4 ms·
How do people fairly evaluate the science behind social media? It seems like a topic that thoroughly infected by personal bias. It reminds me of arguments about
by megaman821 3y ago
How do people fairly evaluate the science behind social media? It seems like a topic that thoroughly infected by personal bias. It reminds me of arguments about violent video games and the rise of school violence; two events that are definitely correlated but have no direct evidence linking them to each other.
- cies 3y agoLook an "natural control groups". Violent games where also played in JP, but only in the US kids started bringing guns to school. Seems to me like a case closed. With social media usage we see also a strong rise in asian societies wrt mental health problems especially in girls. Good to investigate further. Also, the NRA tried to put the blame on anything except for prevalence of guns: there's money behind that narrative.
- ImaCake 3y agoMy answer is simply to ignore the science. Unless the experimenters have done a robust randomised clinical trial (or equivalent) the conclusions are no better than an editorial. Social media is confounded by human social factors: factors which are hard to measure, poorly understood, and every bit as complex as cell signalling pathways. Never forget that scientists are under strong pressures to present results favourable to them getting future funding. This works out in the wash, but individual studies are inevitably biased. I think what we can establish is that social media has some negative and positive effects but its hard to know if social media is just a conduit or if it is the root cause. You may as well look to personal experience; if you have a bad time on social media then stop using it. If it helps you build community and joy, keep using it.