234

Thanks to bestselling authors like Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge, the public has become increasingly aware of the rapid rise in mental health issues among younger people [...] Their warnings about the destructive impact of social media have had an effect, reflected not least in a wave of schools across Europe banning smartphones.

While it’s good to draw attention to the rising rates of depression and anxiety, there’s a risk of becoming fixated on simplistic explanations that reduce the issue to technical variables like “screen time”.

[...]

A hallmark of Twenge and Haidt’s arguments is their use of trend lines for various types of psychological distress, showing increases after 2012, which Haidt calls the start of the “great rewiring” when smartphones became widespread. This method has been criticised for overemphasising correlations that may say little about causality.

[...]

Numerous academics [...] have pointed to factors such as an increasing intolerance for uncertainty in modernity, a fixation – both individual and collective – on avoiding risk, intensifying feelings of meaninglessness in work and life more broadly and rising national inequality accompanied by growing status anxiety. However, it’s important to emphasise that social science has so far failed to provide definitive answers.

[...]

It seems unlikely that the political and social challenges we face wouldn’t influence our wellbeing. Reducing the issue to isolated variables [such as the use of smartphones], where the solution might appear to be to introduce a new policy (like banning smartphones) follows a technocratic logic that could turn good health into a matter for experts.

The risk with this approach is that society as a whole is excluded from the analysis. Another risk is that politics is drained of meaning. If political questions such as structural discrimination, economic precarity, exposure to violence and opioid use are not regarded as shaping our wellbeing, what motivation remains for taking action on these matters?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Buttons@programming.dev 1 points 2 hours ago
[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 6 points 6 hours ago

Now I might be an old disillusioned fart but nope, social media hasn't changed a thing... for me. The anxiety, depression, and anger was already there, full force, in the 80s and 90s. I mean come on listen to Punk and Grunge. Coincides pretty well with the rise of Neoliberalism and New Labour, wait why did I use the same term twice. It's at the tail wave of boomers having had their revolution and subsequently declaring the end of history.

What differs though is that (yeah I'm going to do it) the young'uns who never experienced life without the internet, worse, without a smartphone or tablet, don't even go to fucking concerts any more where they could touch some grass and get laid. Also media competency falls off drastically again I think somewhere in the middle of gen Z.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 5 points 8 hours ago

On the one hand I can believe that people are getting more anxious because things are getting more bleak and it's an op to get the whole thing blamed on social media.

On the other hand, it also feels like an op from social media companies to insist that their algorithms aren't preying on people.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

i actually found a video yesterday that summarizes my thoughts on this very well:

Social Media isn't the problem, Life is.

[-] Kissaki@beehaw.org 2 points 9 hours ago

Very good.

With that many camera scenes and him walking towards or away, I repeatedly thought of how he must have went back and forth to place or get the camera. Factually walking the path three times. For so many cuts and places. That's quite a commitment.

[-] Megaman_EXE@beehaw.org 14 points 17 hours ago

I don't really have much to go off of other than my own experiences, but I don't think social media caused me more anxiety than normal except for one exception. During the beginning and early years of the pandemic, reddit usage did sometimes cause me more anxiety. Especially when people were hateful/disregarded other people.

Otherwise, the main things that cause me anxiety are a lack of community + a lack of third spaces. Feeling like I have no purpose other than being a cog in a machine/wealth disparity/alienation from my labour. Governments that don't care for the people they're supposed to serve. A general feeling of not being able to get ahead in life.

That's been the major cause of anxiety for me for the past 12 years

I think it really depends on how people are using the internet/ social media. I'm sure we all use it differently, and it might cause more or less anxiety.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 9 points 16 hours ago

Its capitalism

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 11 points 17 hours ago

It's been clear from Gen X onwards that we'll have a worse life than our parents, of course you'll get anxious about it. You can probably plot this on the same chart that shows the rise of income inequality.

I'll be honest, I really do not like how we're getting hammered for our risk-aversion.

"Don't do [risky behavior with bad consequences], otherwise [bad thing will happen]! And don't give into peer pressure telling you you have to do [bad thing]!" is what I was taught in school and by my parents.

I listened instead of rebelling. This made sense to me, and besides a lot of the risky behaviors held no appeal for me anyways.

OMGWTFBBQ THE YOUNG GENERATION IS RISK-AVERSE :((((

I'll keep living this way, thanks.

If they are talking about more calculated risks that we kind of need people to take, like people starting small businesses, I feel like people will always be taking that kind of risk. If they are talking about just "basic safety" risks like people not wearing seatbelts in cars, driving drunk, it's good that that kind of risk is becoming unpopular. Whatever part of society is dependent on us taking that kind of risk can adapt or die. And if they are sad about lifestyle type risky behavior, neither good nor bad, stuff like bungee-jumping off cliffs, I have no words for older generations believing living a quiet, straight-edge life is a problem and wanting us to change that.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 11 points 1 day ago

When was the last time you brought/did something without checking an online review? Got into a conversation with a complete stranger? Left the house without a phone?

I think that's the kind of risk they are talking about.

[-] Emotional_Series7814@kbin.melroy.org 17 points 22 hours ago

I buy groceries without checking a review, try local activities without checking reviews, etc.—I'm not exactly paralyzed. But something that costs a decent chunk of money I am absolutely checking a review and I don't think that is wrong to do. The trouble with checking reviews nowadays is how easy they are to fake, how easy it is to get a genuine negative review deleted on certain sites, how a person who has it out for a small business owner can flood them with untrue negative reviews, how often they are gamed in some way such that it does not reflect the true quality of the thing…

Conversations with strangers… I'll be honest that's a hard one because I'm not good at social cues and I don't want to think I'm having a nice conversation when the other half is composing a OH MY GOD STUPID FUCKING EXTROVERTS THE WORLD HATES INTROVERTS CAN'T THEY TELL I DON'T WANT TO TALK story in their head about me (being extroverted and having autism where you suck at social cues and know you suck at social cues is not a fun combination). I learned this behavior after seeing people express annoyance about strangers talking to them. Some things are obvious, like if you're occupied with a book, but nowadays who isn't occupied on their phone? I have had plenty of situations where I was on my phone but would have loved if someone started conversation with me—but I might be an anomaly so I just keep following the social rule of "occupied = don't talk". If I'm in a space where I think someone is open to socialization I am much more likely to initiate conversation—like a party or something. I'm not afraid of "sorry, not interested," but I am afraid of "yeah I'm cool with you" (actually no I'm not but I'll never tell you I have a problem with you until I blow up about it 6 months later).

I like quick and easy access to 911 or a locksmith's number in case I leave the house and lock myself out and cannot find the spare key but there are other reasons I leave the house with a phone than risk aversion/insurance for screwups I have committed before—for directions, or because it's nice to have a thing that staves away boredom if I know I'll probably be sitting in a line for 30 minutes, or because I have a digital wallet on there that is easier to carry around than my real wallet…

The issue with those metrics is how many other things can motivate those behaviors besides being scared of everything, or factors that make what might be an unreasonable fear for most people actually reasonable for you (for example, a phobia of bees suddenly becomes a lot more reasonable if you are deathly allergic, live near them, and aren't good at recognizing their hives/are accident-prone), but I do get the core of what you are saying. A generation who is more anxious about basic everyday things, which is definitely not good.

Although with checking reviews specifically, I'd argue that given how many times companies lower quality, change stuff, pull the rug out from under you in the name of profit, people have more and more cause to try to verify they are getting something decent when they would not have done so in the past. The more you hear of people getting screwed over, naturally the more you'll check to make sure you are not getting screwed too. This increased risk aversion is entirely rational in my opinion.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 6 points 22 hours ago

I live on Staten Island. Used to be that I'd hear chatter on the ferry every day. I would have a nice chat almost daily, and a serious conversation a couple of times a month. These days it's mostly silent and those who do talk came on the boat together. Otherwise, everyone is staring at the phone.

[-] SurpriZe@lemm.ee 3 points 16 hours ago

So what would be the solution you think?

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 2 points 9 hours ago

I wish I knew.

[-] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 22 hours ago

There are gradients to risk-aversion, and that's certainly on the low end of the spectrum. But also, those same parents were the ones who were actively rebelling in the 90s or in the 60s and 70s, in some cases for very good causes that were worth risking injury or even a chance of getting shot.

We need those people, now more than ever. And despite it being a natural personality trait, risk-aversion is more pervasive than ever. We risk losing our freedoms to people with far more power than us, because we collectively decided that it's too risk-averse to fight.

We are frogs boiling in water, unwilling to fix our situation, because there's a risk of injury or death.

Injury is a lot easier to risk if you won't be charged more than your entire net worth for treatment. If you haven't experienced the misery of medical debt, and know how others live with it, it's absolutely terrifying to think about having to live with, all because you tried to do something good.

I like to try to help others but I am selfish enough to admit I'd never run myself into debt or risk my life for someone else. I always respect those willing to do what I'm not.

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 8 points 22 hours ago

The thing is, it's not the fear of injury or death, it's the fact that people have forgotten the idea of public engagement.

There was a story a while back about a Georgia family who got in real legal trouble for letting a 10 year old wander about in their own neighborhood.

I used to ride my bike all over town and I'd see gangs of kids doing the same. I was in Jersey City, NJ a while back and was surprised by the sight of elementary school age kids out alone.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Comment105@lemm.ee 2 points 18 hours ago

Left the house without a phone?

What?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 61 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's capitalism coupled with access to education.

You get more anxious when you're super educated about how badly you're getting fucked by capitalism and have zero power to change it!

[-] Kissaki@beehaw.org 1 points 9 hours ago

I don't think that causation is evident or certainly or obviously factual. The negative interpretation is something you learn and internalize from your environment. You seem to already be in it, so I'm sure it may be hard to see an alternative. But I imagine education is neutral. And having zero power is an absolut defeatist mindset that is a conclusion of a lot of input and experience rather than a natural mindset from access to education.

I'm sure there is an alternative way of life, if the environment were different, if education were different, not less, but a different environment and approach, that people could become concerned but confident and active rather than scared and defeatist.

You said zero power. But looking back, every big social shift was in situations where individuals felt powerless. I can certainly see and feel powerless. But looking back into history, I feel like that individual conclusion should not be extrapolated to our society overall, and in consequence, ourselves as individuals within that society.

[-] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 22 hours ago

It doesn't help when you have to share the planet with people who have the same power as you and are half as intelligent, who actually enjoy getting fucked by capitalism.

load more comments (33 replies)
[-] araneae@beehaw.org 11 points 1 day ago

However, it’s important to emphasise that social science has so far failed to provide definitive answers.

Yeah thats traditionally not the job of the social sciences or science in general.

[-] Kissaki@beehaw.org 2 points 9 hours ago

What do you mean by that? Isn't science always searching for answers?

[-] adespoton@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 day ago

I remember when the rise in anxiety was blamed on the cold war.

[-] Dirac@lemmy.today 14 points 1 day ago

Correlation may not equal causation, but causation equals causation, and social media has caused enough documented strife among young people to make me question who bankrolled this research group.

[-] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 13 points 1 day ago

make me question who bankrolled this research group.

Yeah. This reads a lot like "well known harmful but profitable product not as harmful as previously understood". I've seen that headline a lot of times over the years, and rarely was it honest.

[-] astro_ray@piefed.social 18 points 1 day ago

yeah. I have had anxiety issues long before I had access to internet.

[-] Kissaki@beehaw.org 2 points 9 hours ago

Did it get worse with the internet or social media?

[-] astro_ray@piefed.social 2 points 6 hours ago

not really. honestly never been much active social media. I will say this though. I was on reddit for a little while and that was bad. Never again will I go back.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
234 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37739 readers
730 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS