Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

jonathanhaidt.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 580 posts

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#31

Post by YuukiRey »

chrisco255 wrote: post #18
YuukiRey wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which period are you referring to? According to https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/i/101249738/increases-in-... this is not the case.

There's a hard line drawn on that chart in the year 2012, as if it's some sort of significant outlier in the data, except that it's not. The upward trend in suicides seems to begin in 2007.

That's not why the line was drawn.

> In the rest of this Substack post, I offer a preview of the evidence that a mental illness epidemic emerged around 2012

All of the charts have this line to highlight how the chart relates to the supposed theory of "problems starting in 2012". Not every chart will show anomalies around that time though.

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#32

Post by frostburg »

joenot443 wrote: post #20
frostburg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "coddling" one has always been a bad faith argument; a post hoc rationalization for political goals.

You’ll have to be more specific. What political goals do you think are being accomplished here? For 11 years now Haidt has very deliberately identified as a centrist, partially because folks like yourself unfamiliar with his work find habit in dismissing his research as being politically motivated. Just because a researchers findings don’t align with YOUR politics doesn’t make the research itself politically motivate…

I mean in general; I assume you're aware of the jokes on how ancient complaints about the newer generations being weak, disrespectful et. are.

I don't see how Haidt identifying as a centrist has any bearing on anything; the idea that "centrism" is apolitical is also untenable.

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#33

Post by jackmott42 »

ThomPete wrote: post #12
woodruffw wrote: post #5

Just to levy a single criticism among several: I find Haidt’s rebuttal of the climate change hypothesis unconvincing: fears around climate change are not “energizing” in the way that prior crises are, in a significant part because public sentiment around climate change is that we’re already doomed in a way that isn’t really possible with social crises. Similarly: I don’t think most teenage girls were voraciously read…

Climate change is now climate catastrophism. It's unfortunately many times more doomer today than ever. And while climate itself is not energizing, "doing something about it to save the world' is because it's simple even if it's in-effective. A phenomena like Greta Thunberg wouldn't be possible if it wasn't for that. And wind and solar and tesla and other avenue that doesn't really do anything other than let us waste…

Figure heads for causes like Greta aren't a new thing, sir.

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#34

Post by ajkjk »

Hmm, he seems to think that the criminal standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) is equivalent to p<0.05 in the sciences. That is highly dubious. I'm surprised he doesn't know the by-now standard belief that p<0.05 is, itself, a criminal standard of proof (lol).

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#35

Post by jostmey »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #16

> girls who spend more than 4 hours a day on social media have two to three times the rate of depression as girls who spend an hour or less. Not that it proves anything, but the converse argument, that depressed girls spend more time on social media or online in general, should also be examined. If the data could support this thesis to a similar degree, there is no conclusive statement about social media really induc…

But that’s not the basis of his argument. His argument is based on the timing of when social media usage started. I mint argue 3-4 hours or social media use alone didn’t cause depression, but had to be combined with a causal factor

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#36

Post by AnimalMuppet »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #16

> girls who spend more than 4 hours a day on social media have two to three times the rate of depression as girls who spend an hour or less. Not that it proves anything, but the converse argument, that depressed girls spend more time on social media or online in general, should also be examined. If the data could support this thesis to a similar degree, there is no conclusive statement about social media really induc…

> I am always ready to yell at the cloud for that.

Yell at the cloud? Nicely done.

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#37

Post by DharmaPolice »

thih9 wrote: post #8

What about the increase in mental health awareness (including: better education and reducing the stigma) - is being able to detect more cases contributing in a meaningful way to the overall increase?

I'm not sure this would account for the increased number of girls allegedly cutting/poisoning themselves. According to the graph on an older article on his substack, the number of girls admitted to hospital from self-harm has gone up by 48% since 2010. Perhaps some of these cases would have been categorised as accidental in the past (or not even taken to hospital maybe) but all of them?

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#38

Post by frostburg »

voldacar wrote: post #29
frostburg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "coddling" one has always been a bad faith argument; a post hoc rationalization for political goals.

What political objective is accomplished by not coddling children?

That's the point; children would die otherwise, by the very biological nature of our species.

What the various kinds of "avoid coddling" types want is determining the details of what should be allowed to traumatize them, specifically, in order to shape society.

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#39

Post by LapsangGuzzler »

raxxorraxor wrote: post #16

> girls who spend more than 4 hours a day on social media have two to three times the rate of depression as girls who spend an hour or less. Not that it proves anything, but the converse argument, that depressed girls spend more time on social media or online in general, should also be examined. If the data could support this thesis to a similar degree, there is no conclusive statement about social media really induc…

Something has to be behind the seemingly coordinated rise in depression among children globally, that's the leading indicator he's using to assess the problem. His argument is that it can't be anything other than social media.

You're making the case in the micro scale: what is one person's relationship with depression and social media, and he's arguing in the macro scale. Something has caused depression to spike in children worldwide. What could it be?

Re: Why some researchers think I’m wrong about social media and mental illness

#40

Post by mawadev »

It is truly remarkable to which great lengths people go to justify their unhealthy relationship with social media. It is nearly the same as telling an alcoholic they have an alcohol problem and then hearing excuse after excuse and re-framing and mental gymnastics to jump around the elephant in the room.

I'm glad write-ups like this one are a thing.

Maybe our parents were indeed right when they told us we are glued to our devices and should go touch grass.

Post reply on HN