Slashdot Mirror
Tech Tools Fostering "Mini Generation Gaps"
Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times has an interesting report on the iGeneration, born in the '90s and this decade, comparing them to the Net Generation, born in the 1980s. The Net Generation spend two hours a day talking on the phone and still use e-mail frequently while the iGeneration — conceivably their younger siblings — spends considerably more time texting than talking on the phone, pays less attention to television than the older group, and tends to communicate more over instant-messenger networks. 'People two, three or four years apart are having completely different experiences with technology,' says Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Research Center's Internet and American Life Project. 'College students scratch their heads at what their high school siblings are doing, and they scratch their heads at their younger siblings. It has sped up generational differences.' Dr. Larry Rosen, a professor of psychology at California State University, says that the iGeneration, unlike their older peers, expect an instant response from everyone they communicate with, and don't have the patience for anything less. 'They'll want their teachers and professors to respond to them immediately, and they will expect instantaneous access to everyone, because after all, that is the experience they have growing up,' says Rosen." Read below for another intra-generational wrinkle.
Another intra-generational gap is the iGeneration comfort in multi-tasking. Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time — like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television; while people in their early 20s can handle only six, and those in their 30s about five and a half. "That versatility is great when they're killing time, but will a younger generation be as focused at school and work as their forebears?" writes Brad Smith. "I worry that young people won't be able to summon the capacity to focus and concentrate when they need to," says Vicky Rideout, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Another intra-generational gap is the iGeneration comfort in multi-tasking. Studies show that 16- to 18-year-olds perform seven tasks, on average, in their free time — like texting on the phone, sending instant messages, and checking Facebook while sitting in front of the television; while people in their early 20s can handle only six, and those in their 30s about five and a half. "That versatility is great when they're killing time, but will a younger generation be as focused at school and work as their forebears?" writes Brad Smith. "I worry that young people won't be able to summon the capacity to focus and concentrate when they need to," says Vicky Rideout, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation.
I guess I'm Net generation. Except that doesn't sound right for anyone I know of my age group.
Furthermore, I've always adopted the best tools for the job, and ignored blatant fads such as twitter.
As for multi-tasking; Again, not a generation issue, as task switching just interrupts. Texting and facebook updating is a leisure activity, and doesn't mix with work at all.
"I worry that young people won't be able to summon the capacity to focus and concentrate when they need to," says Vicky Rideout, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation.
I once read a story about Einstein. He was walking and thinking about one of his problems and didn't even notice a minor earthquake while he was walking.
Having the ability to concentrate at one time was considered to be an excellent character trait. Now, being able to "multitask" is considered to be a valuable trait. And we all know what the quality of work is of one who flits their attention between multiple activities - crap.
I'm from the beginning of the 80s...and not only that, I'm from a country that was under Soviet influence. Meaning "radio, telephone and TV" for a few decades; few generations knew nothing else. Till the first half of 90s I knew nothing else.
And yet, when reading TFS, I have a strong impression its description of people born in the 90s and 00s fits nicely to me. I guess in large part because I fully realize "our times were better" is only BS meant to make oneself feel better about youth that has passed or is passing away. And it causes harm by unreasonably valuing the past above present, which is almost universally better. You only have to embrace it (well, I do pick what I want; but the time of introduction doesn't play big role)
One that hath name thou can not otter
I thought that one of the benefits of texting was that you don't have to have a response immediately, or even read it immediately.
Which all sounds like a polite way of saying that kids these days have been spoiled. Instant gratification, be it through next-day felivery net-based purchases, simplistic video games or instantly downloaded media, means they have no patience.
Younger people scratch their heads in amazement at the things people of my generation and older have done that required supreme patience, whether learning a complex skill or finely crafting a model. This comes right on the heels of lacking discipline. If you can't see the value or take the time to perfect anything, how will you ever get good at anything except the trivial?
Oh, and get off my lawn.
Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
I worry that young people won't be able to summon the capacity to focus and concentrate when they need to
Doesn't -every- older generation say that? First it was that comic books were killing novels, next it was MTV killing attention spans, now it is multitasking.
The thing is, most young people have no real need to focus and concentrate. With the increased importance placed on education, both high schools and colleges are passing more students because you need a degree to be successful. Just think, a hundred years ago a high school education was all most people needed and people could still be successful without it. Today most people need at least some college or vocational training to do almost anything.
With jobs, it is collective blame, no one person takes the fall usually a small team will take it. There are few occasions where young people really need to focus.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
I suspect their expectations will change once they start communicating about things that can't be answered with OMG LOL.
Regards,
Jason
When I was a child, there was no public Internet. In my late teens we had dial-up web sites that would pass messages back and forth with each other as far as a local call would go.
I don't miss those days - I think information should be available more or less instantly 24/7 if possible.
However, the current constant phone texting, Facebook, etc crap is just that, crap. It's electronic substitution for true socializing, and I can't help but feel that when a bunch of people stand around unable to interact with the people in their immediate vicinity because they're texting with someone who couldn't be bothered to actually show up... well, I think there's something wrong with that.
Sometimes the younger generations ARE wrong. I think the problem is these technologies are fad technologies and the people making them popular haven't outgrown them yet.
Call me if the text-aholics of today are still rabidly texting when they're 30.
I'm in my early thirties and I avoid multitasking like the plague. My younger colleagues and siblings seem to have no problems with doing several things at once - but the flip side is they end up doing many things twice simply because they sacrifice focus for versatility. They're so busy trying to do too many things at once that they rarely get anything done properly.
As for being always in contact, I couldn't care less. I'll usually answer as soon as possible, but I have no qualms when it comes to ignoring calls or messages if I'm busy with something, or simply don't feel like talking to someone. I don't expect people to be available on my schedule and see no reason why I am obligated to be always available when it suits them.
I would like to add this one:
As a member of the "Net Generation", I feel we have tuned ourselves to calling out Bullshit...
We have an ability to figure out that some stuff is the result of marketing vs. actual Buzz. That's why fake "viral videos" are so painful to watch.
Examples:
- Cyber Monday (We know this WAS fake, but stores use it to market now)
- MySpace Buzz (We knew this was dead years ago)
- CNN trying to be "hip" (We saw this from a mile away)
- The ACTUAL relevancy of Twitter vs. what is said on TV (Regis has a twitter account, it's officially uncool)
- 3DTV (A new one from this week due to CES. Seriously, I/We're not feeling it)
Now we can easily add the phrases "iGeneration" and "Net Generation"
We know these phrases are bullshit, but get ready to hear more about it.
Many of these people born in the 1990s feel that the entire world should instantly respond to them and they get extremely impatient when it doesn't.
Sounds like how teenagers have always been.
... and then they built the supercollider.
A failure to out grow the "Are We There Yet" syndrome.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
The article makes a couple of leaps and doesn't seem to understand tech.
First off, the number of tasks in front of the tv. Is this a generation difference OR an age difference? They seem to claim that young people do more tasks because they are exposed to more modern technology at a younger age. HOWEVER this would ONLY be valid if they KEEP doing this as they get older. Else the conclusion must be that as you get older, you do fewer things at the same time.
And then they claim that instant messaging results in an instant reply. But SMS is NOT instant, voice is. So, if they want an instant reply, why do they send an SMS?
I think the author of the article tries to hard to make connections.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
That's OK, they'll get their comeuppance when they go into the workforce and find management also expects instantaneous access to them -- 24/7/365.
Interest isn't relevant.
Do they want to learn? (Hopefully) Do the professor have the knowledge? (Hopefully) Do the professor have time to have one-on-one discussions with every singel student? (Unlikely)
Maybe they will have to get used to not recieving instant gratification, or learn some things the hard way.
---
The combined human population is enough to feed every living tiger for app. 28000 years.
I've got to say, this sort of behaviour just reinforces the common view of psychology as mostly worthless generalisations and unsupported theory.
WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS?
Let's see a proper study, using statistically valid numbers of subjects - taken from all races, creeds, famiily backgrounds and nationalities. Then there's be something worth discussing. Until then this is just a "aren't my children are wonderful" monolog. Boring.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
and don't forget:
D) on a 12 key pad the UI is so bad that it isn't worth the bother to try to send a SMS.
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
I can see collaborative social media overtaking a lot of traditional education. But telling professors to "use Twitter" will *not* be any use for anyone.
Getting professors to blog, perhaps giving students a window onto the ongoing process of research (as opposed to the sanitized version they can read in journals) might be a step.
Did I say getting? Hmm, professors seem to professionally blog more any than anyone else already (except VCs, startup founders, and a few other niche professions).
Speaking as someone peripherally involved in marketing, let me say that we love to cultivate the notion that you are an independent, autonomous, and free-thinking individual. This is because about the only pure act of will possible in a peaceful society that's been largely drained of the sort of conflict that would otherwise serve as outlets for self expression is a financial transaction, so self-expression always takes the form of a purchase of a good. Yes, always. It's simply a question of whose goods you will be buying to construct your self-image. Naturally, I'd prefer that you associate my products with positive notions like autonomy and independence so you'll choose them and not my competitors. The alternative, of course, is to buy some land and raise chickens somewhere, in which case you've simply exited my particular market (creative/expressive/alternative) and are now a consumer in the self-reliant/survivalist/rural market.
Sounds like how teenagers have always been.
No, the difference is that there's now a whole world of stuff and people out there that will respond to them instantly. Until recently, you could want that, but unless you were rich enough to have servants and had parents who let you give them orders, you couldn't get that.
This is a step up from five hours a day passively watching TV.