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

491–500 of 580 posts

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

#491

Post by CWuestefeld »

freejazz wrote: post #386
CWuestefeld wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your whole chain of responses here running a motte and bailey on both sides. On the one hand, you're pretending that the most silly extremists on the right are central examples; while on the other hand, pretending that there exist no extremists on the left.

Responding to an actual poster here isn't that. Also, who are the alleged extremists on the left? You are just revealing your personal disagreement with my positions.

My mistake. None of the positions held by anyone on the left is extreme in the least.

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

#492

Post by MichaelZuo »

rocketbop wrote: post #489
MichaelZuo wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then it would be brought to their attention? And they can respond? If it's never brought to their attention, it's pointless to worry about.

Obviously doctor, you’ve never been a thirteen year old girl.

So?

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

#493

Post by hgsgm »

bmelton wrote: post #392
asdff wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is unique to social media. Try dressing different from the norm in the 1990s before people even had cellphones in class and you'd definitely end up ostracized. It would be even worse because there's no way to find people who might be different like you, unlike today where there are forums and other websites.

> Try dressing different from the norm in the 1990s before people even had cellphones in class and you'd definitely end up ostracized I think that's a part of OP's point. After that, if you wanted, you could go away to college and buy normal clothes and reinvent yourself completely. Nowadays, if you're a person who agrees for whatever reason is a shitheel, you're that same shitheel forever, and the inertia required t…

Why do you think that? Most people don't have the energy to keep track of people they disagreed with once in the past.

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

#494

Post by Barrin92 »

asdff wrote: post #340
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…

I don't think this is unique to social media. Try dressing different from the norm in the 1990s before people even had cellphones in class and you'd definitely end up ostracized. It would be even worse because there's no way to find people who might be different like you, unlike today where there are forums and other websites.

>I don't think this is unique to social media.

Not just that, it's one of the biggest themes in modern American fiction before social media. Most of PK Dick's work deals with the opressiveness of middle class culture, mental illness, people who don't fit in and how these things overlap. You had Fight Club or Taxi Driver on violence and isolation particular of men, or American Beauty on the conformist and almost totalitarian nature of the suburbs, etc. It's been a major topic in American culture for decades.

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

#495

Post by hgsgm »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #460
Nextgrid wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between some completely random person taking a picture and your circle of friends is that it's very unlikely for the former to reach anyone you know, where as with the latter it's a guarantee.

But then it would be brought to their attention? And they can respond? If it's never brought to their attention, it's pointless to worry about.

How does "responding" help to protect against gang bullying?

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

#496

Post by hgsgm »

screye wrote: post #167
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…

This is the inevitable conclusions of stranger danger and car-based suburbanization. When people only access the world via car and avoid walking around, they never build familiarity with their own neighborhood. All locations worth stepping out of the car for, are miles away and behind security gates. Low density also means that 1 stranger can actually do damage, unlike dense areas where there are at least a few stran…

Suburbs and cars already existed 60 years ago, and that was before cell phones for coordinating meetups.

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

#497

Post by hgsgm »

hudsonjr wrote: post #154
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…

Before cell phones, we didn't worry about making group plans. Everyone just went to the movies or the mall or the Taco Bell parking lot and everyone else went to.

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

#498

Post by pxoe »

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…

>no space to be yourself

not only there are multiple spaces to be yourself within, you can be yourself in different ways and under different identities. there's "side profiles", "finstas", etc., there's more flexibility and more ways to express yourself, across all different sides of you. like, if someone thinks that people just use one identity and hang out around a certain circle of people in a certain space (or set of spaces), that just doesn't align with reality. people make side pages, pseudonyms and identities, with those having different circles of people they interact with, and different audiences, within one space/platform or across multiple different ones. just like, a handful of apps, insta, twitter, tiktok, discord, all may have different circles and dynamics. and it's fine - and it works - because irl spaces/circles/identities, do play out in a similar way. (like, differences between home/friends/school/work/public/etc.)

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

#499

Post by zeroonetwothree »

jeremyjh wrote: post #447
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…

A lot of this rings true but is this a theory that explains a sharp bend in 2012?

There is no sharp bend in 2012. I can easily interpret it as an gradual increase more from 2010 or so. Eyeballing charts is not science.

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

#500

Post by zeroonetwothree »

somedude895 wrote: post #50
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…

The longitudinal factor is essential in this though. Teen mental health issues skyrocketed since 2012. That's really the whole point of his rebuttal of Proposition 1.

We are back to the rates of the 1980s. What caused mental issues to be so high back the ? In the long term it’s the 90s that seem like a strangely low level of issues.
Post reply on HN