Talk:Psychological effects of Internet use

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2022 and 13 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Terence9915 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: NCawit, JackGradyP1.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MOEALI101.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 13 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Scooby7829. Peer reviewers: Ms0615, Rubiii1231.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ashely.dipchan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

How internet use affects the human brain → How web use affects the human brain — This article seems to be about hypertext, web surfing, search engines etc. These are all technologies of the World Wide Web, which is only one part of the Internet. Therefore, it is wrongly named unless there is much more research that is going to be added about how e-mail, file-sharing, remote desktops and the other internet technologies affect brains.Relisted. billinghurst sDrewth 16:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC) Nigelj (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you make a good point. However, I do want to add more information about e mail, twitter, etc. Wouldn't this be considered part of the internet? Thanks --Jo (talk) 16:46, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Twitter, no, email, no. Email exists without needing the internet. Twitter is microblogging, blogging is "web log", a web thing. Don't you remember people using FidoNet mail, or BANGPATH mail, or BITnet mail? None of which are internet email. Then there's Lotus Notes mail, which is intranet mail, also not internet. Or Compu$serve mail, which is not internet mail either. 76.66.195.196 (talk) 03:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh. i'm sorry; I did now know the difference between web and internet! If you think that changing 'internet' to 'web' would be more appropriate, then I agree with you! 'Human neurological effects of web use' sounds like a nice name. But I was thinking that maybe that would be too complicated? Perahps something like, 'Web effects on brain'? I am not sure, really. Do you know if their is a place where more people can discuss this, and so maybe we could get more thoughts? Thanks--Jo (talk) 05:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

That's what talk pages are for. And a WP:RM was filed, garnering more attention. If you'd like, you could increase attention to this issue with a WP:RFC. 76.66.192.55 (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh. Thank you for explaining. --Jo (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose JDDJS (talk) 19:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
• Comment what about Human neurological effects of web use? 76.66.195.196 (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose "Internet" is used more prevalently in cited sources than "web". In some cases, they may technically be using the wrong terminology but I don't think it confuses anyone. Why not create some redirect pages? --Kvng (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

i agree that 'internet' is more appropriate than 'web.' Everyone I know just uses the term 'internet.' In fact, I do not think that anyone would be confused with the title. Personally, I think that the current title is all right.--Jo (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Can we change it to, 'How Internet Affects humans'? That would cover other aspects, too, like social relationships.

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2010/06/losing-our-minds-to-the-web/

--Jo (talk) 05:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. Internet is by far the more commonly used term, and that usage includes aspects which might technically fall under "web". More, "web" is not a precise enough term by itself, because it more broadly means any net-like arrangement; so precision would actually dictate that World Wide Web be the alternative, which is a little dated, unnecessarily long, and not commonly used. As for the rest of the title, localizing the effects to neurology is limiting and doesn't reflect the scope of interest or research into how the internet affects things like family relations, interpersonal communication, workflow, business models, etc.Ocaasi (talk) 10:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

WP:NPOV etc

OK, so the rename discussion went... strangely. Now, we have an article that is mostly written by one person, that is labelled as being an 'essay', and that seems to say that the whole internet is thoroughly bad and damaging. This is patently not the whole picture, so I suggest someone have a look at policies like WP:NPOV and has a think about well-documented facts like, there are billions of web pages and so people can sit almost anywhere on earth and access a level of information and knowledge that was unthinkable a decade ago. This must 'affect humans'? People can write to their friends, shop online, work from home, publish their holiday snaps, report on oppression, describe wars, publish points of view, and build collaborative projects that span the globe. Does any of this 'affect humans'? You get my drift. We cannot have a whole article that is as one-sided as this one currently seems to be. The trouble is, when it's done, there will be a huge duplication of what is already in the internet, www and other articles, but maybe with an emphasis on it all 'affecting humans'. I can't really see where this is going, or how it's going to be useful to the Wikipedia project, at the moment. --Nigelj (talk) 17:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

In short, this article needs to be more like Internet addiction if it wants to survive. --Kvng (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I do not see why someone cannot add something about the positive aspects of the internet. The article may be biased, but it can certainly change. The internet is having a huge impact on people, and their is a lot of research on this, and in my opinion, this research needs to be talked about on Wikipedia. Thus far, most of the stuff I found about how the internet affects human behavior was pretty negative, so i just added it here (I wrote most of the article). I am planning to add more positive material. And at any rate, anyone is free to edit (I have not deleted any contributions, for example.) And i agree that maybe this article was misnamed. Maybe it should be changed back to 'How internet affects human brain'? I have looked at the other internet articles, and I could not find any article that talks about how the internet affects the brain or behavior or intelligence.--Jo (talk) 20:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Individual editors such as yourself must strive for a neutral point of view. If you believe you have put up biased material, you foremost are responsible for correcting it or taking it down. --Kvng (talk) 23:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I understand, and thank you for explaining. I think that the article is quite balanced. For example, the opening paragraph has both sides presented. And their is a section on intelligence and finding information that talks about the benefit of the internet in these areas. for the article, I just presented information that I found by searching the web. i hope to add more information in the future. --Jo (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Another option might be to rename it again, limiting the scope of the article to negative impacts. It might violate WP:FORK, but I think the topic is broad enough to warrant its own article (once developed). Ocaasi (talk) 21:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm revisiting this and a fresh read leads me to believe that WP:NOTESSAY is the fundamental issue here. The article is already so tagged. If work isn't done towards correcting this, the article could eventually become a WP:AFD candidate. --Kvng (talk) 21:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

copyedits

I am afraid many of the claims in the article do no properly reflect the sources cited. I have removed some, but not completed, as this may require a lot of work. This seems mostly an unintelligent collection of bits and pieces pasted or picked from magazine or newspaper articles. The new title doesn't quite reflect the contents yet either, but the old title was horrible. Kbrose (talk) 23:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Title

The best title is "Human impact of Internet use". this title is very comprehensive and describes the article very well. It is just a slight change, as the original title ('How internet use affect humans') was horrible. i think it is an excellent article.--Jo (talk) 00:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The Shallows: How the Internet is Changing the Way We Think, Read and Remember

I didn't realise at first, because it hasn't been published here yet, but I think this article was originally meant to be based on this book by American writer Nicholas Carr.(book review) Maybe it should be changed into a book review article, to include not only the content of this book, but also some of the pasting it has had from academics and the sensible media? --Nigelj (talk) 14:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Does the section "Internet and political revolutions" belong here?

Does the section "Internet and political revolutions" belong in this article? Is a political revolution a "psychological effect"? I'm thinking not. But if this section doesn't belong here, where does it belong? A new standalone article? Part of some existing article? Perhaps Sociology of the Internet? Or in the Social impact section of the main Internet article? Jeff Ogden (talk) 21:36, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done I moved this section to be a sub-section within "Social impact" in the main Internet article. Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 13:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Adding a Section " Effects on Children"

I think this section plays a key role as there is a lot to be said about Internet's effect on children. Internet has a direct impact on most of the children in their daily lives. Children are psychologically addicted to internet which in turn results in many other problems such as health problem, concentration problems, getting exposed to inappropriate stuff at early age which will lead to negative thoughts at very early age. Svenigalla (talk) 04:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Agree - however I don't think that the content you added to that section is good. Here are some useable sources for a start:

• http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2003/12/jackson.aspx
• http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/dev-423391.pdf
• http://www.cdmc.ucla.edu/Published_Research_files/spkg-2001.pdf
• https://books.google.de/books?id=_cyPiIDZy4YC&pg=PA38
• https://books.google.de/books?id=PgVzAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT486
• https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=internet+psychology+children

--Fixuture (talk) 18:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

==Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160B== This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 January 2022 and 22 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Christa Chiu (article contribs).

Assignment on Media Research for how technology affects the attention span of different age groups

Post to Media Research/Study website Title: How Does Technology Affect the Attention Span of Different Age Groups URL: https://www.oxjournal.org/how-does-technology-affect-the-attention-spans-of-different-age-groups/ Authors: Biba Betteridge, William Chien, Ellen Hazels, and Julianna Simone Date Published: September 5, 2023 RosesReads (talk) 20:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

As the use of media and technology expands, and it reaches into more areas of our lives we have begun to see a pattern in the cognitive faculties of persons. The more time one spends in front of a screen absorbing different types of media the less one can stay engaged with the media they are interacting with. They bounce from one application to another to keep their brain stimulated and engaged in anything but what is happening around them. For many, This act has become self-soothing; when something seems too hard or time-consuming and starts to cause stress, instead of tackling the task, people tend to turn to their phones to ease the tension and quiet the mind. In this article by the Ox Journal titled “How Does Technology Affect the Attention Spans of Different Age Groups,” they researched how the use of technology affects different ages and how this has led to the development of ADHD and other attention deficit disorders.

“Balance is about our attitude towards media, our approach to technology.” (Gan, pg 21) This is the cornerstone of all the other media keys because without balance we cannot consume media and use it to its full potential. This article talks about how as children are more exposed to technology and media there reliance upon it increases “and children need to consume more media in order to feel the same dopamine release, impacting the amount and quality of the attention that they can give to other tasks like schoolwork, which do not offer the same dopamine reward” This shows a need for balance in the children's consumption of media to add in their development without causing them to become addicted and thus stunting their growth.

The second media key attitude awareness “helps us to maintain a critical perspective about the messages coming to us through the media. Enabling us to be aware of the media-maker's agendas, and less susceptible to the subtle yet real brainwashing that can take place when we fail to look at media with a critical eye.” (Gan, pg 37) This is an important key when it comes to our media consumption. The article by the Ox Journal says “When people are used to being fed information quickly and then swiping to the next set of information, it can make it incredibly difficult to maintain attention for long periods of time when information is not quickly changing or being presented attractively” (Ox Journal, 2023) When reading this in light of the second media key it is easy to see the harm of mindless scrolling and how that can be damaging to our minds. Thus it is important to practice mindfulness when it comes to our media consumption and to not let ourselves be force-fed information that can seem mindless but in reality, is causing us to think and act wrongly.

Out of all the media keys, the third is by far the one that is most needed by those who consume media. “Making man “more worthy of man” –All media should reflect, uphold, and enhance human dignity.” This key calls us back to personhood and calls us to be better not for our sake but for the sake of others. While this article does not expressly talk about human dignity and how it refers to media, it can be interpreted in the light of this media key. This article is about the effects of media and technology usage at each stage of human development, and while reading it one can sense the author's care for the human person by bringing to light the effects of overconsumption and how that can be damaging to development.

The fourth media key is one of responsibility, a responsibility not only to yourself as a media user but to all media publishers and owners. That is “Media, properly crafted and used, can be a tool for conveying truth.” (Gan, 68) There for many ways to state the truth, and to prove to others that what you are saying is truth. For articles such as these that are research-based and are being used to prove a hypothesis the way to convey the truth of it is through showing your research and backing it up with proper sources, and by being completely transparent in what the purpose of your article is. This article is upfront about its findings and concludes by saying “Altogether, the research we have discussed suggests that in order to study the effects of technology on attention spans, we must consider the different types of attention in all age demographics” (Ox Journal, 2023) It is upfront and truthful about its findings and seeks to make others aware of the benefits and dangers of media consumption.

The fifth media key says the media “inspires us to the good.” (Gan, 84) Media does properly often inspires us, opens us up to a new way of thinking, and gives up hope in what is out there. When looking at a piece of scholarly work that is meant to illustrate the often negative effects of technology on the human attention spans it can be hard to find such an article inspiring. Especially when one considers the severity of its content and how this is a real and prevalent issue in our society.

The sixth media key can be understood by all and that is that media should be skillfully developed. Why is that? Because “Our media-saturated environment has made most of us critics already, telling us what makes for well-made, well-designed media and brings us into an encounter with skillfully developed media virtually every day.” (Gan, 100-101) How does this key apply to a research article, well it applies to not just the content of the article but also to the format, flow, and language used. This article is easy to follow from beginning to end, starting broad and narrowing towards a reasonable conclusion. It says itself what it does saying “We thoroughly examine the influence of digital media on four age groups: young children, older children, teenagers, and adults. Furthermore, we investigate whether excessive screen time is directly contributing to the rise of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) within contemporary society.” (Ox Journal, 2023) This objective can be easily followed from beginning to end, thus it is easy to conclude that this is a skillfully developed article for its field.

The final media key is “all media should be motivated by and relevant to experience.” (Gan, 116) A key that is especially important to curating accurate and knowledgeable media. Without this key, it could be believed that anyone can post about any subject whether or not they had experience on the topic or it was relevant to their field. This article is both motivated by experience and relevant to today's society. The effects outlined in this research are relevant to our experiences with media today. “Our research has established an evident correlation between digital media use and the prevalence of ADHD in contemporary society. This applies for all age demographics, depending on the setting, such as being in school or in a workplace.” (Ox Journal, 2023) RosesReads (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)