4 ms·

That assumes people aren’t induced towards self harm due to an increased awareness? If you believe suicide or self harm are common (and valid/acceptable) solut

by Aeolun 3y ago

That assumes people aren’t induced towards self harm due to an increased awareness? If you believe suicide or self harm are common (and valid/acceptable) solutions to your issue, would you not be more likely to do so?

julianeon 3y ago
This is also complicated by the fact that, if you are about to self-harm or in the population of people verging on self-harm, you are overdue for a mental health diagnosis for depression or a condition like it. It seems a little circular past this point. You may have diagnosed yourself, but if you saw a doctor, they would do the same.
nasmorn 3y ago
I guess also suicide attempts and hospitalizations will be highly affected by how society views it. Actual successful suicides seem the least influenced by external trends.
- FabHK 3y ago
  Actual suicides can be quite influenced by events (eg other suicides and reporting about them in the media). This is known as the Werther effect (after Goethe's "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers"). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
SkyBelow 3y ago
One group is claiming that X is occurring more and another group is saying that X is occurring just as often as in the past, but awareness of X means we identify more cases. The argument that X is increasing because of awareness of X has increased is still, at its core, an argument that X has increased, and is a subset of the first group's argument. The poster you replied to seemed to be looking for evidence that shows X was actually increasing by looking at an increase in reporting that wouldn't be solely caused by awareness of X and thus had to be because of an actual increase of X. To this end, your argument that the awareness of X is causing an actual increase of X would be one possible reason X is increasing, but that wasn't relevant to the previous poster's point, at least from my reading of it.
- pixl97 3y ago
  Of course when measuring X now, you have to ensure that methodology for measuring X has not changed. For example, are medical examiners back then, or even now, more apt to rule a suicide an accidental death? Wide social trends can affect how these individual decisions are marked at population scales.
tomp 3y ago
Isn’t this just the argument that it’s a social contagion? And indeed, if you can be convinced those are the solutions to your problems, surely you can be convinced you have problems in the first place as well?
- pixl97 3y ago
  I wouldn't use the word just. Instead think of social contagion as an additive/multiplicative factor that we don't know the value of. So imagine a world where we're not allowed to talk about or problems. In that world you'll have your base measured rate X. Then you add a new stressor and get your increase over X. In a model with social contagion you still have X, you still have your increase in your stressors, then you have the confounding factor of the social contagion.
ascorbic 3y ago
If this were true, what happened around 2010-2012 to make this the case? And if that were the case, wouldn't the most likely explanation be because suddenly all these kids got easier access to the kind of online communities that would encourage this?

by Aeolun 3y ago

julianeon 3y ago

This is also complicated by the fact that, if you are about to self-harm or in the population of people verging on self-harm, you are overdue for a mental health diagnosis for depression or a condition like it. It seems a little circular past this point. You may have diagnosed yourself, but if you saw a doctor, they would do the same.

nasmorn 3y ago

I guess also suicide attempts and hospitalizations will be highly affected by how society views it. Actual successful suicides seem the least influenced by external trends.

FabHK 3y ago
Actual suicides can be quite influenced by events (eg other suicides and reporting about them in the media). This is known as the Werther effect (after Goethe's "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers"). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

SkyBelow 3y ago

One group is claiming that X is occurring more and another group is saying that X is occurring just as often as in the past, but awareness of X means we identify more cases. The argument that X is increasing because of awareness of X has increased is still, at its core, an argument that X has increased, and is a subset of the first group's argument. The poster you replied to seemed to be looking for evidence that shows X was actually increasing by looking at an increase in reporting that wouldn't be solely caused by awareness of X and thus had to be because of an actual increase of X. To this end, your argument that the awareness of X is causing an actual increase of X would be one possible reason X is increasing, but that wasn't relevant to the previous poster's point, at least from my reading of it.

pixl97 3y ago
Of course when measuring X now, you have to ensure that methodology for measuring X has not changed. For example, are medical examiners back then, or even now, more apt to rule a suicide an accidental death? Wide social trends can affect how these individual decisions are marked at population scales.

tomp 3y ago

Isn’t this just the argument that it’s a social contagion? And indeed, if you can be convinced those are the solutions to your problems, surely you can be convinced you have problems in the first place as well?

pixl97 3y ago
I wouldn't use the word just. Instead think of social contagion as an additive/multiplicative factor that we don't know the value of. So imagine a world where we're not allowed to talk about or problems. In that world you'll have your base measured rate X. Then you add a new stressor and get your increase over X. In a model with social contagion you still have X, you still have your increase in your stressors, then you have the confounding factor of the social contagion.

ascorbic 3y ago

If this were true, what happened around 2010-2012 to make this the case? And if that were the case, wouldn't the most likely explanation be because suddenly all these kids got easier access to the kind of online communities that would encourage this?