Medical Express - A new study, published in the journal Clinical Psychological Science, suggests that the time adolescents are spending on their phones and online is not that bad.
"It may be time for adults to stop arguing over whether smartphones and social media are good or bad for teens' mental health and start figuring out ways to best support them in both their offline and online lives," [researcher Candice] Odgers said.
"Contrary to the common belief that smartphones and social media are damaging adolescents' mental health, we don't see much support for the idea that time spent on phones and online is associated with increased risk for mental health problems," [researchers Michaeline] Jensen said.
1 comment:
I tried locating the paper on their website. Had no luck. Looked at a few other papers published recently. As an erstwhile academic, I was struck again by modern methodology standards. Back when I had to hike uphill, both ways, usually in a snow storm with only my mortar board to protect me from the chill winds on my way to campus, any one who tried to publish a definitive paper with a sample of 20 to 40 would have been laughed out of the faculty lounge.
Statistically speaking, you could round up a sample of 20 people who would in earnest give you a confidence ration of well into the 90's that the color of a clear sky is vermilion. If the paper that is supposed to have us embrace our new overlords has the same approach, I would only have confidence in using those results as a hygiene product in a collapse situation. Which is bound to come as the sheer gullibility through dumbing down by fartsmone is only producing a generation which will have zero ability to do anything but push pixels.
Modernity, the internet, the integrated circuit, the moon landing were all engineered by persons who read information off of paper and resolved calculus equations with slide rules. Contrast ratios aside, how can anyone seriously accept that we can be as educated as our predecessors when filtering all information through a screen barely one fourth the size of a serious text in print?
In the end, I call foul on the verisimilitude claimed by the article. In the day and age you also needed to correlate results with other findings before claiming conclusively your findings are gospel. Show me three or more papers with a n of 1000+ and I might be your Huckleberry...
Post a Comment