Today, I will focus specifically on children and how Internet use affects their developing brains.
In the reading for my CS47N class (the one that this blog is for) today, game designer Jane McGonigal discussed the increasing divide between schooling methods and children's needs in this generation that has grown up with the constant mental engagement of the digital world. She approached the topic from the point of view of a sociocultural phenomenon, a shift that has occurred along with the cultural changes brought by new technology. But more recently, researchers have examined the biological basis of this shifting attitude, giving a whole new meaning to the term "digital native." Has use of the Internet from an early age actually caused the brains of today's children and adolescents to be wired differently? This past week, the media have had a lot to say on this question.
On the negative side, child advocate Jim Adler argues that Internet use may be giving kids ADD. The pervasive presence of alluring updates across the scope of the Internet - gaming, social networking, media updates - makes it difficult for them to focus in the real world. CNN backs him up, calling the phenomenon "popcorn brain." The constant stimulation provided while using the internet activates dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, one of the main pleasure centers of the brain. They also cite a study conducted in China showing that students who spent over 10 hours a day on the Internet had significantly less gray matter - the component of the brain that does the thinking.
On a more positive note, Christopher Chabris, a psychology professor, argues in the New York Times that the popcorn phenomenon speaks to the plasticity of the brain and untapped cognitive capabilities. Yes, Internet use stimulates dopamine receptors in a manner similar to cocaine use, but a "revolutionary" experiment conducted at the NIH showed that monkeys (and presumably humans by extension) got a "buzz" from extra information, all else equal. Chabris argues that this experiment shows that "the Internet doesn’t change our brains at all, for good or for ill." It doesn't destroy or modify anything, but just stimulates the already existing reward pathways. This attitude fits right in with McGonigal's pitch for a society centered around the advantages of gaming and its exposure of untapped intellectual capability.
Lastly for today, a little informal mythbusting from Huffington Post.
1. The Internet doesn't negatively affect memory. It just makes memorizing unnecessary and tedious. As she puts it, tools like the Internet "allow us to replace one kind of mental effort with another."
2. The Internet hasn't decreased concentration ability. The younger generation just has different tastes. Case in point: Harry Potter. Kids display a remarkable ability to concentrate on that long and complex storyline. I wonder what Jim Adler would have to say to that.
3. Young people's multitasking isn't all bad. Or, at least, other sources of distraction unrelated to technology cause far more harm.
The debate is far from over, and the research far from complete. Scientists have only just taken a few spoonfuls from the bowl of possibilities for ways our extensive use of the Internet could affect developing brains.
One last laugh - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXV-yaFmQNk
In the reading for my CS47N class (the one that this blog is for) today, game designer Jane McGonigal discussed the increasing divide between schooling methods and children's needs in this generation that has grown up with the constant mental engagement of the digital world. She approached the topic from the point of view of a sociocultural phenomenon, a shift that has occurred along with the cultural changes brought by new technology. But more recently, researchers have examined the biological basis of this shifting attitude, giving a whole new meaning to the term "digital native." Has use of the Internet from an early age actually caused the brains of today's children and adolescents to be wired differently? This past week, the media have had a lot to say on this question.
On the negative side, child advocate Jim Adler argues that Internet use may be giving kids ADD. The pervasive presence of alluring updates across the scope of the Internet - gaming, social networking, media updates - makes it difficult for them to focus in the real world. CNN backs him up, calling the phenomenon "popcorn brain." The constant stimulation provided while using the internet activates dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, one of the main pleasure centers of the brain. They also cite a study conducted in China showing that students who spent over 10 hours a day on the Internet had significantly less gray matter - the component of the brain that does the thinking.
On a more positive note, Christopher Chabris, a psychology professor, argues in the New York Times that the popcorn phenomenon speaks to the plasticity of the brain and untapped cognitive capabilities. Yes, Internet use stimulates dopamine receptors in a manner similar to cocaine use, but a "revolutionary" experiment conducted at the NIH showed that monkeys (and presumably humans by extension) got a "buzz" from extra information, all else equal. Chabris argues that this experiment shows that "the Internet doesn’t change our brains at all, for good or for ill." It doesn't destroy or modify anything, but just stimulates the already existing reward pathways. This attitude fits right in with McGonigal's pitch for a society centered around the advantages of gaming and its exposure of untapped intellectual capability.
Lastly for today, a little informal mythbusting from Huffington Post.
1. The Internet doesn't negatively affect memory. It just makes memorizing unnecessary and tedious. As she puts it, tools like the Internet "allow us to replace one kind of mental effort with another."
2. The Internet hasn't decreased concentration ability. The younger generation just has different tastes. Case in point: Harry Potter. Kids display a remarkable ability to concentrate on that long and complex storyline. I wonder what Jim Adler would have to say to that.
3. Young people's multitasking isn't all bad. Or, at least, other sources of distraction unrelated to technology cause far more harm.
The debate is far from over, and the research far from complete. Scientists have only just taken a few spoonfuls from the bowl of possibilities for ways our extensive use of the Internet could affect developing brains.
One last laugh - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXV-yaFmQNk
An interesting set of points. It has relevance to a lecture I heard during admit weekend from a Psychology professor. In said lecture the professor cited his recent research on multitasking and said that multitasking on media has caused people brain to change, making it more difficult for them to focus on a single task because they become more prone to distraction. However, I do agree that the internet has its benefits, it allows for interaction and competition that could possibly be used to aid in children's learning.
ReplyDeleteI like the way you weave together different sources with conflicting opinions. I especially like the user's "comments" as she tried things on the video. It's interesting to see the comments on YouTube, pointing out that the behaviors on the magazines are natural attempts to explore, not necessarily learned from iPad. But that does point out that part of iPad's success is that it responds to natural movements in an understandable way.
ReplyDeleteThe whole question of multi-tasking is worth following. I am not convinced by the Huffpost statement that concentration hasn't decreased, but to back it up or refute it will take more research.
--t