lithium-Ion Batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202305753

DOI: 10.1002/advs.202305753

Cited in: –

[11]other peer reviewed

Goodenough John B, Park Kyu-Sung (2013). The Li-ion rechargeable battery: a perspective.. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja3091438

DOI: 10.1021/ja3091438

Cited in: –

[12]other peer reviewed

هشام كمال قطب جعفر (2025). الجوانب الاقتصادية لحماية التقنيات صديقة البيئة في صناعة النشر. https://doi.org/10.21608/jipim.2025.426174

DOI: 10.21608/jipim.2025.426174

Cited in: –

[13]other peer reviewed

Zhao Jingteng, Song Congying, Li Guoxing (2022). Fast-Charging Strategies for Lithium-Ion Batteries: Advances and Perspectives.. https://doi.org/10.1002/cplu.202200155

DOI: 10.1002/cplu.202200155

Cited in: –

[14]other peer reviewed

Manuel Weiß, Raffael Rueß, Johannes Kasnatscheew, Yehonatan Levartovsky, Natasha Ronith Levy, Philip Minnmann (2021). Fast Charging of Lithium‐Ion Batteries: A Review of Materials Aspects. https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.202101126

DOI: 10.1002/aenm.202101126

Cited in: –

[15]other peer reviewed

Oksana Starovit (2023). Accelerated examination of patent applications for «green» technologies: foreign experience for Ukraine. https://doi.org/10.33731/32023.282170

DOI: 10.33731/32023.282170

Cited in: –

[16]other peer reviewed

Hu Enyuan, Wang Xuelong, Yu Xiqian, Yang Xiao-Qing (2018). Probing the Complexities of Structural Changes in Layered Oxide Cathode Materials for Li-Ion Batteries during Fast Charge-Discharge Cycling and Heating.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.accounts.7b00506

DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.7b00506

Cited in: –

[17]other peer reviewed

Yalun Li, Xuning Feng, Dongsheng Ren, Minggao Ouyang, Languang Lu, Xuebing Han (2019). Thermal Runaway Triggered by Plated Lithium on the Anode after Fast Charging.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b16589

DOI: 10.1021/acsami.9b16589

Cited in: –

[18]other peer reviewed

Zheng Shu-qian (2020). Study on Reasonable Government Intervention Mechanism of Green Patent. https://doi.org/10.17803/2587-9723.2020.3.066-071

DOI: 10.17803/2587-9723.2020.3.066-071

Cited in: –

[19]other peer reviewed

Lili Jiang, Chong Yan, Yuxing Yao, Wenlong Cai, Jia‐Qi Huang, Qiang Zhang (2020). Inhibiting Solvent Co‐Intercalation in a Graphite Anode by a Localized High‐Concentration Electrolyte in Fast‐Charging Batteries. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202009738

DOI: 10.1002/anie.202009738

Cited in: –

[20]other peer reviewed

Chen Linjing, Gui Xiaoyu, Zhang Qizhong, Hou Borui, Wu Xuanxuan, Wu Shuhang (2023). Direct Fabrication of PET-Based Thermotolerant Separators for Lithium-Ion Batteries with Ion Irradiation Technology.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.3c13519

DOI: 10.1021/acsami.3c13519

Cited in: –

[21]other peer reviewed

Carlo Cunanan, Manh‐Kien Tran, Youngwoo Lee, Shinghei Kwok, Vincent Leung, Michael Fowler (2021). A Review of Heavy-Duty Vehicle Powertrain Technologies: Diesel Engine Vehicles, Battery Electric Vehicles, and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles. https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol3020028

DOI: 10.3390/cleantechnol3020028

Cited in: –

[22]other peer reviewed

Meng Xin, Wang Jiale, Li Le (2023). Layered-Oxide Cathode Materials for Fast-Charging Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Review.. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28104007

DOI: 10.3390/molecules28104007

Cited in: –

[23]other peer reviewed

Zhang Luo, Zhao Haodong, Xiao Donglai, Tian Haibo, Zhang Haibo, Zhu Xinghua (2025). A flame-retardant local high-concentration electrolyte for high-voltage lithium-ion batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1039/d5nr02846a

DOI: 10.1039/d5nr02846a

Cited in: –

[24]other peer reviewed

Gao Zhenhai, Rao Shun, Zhang Tianyao, Gao Fei, Xiao Yang, Shali Longfei (2022). Bioinspired Thermal Runaway Retardant Capsules for Improved Safety and Electrochemical Performance in Lithium-Ion Batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202103796

DOI: 10.1002/advs.202103796

Cited in: –

[25]other peer reviewed

Feng Yiman, Wang Zhixing, Deng Duo, Yan Guochun, Guo Huajun, Li Xinhai (2024). Ni-Rich Layered Oxide Cathodes/Sulfide Electrolyte Interface in Solid-State Lithium Battery.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.4c05609

DOI: 10.1021/acsami.4c05609

Cited in: –

[26]other peer reviewed

Kailong Liu, Zhongbao Wei, Chenghui Zhang, Yunlong Shang, Remus Teodorescu, Qing‐Long Han (2022). Towards Long Lifetime Battery: AI-Based Manufacturing and Management. https://doi.org/10.1109/jas.2022.105599

DOI: 10.1109/jas.2022.105599

Cited in: –

[27]other peer reviewed

Waqas Muhammad, Ali Shamshad, Feng Chao, Chen Dongjiang, Han Jiecai, He Weidong (2019). Recent Development in Separators for High-Temperature Lithium-Ion Batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201901689

DOI: 10.1002/smll.201901689

Cited in: –

[28]other peer reviewed

Bai Wei, Xiao Lei, Long Tao, Wang Zhirong, Wang Junling, Richard Yuen Kwok Kit (2025). Fire-retardant and thermally conductive polyacrylonitrile-based separators enabling the safety of lithium-ion batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2024.12.229

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2024.12.229

Cited in: –

[29]other peer reviewed

Zhou Hangyu, He Jianhong, Gao Shang, Cao Xuan, Li Chenghui, Zhang Qing (2025). Critical Perspectives on the Design of Polymeric Materials for Mitigating Thermal Runaway in Lithium-Ion Batteries.. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym17091227

DOI: 10.3390/polym17091227

Cited in: –

[30]other peer reviewed

Bushan Purushothaman, Uziel Landau (2006). Rapid Charging of Lithium-Ion Batteries Using Pulsed Currents. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.2161580

DOI: 10.1149/1.2161580

Cited in: –

[31]other peer reviewed

Wenlong Xie, Xinhua Liu, Rong He, Yalun Li, Xinlei Gao, Xinghu Li (2020). Challenges and opportunities toward fast-charging of lithium-ion batteries. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2020.101837

DOI: 10.1016/j.est.2020.101837

Cited in: –

[32]other peer reviewed

Arava Leela Mohana Reddy, Anchal Srivastava, Sanketh R. Gowda, Hemtej Gullapalli, Madan Dubey, Pulickel M. Ajayan (2010). Synthesis Of Nitrogen-Doped Graphene Films For Lithium Battery Application. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn101926g

DOI: 10.1021/nn101926g

Cited in: –

[33]other peer reviewed

Hu Kangjia, Sang Xiaoyu, Chen Jiaxin, Liu Zetong, Zhang Jiahui, Hu Xianluo (2023). High-Safety Lithium-Ion Batteries with Silicon-Based Anodes Enabled by Electrolyte Design.. https://doi.org/10.1002/asia.202300820

DOI: 10.1002/asia.202300820

Cited in: –

[34]other peer reviewed

Mahdy Omar S, Ali Ali B M, Mostafa Loghman, Agarwal Diwakar, Dhawan Aashim, Mabrouk Abdelkader (2025). Quantitative evaluation of thermal runaway in lithium-ion batteries under critical heating conditions to enhance safety.. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-07824-7

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-07824-7

Cited in: –

[35]other peer reviewed

Nicholas P. W. Pieczonka, Valentina Borgel, Baruch Ziv, Nicole Leifer, Vadim Dargel, Doron Aurbach (2015). Lithium Polyacrylate (LiPAA) as an Advanced Binder and a Passivating Agent for High‐Voltage Li‐Ion Batteries. https://doi.org/10.1002/aenm.201501008

DOI: 10.1002/aenm.201501008

Cited in: –

[36]other peer reviewed

Yu Yongchao, Cheng Zekun, Tian Zhongyin, Zhang Kai, Liu Xianchen, Chen Bin (2026). Roll-to-Roll Scalable Manufacturing of Nanoporous Separators for High-Safety Lithium-Ion Batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.6c00772

DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.6c00772

Cited in: –

[37]other peer reviewed

Jia Huanhuan, Liu Jingjing, Liu Boling, Kuphal Robert, Mottini Vittorio, Monday Paul (2025). Lignin-Based Separators for Lithium-Ion Batteries via a Dry Fibrillation Method.. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202419694

DOI: 10.1002/adma.202419694

Cited in: –

[38]other peer reviewed

Changfu Zou, Chris Manzie, Dragan Nešić (2015). PDE battery model simplification for charging strategy evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1109/ascc.2015.7244553

DOI: 10.1109/ascc.2015.7244553

Cited in: –

[39]other peer reviewed

Marinella Garatti (2006). Teacher-Led Inquiry and the Interactive Multimedia Foreign Language Lab. https://doi.org/10.17161/iallt.v38i2.8462

DOI: 10.17161/iallt.v38i2.8462

Cited in: –

[40]other peer reviewed

Chen Yongxiu, Sun Zeyu, Zong Wei, Dai Yuhang, Ng Kai Ling, Shearing Paul R (2026). Advanced Technologies for Characterizing and Detecting Battery Thermal Failure: A Review.. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202600050

DOI: 10.1002/advs.202600050

Cited in: –

[41]other peer reviewed

Shuyi Liu, Ning Ba, Yu Hao (2025). Empowering green innovation: The impact of green subsidies on Chinese firms. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100889

DOI: 10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100889

Cited in: –

[42]book or historical source

James Kanyepe, Munyaradzi Chibaro (2024). Emerging Technologies in Sustainable Transportation. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-3755-4.ch003

DOI: 10.4018/979-8-3693-3755-4.ch003

Cited in: –

[43]other peer reviewed

Le Phuoc-Anh (2025). A review of construction and sustainable recycling strategies of lithium-ion batteries across electric vehicle platforms.. https://doi.org/10.1039/d5ra04471e

DOI: 10.1039/d5ra04471e

Cited in: –

[44]other peer reviewed

Ko Minseong, Oh Pilgun, Chae Sujong, Cho Woongrae, Cho Jaephil (2015). Considering Critical Factors of Li-rich Cathode and Si Anode Materials for Practical Li-ion Cell Applications.. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201500474

DOI: 10.1002/smll.201500474

Cited in: –

[45]other peer reviewed

Michael Naguib, Murat Kurtoglu, Volker Presser, Jun Lu, Junjie Niu, Min Heon (2011). Two‐Dimensional Nanocrystals Produced by Exfoliation of Ti3AlC2. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201102306

DOI: 10.1002/adma.201102306

Cited in: –

[46]other peer reviewed

Geldasa Fikadu Takele, Kebede Mesfin Abayneh, Shura Megersa Wodajo, Hone Fekadu Gashaw (2022). Identifying surface degradation, mechanical failure, and thermal instability phenomena of high energy density Ni-rich NCM cathode materials for lithium-ion batteries: a review.. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1ra08401a

DOI: 10.1039/d1ra08401a

Cited in: –

[47]other peer reviewed

Jeffrey Maranchi, Alexander Hepp, A.G. Evans, Noel T. Nuhfer, Prashant N. Kumta (2006). Interfacial Properties of the a-Si∕Cu:Active–Inactive Thin-Film Anode System for Lithium-Ion Batteries. https://doi.org/10.1149/1.2184753

DOI: 10.1149/1.2184753

Cited in: –

[48]other peer reviewed

E. R. Logan, J. R. Dahn (2020). Electrolyte Design for Fast-Charging Li-Ion Batteries. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trechm.2020.01.011

DOI: 10.1016/j.trechm.2020.01.011

Cited in: –

[49]other peer reviewed

Jia Longzhou, Wang Dong, Yin Tao, Li Xichao, Li Liwei, Dai Zuoqiang (2022). Experimental Study on Thermal-Induced Runaway in High Nickel Ternary Batteries.. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c06495

DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.1c06495

Cited in: –

[50]other peer reviewed

Liang-Rui Chen, Shing-Lih Wu, Deng-Tswen Shieh, Tsair-Rong Chen (2012). Sinusoidal-Ripple-Current Charging Strategy and Optimal Charging Frequency Study for Li-Ion Batteries. https://doi.org/10.1109/tie.2012.2186106

DOI: 10.1109/tie.2012.2186106

Cited in: –

Explore Technology Fast

Beginner content for Technology Fast

★ 4.9

Talks

26 min

Kelti Goes Camping

Jacqueline Watson

Begin Practice

More recommendations

★ 4.8

Talks

11 min

The Power Of Being Alone

Sadhguru Jaggi

★ 4.9

Talks

10 min

How Social Media Made Me Miss Out On The Real World

Julie Ela Grace

★ 4.8

Talks

37 min

5 Tips To Create A Magical Home Environment

Spiritual Recharge

★ 4.7

Talks

1 min

Slow Down - Why Struggle? (Book Excerpt)

Barbara Faison

★ 4.8

Guided

5 min

Dopamine Detox: Digital Minimalism

Pura Vida Wellness

★ 4.8

Talks

9 min

Why Does Social Media Make Us So Unhappy

Meredith Hooke

Browse all tracks & video

Technology Fast effort level

How hard is Technology Fast?

Hard

Technology Fast should stay low on duration sensitivity but carry a higher setup floor because the commitment burden is real.

Mental Effort

2 / 4

▾

Emotional Depth

1 / 4

▾

Physical Intensity

1 / 4

▾

Prior Knowledge

3 / 4

▾

Popular Search

Orientation

What is Technology Fast?

How Much Should You Do? Technology Fast Practice Dose

Related Techniques to Technology Fast

Common questions about Technology Fast

What does the research say about a Technology Fast?

Who is a Technology Fast good for?

Is a Technology Fast safe?

How does a Technology Fast work?

For clinicians, researchers, and curious readers

What does a Technology Fast session involve?

How does Technology Fast work?

What does Technology Fast do to the body?

What is Technology Fast used for?

What does the research say about Technology Fast?

Which studies have tested Technology Fast?

Where does Technology Fast come from?

Is Technology Fast safe?

Who should practise with care?

Early restlessness and withdrawal discomfort

Staying reachable during the fast

How does Technology Fast compare to similar techniques?

Other questions readers ask

What exactly is a Technology Fast?

How long should a Technology Fast last?

Glossary

Digital Sabbath

Technology Shabbat

National Day of Unplugging

Arousal downregulation

Cognitive reappraisal

Decentering

Habit deautomatization

Full References

Technology Fast Tracks & Video

Kelti Goes Camping

The Power Of Being Alone

Self Discipline

How Social Media Made Me Miss Out On The Real World

7 Self Love Practices For Everyone - Weekly Energy Boost

5 Tips To Create A Magical Home Environment

Quick Social Media Detox

Finding Patience During Self-Isolation

Slow Down - Why Struggle? (Book Excerpt)

Why You Need To Unplug From Technology For A Day: The Science Of How A Digital Detox Improves Your Life. | The WISDOM Podcast | S2 E6

Practice For Digital Detox

5-Minute Toilet Meditation ~ Mindfulness Over Scrolling

Significant anxiety or compulsive technology use

Devices with essential functions

How to practise safely?

Arrange a reachable backup

Choose a bounded window

Set your devices physically aside

Expect the early restlessness and name it

Fill the freed time deliberately

Return gradually

Medical Disclaimer

Does a Technology Fast actually reduce stress?

Is there any real research on the Technology Fast itself?

Why does putting my phone away make me feel calmer?

Why do I feel restless or notice phantom phone buzzes when I unplug?

Is a Technology Fast safe if I have anxiety or compulsive phone use?

How do I stay reachable for emergencies during a Technology Fast?

What's the difference between a Technology Fast and screen-time limits?

FOMO (fear of missing out)

Phantom vibration

More Technology Fast in Insight Timer

14 Minute Solo Piano Journey

Digital Detox Guided Sleep Meditation

Analog Girl

Managing The Mind In A Troubled World | 7 Mar 2025

Putting Humans First With Rob Krecak

Establishing Healthy Screen Routine For Children

Where To Start In Your Health And Wellness Journey

How To Stay Sane When The World's Gone Crazy

Embracing Digital Minimalism (Live Session Recording)

Boredom And The Art Of Becoming Your Best Friend | SFTS Ep 7

Explore Technology Fast

Kelti Goes Camping