iDisorder...disordering

For being a lecture on a somewhat feared, revered and hot topic, I think Dr. Rosen did a decent job of presenting without too much opinion or bias. His studies seemed valid and well conducted, although the one on poor health correlated with amount of technological use seemed more based on assumption than concrete cause and effects. He did make the point that his studies were statistically significant, as opposed to cause/effect.

I have a few questions to pose though: In the study where the researchers measured the levels of anxiety of students separated from their phones, and those who had their phones but were not allowed to use them, did the researchers factor in anxiety being caused by the study itself? When participants know they are part of a study and are being measured, it can cause extra stress.
Also, if they had been allowed to read a novel during the hour, how would the results have been different? Is it more fair to have given them a book than just have them sit there in silence? Part of our society includes the social expectation that, when you are around people, you are supposed to make small talk, conversation. Could this factor into the study? Been another causing factor of anxiety?

When Dr. Rosen spoke of personality disorders and the affect of media/technology on them, I wondered if cases of narcissism can be created through social media. I'm unfamiliar with personality disorders, I assume it's something your born with? But what if something like Facebook causes these disorders. Please correct me if my assumptions are wrong!

And finally, when talking about E-breaks, Dr. Rosen suggested that we write an email or text then step away for half a minute, a few minutes, whatever, then go back to it. I can see this being a very useful technique if someone is writing an angry or emotional text/email. But then I wondered if this would cause us to become even more overanalytical? If we leave it, it will most likely still be on our mind and Dr. Rosen encouraged us to think and think about how the receiver will interpret the message. But to what extent do we need to do this? I can see us all spending more and more time, energy and anxiety, coming up with all the different ways a message could be interpreted. Yikes.