Is social media addiction a real problem?

[The Amazing Hanna]

It has come to my attention that a lot of us, myself reluctantly included, spend much time these days stimulating the pleasure center of our brains by clicking the "Update" button on Facebook, rather like the monkeys in those 1950s experiments.

Is social media addiction real, and if it is, is it detrimental to our long-term happiness, relationships or productivity?

[Lobsang]

I think it's seriously damaged my attention sp...


... I wonder what funny things the kittehs are saying ...


... has anyone posted a new interesting link to reddit since seven seconds ago? ...


... we're doomed.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by The Amazing Hanna

Is social media addiction real, and if it is, is it detrimental to our long-term happiness, relationships or productivity?

People can be addicted to anything pleasurable - there are people addicted to running for example, who'll try to run on a broken leg to get their "runner's high". So I'm sure it happens, I'm sure it can be destructive; what I don't see is that it is anything special.

[Mijin]

Also note that addiction means more than just doing something a lot.

It's fairly healthy to do something a lot if it brings you enjoyment. Where it becomes an addiction is if you feel incomplete and/or unhappy when you don't have that something.

[Markxxx]

I think the problem is two fold.

First of all people are convincing themselves, it's something the can't live without.

Second, it is taking the place of real interaction.

In the old days we'd "lose touch" with people, as it was hard to find time to sit down and write a letter and a long distance call WAS a big expense.

So know we have these quick ways to let people know about it. In some ways it lessens the impact and importance of actual interaction.

[The Amazing Hanna]

Hanging out on Facebook is certainly a step up from watching TV, but a big step down from face-to-face interaction. What worries me is that people do the social media thing instead of spending quality time with friends and family.

[The Amazing Hanna]

The Guardian, a British daily, has an interesting article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...ticism-twitter

Twitter and Facebook don't connect people – they isolate them from reality, say a rising number of academics

Turkle's thesis is simple: technology is threatening to dominate our lives and make us less human. Under the illusion of allowing us to communicate better, it is actually isolating us from real human interactions in a cyber-reality that is a poor imitation of the real world.

We have invented inspiring and enhancing technologies, yet we have allowed them to diminish us," [Turkle] writes.

"The different kinds of communication that people are using have become something that scares people," said Professor William Kist, an education expert at Kent State University, Ohio.

Just naysayers, or onto something?

[wheresmymind]

Originally Posted by The Amazing Hanna

The Guardian, a British daily, has an interesting article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...ticism-twitter






Just naysayers, or onto something?

Perhaps they've researched this more carefully than I have, but in my experience social networks have only helped me be more social. I can think of a half-dozen close friends that I hang out with on a regular basis that would likely be passing acquaintances without facebook, and dozens of passing acquaintances that I occasionally talk to/hang out with (in real life) that would simply not have happened otherwise. Until one of these academics provides actual data suggesting otherwise, I'll continue to believe that my results are somewhat typical.

[Justin_Bailey]

Originally Posted by The Amazing Hanna

The Guardian, a British daily, has an interesting article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...ticism-twitter

Just naysayers, or onto something?

They're morons who are deliberately ignoring the fact that one of the main reasons Facebook exists is to help people organize real life meetings and get-togethers.

[The Jay]

It's cool to slag off popular things. It makes the people doing it and agreeing with it feel better than the "sheeple".

I have a Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr etc and while I realise that most of those are more niche things and not for everybody, Facebook is a good way to stay in touch with people.

People seem to romanticise letter writing for some reason. But text is text, and sometimes you can't always see people in person.

What is with the war on convenience/technology?

[athelas]

Social media and games have the same dynamic as fast food and candy bars - the way to sell things is to algorithmically optimize its addictiveness. Just like a candy bar tastes more like food than real food ever could (huge hit of sugar and fat), online media tries to be more engaging than real intellectual work.

This seems to me a different class of danger than that of, say, marathon running to get a runner's high. We've been able to run throughout evolutionary history, and it's not much more addictive now than in the past. But the marketplace for social media is being optimized to be addictive far beyond what we would have encountered in the ancestral environment. We're setting up tests of willpower far beyond what we've evolved to deal with - and at some margin this will be a problem.

[Justin_Bailey]

Originally Posted by athelas

This seems to me a different class of danger than that of, say, marathon running to get a runner's high. We've been able to run throughout evolutionary history, and it's not much more addictive now than in the past. But the marketplace for social media is being optimized to be addictive far beyond what we would have encountered in the ancestral environment. We're setting up tests of willpower far beyond what we've evolved to deal with - and at some margin this will be a problem.

Bullshit, plain and simple.

[godix]

Different people socialize different ways. Do we ask if the person who hangs out with his friends every night of the week is addicted? Facebook and so on are fine, as long as people remember that a REAL friendship involves more than clicking 'accept' on a website.

[Burton]

I've met a lot of people I otherwise never would have though the internet.

Being able to publish anything instantly to a large audience though certainly has drawbacks and consequences as we've seen vividly demonstrated.

[athelas]

Originally Posted by Justin_Bailey

Bullshit, plain and simple.

Oh man, I'm crushed.

[Evil Captor]

A lot of things would be less addictive if real life didn't suck so hard!

There! I said it!

[The Amazing Hanna]

Of course, being addicted to the Straight Dope, while significantly more awesome, is still a kind of addiction. I must confess I have sometimes prioritized following a thread to doing important things at work, or getting enough sleep - the last election comes to mind.

Somebody should start a thread entitled "When is addiction bad?". I'm addicted to watching anime, eating Caesar salad, petting my dog and vacationing in France. I'm not convinced those make my life any worse, although, if taken to an extreme, it is conceivable that they could. And, of course, doing these things prevent me from doing various other things, which could potentially give me more pleasure or gain.

[JKellyMap]

Originally Posted by athelas

Social media and games have the same dynamic as fast food and candy bars - the way to sell things is to algorithmically optimize its addictiveness. Just like a candy bar tastes more like food than real food ever could (huge hit of sugar and fat), online media tries to be more engaging than real intellectual work.

This seems to me a different class of danger than that of, say, marathon running to get a runner's high. We've been able to run throughout evolutionary history, and it's not much more addictive now than in the past. But the marketplace for social media is being optimized to be addictive far beyond what we would have encountered in the ancestral environment. We're setting up tests of willpower far beyond what we've evolved to deal with - and at some margin this will be a problem.

Despite Justin Bailey's eloquent dismantling of this post, I agree with it completely. At least, it states my own experience very well.

Human brains/bodies have evolved to take advantage of certain things which were scarce, but necessary for survival, in the environment they evolved in -- sugar and fat are good examples.

Yes, our brains are remarkably flexible and adaptable, BUT there are limits. When some things become so easily available, they can become a problem for some people (I guess not for Justin Bailey -- more power to him!). For me, the test is, "would I be at all embarrassed if my wife or boss knew I spent so much time doing X, Y, or Z?". If the answer is "yes", that's a sign your willpower is being tested, as Athelas put it.

[JKellyMap]

Let me add that what does impress me is how humans have developed a good sense of knowing when they're doing something that is wrong or excessive. When we are "addicted" to something (in the broadest sense of the term, not in the narrower clinical sense), we know we need to cut back, we just find it difficult to do so. That nagging feeling is pretty infallible. It must have evolved somehow. Topic for another thread.

And with that...no more Doping for today! JKellyMap, YOU CAN DO THIS!