Here’s a new study about the use of digital-tech among kids that states that warnings of danger might be overblown. I don’t really buy it for various reasons (too broad actually, too statistically-mathematic than psychological or qualitative, much more „screen time“ than „social pressure“ and so on), but you know what: I’m already in holiday-mode, so make of that what you will. Here’s the PDF, here’s the Scientific American on the Paper.
And then there’s this: „In a previous paper, Przybylski and colleague Netta Weinstein demonstrated a “Goldilocks” effect showing moderate use of technology—about one to two hours per day on weekdays and slightly more on weekends—was “not intrinsically harmful,” but higher levels of indulgence could be.“
According to Pew from 2015 data, the mean number of Texts kids send and receive on a single day at the age between 15 and 17 years is 80. EIGHTY. The average time with entertainment media is 9 hours. NINE HOURS, which, I guess, includes social media. And 75% of all teens have smartphones. For 2018, most kids (45%) say, they are online CONSTANTLY. Not 2 hours, 5 hours or 12 hours. CONSTANTLY. (I guess they have to sleep at one point, but what do I know about kids these days.)
Yes, those numbers are not specific enough and yes, the science is not there yet. But the reports are in and yes, under certain circumstances, for certain age groups, the consequences of social pressure through social media are serious enough to raise my hair, especially because I am among that generation, that invented this fucking thing.
And there’s this bit from the paper: „the small negative associations diminish even fur-ther when proper and pre-specified control variables, or caretaker responses about adolescent well-being, are included in the analyses.“ How many caretaker responses do you know, that actually had a big amount of influence on the build up of your social world? For me it wasn’t too many and for you thats most likely true, too. Its a nobrainer in sociology, that the social world is build among PEERS, not with parents or teachers or “caretakers”.
So no, I don’t really buy this statistically voodoo which is a nice distraction for the tech industry and some outlets to get some clicks by comparing the social pressure among kids to a fucking potato. But it’s good to have rigorous critique of this form of science, because the better that science will get, the better for everyone.