11 ms·

I like the article, but I gotta ask: why the focus on "new research"? Is "old research" not good enough? I suppose it might not be, but some of it should really

I like the article, but I gotta ask: why the focus on "new research"? Is "old research" not good enough? I suppose it might not be, but some of it should really be at least brought up. Here's a book from 1974 [1] by Robert Weiss, whose first (sample) chapter [2] reads very similar to the NYTimes piece, and covers many of the same issues, even before the internet was around. In particular, it draws the line (much more clearly than the NYTimes piece) between what it calls loneliness of emotional isolation and loneliness of social isolation, and, to me, its examples like the condition of married couples who moved far away are much more salient (and convincing) than reliance on surveys and dry statements like "loneliness can accelerate cognitive decline" and "increases risk of heart disease by 29%". Am I missing something? P.S. One cool thing I learned about from reading about Cacioppo's research is that when designing a survey about loneliness you can't ask questions like "do you feel lonely?" because it's much too ambiguous and people end up giving incoherent useless answers. I never thought something so basic could be so confusing to people. [1] https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/loneliness https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/loneliness [2] https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/9780262730419_sch_0001.pdf https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/...

muninn_ 10y ago
Right. It's not an issue of technology, for the most part, but it's the way American cities are designed. Instead of mixed-use walkable neighborhoods where people with a variety of incomes and backgrounds live, and stay put, we have suburban fortresses where people live in a box, never talk to their neighbors, drive a box to work, work in a box, then do it all over again. The national highway system was great for a nation on the brink of all-out war. We needed to move troops, tanks, people, supplies quickly and efficiently. This system ended up being used to separate black people from working class whites. Naturally we have drug and violence problems in those communities that were segregated from the more educated and affluent white population. Terrible. I wish I could be governor or something and make sure that we stop this. It makes me sad.
- winter_blue 10y ago
  You could get involved in local politics, and maybe eventually even run for governor. Is there anything stopping you?
  - bluejekyll 10y ago
    Exactly. If you want this stuff to change, stop waiting for others to do it, you can get involved and start changing things.
  - muninn_ 10y ago
    Yes. I have a high-paying job, a mortgage, and although I'm personable I don't see any starting point or path toward doing anything about it.
    - Frondo 10y ago
      Volunteer with your preferred local political party. The path to getting into politics can start as easily as showing up until people know you, and having good ideas that enough people agree with. Your job as a politician would be to carry those ideas to the structures of power (town council, school board, whatever). It's pretty time-consuming, but it's a big responsibility, making decisions that affect lots of people's lives. So, trade-offs.
      - zeroer 10y ago
        Another reason not to do so is that it's a high-risk, low-reward endeavor.
- arkitaip 10y ago
  We city apartment people aren't better at socializing with our neighbors, probably even worse. The stereotype that cities can be harsh and unfriendly is very much rooted in reality.
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
cableshaft 10y ago
Older research is generally given less credence than newer research because of certain assumptions which may or may not be accurate: * That the researchers looked into previous research, examined those results, and are either replicating them (thus adding extra evidence to those hypothesis), or have found some sort of flaw in how the research was gathered. * That the researches have, in their research, looked into multiple previous studies, including the old one you referenced, and synthesized them all for their new research. * It's often been shown that older research studies are flawed in some way, especially in certain fields, such as nutrition, so older studies should be held suspect (really the newer studies should be held with just as much skepticism, but they never are) Again, the assumptions that this is done is not necessarily what happened in reality, but without media or laypeople doing their own research into things (and neither have time for that), it's usually a useful greedy heuristic to assume newer research is better and more accurate than older research.
bogomipz 10y ago
>'I gotta ask: why the focus on "new research"?' I think this passage is key, I had not heard this postulated before: "New research suggests that loneliness is not necessarily the result of poor social skills or lack of social support, but can be caused in part by unusual sensitivity to social cues. Lonely people are more likely to perceive ambiguous social cues negatively, and enter a self-preservation mind-set — worsening the problem."
- TheRealDunkirk 10y ago
  Totally agree. I think the internet and social media have just exacerbated the existing problem that society is fracturing into countless splinter groups, with no tolerance for any of the others' views, and it's really difficult to find and keep up with those handful of people you can actually tolerate enough to keep a close social bond with. I don't think that it takes a degree in sociology, or a controlled study, to see this happening. As for WHY, my own, personal theory is that "we" (the US) came together to support the war effort in the forties in a way that the world had never experienced before or since, and it's all been a snowballing disassociation since, made worse as a reaction TO the perceived stifling effect of the dominant societal norm of that day.
  - bendoernberg 10y ago
    FWIW communities coming together in times of emergency is a pretty universal experience, not unique to the US in the 1940's (the UK's home front experience during WW2 [1] is cited as an example most often I think). A book I've been meaning to read for a while is "A Paradise Built in Hell" by Rebecca Solnit. From the Washington Post review [2]: "Her book is worth reading for its storytelling alone. But what makes it even more fascinating is Solnit's demonstration that disasters give rise to small, temporary utopias in which the best of human nature emerges and a remarkable spirit of generosity and cooperation takes over. 'Disaster,' she writes, 'along with moments of social upheaval, is when the shackles of conventional belief and role fall away and the possibilities open up.' People suffering unimaginable misfortune often revert not to savagery but to an almost beatific selflessness, comforting themselves in extremis by aiding others. Solnit cites many examples of those who remember a disaster as, paradoxically, one of the great moments of their lives. The reaction is similar to that of some who recall the Great Depression as a time of spiritual and social richness." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_front_during_World_War_II#Britain_and_Commonwealth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_front_during_World_War_II... [2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/21/AR2009082101111.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08...
mtw 10y ago
It's because loneliness is much more prevalent now than in 1974. It's no longer exotic but a condition sometimes voluntarily chosen and supported by modern technologies in 2016. Also we used to think that heart disease risk is mostly tied to diet and exercise. But it's still the #1 killer in the United States. So every protective or risk factor needs to be considered. As such, new research linking heart disease, CVD, CHD to loneliness, friendship or marriage is interesting. And It doesn't stop there. Loneliness is also tied to breast cancer, lymphoma and obesity : http://outcomereference.com/causes/59 http://outcomereference.com/causes/59
- gragas 10y ago
  That's not to say that loneliness causes those things. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that lonely people are more likely to be depressed and sedentary. Many diseases follow from being depressed and sedentary.
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  My folks were Silent Generation,and I think we're a lot less lonely than they were. And face it, I like being alone. I haven't felt lonely since college, and I think that was mostly performance anxiety.
EGreg 10y ago
Or Putnam's "Bowling Alone"
- bogomipz 10y ago
  That was an excellent book. It was also a prescient book as it predates social media and the smart phone.
Chathamization 10y ago
I think that been undergoing a number of changes - including (but not limited to) the increase in urbanization (moving away from close small communities), increase in movement (relatives spread across the country/globe), increase in secularism (decrease in religious communities), and more access to personal entertainment (see the end of the Chautauqua movement), that have definitely caused us to be more isolated and have less of a sense of community. We are still trying to adapt to - or even be aware of - the changes we have been undergoing and the implications of it. It seems like a sense of community is extremely important for a society, particularly with the connection there seems to be between community and happiness (my understanding is that much of the happiness that religious people get is from the community, for example). Still, I haven't seen a great idea as to how one can be fostered (though there are some decent ideas about what you as an individual can do to get a better sense).
PavlovsCat 10y ago
> Is "old research" not good enough? Indeed.. while waiting for the new research to come out, read Marcus Aurelius, Erich Fromm and Hannah Arendt. Maybe throw in some Roman and Greek classics. That should "help a bit". The problem isn't that we don't know how to live well and healthy and sleep soundly, it's that we want to be healthy and sleep soundly without living that way. We don't want to be simply just and honest and go from there. Well, joke's on us, the truth remains where it is, waiting for dithering people to stop being scared of it.
vonnik 10y ago
> why the focus on "new research"? Is "old research" not good enough? Because the NYT is a newspaper and they need a reason to publish a news article. This is known as a "hook." The hook in cases like this will be something new being published. It's hard to hook readers by announcing: What we've known since the 1970s still holds true. Just doesn't work.
- ianai 10y ago
  Yep, same reason Taylor Swift has so many breakup songs. They sell. The NYT has so many words to push per release and they have to come from a variety of topics.

muninn_ 10y ago

Right. It's not an issue of technology, for the most part, but it's the way American cities are designed. Instead of mixed-use walkable neighborhoods where people with a variety of incomes and backgrounds live, and stay put, we have suburban fortresses where people live in a box, never talk to their neighbors, drive a box to work, work in a box, then do it all over again. The national highway system was great for a nation on the brink of all-out war. We needed to move troops, tanks, people, supplies quickly and efficiently. This system ended up being used to separate black people from working class whites. Naturally we have drug and violence problems in those communities that were segregated from the more educated and affluent white population. Terrible. I wish I could be governor or something and make sure that we stop this. It makes me sad.

winter_blue 10y ago
You could get involved in local politics, and maybe eventually even run for governor. Is there anything stopping you?
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  Exactly. If you want this stuff to change, stop waiting for others to do it, you can get involved and start changing things.
- muninn_ 10y ago
  Yes. I have a high-paying job, a mortgage, and although I'm personable I don't see any starting point or path toward doing anything about it.
  - Frondo 10y ago
    Volunteer with your preferred local political party. The path to getting into politics can start as easily as showing up until people know you, and having good ideas that enough people agree with. Your job as a politician would be to carry those ideas to the structures of power (town council, school board, whatever). It's pretty time-consuming, but it's a big responsibility, making decisions that affect lots of people's lives. So, trade-offs.
    - zeroer 10y ago
      Another reason not to do so is that it's a high-risk, low-reward endeavor.
arkitaip 10y ago
We city apartment people aren't better at socializing with our neighbors, probably even worse. The stereotype that cities can be harsh and unfriendly is very much rooted in reality.
- k-mcgrady 10y ago

cableshaft 10y ago

Older research is generally given less credence than newer research because of certain assumptions which may or may not be accurate: * That the researchers looked into previous research, examined those results, and are either replicating them (thus adding extra evidence to those hypothesis), or have found some sort of flaw in how the research was gathered. * That the researches have, in their research, looked into multiple previous studies, including the old one you referenced, and synthesized them all for their new research. * It's often been shown that older research studies are flawed in some way, especially in certain fields, such as nutrition, so older studies should be held suspect (really the newer studies should be held with just as much skepticism, but they never are) Again, the assumptions that this is done is not necessarily what happened in reality, but without media or laypeople doing their own research into things (and neither have time for that), it's usually a useful greedy heuristic to assume newer research is better and more accurate than older research.

bogomipz 10y ago

>'I gotta ask: why the focus on "new research"?' I think this passage is key, I had not heard this postulated before: "New research suggests that loneliness is not necessarily the result of poor social skills or lack of social support, but can be caused in part by unusual sensitivity to social cues. Lonely people are more likely to perceive ambiguous social cues negatively, and enter a self-preservation mind-set — worsening the problem."

TheRealDunkirk 10y ago
Totally agree. I think the internet and social media have just exacerbated the existing problem that society is fracturing into countless splinter groups, with no tolerance for any of the others' views, and it's really difficult to find and keep up with those handful of people you can actually tolerate enough to keep a close social bond with. I don't think that it takes a degree in sociology, or a controlled study, to see this happening. As for WHY, my own, personal theory is that "we" (the US) came together to support the war effort in the forties in a way that the world had never experienced before or since, and it's all been a snowballing disassociation since, made worse as a reaction TO the perceived stifling effect of the dominant societal norm of that day.
- bendoernberg 10y ago
  FWIW communities coming together in times of emergency is a pretty universal experience, not unique to the US in the 1940's (the UK's home front experience during WW2 [1] is cited as an example most often I think). A book I've been meaning to read for a while is "A Paradise Built in Hell" by Rebecca Solnit. From the Washington Post review [2]: "Her book is worth reading for its storytelling alone. But what makes it even more fascinating is Solnit's demonstration that disasters give rise to small, temporary utopias in which the best of human nature emerges and a remarkable spirit of generosity and cooperation takes over. 'Disaster,' she writes, 'along with moments of social upheaval, is when the shackles of conventional belief and role fall away and the possibilities open up.' People suffering unimaginable misfortune often revert not to savagery but to an almost beatific selflessness, comforting themselves in extremis by aiding others. Solnit cites many examples of those who remember a disaster as, paradoxically, one of the great moments of their lives. The reaction is similar to that of some who recall the Great Depression as a time of spiritual and social richness." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_front_during_World_War_II#Britain_and_Commonwealth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_front_during_World_War_II... [2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/21/AR2009082101111.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08...

mtw 10y ago

It's because loneliness is much more prevalent now than in 1974. It's no longer exotic but a condition sometimes voluntarily chosen and supported by modern technologies in 2016. Also we used to think that heart disease risk is mostly tied to diet and exercise. But it's still the #1 killer in the United States. So every protective or risk factor needs to be considered. As such, new research linking heart disease, CVD, CHD to loneliness, friendship or marriage is interesting. And It doesn't stop there. Loneliness is also tied to breast cancer, lymphoma and obesity : http://outcomereference.com/causes/59 http://outcomereference.com/causes/59

gragas 10y ago
That's not to say that loneliness causes those things. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that lonely people are more likely to be depressed and sedentary. Many diseases follow from being depressed and sedentary.
ArkyBeagle 10y ago
My folks were Silent Generation,and I think we're a lot less lonely than they were. And face it, I like being alone. I haven't felt lonely since college, and I think that was mostly performance anxiety.

EGreg 10y ago

Or Putnam's "Bowling Alone"

bogomipz 10y ago
That was an excellent book. It was also a prescient book as it predates social media and the smart phone.

Chathamization 10y ago

I think that been undergoing a number of changes - including (but not limited to) the increase in urbanization (moving away from close small communities), increase in movement (relatives spread across the country/globe), increase in secularism (decrease in religious communities), and more access to personal entertainment (see the end of the Chautauqua movement), that have definitely caused us to be more isolated and have less of a sense of community. We are still trying to adapt to - or even be aware of - the changes we have been undergoing and the implications of it. It seems like a sense of community is extremely important for a society, particularly with the connection there seems to be between community and happiness (my understanding is that much of the happiness that religious people get is from the community, for example). Still, I haven't seen a great idea as to how one can be fostered (though there are some decent ideas about what you as an individual can do to get a better sense).

PavlovsCat 10y ago

> Is "old research" not good enough? Indeed.. while waiting for the new research to come out, read Marcus Aurelius, Erich Fromm and Hannah Arendt. Maybe throw in some Roman and Greek classics. That should "help a bit". The problem isn't that we don't know how to live well and healthy and sleep soundly, it's that we want to be healthy and sleep soundly without living that way. We don't want to be simply just and honest and go from there. Well, joke's on us, the truth remains where it is, waiting for dithering people to stop being scared of it.

vonnik 10y ago

> why the focus on "new research"? Is "old research" not good enough? Because the NYT is a newspaper and they need a reason to publish a news article. This is known as a "hook." The hook in cases like this will be something new being published. It's hard to hook readers by announcing: What we've known since the 1970s still holds true. Just doesn't work.

ianai 10y ago
Yep, same reason Taylor Swift has so many breakup songs. They sell. The NYT has so many words to push per release and they have to come from a variety of topics.