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

151–160 of 580 posts

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

#151

Post by [deleted] »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #111
creshal wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe our parents were indeed right when they told us we are glued to our devices and should go touch grass. And yet, their generation seems to be the most addicted these days, and the most unhinged when it comes to following conspiracy theories.

This is a good point. I suspect that one reason is that "digital natives" have been raised with the tech, so have sort of a "natural resistance," yet the oldtimers were hooked almost immediately. For myself, I have been using electronic communications, almost since they were invented (BBSes and UUNet, anyone?), so I have "more resistance" than most of my peers. Yet, I still have to stay off of Facebook. This is prett…

[deleted]

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

#152

Post by kelipso »

zzbzq wrote: post #139
knallfrosch wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kids are coddled which makes them fragile and kids are addicted to phones which makes them depressed. Can you explain where you see a contradiction? Those concepts seem unrelated.

Seems perfectly contradictory to me, "We need to shelter our kids from the big bad social media because they are too fragile to handle it"

Right and "We need to shelter our kids from crack cocaine because they are too fragile to handle it" is perfectly contradictory too.

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

#153

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

freework wrote: post #118

If you ask 10 different people why they are depressed, you'll get 10 different answers. This illustrated why I think the scientific method is the wrong way to go about understanding the human mind. Also, if you ask a depressed person why they are depressed, they may not know exactly why they are depressed. I spent my entire high school years depressed. It wasn't until a few years after I graduated college before I re…

I am willing to agree that it is still more art than science in its current state, but I personally think we are slowly moving towards a replicable mind after all -- a terrifying prospect, because it would truly prove 'free will' is an illusion. It currently seems impossible due to sheer number of factors with overlapping effects. I don't think it is impossible though.

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

#154

Post by hudsonjr »

softwaredoug wrote: post #113

As a parent. It's a hard topic. And not black and white. For the 10+ crowd, the days of kids roaming the streets, finding their friends and playing are gone. I think the causes for this are complicated, and social media (and screens) are just one part of the puzzle. Consider a few things: 1. The percentage of households with kids has gradually declined over time, while the percentage of retirees has gone up. So you j…

I wonder if some of the lack of teenager tolerance has to do with larger congregations of teens due to social media. When I was young with no cell phone it was a non-trivial exercise to get a few friends to coordinate to meet and go to a movie.

Now you can start with 4 or 5 people, and if their friends and friends of friends start to get looped in then you have a larger group. Now instead of 0 or 1 obnoxious kids in a group, you may have 3-4 obnoxious ones and a much larger group.

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

#155

Post by knallfrosch »

iamerroragent wrote: post #55
knallfrosch wrote: post #11

Kudos to Mr Haidt. I wouldn't have the patience to explain over and over again why being addicted to your phone and comparing your looks to global superstars makes girls lonely and depressed. People will argue over percentage points of an r-value instead of simply asking three girls whether using Instagram four hours a day makes them happy.

Okay but how are we supposed to get teen girls not to compare themselves to the looks of global stars? This existed before social media. At best I can see it being a catalyst here and so sure limit or ban social media (at least for under 18s ~ 25s, whatever we agree on is a developed adult brain). Lowering the percentage of teens with mental health issues is a good thing. However that doesn't stop teens from comparin…

This article is about making people even acknowledge that social media is a or the problem. Acknowledging that one has a problem is the first step. Unfortunately, I don't have a societal solution ready.

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

#156

Post by dexterdog »

1827162 wrote: post #116
creshal wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe our parents were indeed right when they told us we are glued to our devices and should go touch grass. And yet, their generation seems to be the most addicted these days, and the most unhinged when it comes to following conspiracy theories.

Likely because that generation was raised to believe everything they were told, starting from an early age with school, religion, then with television and newspapers, etc. The younger generation were raised with media that spread obvious untruths such as conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, etc. and they learned to think more critically about what they are reading.

That is an awfully broad brush you are painting with there. It's also painfully obvious which of the two groups you are in.

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

#157

Post by afthonos »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #117
1827162 wrote: post #94

I think it's the total visibility that's causing mental illness. There is no space where you can be with your friends, screw up, and not have it become known to everyone in your peer group. There's little space to make mistakes. No space to be yourself. You are under the watchful gaze of your friends, i.e. peer surveillance, nearly all of the time. Which induces stifling conformity. Everything's under constant scruti…

If this is the case, is this reflected in the suicide rate of small, nosy towns? Small towns are notorious for everyone knowing everyone else’s business.

There’s a difference, though, between everyone having access to what you have done, and people in your circle of trust gossiping about you to people outside of it. First, you can theoretically figure out the gossip and exclude them. Second, the gossip gossips about things _they_ find interesting, not about things random bored trolls find juicy. Thus, the odds of your faux pas exposing you to abuse are naturally lower.

In other words, “small towns have no secrets” is an oversimplification.

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

#158

Post by zamnos »

bradleyjg wrote: post #90
psychphysic wrote: post #21

It's quite hard for me to judge this topic because I am so thoroughly convinced that social media is toxic for mental health. I think unfortunately it has become pervasive enough that you can't avoid experiencing it's toxic influence. There has been a complete loss in any interest in meeting a middle ground and like the use of stocks in medieval times the concept of cancellation is much more power than any reality. T…

Twitter really is the worst. At least the other platforms have some good mixed in with the bad. It is nice to stay vaguely connected to people in a sort-of holiday card way. Twitter has nothing to redeem it. Even in communities where there’s attempts at substantive conversation the medium makes a horrible mess to follow.

Not sure why you're ignoring the various official and unofficial accounts which use Twitter to distribute information during natural disasters which has saved lives, in a way that RSS can't replicate.

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

#159

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

frostburg wrote: post #60
cmilton wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think it is?

I'm not sure about what you're asking, but taking a guess: I think that it's safer to have children raised by a larger amount of figures (primarily the parents, but also grandparents in a multi-generational household, other relatives if they exist, family friends - this would have been other people in the tribe or village traditionally - etc.). Having all the responsibility fall on two mostly unsupervised, inexperien…

The issue with humans is that when everyone has the responsibility, no one has the responsibility. The moment those kids are 'raised by a village' or however many participants of the family, it automatically becomes a lot harder unless, somehow, the tribe is much more cohesive and can reinforce effectively the same rules consistently.

I would personally argue that the "traditional roles" seem to help the offspring on several levels, but I didn't see many studies ( as opposed to non-traditional that is ) to that effect.

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

#160

Post by 1827162 »

dexterdog wrote: post #156
1827162 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likely because that generation was raised to believe everything they were told, starting from an early age with school, religion, then with television and newspapers, etc. The younger generation were raised with media that spread obvious untruths such as conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, etc. and they learned to think more critically about what they are reading.

That is an awfully broad brush you are painting with there. It's also painfully obvious which of the two groups you are in.

Yes, quite possibly overgeneralization there. Thinking on it....
Post reply on HN