Live data from Hacker News

The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

jonathanhaidt.substack.com

71–80 of 565 posts

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The increase in suicide rates for both genders (but especially females) are astounding. I really don't believe that any changes in treatment have been so radical as to cause this to manifest the way it has.

Tell someone with an issue with their physical condition that it is because of diet and lack of exercise and many would change habits, tell them it's due to a incurable but perhaps treatable cancer and some will chose suicide. Tell kids that they are unhappy due to choices made in day to day life and they might change those choices, tell them it's due to a incurable but maybe treatable issue with their brain and some…

[deleted]

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#72

This is a good piece, with the author consciously examining their own biases and assumptions. I do think underdiagnosis is an issue; when I sought mental health treatment in an earlier period, there was a veritable line of people telling me I couldn't be mentally ill because my clothes were clean and my sentences coherent. I think the author errs in not projecting his data far back enough into the past and looking fo…

> I'm honestly appalled by the pervasive tendency to rely on repetition of cliches in favor of original communication, for example.

Shaka, when the walls fell ;)

honestly there's an interesting argument to be made there that memes and cliches provide a higher symbol density to our communications via shared context/subtext. A meme has additional layers of context and nuance that are implicitly carried along with the actual words themselves, it has higher "meaning-density".

Whether or not you like them, this is how human communications are evolving, and have been for a long time, particularly as we reshape language around our new technologies. "lol" as an interjective is a tonality carrier, just like vocal tone. Emojis are short textual-form memes. Etc etc. Image memes as high-density multilayered communication are just another form.

I mean half the time when I write out a longform comment, the response I get is "I ain't reading all that shit" even here on HN. ;). People just want higher symbol density, it's the same reason they don't read the article or watch the video. The human brain is a meaning-density machine and we inherently seek ways to increase the amount and preciseness of meaning-interchange. Higher meaning-density per symbol is a great way to do that given our physical limitations at processing more symbols.

In ironic contrast to the rise of youtube-driven content production - I think people inherently crave symbol density and meaning. But since we've monetized attention, there's a perverse incentive to decrease symbol density/meaning-density to allow greater time for monetization... but I think that also rubs against what our brains want to do.

In the aggregate, the way memes bounce around communities nowadays is also not dissimilar to a neural network working with higher-order objects instead of zeros and ones or floats. Memes that don't get passed between groups are the ones that are less relevant - so we have activation energy in some form, short-term storage, and cross-group linkage between neurons. And the memes are symbolic encodings of some groups of features (concepts). They are an emergent cluster of features that activates various groups reliably.

Higher meaning-density is also the reason some people prefer face-to-face communication or phone calls. Things like facial expressions and tone of voice also increase meaning-density as well. People say things like "it's less ambiguous/more immediate" but I think that's because of those sub-channels increasing the meaningfulness. And while meme culture/emojis isn't all good, maybe it's best viewed as replacing some of those sub-channels we lost in the shift from verbal to written communication rather than a regression to repetitive communication.

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#73
It's a pretty good start. "Kids these days" doesn't explain teens' self reported problems, or objective data such as suicide and self harm. Clearly something really is going on. Is social media the culprit? Maybe a case will be made in subsequent articles. One thing I don't see mentioned is the fact that - regardless of whether it comes through "old school" or "new school" media - kids today are barraged by negative news. Incomes for most have stagnated (at best). Costs have skyrocketed (especially housing, health care, and education). Inflation is back. The political situation is an absolute dumpster file. Evidence of climate change is all around. And most of these things seem to be getting worse. Advances in science and technology are positive, but not quite as dramatic as going to the moon or as life-changing as electronics and plastics a couple of generations ago. If my life after ChadGPT is different than my life before, it's likely to be in negative ways.

Who can blame kids for feeling overwhelmed or defeated, which often end up being expressed as not-obviously-related mental (or even physical) health issues? They are, after all, facing a bleaker future than we did, including my own GenX and the Cold War. If social media is part of the problem, then we need to identify how much it's a problem itself vs. as an avenue for a constant flood of depressing news.

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#74

While I don't doubt that social media can have a negative impact on teens... my own experience as the parent of a teen is slightly different and doesn't point to social media as being a driver. At least in my case. I have a teenager that struggles with anxiety, low self-esteem and depression. He's incredibly smart and is an honors student in high school. BUT he also thinks he's terrible and he's incapable of acceptin…

How much gaming does he do, and what kind of games, if you don't mind?

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#75
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The always online I think is a big issue, because now if you're not invited to things or not popular it's very in your face with livestreams that your friends or schoolmates are all having fun together at that exact moment without you.

I think it's also that you and all your friends are invited to completely different livestreams. No one feels left out even though they physically are. Like it or not, you're supposed to fit in with people around you. If you can't do that then there's something either wrong with you or them. That inherent urge to fit in is being digitally compensated, and I don't think it's healthy to avoid being challenged by all th…

Interesting take. I guess your and my high school experiences were very different.

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#77
post #2

Another possible explanation is that we are simply diagnosing these kind of mental health issues better – due to decrease in stigmatization and/or more attention to it – but that our treatment is worse than doing nothing, and is leading to higher rates of self-harm and suicide. I have no idea if that's the case – and if it is a factor at all it probably doesn't account for all of it – but it seems something worth exp…

That would imply that suicides would at least stay the same, or, most probably, decrease due to earlier phycological support.

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's also that you and all your friends are invited to completely different livestreams. No one feels left out even though they physically are. Like it or not, you're supposed to fit in with people around you. If you can't do that then there's something either wrong with you or them. That inherent urge to fit in is being digitally compensated, and I don't think it's healthy to avoid being challenged by all th…

Interesting take. I guess your and my high school experiences were very different.

I was in hs from 2009 to 13 and it was a lonely, niche road filled with watching youtube rants lol.

This comes from my experience thinking I didn't need to fit in for a very long time.

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#79
While I don't doubt that social media can drive some of these mental health issues, I think most teenagers are simply stressed from the constant work that's necessary for the college admissions process.

I'm 24, so I would have been a teenager in 2012, but I didn't have a smartphone until I was 16 or so. My high school experience consisted almost entirely of school, studying, and running (my primary extracurricular). Most of the little extra time I had remaining would go to additional extracurricular activities that had the potential to enhance my college application. I only really got to socialize by talking to my teammates on our runs.

As a result, even when I had extra time I was so burnt out and stressed from everything else that I felt consumed by anxiety. I would sometimes start crying spontaneously after I got home in the evenings. Things only started getting better when I started seeing a therapist and worked on my issues over the second half of my high school experience. Not everyone is so lucky.

If we want a healthier society, we need to take a step back and give teenagers a chance to actually live life. Sure, less social media would help, but it won't solve the root of the problem. Today's society demands so much from adolescents for so little in return. It's very easy to think that you're a failure if you don't know exactly who you are and what you want to be at age 17, and that's not a fair expectation for any 17 year old. We shouldn't be surprised that many break under this kind of pressure.

Re: The teen mental illness epidemic began around 2012

#80

Okay, data is great, but the conclusions at the end have almost nothing to do with the data. They're a bunch of unsupported assumptions about what we've changed that must have caused all of this. It includes two separate links to his article about how we're ruining the children by coddling them with woke bullshit. Here's the tagline: "In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding pr…

This is not an accurate reading of the Conclusion section. He just sums up what has been observed and does not mention any causal factors. Earlier, he explicitly says that causal factos will be covered by other posts. While he indeed links to another article, he claims at no point in this article that coddling is a factor here.
Post reply on HN