Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Slashdot Asks: Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation? (theatlantic.com)

Posted by msmash on from the blame-game dept.

Teens today are more likely to be lonely, depressed and immature than any previous generation, according to analysis published in The Atlantic. According to the professor of psychology who did the analysis, who also has been researching generational differences for 25 years, the culprit is the smartphone. From the article: The advent of the smartphone and its cousin the tablet was followed quickly by hand-wringing about the deleterious effects of "screen time." But the impact of these devices has not been fully appreciated, and goes far beyond the usual concerns about curtailed attention spans. The arrival of the smartphone has radically changed every aspect of teenagers' lives, from the nature of their social interactions to their mental health. These changes have affected young people in every corner of the nation and in every type of household. The trends appear among teens poor and rich; of every ethnic background; in cities, suburbs, and small towns. Where there are cell towers, there are teens living their lives on their smartphone. What do you folks think?

10 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Television...Radio...Books... by qeveren · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The theme repeats. :)

    --
    Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
    1. Re:Television...Radio...Books... by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not even that, it's the fact that the devices are used for bidirectional communications which changes how personal the information coming in to the user is.

      Before, with books, radio, television, even video games, the end-user of the item was both not able to communicate-back in real-time or near-real-time nor terribly likely to experience the negative things that come from from such forms of communications along with a degree of anonymity. Nothing coming back to the user was personal, so the user was not personally ridiculed, or guided, or otherwise personally manipulated.

      Some of us got into the game early, with BBSes, Fidonet, Usenet, IRC, Prodigy, Compuserve, AOL, etc, but the vast majority of the youth population didn't get into using the Internet for communications or as an extension of their social lives until fairly recently. As such, most kids were not affected by the opinions of anyone except those they actually personally met or knew. As such, stupid childhood crap remained just that, stupid childhood crap. One could obviously bring embarrassment or harassment down upon one's self, but it was usually limited in its effects.

      Now, it's possible for stupid kid to mouth-off and suffer at the hands of complete strangers that would never have anything to do with them, or for someone with some weird tastes to suffer vitriol from others that they would never meet in real life, because the Internet as a medium makes that sort of thing possible. Immediately coming to mind are that girl with the Youtube videos whose dad threatened, "Consequences will never be the same," or somesuch stupidity, and the Rebecca Black "Friday" stupidity. The old forums tagline, "Open mouth, insert foot, echo internationally," has actually come to be for this generation.

      Smart parents would do well to teach their children about the need for online anonymity, and why breaching it can have some fairly harsh and permanent results.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Television...Radio...Books... by jodido · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Leaving the rest aside, it's not historically accurate to say books were never considered disruptive. (Relatively) widespread literacy was one of the causes of the split in the Christian church.

    3. Re: Television...Radio...Books... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And anyone that has tried to interact with the modern teen can tell something is not quite right.

      Anyone that has tried to interact with a teen a decade or century ago could also tell something was not quite right. There are differences between teens and adults. That is not new.

    4. Re:Television...Radio...Books... by Evtim · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Based on what I read from Bertrand Russel, the notion that mass book market is somehow disruptive is a propaganda of the ruling class. The one thing the rich did not want to happen is for the poor to have free time and access to information. Russel recalls a party where some " lady" was complaining that those pesky coal miners want reduction of their working day. " What would they do with the free time? They don't need free time" she exclaimed. At the same (ha-ha) time Russel argues in his essay "Praise for idleness" that the most precious resource is free time and it is this above all else that is the boon of being born rich - you are a master of your time and can, for instance read books.

      So you see, literacy and books are not evil, if they are accessible only to the lords :)

  2. No... by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Better question: Will any generation not insist their children are going to inevitable ruin for the technology they adopt?

    Happens every generation

    Modern phones objectively allow folks to do things on the go, that they haven't ever been able to do before. Folks are still learning what NOT to do, but for the most part, they're safe, and much less dangerous than other similar disruptive technologies.

    Flamebait article.

    Ryan Fenton

  3. It's not the smartphone - it's how you use it! by the_skywise · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm old enough to know the before/after here -

    Before the smartphone I'd go out to dinner with family and friends and eventually the conversation would inevitably die and ... and we'd come up with smalltalk and jokes to pick things up and get the conversation moving again which brings out people's personalities and depth

    Now? We check our smartphones.

    The problem is nobody learns the basic smalltalk skills anymore and the people you're with are "real" and not as interesting and entertaining as the 50 people in your facebook friends list who can always keep you going. It breaks down "social structure" in lieu of a social artifice in the "virtual" world.
    I'm not immune to this and have done it myself but I would've easily done the same thing growing up as a teen and probably never learned how to hold a conversation.

  4. Re:huh? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's always some old crank with too much time on his hands

    Except in this case the "researcher" is SELLING BOOKS, and actually profiting from her viewpoint. But I am sure her high integrity keeps the profit motive from interfering with her objectivity.

  5. No. They are prepared for their world. by RhettLivingston · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The mistake always made by those making this argument is assuming an unchanging world. My observation is that the under 30 folks are operating under completely different rules than what I grew up with. Interestingly, I am as locked out of their world as they are from mine. There are many millenial companies that basically won't hire folks over 30.

    They may be less confident in in-person social interactions, but if that is not what dominates their world when they get to power (20-30 years from now when they are in their 50s and 60s), then it won't matter. And if that is not their skill, then it WILL NOT be what dominates their world. The "world" is adjusted by each generation to fit their skills and mindset when they take over the reigns. Those who do not have the strong electronic communications skills will be the ones kicked to the curb.

  6. Problem is backwards by LordZardoz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Complaining about too much screen time misses the point.

    The problem has never been 'too much video games' or 'too much facebook'. The problem is 'Not enough meaningful activities that improve ones quality of life". As long as any given individual is doing something that is personally fulfilling, and as long as they put enough time and effort into those things, it really does not matter how they use the rest of their time.

    But if a random person has few friends, no hobbies, and lacks the means and opportunity to find and pursue something of interest to them, they are going to be depressed and isolated.

    END COMMUNICATION