Apply explicit values criteria before reinstating any technology

Reinstate a technology only if it clearly serves something you genuinely value — not merely because you used to have it.

Why it works

The default rule at the end of most detoxes is "reinstall what I want" — which reinstates the original installation by reflex. Newport inverts the default: the technology is off; it earns readmission only by meeting an explicit values test. This reframes consent: you are now choosing the technology rather than failing to reject it.

How to do it

1. On day 30, review your optional technology list and ask for each: "What specifically does this add to something I value?"
2. For each that passes: add it back only with explicit operational constraints (when, where, for how long).
3. For each that fails or where you are uncertain: leave it removed for another 30 days, then reassess.
4. Do not reinstall under social pressure alone ("everyone is on it"). That is not a values argument.

Evidence

Values-based decision-making is a core component of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and other approaches with strong behavioral outcome research. Applying explicit values criteria to technology decisions operationalises the same structure. (mechanistic)

The application of ACT values-clarification to technology reintroduction decisions is Newport’s design, not a studied protocol; the underlying values-assessment mechanism has strong independent support.

Sources

• Hayes, Strosahl & Wilson (1999), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

Common mistake

Using "I might miss something useful" as the values argument — this is the same habitual logic that produced the cluttered starting state; it is not a genuine values test.