Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
August 5, 2017 10:16 AM Subscribe
What effects has the widespread use of smartphones had on kids? "The arrival of the smartphone has radically changed every aspect of teenagers’ lives, from the nature of their social interactions to their mental health. These changes have affected young people in every corner of the nation and in every type of household. The trends appear among teens poor and rich; of every ethnic background; in cities, suburbs, and small towns."
"Teens who spend more time than average on screen activities are more likely to be unhappy, and those who spend more time than average on nonscreen activities are more likely to be happy.
There’s not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness. Eighth-graders who spend 10 or more hours a week on social media are 56 percent more likely to say they’re unhappy than those who devote less time to social media."
One big issue for teens is FOMO, or fear of missing out.
On the positive side they're apparently not getting high as much as kids in previous generations.
"Teens who spend more time than average on screen activities are more likely to be unhappy, and those who spend more time than average on nonscreen activities are more likely to be happy.
There’s not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness. Eighth-graders who spend 10 or more hours a week on social media are 56 percent more likely to say they’re unhappy than those who devote less time to social media."
One big issue for teens is FOMO, or fear of missing out.
On the positive side they're apparently not getting high as much as kids in previous generations.
On the positive side they're apparently not getting high as much
The polarity of the sides seems to have become inverted since my teenage years.
posted by RogerB at 10:27 AM on August 5, 2017 [9 favorites]
The polarity of the sides seems to have become inverted since my teenage years.
posted by RogerB at 10:27 AM on August 5, 2017 [9 favorites]
I thought that Millennials were causing all the destruction, or was it the Boomers?
posted by ActingTheGoat at 10:28 AM on August 5, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by ActingTheGoat at 10:28 AM on August 5, 2017 [6 favorites]
The arrival of the ____________ has radically changed every aspect of teenagers’ lives,
Comic books
Television
Rock Music
Dungeons and Dragons
Video Games
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 10:29 AM on August 5, 2017 [86 favorites]
Comic books
Television
Rock Music
Dungeons and Dragons
Video Games
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 10:29 AM on August 5, 2017 [86 favorites]
The very young no longer hold out their thumb and pinky against their head to mime talking on the phone. They hold their palm flat, to represent a flat smartphone.
We are the last generation. We are the vestiges of a lost civilization.
posted by kafziel at 10:30 AM on August 5, 2017 [59 favorites]
We are the last generation. We are the vestiges of a lost civilization.
posted by kafziel at 10:30 AM on August 5, 2017 [59 favorites]
Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Thank God for Betteridge's Law.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:31 AM on August 5, 2017 [33 favorites]
Thank God for Betteridge's Law.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:31 AM on August 5, 2017 [33 favorites]
After reading the articles, I have a better understanding of why young people seem so strange nowadays. They simply aren't smoking enough good weed.
posted by strelitzia at 10:31 AM on August 5, 2017 [50 favorites]
posted by strelitzia at 10:31 AM on August 5, 2017 [50 favorites]
The arrival of the ____________ has radically changed every aspect of teenagers’ lives,
Comic books
Television
Rock Music
Dungeons and Dragons
Video Games
But, other than Dungeons and Dragons and perhaps comics save for the few, those things did have a pretty radical effect on people's lives didn't they? I mean if you're watching 8 hours of tv a day, those eight hours are coming from somewhere, and, for good or bad, I'd think any person who listens to a lot of music would say it's awfully important to them, so that too must come from somewhere and cause some effect I'd think.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:36 AM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
Comic books
Television
Rock Music
Dungeons and Dragons
Video Games
But, other than Dungeons and Dragons and perhaps comics save for the few, those things did have a pretty radical effect on people's lives didn't they? I mean if you're watching 8 hours of tv a day, those eight hours are coming from somewhere, and, for good or bad, I'd think any person who listens to a lot of music would say it's awfully important to them, so that too must come from somewhere and cause some effect I'd think.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:36 AM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
The very young no longer hold out their thumb and pinky against their head to mime talking on the phone. They hold their palm flat, to represent a flat smartphone.
We are the last generation. We are the vestiges of a lost civilization.
OH MY GOD WHAT ARE ALL THESE KIDS GOING TO DO WITH THEIR BANANAS
posted by The Underpants Monster at 10:40 AM on August 5, 2017 [85 favorites]
We are the last generation. We are the vestiges of a lost civilization.
OH MY GOD WHAT ARE ALL THESE KIDS GOING TO DO WITH THEIR BANANAS
posted by The Underpants Monster at 10:40 AM on August 5, 2017 [85 favorites]
Teens who spend more time than average on screen activities are more likely to be unhappy, and those who spend more time than average on nonscreen activities are more likely to be happy.
I totally believe it's possible this is exaggerating the problem, but saying rates of teen depression are exploding does not to me fit with the image of teenagers who I knew in the mid-90s, many of whom were deeply unhappy but who just got labelled as "bad students," or "lazy," or, often, "drug addicts". I had a conversation once with a couple friends from high school--one of whom has since passed from an opiate overdose--about how virtually everybody in our social group was more functional as adults, and funny coincidence, we'd almost all been medicated for something by then (and the one person who wasn't was now an academic where his idiosyncrasies were well-tolerated). It's like ADD or autism--if you aren't looking for it and then suddenly you start looking for it, surprise, it's all over the place.
TV didn't cause depression, either, but depressed people could be less functional if they had TV to escape into. Or video games, or whatever. The internet didn't cause my adolescent depression and ADD--most of my problems, looking back, should have been obvious by the time I was 8 or 9--but it did make me worse at managing stuff like homework than if I'd had fewer options for how to spend my time. Better, though, would be to have actually had medication and a therapist through middle and high school, and parents who were helpful and supportive about finding ways to integrate the technology and my mental health care.
posted by Sequence at 10:41 AM on August 5, 2017 [37 favorites]
I totally believe it's possible this is exaggerating the problem, but saying rates of teen depression are exploding does not to me fit with the image of teenagers who I knew in the mid-90s, many of whom were deeply unhappy but who just got labelled as "bad students," or "lazy," or, often, "drug addicts". I had a conversation once with a couple friends from high school--one of whom has since passed from an opiate overdose--about how virtually everybody in our social group was more functional as adults, and funny coincidence, we'd almost all been medicated for something by then (and the one person who wasn't was now an academic where his idiosyncrasies were well-tolerated). It's like ADD or autism--if you aren't looking for it and then suddenly you start looking for it, surprise, it's all over the place.
TV didn't cause depression, either, but depressed people could be less functional if they had TV to escape into. Or video games, or whatever. The internet didn't cause my adolescent depression and ADD--most of my problems, looking back, should have been obvious by the time I was 8 or 9--but it did make me worse at managing stuff like homework than if I'd had fewer options for how to spend my time. Better, though, would be to have actually had medication and a therapist through middle and high school, and parents who were helpful and supportive about finding ways to integrate the technology and my mental health care.
posted by Sequence at 10:41 AM on August 5, 2017 [37 favorites]
I feel like if you've tried to quit social media or screens or whatever, you know how addictive they actually are. And they don't replace actual human connection. They're like the empty sugar calories of social interaction.
Addictions that make you feel good in the short term and shitty in the long term aren't new, but having an entire generation grow up with one seems...novel and unwise.
Honestly, I notice it even when dating. Obviously this is pure anecdata, but...I'm the oldest millenial, and social media happened after I reached adulthood. Conversations with people my age or older tend to be very different than with people even five years younger. Again, anecdata, but like...noticeable enough that it's a recurring topic of conversation with my friends.
posted by schadenfrau at 10:42 AM on August 5, 2017 [26 favorites]
Addictions that make you feel good in the short term and shitty in the long term aren't new, but having an entire generation grow up with one seems...novel and unwise.
Honestly, I notice it even when dating. Obviously this is pure anecdata, but...I'm the oldest millenial, and social media happened after I reached adulthood. Conversations with people my age or older tend to be very different than with people even five years younger. Again, anecdata, but like...noticeable enough that it's a recurring topic of conversation with my friends.
posted by schadenfrau at 10:42 AM on August 5, 2017 [26 favorites]
Thread:
@bethdean: A former depressed teenager is here to tell you this is trash, and correlation is not causation<>
posted by Artw at 10:45 AM on August 5, 2017 [23 favorites]
@bethdean: A former depressed teenager is here to tell you this is trash, and correlation is not causation<>
posted by Artw at 10:45 AM on August 5, 2017 [23 favorites]
Sequence and Artw beat me to the correlation-isn't-causation thing. That leaves me with my own invocation of Betteridge's Law: Are Clickbaity Titles Destroying Online Journalism? I didn't have to delve far into the article to come to the Big Eyeroll:
posted by Halloween Jack at 10:47 AM on August 5, 2017 [10 favorites]
The more I pored over yearly surveys of teen attitudes and behaviors, and the more I talked with young people like Athena, the clearer it became that theirs is a generation shaped by the smartphone and by the concomitant rise of social media. I call them iGen.This being the end product of someone who says that she's been researching generational differences for most of her life. A TED talk is forthcoming, I'm sure.
posted by Halloween Jack at 10:47 AM on August 5, 2017 [10 favorites]
I try to see it less in terms of good/bad but more as a profound change in how our kids interact with peers and society at large. Their world is going be very, very different than the world be grew up in.
Still, staring at a phone for 8 hours a day and primarily socializing through a screen can wreak havoc on a developing mind. I hate my phone habits but at least my brain is done growing.
I'm a teacher. Some kids can handle having phones and use them wisely and not turn into troglodytes. Some can't. The bigger issue in my opinion is that so many of these 10-12yo kids are given the internet in their palm with no restrictions. They see the awful perverse underbelly of society far too early.
posted by gnutron at 10:47 AM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
Still, staring at a phone for 8 hours a day and primarily socializing through a screen can wreak havoc on a developing mind. I hate my phone habits but at least my brain is done growing.
I'm a teacher. Some kids can handle having phones and use them wisely and not turn into troglodytes. Some can't. The bigger issue in my opinion is that so many of these 10-12yo kids are given the internet in their palm with no restrictions. They see the awful perverse underbelly of society far too early.
posted by gnutron at 10:47 AM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
This is nothing compared to the destruction wreacked by marijuana, which is why we have 50% unemployment.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:48 AM on August 5, 2017 [10 favorites]
This is nothing compared to the destruction wreacked by marijuana, which is why we have 50% unemployment.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:48 AM on August 5, 2017 [10 favorites]
On the positive side they're apparently not getting high as much as kids in previous generations
No wonder they're less happy.
also, not to go all "William Gibson called everything" on it, but remember that part in neuromancer where they gave Case a new nervous system that made him really awesome at using a computer but really shitty at getting high?
posted by 7segment at 10:49 AM on August 5, 2017 [7 favorites]
No wonder they're less happy.
also, not to go all "William Gibson called everything" on it, but remember that part in neuromancer where they gave Case a new nervous system that made him really awesome at using a computer but really shitty at getting high?
posted by 7segment at 10:49 AM on August 5, 2017 [7 favorites]
I know it's tempting to dismiss this with a few quick references to the moral panics of the past, but the essay is really worth engaging with seriously.
Yes, people were depressed in the past too. Yes, correlation is not causation. And yes, ubiquitous networks help some isolated people find communities. We've gotten the simplistic replies out of the way. But these sleep deprivation and feelings of loneliness figures ought to be worrisome. So should the increase in teen suicide rates:
posted by informavore at 10:53 AM on August 5, 2017 [57 favorites]
Yes, people were depressed in the past too. Yes, correlation is not causation. And yes, ubiquitous networks help some isolated people find communities. We've gotten the simplistic replies out of the way. But these sleep deprivation and feelings of loneliness figures ought to be worrisome. So should the increase in teen suicide rates:
The suicide rate for girls ages 15 to 19 doubled from 2007 to 2015, when it reached its highest point in 40 years, according to the CDC. The suicide rate for boys ages 15 to 19 increased by 30 percent over the same time period. The analysis looked at data from 1975 to 2015, the most recent year those statistics were available.You could always deny that these trends are real. But if they are, then trying to disentangle their causes is crucial, and I don't think we can afford to take glib potshots at the idea that an ever-networked world might not actually be a very healthy environment for us.
posted by informavore at 10:53 AM on August 5, 2017 [57 favorites]
When I was 14, I spent my entire summer locked in my room listening to the radio. If smartphones had existed I probably would have been glued to my smartphone instead of the radio. My detachment was a symptom of my depression, not the cause. Sure it's anecdotal, but my experience suggests that this may be the case for depressed teenagers today. I would be interested in finding out the roots of their depression rather than demonizing their coping mechanisms. By all accounts life out there is rough for young people.
posted by shalom at 10:54 AM on August 5, 2017 [41 favorites]
posted by shalom at 10:54 AM on August 5, 2017 [41 favorites]
i'm tired of people who aren't mentally present - especially when they're driving - i'm REAL tired of that
posted by pyramid termite at 11:04 AM on August 5, 2017 [23 favorites]
posted by pyramid termite at 11:04 AM on August 5, 2017 [23 favorites]
Either you believe in scientific evidence, or you don't. The evidence for decades now has been this is not just some fashionable, socially constructed reactionary political idea; there's hard evidence and clear theoretical explanations for why too much screen viewing really does cause harm. Why is acknowledging that and accepting it and moving on reasonably from there such a social and cultural third rail, still?
posted by saulgoodman at 11:06 AM on August 5, 2017 [35 favorites]
posted by saulgoodman at 11:06 AM on August 5, 2017 [35 favorites]
Why is acknowledging that and accepting it and moving on reasonably from there such a social and cultural third rail, still?
Because we're all having this conversation from our screens, I'm guessing. Like I wouldn't expect a bunch of people blowing smoke at each other in 1950 to react warmly to the latest news on smoking, either.
posted by schadenfrau at 11:09 AM on August 5, 2017 [32 favorites]
Because we're all having this conversation from our screens, I'm guessing. Like I wouldn't expect a bunch of people blowing smoke at each other in 1950 to react warmly to the latest news on smoking, either.
posted by schadenfrau at 11:09 AM on August 5, 2017 [32 favorites]
I watched a whole lot more television than my kids had "screen time" growing up, and it was so passive and worthless compared to what they do with their screens.
posted by straight at 11:12 AM on August 5, 2017 [22 favorites]
posted by straight at 11:12 AM on August 5, 2017 [22 favorites]
Well that's true, and I did just buy my son a new video game for his birthday, so I'm not claiming to be perfect either, but we don't need to eliminate screens completely, just get used to the idea they should be used in moderation and have norms and social expectations that help rather than hurt when it comes to maintaining a healthy balance. But the reactions always seem to go radically from one extreme on the issue to the opposite. It's either no problem or the biggest problem, it seems from how these discussions go. Reality just isn't that freaking straightforward and simple, ever.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:16 AM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by saulgoodman at 11:16 AM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
But these sleep deprivation and feelings of loneliness figures ought to be worrisome. So should the increase in teen suicide rates:
I'm definitely not saying that letting teenagers just sit on their phones all day, especially if they have depression, is an okay thing or anything. Just that this isn't really new, and that teenagers with depression and other mental health conditions need parents and communities actively engaged in their care, not thinking that just getting rid of their phones is going to make them better. Among other things, I think depression makes people really vulnerable to copycatting stuff they've seen other people do and that can be disastrous.
We need to start dealing with the fact that it might in fact be the normal state of things that a large chunk of the population will not be functional without therapy and medication. And that this was always the state of things, it's just that we all endured it by letting people be nonfunctional. This is the part I feel like there's deep resistance to--actually making mental health screening and care a routine part of adolescence. And as a PART of that mental health care, actually paying attention to things like how your kid is consuming media, whether they're engaged in activities they can enjoy, whether they're eating well and getting exercise, and a lot of other things.
I'm not saying "everything is fine". I'm saying, this is a state of not-fine that already existed for many many people and this doesn't really do anything to fix it, it just lets people who already dislike smartphones feel justified for disliking smartphones.
posted by Sequence at 11:17 AM on August 5, 2017 [17 favorites]
I'm definitely not saying that letting teenagers just sit on their phones all day, especially if they have depression, is an okay thing or anything. Just that this isn't really new, and that teenagers with depression and other mental health conditions need parents and communities actively engaged in their care, not thinking that just getting rid of their phones is going to make them better. Among other things, I think depression makes people really vulnerable to copycatting stuff they've seen other people do and that can be disastrous.
We need to start dealing with the fact that it might in fact be the normal state of things that a large chunk of the population will not be functional without therapy and medication. And that this was always the state of things, it's just that we all endured it by letting people be nonfunctional. This is the part I feel like there's deep resistance to--actually making mental health screening and care a routine part of adolescence. And as a PART of that mental health care, actually paying attention to things like how your kid is consuming media, whether they're engaged in activities they can enjoy, whether they're eating well and getting exercise, and a lot of other things.
I'm not saying "everything is fine". I'm saying, this is a state of not-fine that already existed for many many people and this doesn't really do anything to fix it, it just lets people who already dislike smartphones feel justified for disliking smartphones.
posted by Sequence at 11:17 AM on August 5, 2017 [17 favorites]
I tend to think a lot of new phenomena are something people just have to develop a social immune system for. Like how it's getting harder and harder to trick people into falling for clickbait, or how everybody used to be all about online pileons but far fewer people go for it nowadays.
We adapt, so do the companies trying to sell our attention. They've got the best and brightest working on tricking us, but our brains are better than most people think. I've heard internet advertising people say that many people literally don't see online ads anymore -- our whole sensory system is based around filtering out noise, and that system also takes care of advertisements.
That said I think it is worth worrying about young people, who can't have had time to adapt. Stuff that no longer works on internet-poisoned adults still definitely works on them. I have no idea what the solution is -- parenting, government regulation, and basic human decency all seem hopeless. If social media profits start falling I can easily imagine teens being the last profitable demographic, with companies building systems to even further promote addiction and interpesonal drama, maximizing attention with no concern for harm to users.
And I mean if Facebook's market cap is $500 billion (and it's apparently making the money to justify that), the wisdom of the market says it's a fairly big part of society. I haven't done exact calculations, but adjusting for inflation it seems like it's larger than say, Ford or Bell System -- and I don't think anyone could argue that the automobile and telephone didn't substantially change how people live and relate to each other (especially for young people!).
posted by vogon_poet at 11:20 AM on August 5, 2017 [2 favorites]
We adapt, so do the companies trying to sell our attention. They've got the best and brightest working on tricking us, but our brains are better than most people think. I've heard internet advertising people say that many people literally don't see online ads anymore -- our whole sensory system is based around filtering out noise, and that system also takes care of advertisements.
That said I think it is worth worrying about young people, who can't have had time to adapt. Stuff that no longer works on internet-poisoned adults still definitely works on them. I have no idea what the solution is -- parenting, government regulation, and basic human decency all seem hopeless. If social media profits start falling I can easily imagine teens being the last profitable demographic, with companies building systems to even further promote addiction and interpesonal drama, maximizing attention with no concern for harm to users.
And I mean if Facebook's market cap is $500 billion (and it's apparently making the money to justify that), the wisdom of the market says it's a fairly big part of society. I haven't done exact calculations, but adjusting for inflation it seems like it's larger than say, Ford or Bell System -- and I don't think anyone could argue that the automobile and telephone didn't substantially change how people live and relate to each other (especially for young people!).
posted by vogon_poet at 11:20 AM on August 5, 2017 [2 favorites]
It's anecdotal but I can see how this could affect mood and outlook negatively just from watching my nephew grow up and start using it more and more. FOMO has become a thing but it's not just missing out on something cool it's missing out or not being aware of bad things. Bad things that could happen to you.
I made a home movie of my nephew when he was two. I put him in a Dora the Explorer episode. We brought it out last year and he freaked out. And it wasn't just I'm 13 and embarassed freakout. His biggest fear was that it was going to go onto FB and Youtube. He had an anxiety attack and I had to promise on my life that the CD copy was going to stay on my bookshelf and that I would never put it onto a computer.
I've also heard him and his friends talk about checking to see if something that happened at school is being talked about. It came across more like work, tasks that had to be done. And I recall them being totally bummed when one of there class mates was made the butt of some stupid joke on whatever social media they're using. But you know thank goodness it's not me...
These sorts of social things have always been a part of teenage life. I still remember how much it sucked before it could happen online.
Online and screens have put this sort of social stress into hyper mode in ways I find it hard to imagine because grew up pre digital world. I can't imagine how this has not had at least some general effect on mood and happiness. Fear and anxiety does that.
posted by Jalliah at 11:26 AM on August 5, 2017 [37 favorites]
You could always deny that these trends are real. But if they are, then trying to disentangle their causes is crucial, and I don't think we can afford to take glib potshots at the idea that an ever-networked world might not actually be a very healthy environment for us.
informavore
But the problem is that there's no reason to think the stats you quoted are connected to the use of smartphones. It seems to me that the skyrocketing suicide rates from 2007 to 2015 are far more likely to be linked to the enormous, global economic uncertainty created by the 2008 crash and the resulting "Great Recession". Kids growing up in families who were devastated by that shock are going to have a hard time, and their lives and world are a lot more chaotic and unsure than they were pre-2007. I can imagine that environment creating a lot of anxiety.
I think you're conflating two issues here: the reality of rising suicide rates and depression, and the rise of smartphone use and social networks. I don't think people dispute the former, they just question what relation they have to the latter.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:28 AM on August 5, 2017 [21 favorites]
informavore
But the problem is that there's no reason to think the stats you quoted are connected to the use of smartphones. It seems to me that the skyrocketing suicide rates from 2007 to 2015 are far more likely to be linked to the enormous, global economic uncertainty created by the 2008 crash and the resulting "Great Recession". Kids growing up in families who were devastated by that shock are going to have a hard time, and their lives and world are a lot more chaotic and unsure than they were pre-2007. I can imagine that environment creating a lot of anxiety.
I think you're conflating two issues here: the reality of rising suicide rates and depression, and the rise of smartphone use and social networks. I don't think people dispute the former, they just question what relation they have to the latter.
posted by Sangermaine at 11:28 AM on August 5, 2017 [21 favorites]
Those are some misleading graphs in that article, most with some combination of "only showing a portion of the Y axis" and "things clearly declining before iPhone release".
And so far as there is a decline and/or an acceleration of one that's already there, I'm wondering how much of this can be attributable to changes in parenting styles? See that article from a bit ago about cell phones in camp, where it's the parents insisting that the campers have one on them. How many kids aren't hanging out with their friends because they're just not getting unsupervised time to hang?
And this is compounded with the fact that they have phone makes it impossible to do so: there were some screenshots going around on Buzzfeed of a "Zany Mom" who would randomly text her teenager to send her a picture with her friend doing something silly to prove that she was with her and not someplace else. If my mom was able to track my location, or expected updates whenever she wanted then, yeah, I would've lost my virginity later, too.
posted by damayanti at 11:31 AM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
And so far as there is a decline and/or an acceleration of one that's already there, I'm wondering how much of this can be attributable to changes in parenting styles? See that article from a bit ago about cell phones in camp, where it's the parents insisting that the campers have one on them. How many kids aren't hanging out with their friends because they're just not getting unsupervised time to hang?
And this is compounded with the fact that they have phone makes it impossible to do so: there were some screenshots going around on Buzzfeed of a "Zany Mom" who would randomly text her teenager to send her a picture with her friend doing something silly to prove that she was with her and not someplace else. If my mom was able to track my location, or expected updates whenever she wanted then, yeah, I would've lost my virginity later, too.
posted by damayanti at 11:31 AM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
My generation was destroyed by Pink Floyd.
posted by signal at 11:36 AM on August 5, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by signal at 11:36 AM on August 5, 2017 [6 favorites]
Correlation doesn't equal causation, but I'm not personally willing to dismiss this out of hand. I've lived with major depression and anxiety since I was eight years old. I didn't join social media until I was maybe 18 or so (Livejournal, I think). I didn't get a smartphone until a year ago. Obviously this means neither thing was the root cause of my depression or anxiety. But speaking as someone who has dealt with severe mental illness for the overwhelming majority of my life, I have noticed that both social media and my smartphone can have a strong effect on my wellbeing. The biggest one, for me, is that they make it much easier to self-isolate. I remember how much time I spent on Facebook when I was deeply depressed in my early 20s, and boy did it not help. I still have to step away from social media from time to time for the sake of my mental health (someone once noted, with snark, how many times I had buttoned on this site). Now I have the internet in my pocket at all times, and no matter where I am in the world, or who I'm with, I can be swallowed up by my phone. It is astounding how much my life has changed since I got my iPhone a year ago, and I'm not entirely happy about it.
I'm not saying kids shouldn't have smartphones. I have no interest in going back to the good old days when we all just shared one house phone. But I worry about the effects of this technology on young people, because I worry about the effects on me. Saying "teenagers have always been depressed, and people have always blamed the new Thing" ignores how incredibly revolutionary smartphones and social media are, and how potentially damaging they can be -- to anyone, but especially young people who are still developing emotionally and socially.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 11:40 AM on August 5, 2017 [12 favorites]
I'm not saying kids shouldn't have smartphones. I have no interest in going back to the good old days when we all just shared one house phone. But I worry about the effects of this technology on young people, because I worry about the effects on me. Saying "teenagers have always been depressed, and people have always blamed the new Thing" ignores how incredibly revolutionary smartphones and social media are, and how potentially damaging they can be -- to anyone, but especially young people who are still developing emotionally and socially.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 11:40 AM on August 5, 2017 [12 favorites]
To me, the biggest problem with these kinds of articles is that they frame the issue as X is doing thing Y to Teens as if it's a universal rather than a variable set of outcomes.
It strikes me as unbelievable to suggest that anything new introduced that becomes a major component of a persons life would carry zero effect, but it also strikes me as highly unlikely that any set of effects would be the same for all who engaged with the social change.
With smartphones and constant online activity, it seems entirely plausible that there would be groups of "winners" who found greater pleasure with the change as it added something valuable to their world. Groups who would be or feel more or less the same, perhaps because they don't identify with the change as much or have a more stable life aside from it. And groups who will suffer because of the change, in no small measure due to feeling they aren't a part of the other two groups perhaps.
I mean the ability to see one's social status reflected in real time isn't going to be a benefit for many, but it will be for some. Having a virtual open diary of one's life available to all is also going to create anxiety for some and pleasure for others. I don't think it need be a universal to suggest there may still be serious problems that need addressing, even if there are benefits for some too.
posted by gusottertrout at 11:41 AM on August 5, 2017 [6 favorites]
It strikes me as unbelievable to suggest that anything new introduced that becomes a major component of a persons life would carry zero effect, but it also strikes me as highly unlikely that any set of effects would be the same for all who engaged with the social change.
With smartphones and constant online activity, it seems entirely plausible that there would be groups of "winners" who found greater pleasure with the change as it added something valuable to their world. Groups who would be or feel more or less the same, perhaps because they don't identify with the change as much or have a more stable life aside from it. And groups who will suffer because of the change, in no small measure due to feeling they aren't a part of the other two groups perhaps.
I mean the ability to see one's social status reflected in real time isn't going to be a benefit for many, but it will be for some. Having a virtual open diary of one's life available to all is also going to create anxiety for some and pleasure for others. I don't think it need be a universal to suggest there may still be serious problems that need addressing, even if there are benefits for some too.
posted by gusottertrout at 11:41 AM on August 5, 2017 [6 favorites]
Yes, but sangermaine, the effects have also been produced and observed directly in clinical settings as they happen. There are measurable, direct effects from screen viewing. The worries are not just driven by vague, hand wavey inferences drawn from anecdotes.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:41 AM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
posted by saulgoodman at 11:41 AM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
The arrival of the ____________ has radically changed every aspect of teenagers’ lives
Writing: "this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves." Plato, Phaedrus
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 11:45 AM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
Writing: "this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves." Plato, Phaedrus
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 11:45 AM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?
Seems like pushing this theory would be a great way to get famous and sell books, but it's so tabloidy and vague that I don't really understand how it could offer valuable insight in any way.
posted by winterportage at 11:57 AM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Seems like pushing this theory would be a great way to get famous and sell books, but it's so tabloidy and vague that I don't really understand how it could offer valuable insight in any way.
posted by winterportage at 11:57 AM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Yeah, but Plato was correct. With the development of writing, the need to have people memorize their culture's epic stories dissipated. I'd rather live in a world with writing than without, but it would be silly to pretend that my memorization skills don't get stretched like they would in a pre-writing world--just like it's silly to pretend that having a rectangle in our pockets that connects us to all the world's media, all the world's knowledge, and thousands of games didn't radically change the world. Add in social media with its pressure and punishments and we are in a new reality. If I did something stupid and embarrassing 20 years ago, people might re-tell the story, but that's it. Now a stranger half the world away can mock me on Twitter five seconds late. I don't understand the impulse to downplay that as though it's on par with comic books or Elvis Presley.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 12:04 PM on August 5, 2017 [37 favorites]
posted by Pater Aletheias at 12:04 PM on August 5, 2017 [37 favorites]
Social scientist here. This article drives me nuts. Even more so since some other psychologists and sociologists I respect have retweeted it.
As someone up thread has pointed out, this is purely correlative. Look at the graphs - random inflection point are added to long trends to align with the iPhone. Look at the data selection, why look at these particular factors? Because they support the story. (And when did decreasing teen pregnancy become bad and a sign of alienation?)
Well conducted peer-reviewed studies show that moderate social media use increases teen happiness. (With interesting moderating effects). There is lots of evidence that social media and phones don't work like the article says. Cyberbullying is far less prevalent that regular bullying, etc.
There are no doubt troubling and challenging implications of social media and phones, but this article is not the place to find them.
posted by blahblahblah at 12:12 PM on August 5, 2017 [48 favorites]
As someone up thread has pointed out, this is purely correlative. Look at the graphs - random inflection point are added to long trends to align with the iPhone. Look at the data selection, why look at these particular factors? Because they support the story. (And when did decreasing teen pregnancy become bad and a sign of alienation?)
Well conducted peer-reviewed studies show that moderate social media use increases teen happiness. (With interesting moderating effects). There is lots of evidence that social media and phones don't work like the article says. Cyberbullying is far less prevalent that regular bullying, etc.
There are no doubt troubling and challenging implications of social media and phones, but this article is not the place to find them.
posted by blahblahblah at 12:12 PM on August 5, 2017 [48 favorites]
How Information Overload Robs Us of Our Creativity: What the Scientific Research
Shows
posted by Room 641-A at 12:13 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
Shows
"We need to find ways to give our brains a break.... At work, we’re intensely analyzing problems, organizing data, writing—all activities that require focus. During downtime, we immerse ourselves in our phones while standing in line at the store or lose ourselves in Netflix after hours".I'm no scientist, but this is from a respectable site and heavily cited, so I'm sure if it's bunk someone will say so. But are there any adults here who can say their behaviors and experiences haven't been even a little impacted by phones and screens? I don't see how this wouldn't apply to younger minds. In any event, well probably have to wait another decade or two to see what the long term effects are. It seems premature to dismiss the concerns at this stage of the game.
Seppälä exhorts us to relax and let go of the constant need for stimulation, to take longs walks without the phone, get out of our comfort zones, make time for fun and games, and generally build in time for leisure. How does this work? Let's look at some additional research. Bar-Ilan University’s Moshe Bar and Shira Baror undertook a study to measure the effects of distraction, or what they call “mental load,” the “stray thoughts” and “obsessive ruminations” that clutter the mind with information and loose ends. Our “capacity for original and creative thinking,” Bar writes at The New York Times, “is markedly stymied” by a busy mind. "The cluttered mind," writes Jessica Stillman, "is a creativity killer."
posted by Room 641-A at 12:13 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
When I was 14, I spent my entire summer locked in my room listening to the radio.
That was pretty much my entire four years of high-school. I knew the DJs on WNEW-FM way better than I knew any of my classmates.
posted by octothorpe at 12:16 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
That was pretty much my entire four years of high-school. I knew the DJs on WNEW-FM way better than I knew any of my classmates.
posted by octothorpe at 12:16 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
I'm a mentally ill grownup who finds most social media really harmful, and I get similar "oh-fuck-off-with-your-silly-moral-panic" reactions when I talk about it. And I'm reminded too of a relative who had a serious life-ruining psychological dependency on marijuana — like, lying to their spouse, throwing their stash away and then digging through trash cans in the middle of the night to find it, the whole addict trip —and who's taken to just lying and saying they go to AA for a drinking problem, because they're tired of being told that Nobody Ever Gets Addicted To Weed and They Must Be Exaggerating.
And okay, fine, correlation isn't causation, whatever, but trying an intervention and seeing if it changes things is one of the best ways we've got of determining what direction causation runs in — and lemme tell you, mental health interventions never made me spend less time on Facebook or my relative smoke less, but getting off Facebook sure as shit made me saner and getting sober sure made my relative saner. The idea that they were pleasant distractions that we indulged in when we were sad and don't need now that we're happy doesn't fit our experience at all.
Like, I want marijuana legal, I want teenagers to have access to the internet, I'm not calling for some kind of crusade here. I certainly don't want people like me or my relative to be stigmatized or pilloried — why would I? And I'm pretty sure we're both in the minority — most people who say they're "addicted" to Facebook don't really mean "I've gotten fired from jobs for sneaking away to compulsively and joylessly hit 'reload' on my phone," they just mean "I like the cat pictures! They're fun!"
But… I don't know. It feels like in some circles there's a kind of meta–moral panic about nipping in the bud any sort of talk that even remotely reminds them of moral panic, and it's frustrating sometimes.
Besides, generational changes are real. Industry changed people's lives. World War I changed people's lives. Cars changed people's lives. Radio and television advertising changed people's lives. Mass literacy changed people's lives. Some of those changes were shitty for some people, and it's irritating that we can't talk about it without having the conversation bog down into "this is pointless to even discuss and you're a fool for considering it" vs "oh gee I dunno maybe there's a point here somewhere."
posted by nebulawindphone at 12:19 PM on August 5, 2017 [40 favorites]
And okay, fine, correlation isn't causation, whatever, but trying an intervention and seeing if it changes things is one of the best ways we've got of determining what direction causation runs in — and lemme tell you, mental health interventions never made me spend less time on Facebook or my relative smoke less, but getting off Facebook sure as shit made me saner and getting sober sure made my relative saner. The idea that they were pleasant distractions that we indulged in when we were sad and don't need now that we're happy doesn't fit our experience at all.
Like, I want marijuana legal, I want teenagers to have access to the internet, I'm not calling for some kind of crusade here. I certainly don't want people like me or my relative to be stigmatized or pilloried — why would I? And I'm pretty sure we're both in the minority — most people who say they're "addicted" to Facebook don't really mean "I've gotten fired from jobs for sneaking away to compulsively and joylessly hit 'reload' on my phone," they just mean "I like the cat pictures! They're fun!"
But… I don't know. It feels like in some circles there's a kind of meta–moral panic about nipping in the bud any sort of talk that even remotely reminds them of moral panic, and it's frustrating sometimes.
Besides, generational changes are real. Industry changed people's lives. World War I changed people's lives. Cars changed people's lives. Radio and television advertising changed people's lives. Mass literacy changed people's lives. Some of those changes were shitty for some people, and it's irritating that we can't talk about it without having the conversation bog down into "this is pointless to even discuss and you're a fool for considering it" vs "oh gee I dunno maybe there's a point here somewhere."
posted by nebulawindphone at 12:19 PM on August 5, 2017 [40 favorites]
The Margaret Atwood quote seems pretty apt here: "With all technology, there is a good side, a bad side, and a stupid side."
posted by not that mimi at 12:24 PM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
posted by not that mimi at 12:24 PM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
Yes, but ... the effects have also been produced and observed directly in clinical settings as they happen. There are measurable, direct effects from screen viewing.
Would you mind linking to some of these studies? Looking around on google scholar a bit, I'm not coming up with any controlled laboratory studies. But I'm not exactly sure what I should be looking for. Most of the studies seem to be directed at obesity, sedentary behavior, sleep, or some combination.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 12:31 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Would you mind linking to some of these studies? Looking around on google scholar a bit, I'm not coming up with any controlled laboratory studies. But I'm not exactly sure what I should be looking for. Most of the studies seem to be directed at obesity, sedentary behavior, sleep, or some combination.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 12:31 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
none of my friends can afford a house
my wife deals with people overdosing on opiates on a daily basis
the leader of the most powerful nation in the world is desperately trying to take away healthcare from his citizens
the environment is literally trying to kill us all off as a result of our profligate use of fossil fuels
but yeah, kids etc today are in a bad way because cell phones.
posted by Sternmeyer at 12:51 PM on August 5, 2017 [15 favorites]
my wife deals with people overdosing on opiates on a daily basis
the leader of the most powerful nation in the world is desperately trying to take away healthcare from his citizens
the environment is literally trying to kill us all off as a result of our profligate use of fossil fuels
but yeah, kids etc today are in a bad way because cell phones.
posted by Sternmeyer at 12:51 PM on August 5, 2017 [15 favorites]
I REMEMBER WHEN THE MONSTER MANUAL WAS 15 BUCKS.
posted by clavdivs at 1:00 PM on August 5, 2017 [13 favorites]
posted by clavdivs at 1:00 PM on August 5, 2017 [13 favorites]
Every time I read one of these articles, I just think, "Have any of y'all talked to a depressed teen?" Like... I was a depressed teen. I grew up around a lot of depressed teens. We were all heavy internet users because the internet gave us access to people who understood, and who cared. Growing up in families that didn't understand depression, and sometimes just didn't give a shit at all, of course we spent hours and hours online. It was the only way we could talk with people who cared.
Depressed teens are also less likely to go out, because they're depressed. They're less likely to spend time with their friends, they're less likely to date, they're less likely to want to drive or get a job, because they're. depressed. All of that was true before we got on the internet. Before the internet, we just hid in our rooms with our music or books and got almost no social interaction. The internet gave us a way to get social interaction that didn't horribly exacerbate our symptoms. I'd also like to point out that almost every depressed teen I knew had some form of other disability as well, whether that's ADHD or autism or chronic illness. All things that make it damn hard to be social, get a job, learn to drive, etc.
Look, I do think that internet has a lot of negative effects. Social pressure is real, fear of missing out is real, bullying are real. But goddamn, the solution to that is changing how we interact with social media, not going "oh no! the internet is terrible!" and treating phones like dangerous radioactive substances you have to carefully limit or your child will die.
The internet probably saved my life. I was an abused queer disabled teen living in a homophobic fundamentalist Christian household. I spent countless hours on the internet because it was the only way I could get any form of positive interaction. When I went into depression spirals, I posted on my favorite writing forum and my internet friends dragged me out of it. Because of their support, I was only passingly suicidal. I am firmly convinced that if I didn't have that support system, I would have tried to kill myself.
I can also say for a fact that the internet is the only reason one of my friends is alive today. We became friends over the writing forum, and eventually exchanged phone numbers. He was struggling with depression as well, and didn't have any support system--his family vaguely tried, but mostly exacerbated his depression more than anything else. I vividly remember sitting on my porch one summer afternoon, staying on the phone for two hours trying to talk him down from suicide, while he was walking along the highway ready to jump into traffic. I was the person he called, even though I literally lived in another country and we had never met, because I was the only person in his life that actually listened to and supported him. If we hadn't grown so close over the internet, he could very well be dead now.
I don't know. I know a lot of my response to this is just a visceral reaction because if my parents tried to limit my internet use as a child, it might've literally killed me. Reaching out to my online friends after my parents hit me was the only thing that kept me from depression-spiraling towards suicidality. Sure, there were shitty things and shitty people on the internet that also probably exacerbated my depression, but not nearly as much being alone with no one to talk to would have been.
posted by brook horse at 1:15 PM on August 5, 2017 [32 favorites]
Depressed teens are also less likely to go out, because they're depressed. They're less likely to spend time with their friends, they're less likely to date, they're less likely to want to drive or get a job, because they're. depressed. All of that was true before we got on the internet. Before the internet, we just hid in our rooms with our music or books and got almost no social interaction. The internet gave us a way to get social interaction that didn't horribly exacerbate our symptoms. I'd also like to point out that almost every depressed teen I knew had some form of other disability as well, whether that's ADHD or autism or chronic illness. All things that make it damn hard to be social, get a job, learn to drive, etc.
Look, I do think that internet has a lot of negative effects. Social pressure is real, fear of missing out is real, bullying are real. But goddamn, the solution to that is changing how we interact with social media, not going "oh no! the internet is terrible!" and treating phones like dangerous radioactive substances you have to carefully limit or your child will die.
The internet probably saved my life. I was an abused queer disabled teen living in a homophobic fundamentalist Christian household. I spent countless hours on the internet because it was the only way I could get any form of positive interaction. When I went into depression spirals, I posted on my favorite writing forum and my internet friends dragged me out of it. Because of their support, I was only passingly suicidal. I am firmly convinced that if I didn't have that support system, I would have tried to kill myself.
I can also say for a fact that the internet is the only reason one of my friends is alive today. We became friends over the writing forum, and eventually exchanged phone numbers. He was struggling with depression as well, and didn't have any support system--his family vaguely tried, but mostly exacerbated his depression more than anything else. I vividly remember sitting on my porch one summer afternoon, staying on the phone for two hours trying to talk him down from suicide, while he was walking along the highway ready to jump into traffic. I was the person he called, even though I literally lived in another country and we had never met, because I was the only person in his life that actually listened to and supported him. If we hadn't grown so close over the internet, he could very well be dead now.
I don't know. I know a lot of my response to this is just a visceral reaction because if my parents tried to limit my internet use as a child, it might've literally killed me. Reaching out to my online friends after my parents hit me was the only thing that kept me from depression-spiraling towards suicidality. Sure, there were shitty things and shitty people on the internet that also probably exacerbated my depression, but not nearly as much being alone with no one to talk to would have been.
posted by brook horse at 1:15 PM on August 5, 2017 [32 favorites]
What's with all the 'get off my lawn, correlation is not causation' BS? This is good news, as in it's good that this is finally permeating into our cultural awareness. I wish I'd know this when our kids were toddlers - I feel guilty for letting them park in front of the Nintendo all day. I'm glad that our grandchildren will be protected (and it's *because* of articles like this). Any honest parent or teacher (who looks) can see the effects first hand. I kind of get that this article maybe doesn't meet the standards of a letter to Nature, but that's really not the audience, is it?
It's like y'all are complaining that lung cancer is just 'correlated' with tobacco.
Now, if only there were a way to get a similar message out about TV, Hollywood, and advertising.....
posted by cfraenkel at 1:28 PM on August 5, 2017 [9 favorites]
It's like y'all are complaining that lung cancer is just 'correlated' with tobacco.
Now, if only there were a way to get a similar message out about TV, Hollywood, and advertising.....
posted by cfraenkel at 1:28 PM on August 5, 2017 [9 favorites]
There’s not a single exception. All screen activities are linked to less happiness, and all nonscreen activities are linked to more happiness.
1) Have they run this test on adults as well, or is it only teens who are unhappier when they spend a lot of time on smartphones?
2) Have they tried searching within the subset who DO NOT use Facebook and Twitter? (I know it's hard to find those, but hey - do they really mean "social media," or do they mean "the two major social media companies who refuse to do anything effective about their rampant bigotry?")
The article talks about kids not spending as much time outside/away from screens; it doesn't talk about how many formerly teen-friendly spaces have been restricted or removed.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:35 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
1) Have they run this test on adults as well, or is it only teens who are unhappier when they spend a lot of time on smartphones?
2) Have they tried searching within the subset who DO NOT use Facebook and Twitter? (I know it's hard to find those, but hey - do they really mean "social media," or do they mean "the two major social media companies who refuse to do anything effective about their rampant bigotry?")
But the allure of independence, so powerful to previous generations, holds less sway over today’s teens, who are less likely to leave the house without their parents. The shift is stunning: 12th-graders in 2015 were going out less often than eighth-graders did as recently as 2009.Err, somehow I doubt that's because of a major shift in kid psychology. It sounds like they're blaming the culture's overprotective, must-check-in-every-half-hour paranoia on the phones, rather than on the parents who insist on keeping their kids on a digital leash.
The article talks about kids not spending as much time outside/away from screens; it doesn't talk about how many formerly teen-friendly spaces have been restricted or removed.
Why are today’s teens waiting longer to take on both the responsibilities and the pleasures of adulthood?Again, I don't think the blame for this can be placed on the teens.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:35 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
Read farther, found this:
I'm in one of the densest-population urban areas on earth, and the only places within five miles where teens can go hang out and not be harassed, are kiddie parks with swings and slides. No roller rinks. No open basketball courts. The nearest pool is open for several weeks in the summer - but it's not public; there's a phone number to call about membership options. And don't get me started on the "local necking spot" restrictions.
And that's before we get to the places where it's actually a crime for a 13-year-old to be without adult supervision.
Teens are hiding behind screens because there's nowhere else for them to go.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:47 PM on August 5, 2017 [52 favorites]
It’s not only a matter of fewer kids partying; fewer kids are spending time simply hanging out. That’s something most teens used to do: nerds and jocks, poor kids and rich kids, C students and A students. The roller rink, the basketball court, the town pool, the local necking spot—they’ve all been replaced by virtual spaces accessed through apps and the web.TEENS DID NOT TEAR DOWN ROLLER RINKS NOR WRITE THE APPS.
I'm in one of the densest-population urban areas on earth, and the only places within five miles where teens can go hang out and not be harassed, are kiddie parks with swings and slides. No roller rinks. No open basketball courts. The nearest pool is open for several weeks in the summer - but it's not public; there's a phone number to call about membership options. And don't get me started on the "local necking spot" restrictions.
And that's before we get to the places where it's actually a crime for a 13-year-old to be without adult supervision.
Teens are hiding behind screens because there's nowhere else for them to go.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 1:47 PM on August 5, 2017 [52 favorites]
I'll dig for even better citations than this one from Psychology Today, which has a history of occasionally falling for sensational woo, but this includes a roundup summary of some more recent studies. But even in the 60s and 70s, there were numerous clinical experiments measuring the direct, immediate physiological effects of TV viewing that made it absolutely clear it has unique physiological effects that are quite powerful and not precedented in previous human natural sensory experience. If nothing else, the fact that sort of viewing isn't at all analogous to how we see and process visual information in nature, despite the intuitive feeling that we're seeing realistically when we view screen images is very well established.
posted by saulgoodman at 1:54 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by saulgoodman at 1:54 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Why does this have to be either/or? Sure, there are plenty of things for teenagers (and adults!) to be depressed about, but maybe excessive screen time isn't the best solution for everyone.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:56 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:56 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Teens are hiding behind screens because there's nowhere else for them to go.
Yes. I was just trying to think of how rare it is to see anyone teenage or under without an adult or involved in an organized activity. An entire generation or more that can't be trusted to walk to school or leave the house unsupervised.
And yet people are surprised that they're spending so much time looking at phones and playing games.
posted by bongo_x at 2:14 PM on August 5, 2017 [7 favorites]
Yes. I was just trying to think of how rare it is to see anyone teenage or under without an adult or involved in an organized activity. An entire generation or more that can't be trusted to walk to school or leave the house unsupervised.
And yet people are surprised that they're spending so much time looking at phones and playing games.
posted by bongo_x at 2:14 PM on August 5, 2017 [7 favorites]
There are a lot of common sense correlations that turn out to fall apart with careful study. For example, video games don't cause aggression, something we just found out as a result of careful meta-analysis of a lot of (occasionally biased) studies.
It is very hard to separate out screen time alone from when and how it is used in observational studies or surveys, as well as the impossibility of discovering causation from most survey data (or to methodologically geek out a bit, to do so without an unexpected exogenous shock, like an unexpected event, which is not in this study). I bristle at the degree of certainty in the article, considering that we know it is a bad approach to social science. This is an important topic, but the article is bad science, and not just in a "people always worry about kids" kind of way. It is dangerous. One prominent social psychologist who studies technology and kids worries that kids will be harmed by parents blindly reacting and taking away safety nets.
This doesn't mean that phones are always good. We know they aren't (for example your cognitive capacity drops if a phone is on your desk, even if it is off). But this is a really bad piece of pop science.
posted by blahblahblah at 2:27 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
It is very hard to separate out screen time alone from when and how it is used in observational studies or surveys, as well as the impossibility of discovering causation from most survey data (or to methodologically geek out a bit, to do so without an unexpected exogenous shock, like an unexpected event, which is not in this study). I bristle at the degree of certainty in the article, considering that we know it is a bad approach to social science. This is an important topic, but the article is bad science, and not just in a "people always worry about kids" kind of way. It is dangerous. One prominent social psychologist who studies technology and kids worries that kids will be harmed by parents blindly reacting and taking away safety nets.
This doesn't mean that phones are always good. We know they aren't (for example your cognitive capacity drops if a phone is on your desk, even if it is off). But this is a really bad piece of pop science.
posted by blahblahblah at 2:27 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
I wonder too if the, for lack of a better word, quality of the current crop of media experiences makes any difference. Interactive stuff, stuff done by other amateurs, and the recent crop of outstanding programming for younger kids, from Backyardigans and Yo Gabba Gabba to Gravity Falls and Steven Universe - these are much richer and much much more intelligently positive experiences than the TV I consumed as a kid - Crusader Rabbit, anyone? OK, I barely remember that one, but still.
It seems to me that, at least, the best of the current screen selections have a lot more going for them than almost all of what went before, and that it certainly makes sense that as the screens become more of a given, that the experiences there become more relevant and positive (as well as the reverse too, probably).
At the very least, the effect of the nature of the media, or the quality, seems like it might should have a place in this discussion.
posted by emmet at 2:39 PM on August 5, 2017
It seems to me that, at least, the best of the current screen selections have a lot more going for them than almost all of what went before, and that it certainly makes sense that as the screens become more of a given, that the experiences there become more relevant and positive (as well as the reverse too, probably).
At the very least, the effect of the nature of the media, or the quality, seems like it might should have a place in this discussion.
posted by emmet at 2:39 PM on August 5, 2017
I'm an old, and I don't even have a smart phone, but just from using a computer, I notice that the way that the internet works and what it values affects my thinking and my feelings.
I'm disappointed when something I post doesn't get a lot of likes, and I'll go back again and again hoping to find more. I ruminate over it when I get into a discussion in which I feel misunderstood and piled onto. And I can't get away from it because the computer is always there (unless I go out, which wouldn't work if I had a smart phone).
Most of the internet is a popularity contest, and not just interpersonally. The big internet giants are in on it too, with their clickbait and shameless eagerness to get eyeballs onto their content. A very young person who doesn't have a longer view might start to think this way automatically, in this single minded quest to get noticed, where one's success or failure is literally quantified with numbers.
posted by Vispa Teresa at 3:06 PM on August 5, 2017 [12 favorites]
I'm disappointed when something I post doesn't get a lot of likes, and I'll go back again and again hoping to find more. I ruminate over it when I get into a discussion in which I feel misunderstood and piled onto. And I can't get away from it because the computer is always there (unless I go out, which wouldn't work if I had a smart phone).
Most of the internet is a popularity contest, and not just interpersonally. The big internet giants are in on it too, with their clickbait and shameless eagerness to get eyeballs onto their content. A very young person who doesn't have a longer view might start to think this way automatically, in this single minded quest to get noticed, where one's success or failure is literally quantified with numbers.
posted by Vispa Teresa at 3:06 PM on August 5, 2017 [12 favorites]
> OH MY GOD WHAT ARE ALL THESE KIDS GOING TO DO WITH THEIR BANANAS
They include them in pictures, for scale.
posted by cardioid at 3:07 PM on August 5, 2017 [9 favorites]
They include them in pictures, for scale.
posted by cardioid at 3:07 PM on August 5, 2017 [9 favorites]
Teens are hiding behind screens because there's nowhere else for them to go.
Yeah. We were living in the far 'burbs when my son was a teen a decade ago and there really was nowhere for them to hang out other than friend's basements. It's says something that the Rt. 22 Sheetz gas station was voted as the #1 hangout in his yearbook.
posted by octothorpe at 3:10 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
Yeah. We were living in the far 'burbs when my son was a teen a decade ago and there really was nowhere for them to hang out other than friend's basements. It's says something that the Rt. 22 Sheetz gas station was voted as the #1 hangout in his yearbook.
posted by octothorpe at 3:10 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
I watched a whole lot more television than my kids had "screen time" growing up, and it was so passive and worthless compared to what they do with their screens.
I think this really bears emphasis. Like I'm at the age where the first half of my life was sans internet, so I often do this compare-and-contrast thing in my head. Apart from the mindless one-way flow that television and radio provides, with smartphones there is more social interaction at play. This can't be overstated.
During depressive bouts in my pre-internet days, I would be holed up in my shitty little room, drinking beer and listening to music, wishing with all my might that someone would check up on me. I would have killed for any human contact. Eventually I discovered chat rooms, and then forums, albeit only accessible from computers at the public library. As devices got smaller and cheaper, I'm now a part of dozens of different communities and in frequent touch with all of them. I have several conversations going simultaneously. I can be laughing at screenshots posted in a Facebook group devoted to bad graphic design, or I can be having serious election-bean-plating. Any time, anywhere.
I cannot tell you what a blessing this has been for me. The advent of smartphones has alleviated my sense of alienation and isolation. It has encouraged me to take the initiative to talk to strangers. I'm not sure I'd be in such great shape without those tools.
posted by Aya Hirano on the Astral Plane at 3:11 PM on August 5, 2017 [13 favorites]
I think this really bears emphasis. Like I'm at the age where the first half of my life was sans internet, so I often do this compare-and-contrast thing in my head. Apart from the mindless one-way flow that television and radio provides, with smartphones there is more social interaction at play. This can't be overstated.
During depressive bouts in my pre-internet days, I would be holed up in my shitty little room, drinking beer and listening to music, wishing with all my might that someone would check up on me. I would have killed for any human contact. Eventually I discovered chat rooms, and then forums, albeit only accessible from computers at the public library. As devices got smaller and cheaper, I'm now a part of dozens of different communities and in frequent touch with all of them. I have several conversations going simultaneously. I can be laughing at screenshots posted in a Facebook group devoted to bad graphic design, or I can be having serious election-bean-plating. Any time, anywhere.
I cannot tell you what a blessing this has been for me. The advent of smartphones has alleviated my sense of alienation and isolation. It has encouraged me to take the initiative to talk to strangers. I'm not sure I'd be in such great shape without those tools.
posted by Aya Hirano on the Astral Plane at 3:11 PM on August 5, 2017 [13 favorites]
What's with all the 'get off my lawn, correlation is not causation' BS? This is good news, as in it's good that this is finally permeating into our cultural awareness. I wish I'd know this when our kids were toddlers - I feel guilty for letting them park in front of the Nintendo all day.
This is exactly the problem. I'm not saying any kid should have been in front of the Nintendo all day, but how often does anybody ever say, "I wish I'd known this about how kids are dealing with deep emotional issues, I wish I'd talked more to my kids and had them have periodic check-ins with a therapist and worked with them on developing appropriate emotional coping skills and managing stress."
"Less screen time" is like "more exercise". It's not that it's bad advice in isolation. It's that it's easy advice to offer, but harder to put into practice, and not actually in any way sufficient to solve the problem of adolescent mental health. "Have you tried spending less time on your phone?" is not a helpful thing to say to either kids or adults with depression who don't have access to adequate services, and yet articles like this that talk about screens outnumber articles about teenagers' access to mental health support and services by actual orders of magnitude.
posted by Sequence at 3:17 PM on August 5, 2017 [17 favorites]
This is exactly the problem. I'm not saying any kid should have been in front of the Nintendo all day, but how often does anybody ever say, "I wish I'd known this about how kids are dealing with deep emotional issues, I wish I'd talked more to my kids and had them have periodic check-ins with a therapist and worked with them on developing appropriate emotional coping skills and managing stress."
"Less screen time" is like "more exercise". It's not that it's bad advice in isolation. It's that it's easy advice to offer, but harder to put into practice, and not actually in any way sufficient to solve the problem of adolescent mental health. "Have you tried spending less time on your phone?" is not a helpful thing to say to either kids or adults with depression who don't have access to adequate services, and yet articles like this that talk about screens outnumber articles about teenagers' access to mental health support and services by actual orders of magnitude.
posted by Sequence at 3:17 PM on August 5, 2017 [17 favorites]
I watched a whole lot more television than my kids had "screen time" growing up, and it was so passive and worthless compared to what they do with their screens.
I still watch a lot of TV, and I don't experience it as passive and worthless. A lot of TV is dramas and sitcoms, which are stories -- like in books, which no one would say are passive and worthless. And even the more mundane TV shows, like talk shows, are a nice way to listen to a conversation. The key is to think about what one is watching.
It's a lot more relaxing and engaging, at least for me, to watch a good drama on TV than to rummage around the internet.
posted by Vispa Teresa at 3:23 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
I still watch a lot of TV, and I don't experience it as passive and worthless. A lot of TV is dramas and sitcoms, which are stories -- like in books, which no one would say are passive and worthless. And even the more mundane TV shows, like talk shows, are a nice way to listen to a conversation. The key is to think about what one is watching.
It's a lot more relaxing and engaging, at least for me, to watch a good drama on TV than to rummage around the internet.
posted by Vispa Teresa at 3:23 PM on August 5, 2017 [5 favorites]
The plural of anecdote is not data. Here is some data.
The teen suicide rate went up sharply from 1975 to 1990, dropped sharply till it reached 1975 rates in 2007, and now is climbing again. These kids are still doing better than the Millennials.
CDC
The suicide rate for all Americans has been rising steadily since 1999. Increases in overall suicide should be subtracted from increases in teen suicide before asserting that teen suicide rates are skyrocketing and that a generation is being destroyed.
CDC
posted by ckridge at 3:37 PM on August 5, 2017 [7 favorites]
The teen suicide rate went up sharply from 1975 to 1990, dropped sharply till it reached 1975 rates in 2007, and now is climbing again. These kids are still doing better than the Millennials.
CDC
The suicide rate for all Americans has been rising steadily since 1999. Increases in overall suicide should be subtracted from increases in teen suicide before asserting that teen suicide rates are skyrocketing and that a generation is being destroyed.
CDC
posted by ckridge at 3:37 PM on August 5, 2017 [7 favorites]
The graphs show quite clearly that most of these trends (hanging out, driving, dating, maybe sex) predate the iPhone, let alone the point when most teens had smartphones. Some of them are quite obviously driven to wider societal and economic pressures - it costs far more to drive than it used to, and our focus on child safety means that sex has been declining for a while, along with roaming and generally hanging out outside of the home.
Unscientifically, I'm more inclined to believe that the increase sleeplessness and loneliness could be related to smartphones and social media - although with loneliness, you do wonder whether that's echoing a wider societal trend amongst everyone who has smartphones. And as a few people have said, the internet can connect people who would otherwise have been lonely.
I agree that we shouldn't immediately dismiss anyone who says the internet/smartphones are bad. But this whole piece seems like it was painted with far too broad a brush, with many of the assertions being laughably tenuous - so it's not at all surprising to me that there's so much pushback.
posted by adrianhon at 3:41 PM on August 5, 2017
Unscientifically, I'm more inclined to believe that the increase sleeplessness and loneliness could be related to smartphones and social media - although with loneliness, you do wonder whether that's echoing a wider societal trend amongst everyone who has smartphones. And as a few people have said, the internet can connect people who would otherwise have been lonely.
I agree that we shouldn't immediately dismiss anyone who says the internet/smartphones are bad. But this whole piece seems like it was painted with far too broad a brush, with many of the assertions being laughably tenuous - so it's not at all surprising to me that there's so much pushback.
posted by adrianhon at 3:41 PM on August 5, 2017
The use of the phrase “iGen” alone suggests a conclusion that came before the evidence.
posted by DoctorFedora at 3:43 PM on August 5, 2017 [10 favorites]
posted by DoctorFedora at 3:43 PM on August 5, 2017 [10 favorites]
Like I'm at the age where the first half of my life was sans internet
As a counterpoint, I remember a time before the internet, and it's advent has not been a positive thing for me. I honestly believe it gave me adult-onset ADD. It's basically been a vast waste of time and a compulsion and I shudder to think of how many books I could have read during the time I've spent skimming articles and forums for some bit of stimulus. I used to read and write all day long and concentrate for hours on stories and whatever my current obsession was.
Never mind the psychologically detrimental aspects of social media, the reduced quality of life out in the world with so many fellow humans glued to their phones. Or the way people feel so free to express the worst of themselves online and at the same time assume the worst of others. Or the ways so many of us live in news and culture bubbles.
Sure there are online communities and they can be great, but what's even greater is in person communities. Back in the day I was on old-school local BBS that was basically a bunch of socially awkward high school nerds, nevertheless we managed to get together to hang out in person regularly and it was awesome and really meant far more to me than any online community I've been a part of since.
I just feel like we've given up a lot of depth in society for shallow yet endless breadth of the internet .
posted by Brain Sturgeon at 4:11 PM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
As a counterpoint, I remember a time before the internet, and it's advent has not been a positive thing for me. I honestly believe it gave me adult-onset ADD. It's basically been a vast waste of time and a compulsion and I shudder to think of how many books I could have read during the time I've spent skimming articles and forums for some bit of stimulus. I used to read and write all day long and concentrate for hours on stories and whatever my current obsession was.
Never mind the psychologically detrimental aspects of social media, the reduced quality of life out in the world with so many fellow humans glued to their phones. Or the way people feel so free to express the worst of themselves online and at the same time assume the worst of others. Or the ways so many of us live in news and culture bubbles.
Sure there are online communities and they can be great, but what's even greater is in person communities. Back in the day I was on old-school local BBS that was basically a bunch of socially awkward high school nerds, nevertheless we managed to get together to hang out in person regularly and it was awesome and really meant far more to me than any online community I've been a part of since.
I just feel like we've given up a lot of depth in society for shallow yet endless breadth of the internet .
posted by Brain Sturgeon at 4:11 PM on August 5, 2017 [11 favorites]
Why does my life not consist of precisely curated bursts of photogenic ecstasy? This is why I don't do social media.
posted by bad grammar at 4:20 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by bad grammar at 4:20 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
My generation was destroyed by Pink Floyd.
and Supertramp.
But seriously, teenagers have always been messed up works in progress somewhere crucial on the long weird path from total dependency to something approaching functional maturity. Meanwhile, each generation ends up stumbling through its own unique version of that-thing-that-seems-to-be-swallowing-them-whole ...
Comic books
Television
Rock Music
Dungeons and Dragons
Video Games
But smartphones are different from all of these, except television. Smartphones (like television) are a technology and what little I know of Marshall McLuhan's theories tells me that this makes them a distinct and significant "thing" -- not just a new flavor of something, but an entirely new food (he said, applying an awfully sloppy metaphor). So to dismiss smartphones' possible ill effects (and what technology has ever NOT had ill effects) as standard generational fear mongering does not strike me as entirely wise.
posted by philip-random at 4:33 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
and Supertramp.
But seriously, teenagers have always been messed up works in progress somewhere crucial on the long weird path from total dependency to something approaching functional maturity. Meanwhile, each generation ends up stumbling through its own unique version of that-thing-that-seems-to-be-swallowing-them-whole ...
Comic books
Television
Rock Music
Dungeons and Dragons
Video Games
But smartphones are different from all of these, except television. Smartphones (like television) are a technology and what little I know of Marshall McLuhan's theories tells me that this makes them a distinct and significant "thing" -- not just a new flavor of something, but an entirely new food (he said, applying an awfully sloppy metaphor). So to dismiss smartphones' possible ill effects (and what technology has ever NOT had ill effects) as standard generational fear mongering does not strike me as entirely wise.
posted by philip-random at 4:33 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
Social scientist here. This article drives me nuts.
THANK YOU. Omg, the moral panic about this stuff drives me nuts, because the hysteria overwhelms any chance of real discussion and or public policy responses around this. There may well be some issues with "Screen Time", but damned if we can talk about them rationally because it's suddenly a bete noir striking down a whole generation.
Saul Goodman, your talk of hard evidence contradicts my experience in looking for proper science demonstrating the damage. Indeed, the vast majority of studies I've found on this topic a) have tiny sample sizes, b) are plagued with noise from other factors e.g socioeconomic status, and c) (and most damning, in my view) position screen time against 1-1 interaction with parents, for example. Meaning, what they are actually researching is the impact of lots of 1-1 quality time with parents, not screen time.
As I say, the idea that smartphones/internet/tv etc has no impact on society is almost certainly not true. But framing that impact in exactly the same way every moral panic about youth has been framed for hundreds of years is no way to investigate it, and indeed says more about societies anxieties about youts and moral panic than it does about screen time. And it drowns out reasonable discussion.
posted by smoke at 4:47 PM on August 5, 2017 [15 favorites]
THANK YOU. Omg, the moral panic about this stuff drives me nuts, because the hysteria overwhelms any chance of real discussion and or public policy responses around this. There may well be some issues with "Screen Time", but damned if we can talk about them rationally because it's suddenly a bete noir striking down a whole generation.
Saul Goodman, your talk of hard evidence contradicts my experience in looking for proper science demonstrating the damage. Indeed, the vast majority of studies I've found on this topic a) have tiny sample sizes, b) are plagued with noise from other factors e.g socioeconomic status, and c) (and most damning, in my view) position screen time against 1-1 interaction with parents, for example. Meaning, what they are actually researching is the impact of lots of 1-1 quality time with parents, not screen time.
As I say, the idea that smartphones/internet/tv etc has no impact on society is almost certainly not true. But framing that impact in exactly the same way every moral panic about youth has been framed for hundreds of years is no way to investigate it, and indeed says more about societies anxieties about youts and moral panic than it does about screen time. And it drowns out reasonable discussion.
posted by smoke at 4:47 PM on August 5, 2017 [15 favorites]
Read the AAP's recommendations for a more nuanced summary on research
Note
a) it's largely correlative
b) early research indicates it's how we use it, not using it per se
c) the report calls out there's not much research on usage patterns
d) it takes a "do no harm" kind of approach
posted by smoke at 4:55 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Note
a) it's largely correlative
b) early research indicates it's how we use it, not using it per se
c) the report calls out there's not much research on usage patterns
d) it takes a "do no harm" kind of approach
posted by smoke at 4:55 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
When a generation of kids sees some birds and immediately thinks "slingshot them into bricks and glass and pigs," we have crossed a line that explains much about our current national state.
posted by delfin at 4:56 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by delfin at 4:56 PM on August 5, 2017 [3 favorites]
When a generation of kids sees some birds and immediately thinks "slingshot them into bricks and glass and pigs," we have crossed a line that explains much about our current national state.
I'm not sure if this is worse or better than "Slingshot some birds"
posted by pan at 5:50 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'm not sure if this is worse or better than "Slingshot some birds"
posted by pan at 5:50 PM on August 5, 2017 [1 favorite]
Slightly offtopic, but I was just browsing Kickstarter and came across this shitshow.
posted by Behemoth at 9:03 PM on August 5, 2017
posted by Behemoth at 9:03 PM on August 5, 2017
That's... fascinating. Not only in its utter lack of awareness of both practical and legal issues, but in its atrocious punctuation, and utter obliviousness to the social dynamics of the standard classroom.
Showed it to daughter; she spent five minutes rattling off ways this thing could be used to further disrupt a classroom, and that's before we got to hardware problems. I am tempted to throw in the $1 level so I can ask what models of phones it works for.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 9:29 PM on August 5, 2017
Showed it to daughter; she spent five minutes rattling off ways this thing could be used to further disrupt a classroom, and that's before we got to hardware problems. I am tempted to throw in the $1 level so I can ask what models of phones it works for.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 9:29 PM on August 5, 2017
The use of the phrase “iGen” alone suggests a conclusion that came before the evidence.
The "About the author" blurb at the end mentions they just wrote a book on this subject called iGen, so yeah.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 3:23 AM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
The "About the author" blurb at the end mentions they just wrote a book on this subject called iGen, so yeah.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 3:23 AM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
i am not long out of being teenage
i think if i was not allowed internet access in some ways it would've been better because i would've been forced into physical places if I wanted to interact
and in some ways worse because I would not have been able to talk to anybody that way a lot of the time from terrible anxiety
it would've been different. would it have been better or worse? i actually don't know
posted by solarion at 3:58 AM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
i think if i was not allowed internet access in some ways it would've been better because i would've been forced into physical places if I wanted to interact
and in some ways worse because I would not have been able to talk to anybody that way a lot of the time from terrible anxiety
it would've been different. would it have been better or worse? i actually don't know
posted by solarion at 3:58 AM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
I was born in a house with the television always on
Guess I grew up too fast and I forgot my name -David Byrne
Me and David, and all of us, we've been morphing into cyborgs for a long long time now. Offloading memory and recall function into the Internet. The hordes I see on the subways and in the streets are all glued to the screen, all ages, this is nothing special about kids. I am almost 50, I am there too.
What I don't get is using the phones at home, or watching video on a phone. Or even writing anything of meaningful length. Those buttons and screens are fucking tiny, why would you spend 8 hours a day with that and not want to do your eight+ hours a day of screening in front of a nice big computer monitor like I do? And a keyboard and mouse seems a much more fine tuned control / interface than swiping fingers and typing with thumbs.
Kids, even cyborging wrong... Whatever, I'll just be back here in the beta version of depersonalized interconnected network thang.
posted by Meatbomb at 7:14 AM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
Guess I grew up too fast and I forgot my name -David Byrne
Me and David, and all of us, we've been morphing into cyborgs for a long long time now. Offloading memory and recall function into the Internet. The hordes I see on the subways and in the streets are all glued to the screen, all ages, this is nothing special about kids. I am almost 50, I am there too.
What I don't get is using the phones at home, or watching video on a phone. Or even writing anything of meaningful length. Those buttons and screens are fucking tiny, why would you spend 8 hours a day with that and not want to do your eight+ hours a day of screening in front of a nice big computer monitor like I do? And a keyboard and mouse seems a much more fine tuned control / interface than swiping fingers and typing with thumbs.
Kids, even cyborging wrong... Whatever, I'll just be back here in the beta version of depersonalized interconnected network thang.
posted by Meatbomb at 7:14 AM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
Meatbomb, I'm with you on that. I have computers at home and at work. They have nice big screens and full size keyboards. Why would I want to go on the internet in that tiny shoulder hunching format?
posted by elizilla at 7:52 AM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by elizilla at 7:52 AM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
Every time I've been to the movies in the last couple of years, I've seen at least one person watching videos on their phone instead of the movie. And those tickets ain't cheap!
posted by The Underpants Monster at 9:53 AM on August 6, 2017
posted by The Underpants Monster at 9:53 AM on August 6, 2017
From way up thread...
"Depressed teens are also less likely to go out, because they're depressed. They're less likely to spend time with their friends, they're less likely to date, they're less likely to want to drive or get a job, because they're. depressed. All of that was true before we got on the internet. Before the internet, we just hid in our rooms with our music or books and got almost no social interaction. The internet gave us a way to get social interaction that didn't horribly exacerbate our symptoms." [emphasis mine]
This is mischaracterizing the current internet landscape to a large degree.
A generation ago, any internet communities had some form of healthy moderating adult influence, which did indeed limit the degree that ones' symptoms were made worse. It was, truly, a healthy socializing environment for people with various socialization difficulties.
Internet communities that today's teens are involved in are very tightly insular, and as a result, (and this was also mentioned in another comment further up thread: "Among other things, I think depression makes people really vulnerable to copycatting stuff they've seen other people do and that can be disastrous.") we now have the Tumblr Phenomenon where kids spiral out of control and try to one-up each other for who has the "worst mental health symptoms". (eg: pro-ana, pro-cutting, suicidal ideation imagery, and so on.)
Granted, it seems to fade out as they hit 19-20 or so, but the 12 to 18 year old kids are playing very dangerous games with their own minds, and the minds of their peers. You are what you immerse yourself in.
I don't know if or how we can steer the ship back toward diverse aged communities, but what we have now is toxic to our young people.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 12:30 PM on August 6, 2017
"Depressed teens are also less likely to go out, because they're depressed. They're less likely to spend time with their friends, they're less likely to date, they're less likely to want to drive or get a job, because they're. depressed. All of that was true before we got on the internet. Before the internet, we just hid in our rooms with our music or books and got almost no social interaction. The internet gave us a way to get social interaction that didn't horribly exacerbate our symptoms." [emphasis mine]
This is mischaracterizing the current internet landscape to a large degree.
A generation ago, any internet communities had some form of healthy moderating adult influence, which did indeed limit the degree that ones' symptoms were made worse. It was, truly, a healthy socializing environment for people with various socialization difficulties.
Internet communities that today's teens are involved in are very tightly insular, and as a result, (and this was also mentioned in another comment further up thread: "Among other things, I think depression makes people really vulnerable to copycatting stuff they've seen other people do and that can be disastrous.") we now have the Tumblr Phenomenon where kids spiral out of control and try to one-up each other for who has the "worst mental health symptoms". (eg: pro-ana, pro-cutting, suicidal ideation imagery, and so on.)
Granted, it seems to fade out as they hit 19-20 or so, but the 12 to 18 year old kids are playing very dangerous games with their own minds, and the minds of their peers. You are what you immerse yourself in.
I don't know if or how we can steer the ship back toward diverse aged communities, but what we have now is toxic to our young people.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 12:30 PM on August 6, 2017
I wonder if there's a correlation between "interacting with strangers via the internet" and depression/anxiety, vs. interacting with people you know face to face (i.e. not including real life bullies). I find that I am much calmer when I restrict my internet activity to people I actually know. Twitter, reddit, Facebook comments, sometimes even metafilter can spike my anxiety because of all the stupidity and hate, and sometimes I get sucked into arguing. I don't really know who teens are reading and talking to, though.
posted by AFABulous at 12:33 PM on August 6, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by AFABulous at 12:33 PM on August 6, 2017 [6 favorites]
A generation ago, any internet communities had some form of healthy moderating adult influence, which did indeed limit the degree that ones' symptoms were made worse. It was, truly, a healthy socializing environment for people with various socialization difficulties.
Hmm. I'm not sure this is necessarily true. The communities I grew up in had very few adults in them at all. When I was growing up, we had problems with pro-ana and pro-cutting--that's not new to this generation. Specifically on the writing forum I was on, we had a period where there were some people being pro-cutting, and it was essentially the teens who got together and decided as a community that wasn't okay.
The teen groups I see today have a lot more adult influence than there was when I was a teen. Even on Tumblr, I've seen a lot more adults influences in teen circles than I did in the past. And I've looked in on some of the teen spaces I used to belong to, and a lot of them are much more healthy than they were when I was there (not that they were necessarily toxic back then--just had issues that seem to have largely been moderated now).
There are absolutely still insular, toxic teen communities today, but I'm not sure if we can piece out whether there's more or less of them than there was in the past. I wonder if it has something to do with where these communities are located? I've found, in general, small sites to be infinitely more healthy than larger social media spaces like Tumblr and Twitter. Maybe that's because it's really easy to create an insular group of people who think exactly like you in those places, where on a small site you're pretty much stuck with who you get--which means you can get counterpoints to pro-ana and pro-cutting ideologies, etc..
I do agree there's a lot of toxic shit going on, though, and we shouldn't just be like "depressed teens need the internet so let them do what they want." Again, I think it has a lot more to do with how teens use the internet, rather than how much they use it.
posted by brook horse at 3:04 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
Hmm. I'm not sure this is necessarily true. The communities I grew up in had very few adults in them at all. When I was growing up, we had problems with pro-ana and pro-cutting--that's not new to this generation. Specifically on the writing forum I was on, we had a period where there were some people being pro-cutting, and it was essentially the teens who got together and decided as a community that wasn't okay.
The teen groups I see today have a lot more adult influence than there was when I was a teen. Even on Tumblr, I've seen a lot more adults influences in teen circles than I did in the past. And I've looked in on some of the teen spaces I used to belong to, and a lot of them are much more healthy than they were when I was there (not that they were necessarily toxic back then--just had issues that seem to have largely been moderated now).
There are absolutely still insular, toxic teen communities today, but I'm not sure if we can piece out whether there's more or less of them than there was in the past. I wonder if it has something to do with where these communities are located? I've found, in general, small sites to be infinitely more healthy than larger social media spaces like Tumblr and Twitter. Maybe that's because it's really easy to create an insular group of people who think exactly like you in those places, where on a small site you're pretty much stuck with who you get--which means you can get counterpoints to pro-ana and pro-cutting ideologies, etc..
I do agree there's a lot of toxic shit going on, though, and we shouldn't just be like "depressed teens need the internet so let them do what they want." Again, I think it has a lot more to do with how teens use the internet, rather than how much they use it.
posted by brook horse at 3:04 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
Kids, even cyborging wrong...
I don't care what your age is, texting is profoundly ... inefficient. Requires both your eyes, both your hands. You can't even safely walk at the same time. It makes no sense. And don't even get me started on the twenty-text-back-and-forth "conversation" that spreads over several hours that could easily be handled by a one minute phone call.
I have seen the future and way too much of it is just dumb.
posted by philip-random at 3:16 PM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
I don't care what your age is, texting is profoundly ... inefficient. Requires both your eyes, both your hands. You can't even safely walk at the same time. It makes no sense. And don't even get me started on the twenty-text-back-and-forth "conversation" that spreads over several hours that could easily be handled by a one minute phone call.
I have seen the future and way too much of it is just dumb.
posted by philip-random at 3:16 PM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
But are there any adults here who can say their behaviors and experiences haven't been even a little impacted by phones and screens? I don't see how this wouldn't apply to younger minds.
Little screens? Meh. Go read about the effect of TV. Marshall McLuhan. Herbert Krugman is claimed to have done brainwave research "When you watch TV, brain activity switches from the left to the right hemisphere. In fact, experiments conducted by researcher Herbert Krugman showed that while viewers are watching television, the right hemisphere is twice as active as the left, a neurological anomaly.1 The crossover from left to right releases a surge of the body’s natural opiates: endorphins, which include beta-endorphins and enkephalins. Endorphins are structurally identical to opium and its derivatives (morphine, codeine, heroin, etc.). Activities that release endorphins (also called opioid peptides) are usually habit-forming (we rarely call them addictive). These include cracking knuckles, strenuous exercise, and orgasm. External opiates act on the same receptor sites (opioid receptors) as endorphins, so there is little difference between the two."
Now consider Since then, I’ve met a number of technology chief executives and venture capitalists who say similar things: they strictly limit their children’s screen time, often banning all gadgets on school nights, and allocating ascetic time limits on weekends.
But somehow, sure.....no worries about the effects of phones-n-screens.
posted by rough ashlar at 3:18 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
Little screens? Meh. Go read about the effect of TV. Marshall McLuhan. Herbert Krugman is claimed to have done brainwave research "When you watch TV, brain activity switches from the left to the right hemisphere. In fact, experiments conducted by researcher Herbert Krugman showed that while viewers are watching television, the right hemisphere is twice as active as the left, a neurological anomaly.1 The crossover from left to right releases a surge of the body’s natural opiates: endorphins, which include beta-endorphins and enkephalins. Endorphins are structurally identical to opium and its derivatives (morphine, codeine, heroin, etc.). Activities that release endorphins (also called opioid peptides) are usually habit-forming (we rarely call them addictive). These include cracking knuckles, strenuous exercise, and orgasm. External opiates act on the same receptor sites (opioid receptors) as endorphins, so there is little difference between the two."
Now consider Since then, I’ve met a number of technology chief executives and venture capitalists who say similar things: they strictly limit their children’s screen time, often banning all gadgets on school nights, and allocating ascetic time limits on weekends.
But somehow, sure.....no worries about the effects of phones-n-screens.
posted by rough ashlar at 3:18 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
But speaking as someone who has dealt with severe mental illness for the overwhelming majority of my life, I have noticed that both social media and my smartphone can have a strong effect on my wellbeing. The biggest one, for me, is that they make it much easier to self-isolate.
I can totally imagine if you can't find anyone like you among your in-person peers the Internet would be a lifesaver. But the above has been my experience.
When we're talking about social media and Internet use and whatever we should also keep in mind that if you were involved in Internet communities the situation now is very different than it was 20 or 10 or even 5 years ago. It used to be easier to log off and disappear back into the "real world" or change usernames when you became the target of bullying or felt you'd embarrassed yourself. You can't really be a kid now in the USA and not somehow be on social media without missing out on interactions that are vital to the social fabric binding your peers. I can't compare the difficulty of doxxing then and now, but there sure weren't as many sites and communities that made it incredibly easier to whip up an army to ruin someone's life.
Even outside of concentrated, Gamergate-style troll armies, drama and the possibilities for humiliation move so much faster than they used to. A classmate gets a hold of a picture where you look dumb and within an hour or two everyone in the school has it and there are 15 photoshops of you looking even worse. Or someone shops your head on an anonymous stranger's naked body while you're in a movie and by the time the credits roll and you log back on you're a social pariah. Or you make a comment on your Tumblr late at night that someone takes the wrong way and the next morning you're fucked.
It's never worked like this before, and it's upped the degree to which kids have to monitor their public personas and presentation. It's nuts and I thank God every day I was on the Internet during a time when everyone else on the Internet was at least to some degree a weirdo and popular kids didn't have the option of recording me eating my lunch alone in a corner and Snapchatting it to everyone in existence.
Finally--keep in mind that you don't have the option of leaving your humiliations behind, either. There's no transferring schools or moving. People track down your old social network and even if all your accounts are deleted someone's ready to provide gossip and screencaps.
Like, it really is no wonder that you can have a kid who goes from "meh" to "suicide" over the course of a few hours of online bullying because kids combine an acute awareness of digital permanence with a myopia that prevents them from realizing in a decade or two they're going to be laughing their asses off at the Dora the Explorer video their aunt made of them when they were two.
I dunno, I think the rate of change of technology and use of the Internet means you don't have to be that much older for your anecdotes about the effect of the Internet on your life to not really apply any more to how things work now.
posted by Anonymous at 3:19 PM on August 6, 2017
I can totally imagine if you can't find anyone like you among your in-person peers the Internet would be a lifesaver. But the above has been my experience.
When we're talking about social media and Internet use and whatever we should also keep in mind that if you were involved in Internet communities the situation now is very different than it was 20 or 10 or even 5 years ago. It used to be easier to log off and disappear back into the "real world" or change usernames when you became the target of bullying or felt you'd embarrassed yourself. You can't really be a kid now in the USA and not somehow be on social media without missing out on interactions that are vital to the social fabric binding your peers. I can't compare the difficulty of doxxing then and now, but there sure weren't as many sites and communities that made it incredibly easier to whip up an army to ruin someone's life.
Even outside of concentrated, Gamergate-style troll armies, drama and the possibilities for humiliation move so much faster than they used to. A classmate gets a hold of a picture where you look dumb and within an hour or two everyone in the school has it and there are 15 photoshops of you looking even worse. Or someone shops your head on an anonymous stranger's naked body while you're in a movie and by the time the credits roll and you log back on you're a social pariah. Or you make a comment on your Tumblr late at night that someone takes the wrong way and the next morning you're fucked.
It's never worked like this before, and it's upped the degree to which kids have to monitor their public personas and presentation. It's nuts and I thank God every day I was on the Internet during a time when everyone else on the Internet was at least to some degree a weirdo and popular kids didn't have the option of recording me eating my lunch alone in a corner and Snapchatting it to everyone in existence.
Finally--keep in mind that you don't have the option of leaving your humiliations behind, either. There's no transferring schools or moving. People track down your old social network and even if all your accounts are deleted someone's ready to provide gossip and screencaps.
Like, it really is no wonder that you can have a kid who goes from "meh" to "suicide" over the course of a few hours of online bullying because kids combine an acute awareness of digital permanence with a myopia that prevents them from realizing in a decade or two they're going to be laughing their asses off at the Dora the Explorer video their aunt made of them when they were two.
I dunno, I think the rate of change of technology and use of the Internet means you don't have to be that much older for your anecdotes about the effect of the Internet on your life to not really apply any more to how things work now.
posted by Anonymous at 3:19 PM on August 6, 2017
The new normal in my city is to have to honk at the person in front of you at the intersection because they are too lost in their phone to notice the light changed. Even then, they think it's ok to roll slow while they finish reading that FB post.
Try adding middle fingers and guns to that mix and you've got the new normal in my city.
posted by blucevalo at 3:45 PM on August 6, 2017
Try adding middle fingers and guns to that mix and you've got the new normal in my city.
posted by blucevalo at 3:45 PM on August 6, 2017
Little screens? Meh
No, I said "a little impacted by phones and screens" which is kind of funny, but we agree. Actually, schroedinger very eloquently expressed what I was thinking, including the part about unplugging.
I am also really concerned about how the normalization of dick pics* and requests for topless or naked photos will impact the young girls who are being sexualized from so many directions.
*in my day that was called flashing, and is deeply upsetting.
posted by Room 641-A at 4:06 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
No, I said "a little impacted by phones and screens" which is kind of funny, but we agree. Actually, schroedinger very eloquently expressed what I was thinking, including the part about unplugging.
I am also really concerned about how the normalization of dick pics* and requests for topless or naked photos will impact the young girls who are being sexualized from so many directions.
*in my day that was called flashing, and is deeply upsetting.
posted by Room 641-A at 4:06 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
I'm thinking this is sounding very CisHet in attitude. "Teens should find community face to face!" Except of course for the teens that don't fit in the rigidly described sexual/gender roles. Maybe in your day teens could just go out to the sock hop to meet- but then again, maybe you haven't checked with LGBTQ people about this.
So what ARE LGBTQ teens supposed to do in your wonderful screen-free, social media-free world? go through life believing that they are isolated and alone?
posted by happyroach at 8:11 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
So what ARE LGBTQ teens supposed to do in your wonderful screen-free, social media-free world? go through life believing that they are isolated and alone?
posted by happyroach at 8:11 PM on August 6, 2017 [2 favorites]
Except that a lot of the people saying screen time harms them are openly LGBTQ. Besides, who is saying 100% no screen time ever? It's just about setting limits and recognizing that while the internet can be a lifeline for some people, it can be a major source of depression and anxiety for others.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 9:59 PM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 9:59 PM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
Except that a lot of the people saying screen time harms them are openly LGBTQ. Besides, who is saying 100% no screen time ever? It's just about setting limits and recognizing that while the internet can be a lifeline for some people, it can be a major source of depression and anxiety for others.
Exactly. It's not "oh ban the Internet", it's "how do the ways we currently use it facilitate damaging social and mental health effects and what ways can we mitigate that". The structure of websites like LiveJournal and random discussion forums and MySpace are different than Twitter and Snapchat and whatever the kids are using now that I am too old to know about. You can't ignore the effect of the type of social media platform on whether a particular community is constructive or destructive.
posted by Anonymous at 10:29 PM on August 6, 2017
Exactly. It's not "oh ban the Internet", it's "how do the ways we currently use it facilitate damaging social and mental health effects and what ways can we mitigate that". The structure of websites like LiveJournal and random discussion forums and MySpace are different than Twitter and Snapchat and whatever the kids are using now that I am too old to know about. You can't ignore the effect of the type of social media platform on whether a particular community is constructive or destructive.
posted by Anonymous at 10:29 PM on August 6, 2017
McKenzie Wark:
I'm not going to even link to that stupid "social media has destroyed a generation" story. Psychologists have been writing this nonsense for nearly a century now. All this article does is show that psychology as a discipline pays no attention to its own history, is unable to think about media, and treats everything as pathology.[...]
The whole field is structured around the myth that anything technical is external to what is human. As a consequence, nothing technical is really thinkable, and whole areas of the human where it is in continuity with the non-human can only appear in the guise of pathology. But if there's a pathology, it is psychology's inability to think its own object. Not that this would matter. All fields are founded on myths. But psychologists have social power. And have not always used it for the good.posted by Joseph Gurl at 10:31 PM on August 6, 2017 [3 favorites]
The core issue shouldn't be, "screen time is bad for developing minds; they should have very limited screen time;" it should be "what alternatives to screen time do they have?"
In a world where parents can go to jail for letting their 11-year-old play in their own yard for an hour and a half (He was totally unsupervised! Anything could've happened!), many, many parents opt for "go to your room and get online" instead of outdoor activities of any sort.
There's not going to be less screen time, no matter what the pros and cons are, until this society stops thinking that anyone under age 18 needs 24-7 adult supervision - and there really are people insisting that there is absolutely no age when it's "safe" for a minor to be more than 20 yards for an assigned-responsible adult, and that any mishap that happens to a child is the result of criminal neglect. (Please don't ask for specific cites right now. I've been avoiding the Free Range Kids blog because it's just too depressing.)
One article worth mentioning - How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 10:44 PM on August 6, 2017 [9 favorites]
In a world where parents can go to jail for letting their 11-year-old play in their own yard for an hour and a half (He was totally unsupervised! Anything could've happened!), many, many parents opt for "go to your room and get online" instead of outdoor activities of any sort.
There's not going to be less screen time, no matter what the pros and cons are, until this society stops thinking that anyone under age 18 needs 24-7 adult supervision - and there really are people insisting that there is absolutely no age when it's "safe" for a minor to be more than 20 yards for an assigned-responsible adult, and that any mishap that happens to a child is the result of criminal neglect. (Please don't ask for specific cites right now. I've been avoiding the Free Range Kids blog because it's just too depressing.)
One article worth mentioning - How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 10:44 PM on August 6, 2017 [9 favorites]
A quick ctrl-F didn't turn up this article, but apologies if it was posted and I missed it.
No, smartphones are not destroying a generation.
posted by runcibleshaw at 11:58 PM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
No, smartphones are not destroying a generation.
posted by runcibleshaw at 11:58 PM on August 6, 2017 [1 favorite]
I got my first smartphone when I was 19-20. I'm 25 now, and it's wild how much I use it for everything. I went from being skeptical about the need for a smartphone when I was happy with my flip phone, to currently learning how to make apps.
I can't imagine having access to an iPhone when I was 7. But it's probably not that devastating - I had access to my first computer when I was 9. Handwringing will always happen.
posted by yueliang at 1:16 AM on August 7, 2017
I can't imagine having access to an iPhone when I was 7. But it's probably not that devastating - I had access to my first computer when I was 9. Handwringing will always happen.
posted by yueliang at 1:16 AM on August 7, 2017
This is the damn problem with young people nowadays. They don't listen to their elders. Look, when we old folks say your generation's destroyed, it is! That's all there is to it. Don't come sassing us with your "Well I like my smart phone" attitude. Just accept the fact you and your friends are a complete disaster and deal with it.
Feel free to ask how we clever older people did things back in our day, when the sun shone brighter and the grass was greener, and we'll be all too happy to pass on some of our great store of wisdom to you.
posted by gusottertrout at 3:39 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Feel free to ask how we clever older people did things back in our day, when the sun shone brighter and the grass was greener, and we'll be all too happy to pass on some of our great store of wisdom to you.
posted by gusottertrout at 3:39 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
My parents bought me a laptop in high school, but seeing how much time I spent alone in my room with it (and how much sleep I lost, using it late into the night) they switched to desktop computers in a central room for my brothers and, until they were 16 or so, enforced a strict "phones charge in the kitchen at night" rule. It's not that we weren't allowed on social media or the internet - I mean, I joined metafilter at 16 - but at a bare minimum they fiercely safeguarded our phone-free sleep time and I can't really be mad about that given how sleep deprived I was anyways.
posted by R a c h e l at 7:11 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by R a c h e l at 7:11 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Late to the party, but obligatory XKCD is obligatory.
posted by signal at 7:57 AM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by signal at 7:57 AM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I went back up to the top to count the number of comments that were taking seriously this massive shift in how children's brains are being shaped. Thankfully, it's not insignificant, just overwhelmed by the number of folks who don't really seem to care.
Can you give the author a little bit of a break - where it says that interactive screens make kids "unhappy" could you maybe substitute "unhappier"? Could you maybe assume the author isn't an idiot who thinks that things were perfectly fine before smartphones?
Why would anyone think that children being raised by the internet - in its current form - is nothing to worry about?
posted by turkeybrain at 8:14 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Can you give the author a little bit of a break - where it says that interactive screens make kids "unhappy" could you maybe substitute "unhappier"? Could you maybe assume the author isn't an idiot who thinks that things were perfectly fine before smartphones?
Why would anyone think that children being raised by the internet - in its current form - is nothing to worry about?
posted by turkeybrain at 8:14 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Why would anyone think that children being raised by the internet - in its current form - is nothing to worry about?
Or even consider? We just had a long thread where the overwhelming number of people eagerly blamed South Park for raising a generation of assholes. (Not that everyone watching is an asshole, but that the assholes were nurtured and encouraged.)
And really, I like XKCD as much as the next person, but as someone else mentioned, burying your nose in a book doesn't have any of the implications of being online.
posted by Room 641-A at 8:27 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Or even consider? We just had a long thread where the overwhelming number of people eagerly blamed South Park for raising a generation of assholes. (Not that everyone watching is an asshole, but that the assholes were nurtured and encouraged.)
And really, I like XKCD as much as the next person, but as someone else mentioned, burying your nose in a book doesn't have any of the implications of being online.
posted by Room 641-A at 8:27 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I went back up to the top to count the number of comments that were taking seriously this massive shift in how children's brains are being shaped. Thankfully, it's not insignificant, just overwhelmed by the number of folks who don't really seem to care.
Thank you. I thought about doing this, but I couldn't bear wading through a whole thread of "AND PLATO SAID THE YOUTH OF ATHENS ARE WEARING SAGGY PANTS!"
posted by thelonius at 8:33 AM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
Thank you. I thought about doing this, but I couldn't bear wading through a whole thread of "AND PLATO SAID THE YOUTH OF ATHENS ARE WEARING SAGGY PANTS!"
posted by thelonius at 8:33 AM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
metafilter on pop music: that's just the golden age fallacy again. today's music is no better or worse than that of your youth; it's just different! stop living the past!
metafilter on a smartphones: WE ARE LIVING IN THE END TIMES
posted by entropicamericana at 8:42 AM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
metafilter on a smartphones: WE ARE LIVING IN THE END TIMES
posted by entropicamericana at 8:42 AM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
The self-experimenters who are buying and working on OpenBCI are going to be the ones to show changes in brain patterns based on media consumption, diet, and exposure to chemicals.
They will also show any changes (if any) due to man made electromagnetic radiation.
Eventually I'd expect the ability to detect the epigenetic changes and wiring differences once non-invasive observation of the brain can occur. No idea when THAT will happen, odds are I'll be dust and so will the readers of this post today. Where testing is "Easy" - like your legs changes have been noted.
burying your nose in a book doesn't have any of the implications of being online.
Different known effects. There is a reason Facebook favors pictures to be shared.
posted by rough ashlar at 8:52 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
They will also show any changes (if any) due to man made electromagnetic radiation.
Eventually I'd expect the ability to detect the epigenetic changes and wiring differences once non-invasive observation of the brain can occur. No idea when THAT will happen, odds are I'll be dust and so will the readers of this post today. Where testing is "Easy" - like your legs changes have been noted.
burying your nose in a book doesn't have any of the implications of being online.
Different known effects. There is a reason Facebook favors pictures to be shared.
posted by rough ashlar at 8:52 AM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'm gonna stand by XKCD's "take a hint": if we, as a species, are investing so many resources, so much time, into avoiding face to face interactions, into having the semblance of human contact without actual human contact, maybe there's a reason for that?
Maybe we like our interactions mediated, accelerated and abstracted?
I think defaulting to the naturalistic position that this is bad because it used to not be this way is as lazy as automatically assuming all change is good. There's a reason people mock this particular brand of pearl clutching.
posted by signal at 9:09 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Maybe we like our interactions mediated, accelerated and abstracted?
I think defaulting to the naturalistic position that this is bad because it used to not be this way is as lazy as automatically assuming all change is good. There's a reason people mock this particular brand of pearl clutching.
posted by signal at 9:09 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
I went back up to the top to count the number of comments that were taking seriously this massive shift in how children's brains are being shaped. Thankfully, it's not insignificant, just overwhelmed by the number of folks who don't really seem to care.
The article doesn't talk about brain changes, though. It's all survey data. I absolutely think that screen time has an impact on the brain, I just don't think we can say "depressed kids spend more time on the internet, clearly screen time causes depression!" I'm not willing to say screens make kids "unhappier" because I haven't seen any data that shows that's the case as a general rule. Screens make lots of kids happier, while it also makes lots of kids unhappier. I don't feel comfortable giving a blanket "screens make kids unhappy" because I haven't seen any data to support that. All I've seen is "depression and screen time are linked" and nothing that addresses the possibility that depression leads to more screen time rather than the other way around.
I an concerned about the impact screen time has on the brain--and I'm sure there is one--but I want to see studies actually focusing on brain changes and development, not surveys. It's not that we don't care or think there's no danger, it's that fearmongering articles based on survey data (which can tell us a lot about behavior, but not about cause) help no one. And they may actively hurt depressed teens for whom screen time has a positive effect.
posted by brook horse at 9:13 AM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
The article doesn't talk about brain changes, though. It's all survey data. I absolutely think that screen time has an impact on the brain, I just don't think we can say "depressed kids spend more time on the internet, clearly screen time causes depression!" I'm not willing to say screens make kids "unhappier" because I haven't seen any data that shows that's the case as a general rule. Screens make lots of kids happier, while it also makes lots of kids unhappier. I don't feel comfortable giving a blanket "screens make kids unhappy" because I haven't seen any data to support that. All I've seen is "depression and screen time are linked" and nothing that addresses the possibility that depression leads to more screen time rather than the other way around.
I an concerned about the impact screen time has on the brain--and I'm sure there is one--but I want to see studies actually focusing on brain changes and development, not surveys. It's not that we don't care or think there's no danger, it's that fearmongering articles based on survey data (which can tell us a lot about behavior, but not about cause) help no one. And they may actively hurt depressed teens for whom screen time has a positive effect.
posted by brook horse at 9:13 AM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
From my perspective, the reasons people react as they do to these sorts of claims is in no small part due to the claims usually being framed around a comparative, where "kids today" are brought in as a measure instead of the focus being put more directly on the technological change itself.
It took my father, as an example, a long time before he adapted to TV culture. Being sedentary wasn't how he grew up, so for much of my life he couldn't sit still for more than an hour or two before becoming restless. Eventually though he did adapt and late in his life took to watching ever increasing amounts of tv. Unfortunately, he didn't adapt so well to the obesity, gout, and diabetes that accompanied that lifestyle change, but, what the hell, he got to see more football.
I, on the other hand, took to tv like a fish to water, as the saying goes. Completely at comfort sitting doing nothing save watching movies, television shows of great import, like Gilligan's Island reruns, and reading comics and books. Archimedes couldn't have found a big enough lever to move my sorry ass. But my experience didn't prepare me for smart phones, which I still shun as being outside my preferred experiential state. So to the author's of these pieces tend to start from a place necessarily already "infected" by technological change and condemn the new change for being unlike their own experiential patterns, and thus a "new" danger, when it is more just a continuing development of an already existent pattern moving in different directions.
It's the young who adapt the most quickly and the old who feel most disoriented by the changes and worry about how the young will grow differently than they did, suggesting their youth was somehow more "right" than today's even if that isn't a provable claim. The changes aren't just to the young, they're to the society as a whole, which makes separating out any specific potential problem almost impossible and makes fixing it even harder should one be found. There's a point where tvs simply weren't going away no matter what the consequences, so we instead just pretend they weren't that big a change. With smart phones it'll be the same thing most likely. They're already so central to the society as a whole that removing them isn't going to happen, so these articles end up, at best worrying some into attempts at moderation, which aren't especially effective in a culture so immoderate about their media.
A failure to see there has been serious changes is likely akin to the analogy of the frog in boiling water. We're immersed in the culture, so seeing alternatives to it becomes extremely difficult. One can point to effects of television, not least being the current president, but every claim can be met with arguments of it not being the technology really, since, at the core, its a people are people thing and we've always been pretty damn stupid despite our occasional bursts of cleverness, so the tech isn't really changing anything. That argument is true to an extent, but the technology changes the reach and scope of our clever moments and stupid normality. It forces change in different directions and with consequences that may not be seen as being directly attributable to the thing under consideration, even as it is almost certainly connected at a remove, but not felt or realized uniformly by all who engage with the change.
Looking to ourselves as measures for harm or benefit is not a adequate marker since how any significant change might effect us is hard for us to see given we have no distance from ourselves to see the full effect, and more importantly, the culture, or any group within it is made up of more than just people like ourselves, so the measure needs to encompass more than anecdotes, such as I provided above. It, to me, is impossible to believe that something as central to so many lives and that has been so key to so many important events of recent years wouldn't have some profound effect on the society and the children in ways both bad and good perhaps, but different and unknown from what was more familiar. That is something that demands study and care, I'd think, even if there isn't completely clarity and no real improvement may end up being accepted.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:26 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
It took my father, as an example, a long time before he adapted to TV culture. Being sedentary wasn't how he grew up, so for much of my life he couldn't sit still for more than an hour or two before becoming restless. Eventually though he did adapt and late in his life took to watching ever increasing amounts of tv. Unfortunately, he didn't adapt so well to the obesity, gout, and diabetes that accompanied that lifestyle change, but, what the hell, he got to see more football.
I, on the other hand, took to tv like a fish to water, as the saying goes. Completely at comfort sitting doing nothing save watching movies, television shows of great import, like Gilligan's Island reruns, and reading comics and books. Archimedes couldn't have found a big enough lever to move my sorry ass. But my experience didn't prepare me for smart phones, which I still shun as being outside my preferred experiential state. So to the author's of these pieces tend to start from a place necessarily already "infected" by technological change and condemn the new change for being unlike their own experiential patterns, and thus a "new" danger, when it is more just a continuing development of an already existent pattern moving in different directions.
It's the young who adapt the most quickly and the old who feel most disoriented by the changes and worry about how the young will grow differently than they did, suggesting their youth was somehow more "right" than today's even if that isn't a provable claim. The changes aren't just to the young, they're to the society as a whole, which makes separating out any specific potential problem almost impossible and makes fixing it even harder should one be found. There's a point where tvs simply weren't going away no matter what the consequences, so we instead just pretend they weren't that big a change. With smart phones it'll be the same thing most likely. They're already so central to the society as a whole that removing them isn't going to happen, so these articles end up, at best worrying some into attempts at moderation, which aren't especially effective in a culture so immoderate about their media.
A failure to see there has been serious changes is likely akin to the analogy of the frog in boiling water. We're immersed in the culture, so seeing alternatives to it becomes extremely difficult. One can point to effects of television, not least being the current president, but every claim can be met with arguments of it not being the technology really, since, at the core, its a people are people thing and we've always been pretty damn stupid despite our occasional bursts of cleverness, so the tech isn't really changing anything. That argument is true to an extent, but the technology changes the reach and scope of our clever moments and stupid normality. It forces change in different directions and with consequences that may not be seen as being directly attributable to the thing under consideration, even as it is almost certainly connected at a remove, but not felt or realized uniformly by all who engage with the change.
Looking to ourselves as measures for harm or benefit is not a adequate marker since how any significant change might effect us is hard for us to see given we have no distance from ourselves to see the full effect, and more importantly, the culture, or any group within it is made up of more than just people like ourselves, so the measure needs to encompass more than anecdotes, such as I provided above. It, to me, is impossible to believe that something as central to so many lives and that has been so key to so many important events of recent years wouldn't have some profound effect on the society and the children in ways both bad and good perhaps, but different and unknown from what was more familiar. That is something that demands study and care, I'd think, even if there isn't completely clarity and no real improvement may end up being accepted.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:26 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
It was ROCK & ROLL that destroyed civilization. Jeezus on a jumping bean, don't youse guys ever read history?
posted by mule98J at 10:38 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by mule98J at 10:38 AM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
Different known effects.
Yes, what I was trying to say is that I don't think they're analogous.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:41 AM on August 7, 2017
Yes, what I was trying to say is that I don't think they're analogous.
posted by Room 641-A at 10:41 AM on August 7, 2017
McLuhan's already been summoned in this thread, but not the tetrad parlour game, so I figured I'd bring it up. (Example of tetrad in action.)
So as I see it, smartphones:
* Extend human connections with each other (I remember the 80s and the super long phone cords so that you could take the phone into your room, and talking for hours on a phone)
* obsolesces privacy -- and obsolesces forgetfulness. I'm so glad I didn't live my 20s in a cell phone era. So many embarrassing moments that are long-forgotten!
* retrieves tribal feelings -- for good or bad. I'd never heard of the pro-Ana tribe and wish it didn't exist. But it also connects vulnerable people with each other for mutual support.
* reverses into polarized tribes of us vs them. 'Nuff said.
You can come up with more, of course.
Every new technology comes with unknown bargains with the devil. Would we have said yes to the car if they knew back then that it would come with global warming and the destruction of the environment -- and massive economic growth beyond their wildest dreams?
posted by wenat at 11:56 AM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
So as I see it, smartphones:
* Extend human connections with each other (I remember the 80s and the super long phone cords so that you could take the phone into your room, and talking for hours on a phone)
* obsolesces privacy -- and obsolesces forgetfulness. I'm so glad I didn't live my 20s in a cell phone era. So many embarrassing moments that are long-forgotten!
* retrieves tribal feelings -- for good or bad. I'd never heard of the pro-Ana tribe and wish it didn't exist. But it also connects vulnerable people with each other for mutual support.
* reverses into polarized tribes of us vs them. 'Nuff said.
You can come up with more, of course.
Every new technology comes with unknown bargains with the devil. Would we have said yes to the car if they knew back then that it would come with global warming and the destruction of the environment -- and massive economic growth beyond their wildest dreams?
posted by wenat at 11:56 AM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I an concerned about the impact screen time has on the brain--and I'm sure there is one-
Different known effects.
Yes, what I was trying to say is that I don't think they're analogous.
The problem at the moment is who's gonna pay to study the issue? Then you get to what protocol/thing are you trying to study and in the course of a long term study does the change of model and stats change the outcome? (screen size, refresh rate, pixel size, frequency and power of transmitters et al)
The low cost and constant communication are seen as a boon for a social species. And until the openbci people can ship a 'here is an image that runs right as a container/image here and here' what incentive is there for the interested but not hardcore to buy and set up something to gather enough data to say "there is this effect"?
The incentive for the creators and entities that make money or establish some form of behaviour control via these devices have no reason to spend effort to establish "hey they suck for this reason". And while you can find people who remember things like the Stazi in East Germany, how many east Germans are going "yup, no smart phone tracking device for me!" Other than Richard Stallman - how many people are passing on cell phones for privacy reasons? These small screens are too damn convenient. And what kind of risk would they have to represent to you before you'd say "nope".
posted by rough ashlar at 12:52 PM on August 7, 2017
Different known effects.
Yes, what I was trying to say is that I don't think they're analogous.
The problem at the moment is who's gonna pay to study the issue? Then you get to what protocol/thing are you trying to study and in the course of a long term study does the change of model and stats change the outcome? (screen size, refresh rate, pixel size, frequency and power of transmitters et al)
The low cost and constant communication are seen as a boon for a social species. And until the openbci people can ship a 'here is an image that runs right as a container/image here and here' what incentive is there for the interested but not hardcore to buy and set up something to gather enough data to say "there is this effect"?
The incentive for the creators and entities that make money or establish some form of behaviour control via these devices have no reason to spend effort to establish "hey they suck for this reason". And while you can find people who remember things like the Stazi in East Germany, how many east Germans are going "yup, no smart phone tracking device for me!" Other than Richard Stallman - how many people are passing on cell phones for privacy reasons? These small screens are too damn convenient. And what kind of risk would they have to represent to you before you'd say "nope".
posted by rough ashlar at 12:52 PM on August 7, 2017
Steven Pinker, an actual cognitive neuroscientist:
posted by Joseph Gurl at 3:14 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
Critics of new media sometimes use science itself to press their case, citing research that shows how “experience can change the brain.” But cognitive neuroscientists roll their eyes at such talk. Yes, every time we learn a fact or skill the wiring of the brain changes; it’s not as if the information is stored in the pancreas. But the existence of neural plasticity does not mean the brain is a blob of clay pounded into shape by experience.(emphasis mine)
posted by Joseph Gurl at 3:14 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
turkeybrain: I would put that back on Twenge for overselling the conclusion. There's a discussion we should be having here but making such sweeping claims actively distracts from it, especially when trying to push the idea that this single factor explains a huge variety of complex social trends and that it's conveniently one old people were already blaming.
Speaking of which, I was curious about past work and found that in 2013 the thing destroying young people was the self-esteem moment:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/06/science/seeing-narcissists-everywhere.html
The NYT asked other psychologists about that work and it's eerie how completely the criticism for relying on correlations, ignoring studies which came to different conclusions, etc. could be copied into a story about this work and still apply.
posted by adamsc at 5:39 PM on August 7, 2017
Speaking of which, I was curious about past work and found that in 2013 the thing destroying young people was the self-esteem moment:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/06/science/seeing-narcissists-everywhere.html
The NYT asked other psychologists about that work and it's eerie how completely the criticism for relying on correlations, ignoring studies which came to different conclusions, etc. could be copied into a story about this work and still apply.
posted by adamsc at 5:39 PM on August 7, 2017
Really well said gusottertrout. If my focus and attention span had not been shredded by our new hive mind I would have written exactly that. Check out the brain on gusottertrout!
posted by Meatbomb at 11:29 PM on August 7, 2017
posted by Meatbomb at 11:29 PM on August 7, 2017
Adamsc: The important thing is not whether these studies are properly vetted or have proper methodology, but whether they fit into the reoccuring Metafilter theme of "Modern technology and the youth are broken."
Correlation and Causation can be ignored, as long as it fits into the proper narrative.
posted by happyroach at 12:39 AM on August 8, 2017
Correlation and Causation can be ignored, as long as it fits into the proper narrative.
posted by happyroach at 12:39 AM on August 8, 2017
So we shouldn't show any amount of concern until there's a finalized study? Moderation for everything but the internet? I guess I don't get it.
posted by Room 641-A at 5:46 AM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Room 641-A at 5:46 AM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
Why would you see this as a special Metafilter thing? It's a topic of broad interest.
posted by thelonius at 5:56 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by thelonius at 5:56 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
« Older The Ethics of Adjusting Your Assets to Qualify for... | In Beijing, 20 Million People Pretend to Live Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by MikeWarot at 10:20 AM on August 5, 2017 [2 favorites]