Slashdot Mirror
Addicted to Information?
SiMac writes "According to this New York Times article, two Harvard faculty members say that information causes a "dopamine squirt" in humans, a rush similar to that given by narcotics. Just as narcotics are addictive, information is as well. They've given the disorder of information addiction the name 'pseudo-ADD' because it tends to cause somewhat ADD-like symptoms."
Damn this is interesting! I must know more about it! More! More! And for some strange reason I want some twinkies.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
This article essentially states that 'being connected' is distracting and shortens attention spans, and that it's also pleasurable. So far so good- but putting a new medical label on it seems akin to creating a 'eating cookies is pleasurable disorder' or 'loud sounds and flashing lights harm one's ability to focus disorder'. It's common sense. Medical science nowadays gets excited when they reinvent the wheel.
I can stop anytime I want.
for playing online at work? Americans with Disabilities Act protects us, eh? Kickass.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Just wait until information is added to the list of forbidden substances, and included in the War on Drugs.
The pair have their own term for this condition: pseudo-attention deficit disorder. Its sufferers do not have actual A.D.D., but, influenced by technology and the pace of modern life, have developed shorter attention spans. They become frustrated with long-term projects, thrive on the stress of constant fixes of information, and physically crave the bursts of stimulation from checking e-mail or voice mail or answering the phone.
I wonder if these are the kind of managers who F-up a project just because they like the yelling and screeming associated with emergency efforts to get it back on track. They like the scenes of Trek where the captain is yelling at the engineers to fix something now else they will be vaperized.
Table-ized A.I.
Did anyone else read this instead?
Hate me!
The article doesn't say you get a shot of dopamine when you connect, it just quotes some psycologist saying it's *like* a dopamine squirt. Nowhere do they site research backing up that claim.
The whole article is really just a set of case studies of people who do many things at once all the time, and who find that makes them unhappy for one reason or another. Throw in a few off the cuff, baseless statements by shrinks, and the NYT has made a roll-your-own disorder: pseudo-ADD. It's not even it's own disorder, just a fake version of another hotly debated syndrome.
When I see real scientific data showing that A) there is an actual neurochemical response to data that can lead to addiction, B) that this addiction can and has happened in real people, and C) that it has caused these people's quality of life to be reduced, I'll believe it's a disorder. Right now, though, all we've got is some unhappy businessmen and a few shrinks looking to make a name for themselves.
Narrative
Curiosity
John: Hi... I'm John.
ADDA Crowd: Hi, John!
John: And I'm a Salshdot addict...
Seriously, though, to whatever extent this can be meaningfully described as an addiction, I think it might be better compared to over-eating disorders (bingeing) than to drug addictions, at least in terms of treatment.
With drug addictions, the idea is to minimize the dosage, hopefully to zero or at least to some very low "maintenance level". But with over-eating disorders, it's not just a matter of avoiding food, but eating healthy amounts of healthy food, and giving your body time to digest it properly. The analogy to treating a compulsive information disorder seems obvious. (Ob:IANAD.)
One could also make obvious comparisons to the ubiquity of unhealthy food in much of society and the ubiquity of bad information. Not just incorrect information, but badly prepared information from bad "ingredients", presented in ways that can't be meaningfully "digested".
Also, I bet there's an information-access disorder analogous to anorexia -- people who avoid as much information as they can.
No, the article is about being addicted to information. People who regularly read Slashdot are addicted to misinformation.
You're kidding, right? So it's more productive for me to track down that one last news story on an obscure subject then it would be to leave early and get more billable hours?
"The more information the better?"
Really?
Opportunity cost, my anonymous friend, opportunity cost.
Speaking as somebody with the email tag of "data omnivore", (used to be "Mycroft") I can assure you that while more information can be good, making money, dating, exercising, and a dozen other things, can be better.
"Hello everybody. My name is Rustin and I'm a dataholic."
Yeah, when you have an idle moment in the airport and you start reading the ingredient list on the granola bar because suddenly you care, then you know that the pursuit of data has passed beyond the rational and entered the, yes, that's right, addictive.
Rustin
Data is the lever, rigor the fulcrum, brains the force that drives it all.
Presuming you're asking "Why do I hate school?":
It's because the information isn't coming at the rate you'd like, and you feel like you're wasting your time doing B.S. tasks (exams, papers, projects, etc.) which really mean nothing in a 'real world' context.
Sure, it sucks. I barely scraped by myself, but I kept at it because it's the only game in town and I knew that if I dropped out I'd be stuck flipping burgers for the rest of my life.
Hang in there. Once you're done, you can learn things at a rate you can only dream of now.
I watched a program on PBS some months back (NOVA, perhaps) that chronicled a series of scientific studies that demonstrated women exhibited a natural ability to work at multiple things at the same time ("multi-task"?), and men were able to accomplish successfully only one task at a time. The inference was that the natural talents women have for raising children and taking care of families lend themselves to being excellent secretaries (politically incorrect, perhaps, but a valid example of having to do multiple things at the same time).
In one of the videotaped studies, a man was shown trying to pull off the secretarial equivalent of walking while chewing gum -- he was given a series of tasks which included making sets of photocopies while being subjected to a repeated series of interruptions that included a ringing telephone. To sum up, he didn't perform any of his tasks very well, whereas the woman in the identical situation performed all of them efficiently.
I don't know what long-term effects of information overload are on men or women, but I do know that while parties are fun, trying to have a real conversation with someone at one is a waste of time. Then again, the same can be said of most parties. The distractions can be fun, but often a waste of time.
Man, more and more every personality trait is becoming a 'disease' complete with drugs to get rid of it. People talk about how this is caused by over psychologicalizing everything, but actually I think it has to do with our war on drugs. People think taking drugs for anything other then being sick is "wrong" so they convince themselves that they are "sick" in order to take drugs.
clearly, this is a disease. recreational pharmophobic syndrome, and should be cured by smoking liberal doses of pot.
Seriously though, if people want to take drugs to change parts of their psyche that they want changed, I say go for it. But I'd rather not see everything labeled as a 'disease' to be 'treated'
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
The articles analogy to "ADD" and many references to it within the slashdot article reminds me of a joke I heard recently I'd like to share.
Q: How many kids with ADD does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Hey! Wanna go ride bikes?!?
Beware blue cats moving at
Here's the definition from the Harvard Medical School Division on Addictions:
Addiction is the compulsive use of a substance or activity resulting in physical, psychological, or social harm to the user; the user continues in this pattern of behavior despite the harms that result. Addiction is differentiated from psychological dependence and physical dependence. Psychological dependence is the feeling that someone has when they think that drugs or activities are necessary to achieve a feeling of well-being. Physical dependence is marked by the development of tolerance to a drug or activity's effects so that increased amounts of a drug or activity are needed to obtain the desired effect. Tolerance also reveals its presence by the development of withdrawal symptoms when the drug or activity is stopped for a sufficient time. These matters are more complex than often thought.
And here's the definition of addiction from the National Institutes of Health's MedLine.
Drug dependence (addiction) is compulsive use of a substance despite negative consequences which can be severe; drug abuse is simply excessive use of a drug or use of a drug for purposes for which it was not medically intended. Physical dependence on a substance (needing a drug to function) is not necessary or sufficient to define addiction. There are some substances which don't cause addiction but do cause physical dependence (for example, some blood pressure medications) and substances which cause addiction but not classic physical dependence (cocaine withdrawal, for example, doesn't have symptoms like vomiting and chills; it is mainly characterized by depression).
What you described is a voluntary lack of self-control. I think that's called gluttony.
I loved to buy a few magazines and sit in a cafe and read them and write in my journal or sketch someone. People talked to people that they didn't know in public places. Now I choose my cafes according to the speed and expense of their WiFi connections and the top floor of my favorite cafe in Seattle resembles a computer lab. I don't often buy magazines as I usually already read the content online.
The last time I tried to spend an afternoon in a cafe without my laptop and a good book by an author I enjoyed, I found myself quickly getting very bored and cut the afternoon short. You can't go back I guess.
Slashdot itself is a perfect example of pseudo-attention deficit disorder. As I often post comments to stories late in the life of the story, I rarely think that many people read what I have to write as their focus has already passed on to the newer story. You can see it in how quickly people scramble to post their half-formed thoughts... which often get modded up higher than they deserve by virtue of being there first.
That's not a dig... just an observation.
"Under the spreading chestnut tree, I sold you and you sold me."
This is simply how we study things. We now know that there are groups of people who react "differently" to certain sets of stimuli, and we have studied the phenomenon enough to have come to a general, but highly contested decision to treat such people with stimulants of various sorts. w00t. What now? Well, while certain researchers delve into the biochemical, genetic, physiological details of this condition, others will subspecialize in particular demographic slices of the group.
That's what grad school is for, isn't it? "Oh, oh, find something that noone else has really put too much time into and go write up a really long paper and come back in a few years so we can yell at you for a few hours".
Even outside of academia, the mentality is pervasive. This is why there's an aisle in stores for "cleaners". There are cleaning products for every imaginable material, for variants of materials. For vinyl, acrylic, plastics, laminates, polished surfaces, glass, concrete, stainless steel, silver, marble, stained wood, unstained wood, painted surfaces, etc... if we really didn't think that way, all we'd have is soap and water.
In any case, I'm glad we do these things. Of course, I am currently being strongly swayed by the prescribed afternoon dose of methylphenidate which is just now (aaah) breaking the blood-brain-barrier. Without people digging frantically into statistical data concerning behavior patterns, I wouldn't have my Ritalin.
I dropped out of school because of it. I would spend 3-4 hours checking slashdot and browsing the web at a time! After I post messages like this I somehow have to check them every few hours.
I saw a phsycologist who specializes in disabilities because my ADHD was alot worse and I began to show signs of lethargic-ness.( If there is such a word ). Nothing interested me anymore and I could not focus.
Eventually I unplugged from the net and went through withdrawl symptoms. I got a shitty job since I no longer was in school and the economy went into the crapper. I had trouble at first but my attention span improved.
You made a reference to white Castle (which has shitty burgers by the way) and food addiction. In some people who are severely depressed it can effect their lives and jobs just like Internet addiction. Some people are move vulnerable then others. But yes they can be serious depending on the individuals genetic makeup to dopamine overload. I come from a family who has a few alcoholics. In my case I am susceptible because of the way my brain is wired from my genes.
http://saveie6.com/
BTW--the word you're looking for is 'lethargy'. I'm sorry to hear that.
:) as well. I personally can *see* how my sometimes short attention span can take control and screw me up.
I fear the I may be mildly ADD (though not ADHD, as anyone who has met me will know, I'm anything but hyper.
OTOH, look at my vantage point. Since I'm able to control it, and sometimes even use it to my own benefit (when working, as someone on the ADHD story said, I, too, am able to call upon my 'inner spaz' so to speak to get major productivity benefit). A large percentage of the hacker/geek culture would probably meet the DSM-IV criteria for ADD and/or ADHD. Yet, it seems that most of us are able to function perfectly well in society.
Does this mean that we ALL have a disorder, or does it mean that this is just another one of the standard personality variations found in differing inviduals.
At what point is it a 'disorder' vs. a 'personality type'. Do you see what I'm getting at?
My journal has hot
Q: What is an addiction?
A: An addiction is something you disapprove of, and yet enjoy doing enough to override your own disapproval, so you pretend to yourself you can't control it.
Q: Why is there a word "addiction"?
A: It serves the same function as mediaeval demons of temptation: it's a socially accepted way of excusing yourself for hypocrisy between your moral opinions and your preferred actions. There's a huge puritannical streak in "western" culture which disapproves of self-destructive pleasant activities. It's nicer for your self esteem to see yourself as a "disease victm" rather than a "libertine sot".
Q: Why can't I kick my addiction?
A: Because you don't want to, not as much as you want to carry on.
Q: Why did I succeed in kicking my addiction?
A: Because you did want to, or something else showed up that fulfilled the same function better.
Q: What about addiction cures (12step, religion, meds, etc)?
A: They are alternatives that give you equivalent pleasure/stimulation/attention/whatever as your addiction did, only they're more morally acceptable to you, so you don't agonize over "needing" them. Smile, now you're addicted to religion/etc/whatever. Don't it feel grand?
Q: So what about all this medical stuff?
A: It consists largely of overblown readings of the blindingly obvious. Yes, pleasure has a neurochemical form. Yes, people seek pleasure, and will make a habit out of consistently pleasant things. No this does not constitute some sort of disease. But it pays in funding to "research", rather than debunk, addictions. And if you can invent a new addiction, people will suck up to you and make laws forbidding it, which will make you feel grand and help puff up your ego.
There are only two industries that call their customers "users".