this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
257 points (95.4% liked)
Technology
58143 readers
5397 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
TLDR, less nuanced:
Betteridge’s law of headlines still applies: When the headline is a question, the answer is no.
I can't make sense of bringing this in for this piece.
The headline of this piece is not really a question. Sure, there is a question in it. But it answers the question in the headline. . . .and that answer isn't "no." It's "it's not clear what the cause is."
Blaming teenage mental illness on social media feels to me like the boomers are trying to find a different scapegoat than all the factors caused by their own stupidity, greed and destruction of human habitat.
So. . .where's your evidence? Or are you, just like Haidt, currently seeking evidence for your tale?
My guy, you are asking me to provide evidence for the claim that something feels to me a certain way. You do realize how silly that is?
You answered my question: it's a tale seeking evidence.
As is almost entry comment on Lemmy. What's your point?
That's you're exactly like the boomers you are attacking.
So where's your evidence?
Evidence of what? You mean what you just wrote?
So does shortened attention spans not count as any type of brain development change or is that not actually happening/outside of this study?
Even though everybody seems convinced our attention spans have decreased, there is no conclusive evidence of it and scientists don’t even really think it is useful to talk about attention outside the context of motivation anyways.
Your attention span is fine, you are just too burned out from modern life to invest energy into things that take a lot of sustained focus that aren’t essential to survival.
You also have to be way more picky with what content you choose to engage with because there is sooooooo much more content now and that may look like a “short attention span” when your brain optimizes for tossing out the 95% off fluff to get right to the thing you actually wanted.
Our attention spans are fine, this has been the most boring moral panic ever but that is really all it is.
Shortened attention span falls under mental well-being.
The older generation has always criticized the younger generation for the same things. And yet again it is done without merit.
This isn't a study, it's a book review refuting the author's assertion. But it looks like the scope was only mental health, not cognitive skill.
Odd when we are also reading how studies are showing increased levels of depression and suicide. Which lie do we believe? I'll just go with what I see happening with my own eyes and experience then.
This piece isn't saying there is no increase in depression and suicide. In fact, the whole premise of the article is that by blaming screen time we might be missing the actual cause of the issue (increase in depression and anxiety) and thus doing our children a disservice.
I would suggest that before trying to decide who to believe, you actually listen to their argument and evidence first. Instead of just thinking that your own perception of the world is perfectly objective and not anecdotal.