Stoyan R. Vezenkov and Violeta R. Manolova
Center for applied neuroscience Vezenkov, 1582-Sofia, e-mail: info@vezenkov.com
For citation: Vezenkov, S.R. and Manolova, V.R. (2025) Screen-Induced Pathological Eye-Covering Reflex in Children with Early Screen Addiction. Nootism 1(3), 5-10, ISSN 3033-1765 (print), ISSN 3033-1986 (online)
Abstract
The Screen-Induced Pathological Eye-Covering Reflex (SIPECR) is a maladaptive reaction observed in children with early screen addiction. When the child's eyes are covered – using hands, a mask, or an object – it triggers an automatic and intense panic response, including screaming, agitation, tantrums, or even aggression and self-harm. This reflex was observed in 275 of 285 children (96.5%) evaluated at our center. The reaction is context-independent and does not vary based on who performs the action, indicating its reflexive nature rather than an affective one.
Crucially, SIPECR disappears following a structured therapeutic intervention involving complete screen detox and sensorimotor reintegration, but re-emerges upon re-exposure to screen-related stimuli – even indirect ones such as screen-associated songs or compulsions (e.g., washing machines, hairdryers). This highlights its reliability as a diagnostic marker and post-treatment monitoring tool.
Unlike retained primitive reflexes (RPRs), startle reflexes, fear reactions and nyctophobia SIPECR does not occur in typical development and is unique to screen-induced developmental trauma. Its persistence, along with the co-occurrence of the Screen-Induced Pathological Vestibular Reflex (SIPVR), suggests a potential causal link between early screen addiction and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Crucially, its resolution is one of several prerequisites for recovery from early screen addiction and ASD. Recognizing, detecting, and addressing SIPECR is essential for accurate differential diagnosis, effective intervention, and ongoing monitoring in children with early screen addiction – particularly those misdiagnosed with conditions such as ASD, ADHD, or ODD.
Keywords: SIPECR, SIPVR, early screen addiction, ASD
Introduction
Retained Primitive Reflexes (RPRs) are widely recognized as markers of neurodevelopmental immaturity and are strongly correlated with deficits in higher-order cortical functions. The persistence of these reflexes at a later age is a reliable indicator of developmental delay (Amiel-Tison et al., 2001; Bilbilaj et al., 2017; Chandradasa et al., 2019). Their proper integration depends on the maturation of inhibitory control mechanisms – namely, the ability to consciously initiate, sustain, and terminate goal-directed behavior across motor, emotional, and cognitive domains through selective disinhibition. (Vezenkov et al., 2025 (1))
Conversely, the persistence of RPRs indicates a failure in cortical inhibition and the presence of generalized automatized behaviors that are compulsively repeated. These behaviors often serve as maladaptive strategies to seek sensory stimulation or produce a narrow set of end effects. When these effects are not achieved, children frequently display frustration and may develop a repertoire of primitive, often animalistic, control-based behavioral programs (Mateev et al., 2025; Vezenkov et al., 2025 (1)).
It is important to emphasize that RPRs are not genetically predetermined (Gieysztor et al., 2018); rather, they are shaped by environmental factors, particularly early sensory deprivation or overstimulation. Additionally, similar reflex patterns may re-emerge in neurodegenerative conditions later in life, particularly as frontal and prefrontal cortical functions deteriorate (Melillo et al., 2022).
We describe the Screen-Induced Pathological Vestibular Reflex (SIPVR) as a novel, highly sensitive marker for early screen addiction and screen-related autism, present in 99% of affected children and absent in typically developing peers. Its presence strongly correlates with autistic traits and exaggerated sensory responses, and its simplicity allows for broad, rapid screening – even by non-professionals. (Vezenkov et al., 2025 (2))
While SIPVR is not a classic Retained Primitive Reflex (RPR), it is an environmentally induced response resulting from prolonged early screen exposure. In this paper, we introduce a second screen-induced pathological reflex – the Screen-Induced Pathological Eye-Covering Reflex (SIPECR) – and explore its clinical significance, particularly in the context of ASD misdiagnosis among children with early screen addiction.
Clinical Description of SIPECR
The SIPECR is a severe maladaptive sensorimotor response observed in children with early screen addiction. The reflex is triggered when the child’s eyes are covered – either by hands, a mask, or another object – by an examiner, caregiver, or during therapeutic evaluation.
This action induces an acute, disproportionate rejection reaction, often escalating into rage-like behavior, characterized by intense agitation, tantrums, screaming, and physical aggression. In more severe presentations, children exhibit self-injurious behavior, such as banging their heads against walls or the floor, particularly when their hands are gently restrained to prevent them from removing the eye covering. These episodes can persist for 10 even 30 minutes, with no signs of emotional self-regulation until the visual occlusion is removed.
Rather than being a typical defensive or protective response, SIPECR reflects deep dysregulation in sensory integration and cortical inhibition, likely induced by prolonged screen exposure during early neurodevelopmental windows. Its presence is strongly correlated with screen-induced trauma (Manolova et al., 2025) and sensory fragmentation, and it is notably absent in neurotypical children.
Core Features
The SIPECR is typically triggered when the child’s eyes are covered – whether briefly or more persistently – by hands, a mask, or another object. This elicits an exaggerated affective and behavioral reaction, often marked by intense agitation, screaming, crying, physical resistance, or even rage-like outbursts. In many cases, the child may escalate to aggressive behavior toward caregivers or engage in self-injurious actions, such as head-banging, especially if physically prevented from removing the visual obstruction.
These episodes are prolonged, typically lasting between 5 and even 30 minutes, and do not de-escalate on their own while the stimulus remains. The response is involuntary and dysregulated – the child lacks the ability to self-soothe or employ coping strategies, and the reaction continues automatically until the covering is removed. SIPECR appears to be strongly associated with a history of early screen addiction, and it is notably absent in neurotypical children or those without such exposure. Finally, the reflex frequently co-occurs with autistic traits and other sensory processing disturbances, particularly hypersensitivity to sound and vestibular dysfunction, and is present alongside SIPVR. (Vezenkov et al., 2025 (2))
We observed SIPECR in 275 out of 285 children (96.5%) tested. Following successful therapy, the reflex is abolished, but it re-emerges upon re-exposure to screen stimuli – making it a reliable diagnostic marker. Importantly, the trigger may be indirect: songs from electronic devices, light-up or musical toys, or even new compulsive behaviors (e.g., fixation on the washing machine, hairdryer, or traffic light) can evoke the reflex.
Why Screen-induced Reflex?
The term "screen-induced reflex" refers to a maladaptive, involuntary behavioral response that arises specifically from early and excessive exposure to screens during critical stages of brain development. Unlike genetically determined primitive reflexes, these responses are environmentally conditioned, emerging due to the neurophysiological disruptions caused by screen overuse. They reflect disturbed sensory integration, impaired cortical inhibition, and heightened visual dominance.
Two such reflexes have been consistently observed in clinical practice: SIPVR and SIPECR.
Both are absent in neurotypical development and not found in children without a history of early screen addiction. SIPVR is triggered by passive head movements and reflects pathological vestibular hypersensitivity, while SIPECR is elicited by covering the child's eyes, resulting in extreme agitation or aggressive outbursts.
Crucially, SIPECR disappears following a structured therapeutic intervention involving complete screen detox and sensorimotor reintegration, but re-emerges upon re-exposure to screen-related stimuli (Petrova et al., 2025) – even indirect ones such as screen-associated songs or compulsions (e.g., washing machines, hairdryers). (Vezenkov et al., 2025(1))
Importantly, both reflexes reliably disappear following successful screen addiction recovery, confirming their non-genetic, conditioned nature. Their presence serves as a sensitive marker for identifying screen-induced developmental disturbances, while their resolution provides a reliable indicator of functional neurological recovery from early screen addiction and ASD. (Vezenkov et al, 2024 (1); (2))
Is SIPECR a Retained Primitive Reflex?
The SIPECR is similar to retained primitive reflex due to its reflex-like nature and its appearance in young children with neurodevelopmental disorders. However, SIPECR is not a retained primitive reflex in the classical neurodevelopmental sense. Primitive reflexes – such as the Moro, Palmar, or Rooting reflex – are innate, brainstem-mediated responses that serve a specific developmental purpose and typically integrate within the first year of life.
In contrast, SIPECR is an emergent, pathological response induced by early and excessive exposure to screen media. It does not follow the timeline or neurobiological pattern of typical primitive reflexes and is not observed in any phase of typical development. Instead, SIPECR reflects a maladaptive sensory defense mechanism, triggered by visual deprivation (e.g., eye covering) in children who have developed visual dependency and sensory fragmentation due to early screen addiction. This reflex is specific to screen addiction and screen trauma and persisted even after complete digital detoxification, thereby classifying it as a biomarker of pathological neurodevelopment rather than a retained primitive reflex.
Table 1: SIPECR vs. Retained Primitive Reflexes
|
Characteristic |
Retained Primitive Reflexes |
SIPECR |
|
Origin |
Innate brainstem-mediated developmental reflexes |
Pathological reflex-like behavior induced by screen overexposure |
|
Normal appearance |
Present in infancy (0–12 months) |
Never observed in typical development |
|
Purpose |
Support early survival, sensory-motor integration |
Defensive response to visual deprivation in screen-addicted children |
|
Trigger |
Specific physical stimuli (e.g. pressure, movement) |
Covering of the eyes (mask, hand, cloth) |
|
Resolution |
Should integrate by 6–12 months |
Persists in screen-exposed children; re-emerges after screen reintroduction |
|
Associated conditions |
Neurological immaturity, trauma, developmental delays |
Early screen addiction, screen trauma, autism spectrum symptoms |
|
Neurophysiological profile |
Brainstem-origin reflex loops |
Likely involving fragmented cortical-sensory integration (visual-limbic) |
|
Clinical interpretation |
Sign of delayed neurological development |
Marker of screen-induced sensory trauma and fragmented development |
Is SIPECR a startle reflex?
The Screen-Induced Pathological Eye Covering Reflex (SIPECR), although superficially resembling a startle response, is neurofunctionally and developmentally distinct. While the startle reflex (such as the Moro reflex in infancy or the adult acoustic startle response) is a brainstem-mediated, protective mechanism triggered by sudden sensory input, SIPECR emerges only in children with early screen addiction and is provoked by the removal of visual input (e.g., covering the eyes).
The SIPECR is not observed in any stage of typical development and does not follow the neurodevelopmental trajectory of innate reflexes. Instead, it reflects a pathological adaptation to audiovisual overstimulation and visual dominance, indicating disrupted sensory integration. It is best understood as a screen-induced maladaptive reflex – one that signals an altered neurophysiological baseline rooted in trauma-like sensory dysregulation.
Table 2: SIPECR vs. Startle Reflex
|
Characteristic |
Startle Reflex (e.g., Moro) |
SIPECR |
|
Type |
Innate, protective reflex |
Pathological, screen-induced reflex |
|
Developmental stage |
Present in neonates; fades by 4–6 months |
Not present in typical development; emerges after screen exposure |
|
Trigger |
Sudden light, noise, or movement |
Covering of the eyes (even gently, or with a mask) |
|
Neurological origin |
Brainstem (reticulospinal tract) |
Unknown; likely involves disrupted multisensory integration (visual–vestibular–limbic) |
|
Behavioral response |
Startle: limb extension, gasp, quick recovery |
Intense panic/fear: marked by screaming, freezing, and defensive or aggressive behavior, which continues until the child's visual input is restored by reopening the eyes. |
|
Associated conditions |
Brain injury, PTSD, neurological immaturity |
Early screen addiction, sensory trauma, autism spectrum disorder |
|
Reversibility |
Usually resolves with age |
Can be integrated through therapy; re-emerges with screen re-exposure during recovery |
This distinction underscores the need to classify SIPECR not as a variant of a known reflex, but as a novel, pathological marker of screen-related neurodevelopmental disruption – with diagnostic and therapeutic relevance in early childhood.
Is SIPECR a Fear Response?
The SIPECR presents with intense behaviors that outwardly resemble a classical fear response – screaming, freezing, defensive or aggressive reactions, and desperate attempts to uncover the eyes. At first glance, this pattern may suggest an emotional reaction triggered by fear. However, closer analysis reveals that SIPECR is not a typical fear response, but rather a pathological reflex linked to screen-induced sensory trauma and disintegration.
Fear, as an emotional and physiological state, is typically triggered by the perception of threat and processed through the limbic system, particularly the amygdala. It is adaptive and serves to protect the individual from harm. In contrast, SIPECR is elicited not by an external threat but by the sudden deprivation of visual input in children who have become neurologically addicted on screen-based visual stimulation.
These children often regulate their arousal, emotional states, and attention through continuous visual input. When this input is interrupted – such as by gently covering the eyes – the child enters a dysregulated state that mimics fear but originates from disrupted sensory integration and screen-induced trauma. The response is reflexive, persistent, and disproportionate, continuing until visual input is restored. This suggests that the absence of visual stimulation is neurologically interpreted as a threat to homeostasis.
Is SIPECR a Nyctophobia?
Fear of darkness (nyctophobia) is a learned emotional fear, typically associated with imagined threats, and mediated by cognitive appraisal and limbic activation.
The exaggerated reaction to wearing a mask or having the eyes covered by hands may initially appear to stem from a fear of the dark – a common trait among children with screen addiction, who often resist being in darkness and prefer a light on, a television playing in the background, or an open door with illumination from another room. To test this hypothesis, an alternative probe was conducted to differentiate the reaction from fear of darkness. In this test, the child was completely covered with a wide, semi-transparent cloth. Despite the presence of an adult – either a therapist or parent – under the cloth with the child, the child immediately sought to exit the covered space. This clearly indicates that darkness itself is not the primary trigger. Rather, the absence of familiar spatial cues and visual stimuli – which typically provide the child with a sense of relative security – is what provokes the intense response. This observation aligns with other studies showing that spatial stimuli play a crucial role in the behavioral responses of children with ASD.
Conclusions
The SIPECR should not be classified as a retained primitive reflex, startle reflex, fear response, nyctophobia but rather as a distinct, screen-induced pathological response. It is unique in its origin, presentation, and persistence, and its presence indicates a significant disruption in the child’s sensory and emotional development – most likely caused by audiovisual overstimulation during a critical neurodevelopmental window. Although the behavior may resemble a fear response, SIPECR is more accurately understood as a trauma-related maladaptive reflex, rooted in neurological instability and sensory fragmentation. Misinterpreting this reflex as a purely affective or behavioral issue may lead to inappropriate interventions and delay effective treatment.
Importantly, SIPECR resolves fully following successful screen detoxification and targeted therapy, confirming its conditioned and environmental origins. Alongside the SIPVR, SIPECR may serve as an early, sensitive biomarker for screen-related trauma and screen-induced functional impairment in children with ASD, ADHD, ODD etc.
References
Amiel-Tison C, Gosselin J (2001) Neurological Development from Birth to Six Years: Guide for Examination and Evaluation. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore MD.
Bilbilaj, S., Gjipali, A., & Shkurti, F. (2017). Measuring primitive reflexes in children with learning disorders. European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 2(5), 285-298.
Chandradasa, M., & Rathnayake, L. (2019). Retained primitive reflexes in children, clinical implications and targeted home-based interventions. Nursing Children and Young People. doi:10.7748/ncyp.2019.e1132
Gieysztor, E. Z., Choińska, A. M., & Paprocka-Borowicz, M. (2018). Persistence of primitive reflexes and associated motor problems in healthy preschool children. Archives of Medical Science, 1, 167–173. doi:10.5114/aoms.2016.60503
Mateev M.I., Manolova V.R. and Vezenkov S.R. (2025) From Nonverbal to Language – How to Counteract Anti-Human Programming Controlling Children with Early Screen Addiction. Nootism 1(1), 52-58, ISSN 3033-1765 (print), ISSN 3033-1986 (online)
Manolova V.R. and Vezenkov S.R. (2025) Screen Trauma – Specifics of the Disorder and Therapy in Adults and Children. Nootism 1(1), 37-51, ISSN 3033-1765 (print), ISSN 3033-1986 (online)
Melillo R, Leisman G, Machado C, Machado-Ferrer Y, Chinchilla-Acosta M, Kamgang S, Melillo T and Carmeli E (2022) Retained Primitive Reflexes and Potential for Intervention in Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Front. Neurol. 13:922322. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.922322
Petrova, S.N., Manolova V.R. and Vezenkov, S.R. (2025) Reintroducing Screens: Severe Regression and Symptom Aggravation in Children with ASD/Screen Addiction. Nootism 1(1), 59-65, ISSN 3033-1765 (print), ISSN 3033-1986 (online)
Vezenkov, S. R., & Manolova, V. R. (2024). A Central Role of Biofeedback in a Complex Therapy of Screen Devices Usage Addiction. BFE 21tst Meeting Montesilvano, Italy, 21-22 September 2022, In APPLIED PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY AND BIOFEEDBACK. Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 173-173, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-023-09607-0 (1)
Vezenkov, S.R., Manolova, V.R. (2024) Rethinking Autism: The Screen Addiction Paradigm. BFE 22nd Meeting, 8-13 April 2024, Ljubljana, Slovenia, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27970.80328 (2)
Vezenkov, S.R. and Manolova V.R. (2025) Neurobiology of Autism/Early Screen Addiction Recovery. Nootism 1(1), 19-36, ISSN 3033-1765 (print), ISSN 3033-1986 (online) (1)
Vezenkov, S.R., Manolova, V.R. (2025) Screen-Induced Pathological Vestibular Reflex: A Specific Marker of Early Screen Addiction. Nootism 1(2), 5-10, ISSN 3033-1765 (print), ISSN 3033-1986 (online) (2)