AEA Papers and Proceedings,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
114, С. 678 - 683
Опубликована: Май 1, 2024
Why
do
social
media
users
spend
so
much
time
consuming
content
that
seemingly
harms
them?
We
build
a
simple
model
to
argue
advertising-driven
platforms
can
find
it
profitable
display
when
is
complementary
their
spent
on
the
platform.
These
incentives
disappear,
absent
network
effects,
in
case
of
subscription-based
business
because
harmful
reduces
willingness
pay
for
Our
results
warn
against
interpreting
increases
engagement
as
welfare
increases.
Kyklos,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
77(3), С. 690 - 704
Опубликована: Апрель 29, 2024
Abstract
Recent
evidence
shows
that
social
media
use
has
negative
effects
on
well‐being
of
children
and
youths.
However,
the
underlying
reasons
are
unclear,
as
means
can
also
serve
beneficial
purposes.
We
propose
hypothesis
induce
users
to
harmful
addiction
a
new
variety
because
such
is
not
toxic
per
se
but
becomes
by
crowding
out
activities.
identify,
in
particular,
key
mechanism
change
time
preference:
While
present‐biassed
activities,
thus
encouraged
how
platforms
designed,
they
crowd
activities
develop
skills
forward‐looking,
education,
volunteering
democratic
participation.
This
triggers
vicious
circle
leading
long
run
deterioration
would
have
acted
an
antidote
addiction.
As
implication,
policies
should
address
adequate
information
education
general,
well
increased
competition
digital
platform
market.
available
supports
our
many
respects,
more
empirical
research
needed.
SSRN Electronic Journal,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
unknown
Опубликована: Янв. 1, 2024
We
survey
the
recent
literature
in
economics
measuring
what
is
on
top
of
people's
minds
using
open-ended
questions.
first
provide
an
overview
studies
political
economy,
macroeconomics,
finance,
labor
economics,
and
behavioral
that
have
employed
such
measurement.
next
describe
different
ways
considerations
are
minds.
also
methods
to
annotate
analyze
data.
Next,
we
discuss
types
applications,
including
measurement
motives,
mental
models,
narratives,
attention,
information
transmission,
recall.
Our
review
highlights
potential
questions
gain
a
deeper
understanding
mechanisms
underlying
observed
choices
expectations.Institutional
subscribers
NBER
working
paper
series,
residents
developing
countries
may
download
this
without
additional
charge
at
www.nber.org.
Acta Paediatrica,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
unknown
Опубликована: Июль 31, 2024
In
the
study
by
Carter
et
al
(2024),
657
16-
to
18-year-olds
were
included
from
five
schools
in
England
and
found
an
association
between
anxiety,
depression
problematic
smartphone
use,
a
pattern
of
behaviour
which
resembles
behavioural
addiction.1
Qualitative
data
younger
sample
revealed
that
while
teenagers
valued
their
smartphones
for
school
connection
with
family
friends,
they
recognised
impacted
time
spent
on
work,
pursuing
hobbies.2
So
what
do?
The
good
news
is
are
already
trying
limit
use:
further
findings
same
but
not
reported
2024
625
(95%)
had
used
at
least
one
reduction
strategy.
most
popular
strategies
putting
Silent
(78.1%,
n
=
513),
turning
off
notifications
(74.1%,
487)
using
'Do
disturb'
or
'Airplane'
mode
(67.9%,
446).
(Supplementary
Table
S1)
rated
effective
were:
(73.5%,
328/446);
(65.7%,
320/487);
leaving
another
room
bedtime
(58.8%,
130/221).
those
restricted
access
specific
Apps
(38.6%,
97/251);
locked
box
during
revision
(36.0%,
27/75);
greyscale
(32.0%,
32/100).
Participants
also
parents
taking
Smartphone
away
night
(37.5%,
62/165)
as
effective,
may
reflect
this
was
imposed
rather
than
shared
plan.
We
have
previously
surveyed
large
18-
24-year-olds
effective.3
teenagers'
perception
preventing
notifications—via
switching
them
phone
silent
supported
evidence.4
children
young
people,
received
median
237
per
day.5
impact
has
been
shown
reduce
cognitive
performance,
randomised
controlled
trial
removing
reduced
anxiety
depression.4
A
contributing
factor
be
poor
sleep
caused
use
night,
suggested
blur
distinction
day
due
continued
into
night.5
What
can
carers
Although
parental
impulse
remove
entirely,
there
scant
evidence
support
this.
Restrictions
raise
tension
adolescents
counter-productive.6
Rather,
relationship
parent
adolescent
key:
Fostering
partnership
where
harms
benefits
openly
discussed
more
likely
it
acknowledges
both
adolescents'
drive
individuation
relative
inexperience.
Beyond
family,
local
norms
communities,
peer
groups
influence
usage.
Legislation
being
this,
example,
French
law
outlining
when
employees
cannot
send
emails
employees.
Similar
if
communities
came
together
feeling
missing
out.
Guidance
include
families
devices
meal
times
agree
collectively
stop
them.
pressing
need
harmful
content,
unfortunately
little
interventions.
On
hand,
act
social
leveller
allowing
differing
socioeconomic
content
(e.g.,
educational
material),
some
suffer
negative
consequences.
Adolescent
Brain
Cognitive
Development
(ABCD)
differences
usage
patterns
across
genders
age
minoritised
exhibiting
increased
prevalence
video
game
media
addiction.7
One
thorny
problems
inherent
school-level
public
health
interventions
balancing
benefit
inclusion
potential
harm.
Practically,
risk
reducing
particularly
exclusion
group
much
engagement
interchange
occurs
via
smartphones.
This
'collective
action
problem'
vividly
conveyed
microeconomic
university
students
who
platforms
stated
would
require
payment
$30
give
up
TikTok
Instagram
month,
willing
pay
$10
others
gave
up.8
Thus,
tackle
broader
change
necessary
studies
prioritised.
There
particular
whose
warrant
special
attention,
such
neurodiverse
populations.
For
appears
link
worsening
symptoms
ADHD
frequent
notifications.9
Success
generic
should
studied
group,
given
early
advice
about
prevention
development.
people
autism,
picture
complex,
many
report
digital
interaction
makes
feel
confident
secure.
autism
unknown
explored,
order
provide
account
preferences
challenges.
body
dissatisfaction
(extending
dysmorphic
disorder),
linked
symptoms.10
It
interesting
intrusive
thoughts
fear
evaluation
mediating
factors
raises
question
how
clinicians
understand
compulsive
address
it.
Is
'addiction'
type
part
disorder?
Would
subside
treatment
disorder
complicating
needs
additional
focus
care
plan?
As
things
stand,
general
populations,
clinician
recommend
measures
notifications,
removal
agreed
times,
importance
interpersonal
safety
open
sharing
parent–child
base
fact
here
peers
helpful
make
acceptable
adolescents.
More
broadly,
looking
adults
people.
Nicola
J.
Kalk:
Conceptualization;
supervision;
writing
–
original
draft.
Johnny
Downs:
Writing
review
editing.
Bruce
Clark:
Ben
Carter:
draft;
conceptualization;
methodology;
formal
analysis.
like
thank
Sarah
Holloway.
paper
represents
independent
research
funded
National
Institute
Health
Research
(NIHR)
Biomedical
Centre
South
London
Maudsley
NHS
Foundation
Trust
King's
College
London.
views
expressed
authors
necessarily
NHS,
NIHR
Department
Social
Care
(BC).
NK's
Mental
funder
no
role
design,
collection,
analysis,
interpretation
report.
All
declare
conflicts
interest.
Corresponding
Author
right
grant
behalf
all
does
authors,
worldwide
licence
Publishers
its
licensees
perpetuity,
forms,
formats
(whether
known
now
created
future),
(i)
publish,
reproduce,
distribute,
display
store
Contribution,
(ii)
translate
Contribution
other
languages,
create
adaptations,
reprints,
within
collections
summaries,
extracts
and/or,
abstracts
(iii)
any
derivative
work(s)
based
(iv)
exploit
subsidiary
rights
(v)
electronic
links
third
party
material
where-ever
located;
(vi)
do
above.
wishing
contact
corresponding
author
providing
statistical
analysis
plan
addressing
new
question.
requests
will
steering
committee.
S1
Please
note:
publisher
responsible
functionality
supporting
information
supplied
authors.
Any
queries
(other
content)
directed
article.
Philosophy & Technology,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
37(4)
Опубликована: Окт. 16, 2024
Abstract
Critics
of
Big
Tech
often
describe
‘surveillance
capitalism’
in
grim
terms,
blaming
it
for
all
kinds
political
and
social
ills.
This
article
counters
this
pessimistic
narrative,
offering
a
more
favorable
take
on
companies
like
Google,
YouTube,
Twitter/X.
It
argues
that
the
downsides
surveillance
capitalism
are
overstated,
while
benefits
largely
overlooked.
Specifically,
examines
six
critical
areas:
i)
targeted
advertising,
ii)
influence
politics,
iii)
its
impact
mental
health,
iv)
connection
with
government
surveillance,
v)
effects
rule
law
trust,
vi)
privacy
concerns.
For
each
area,
will
be
argued
concerns
about
unfounded
or
exaggerated.
The
also
explores
some
services
provided
by
these
technology
concludes
discussion
practical
implications.
Throughout,
draws
empirical
evidence
relating
to
societal
digital
technologies.
SSRN Electronic Journal,
Год журнала:
2022,
Номер
unknown
Опубликована: Янв. 1, 2022
How
does
the
internet
affect
young
people's
mental
health?
We
study
this
question
in
context
of
Italy
using
administrative
data
on
universe
cases
disorders
diagnosed
Italian
hospitals
between
2001
and
2013,
which
we
combine
with
information
availability
high-speed
at
municipal
level.
Our
identification
strategy
exploits
differences
proximity
municipalities
to
pre-existing
voice
telecommunication
infrastructure,
was
previously
irrelevant
but
became
salient
after
advent
internet.
find
that
access
has
a
significant
positive
effect
incidence
for
cohorts
not
older
ones.
In
particular,
leads
an
increase
diagnoses
depression,
anxiety,
drug
abuse,
personality
-
both
males
females
eating
sleep
only.
similar
results
urgent
compulsory
hospitalizations
self-harm
episodes.
These
suggest
broadband
is
driven
by
rise
underlying
prevalence
merely
increased
awareness
about
these
pathologies.