Moad Yaseen
Mrs. Whitemore
Comp 105-001
2nd of December
2015
Could the use of smartphones in the hands of America's
adolescents regress basic face-to-face socialization?
Phone-Zombies are everywhere. Whether you’re just
innocently walking down the street, having a coffee at Tim Hortons, or simply
sitting in a classroom, you’ll notice a horde of bloodshot eyes, neck aching,
and tedious individuals hiding themselves from the real world like an ostrich
with its head underground in fear. Some people only lift their head to get a
glimpse once in a while to try and create an equilibrium between their real
life and their social media masquerade, while others have no interest in the
world around them, and thus, spend hours on developing their profile online. As
I pondered over these peculiar persons, curiosity struck, if a person spent
most of his life concealed by his handheld device, would he lack, or somehow
lose, the necessary skills to speak with another individual face-to-face? As it
appears through immense research, the use of smartphones seems to create a cold
world at war, filled with a vast number of users that only seem to be
increasing, and lacking any sense of real empathy, while a feeling of personal
anxiety dwells beneath them, in the hopes of social acceptance; even though, it
could be controlled using authority, it seems that adults are becoming more
tolerant to this bridge of communication, possibly though because of the
increase in social media authority.
 |
| Figure 1: Pew Research Center 2015 |
The fact to the matter is, text messaging features in
a smartphone simply lack any social cues when in conversation, which would seem
to deteriorate any source of conversational direction or emotional
understanding. A great example of such would be cyber bullying and how children
online don’t understand how simple worded, yet malicious, texts could have a
great detrimental and emotional affect to the retriever. However, if one is to
say such words face-to-face, and not behind a small touch screen, the conversation
could take another turn. Most possibly, the retriever of the message would be
hurt, express such emotions, and create some sort of feedback, which could
change what was initially planned by the sender. An example would be how one
would speak to a person about licentious matters, notices the cringe and wry
smile of their friend, and would then decide to completely shift the
conversation; however, through text, the person would’ve never really known
when to stop until the opposing person really told them to and seemed to
express real concern. Thus, one could say it is face-to-face conversation that
really seems to make us more humane and less malevolent, or even
unintentionally maleficent.
Looking at media use in 8-18 year olds, it seems that
the average total media use over the years has ascended from 1999’s six hours
and nineteen minutes to 2009’s seven hours and thirty-eight minutes- a total
increase of an hour and nineteen minutes (Kaiser Family Foundation 2010). Cell
phone ownership has also increased from 39% in 1999 to 66% in 2009, though if
we look more closely, we could observe that 85% of 15-18 year olds own a cell
phone in contrast to 2004’s 56% of 15-18 year olds (Kaiser Family Foundation).
Looking at the statistical data provided, we can conclude that media and cell
phone possession has drastically increased in a short decade, and since the
progression of technology is still on the rise, we can also expect a rise in
the percentage of cell phone users and media exposure at the naïve ages of 8-18.
One could also state that, as recent generations grow older and have children,
they will be more tolerable when it comes to the use of smartphones, thus, even
allowing their children to use their phones at the dinner table. Since parents
are becoming more tolerable with smartphones, they are accepting, better yet,
welcoming this device into their daily lives and those of their children,
making smartphones, ever more, a great part of their lives.
According to Professor McNeece, a notable sociologist
currently teaching at the University of Michigan, he notices this extensive use
of smartphones as he wanders through the hallways on campus: “… Walking down
the hall from my sociological theory class on Monday. Looking at students
between classes- lots of them sitting on the benches that are aligned up there
along the hallway, and there was one group at the very end of the hallway of
three or four persons who were having a conversation with each other standing.
Virtually, everybody else was sitting and focused on their smartphones, and
completely ignoring everything else that was going on. And of course, as you
may know, I have a term for them- I call them Phone Zombies…In fact one walked
in front of my car, I was driving into campus today and… a phone zombie walked
right in front of my vehicle as I’m driving down the roads… Yes, they’re
everywhere.” The following anecdote by the professor represents, what has
slowly formed to be, a social norm of what to do when you’re simply not doing
anything else. It is as if you feel like nothing interesting would occur in
your ordinary, bland life for quite a while that one decides to shift to their
technological alter-ego instead of finding ways to embellish their own way of
life.
As the usage of smartphones and other handheld device
usage has been made apparent and seems to be elevating as time roams by, with
so many growing children on the line, could such technological exposure
detrimentally affect new generations sociologically? “I don’t think there is
one answer to that question” said local sociologist and University of
Michigan-Dearborn professor William McNeece, “…It really comes down to this in
my view… whether or not… you use the technology, or the technology uses you”
(McNeece 2015). However, if that seems to be the case, then technology seems to
be the puppet master in this post-modern affair. As 97% if 18-29 year olds seem
to use their smartphones to avoid boredom, 47% use it to avoid people around
them, and 57% use it to find a good way to get somewhere (PewResearchCenter
2015), we could already see how our young, yet mature, generation seems to be
using it as a means of sidestepping reality and the people around them. Of
course, now and then, we all have that one person who we wouldn’t want to spend
a mere second with, but instead of confronting such issues and finding
permanent solutions, this sort of evasive behavior could persuade our growing
generation to take the easy route. Such an example would be how 80% of mature
teens and 20 year olds would use their smartphone for turn by turn navigation
(PewResearchCenter 2015); even though navigation could evade people getting
lost, as Professor McNeece would corroborate, using your Smartphone for such a
task implements an added dependency towards this handheld device, which would
mean more power in the hands of such devices in a way that could control us. Just
like cars, it seems that smartphones are starting to take a great affect in the
lives of individuals, to the point that their absence could cause some sort of
dilemma or consequence. Such as the absence of a car could cause one to be late
for work, the absence of a smartphone would lead the office perplexed to that
person’s whereabouts and that could lead the office to promote a sort of strict
response concerning one’s position due to that person’s lack of accessibility.
Looking at the sociological aspect of media towards
the developing ages of 8-18, we observe that moderate and light media users
seem more likely to produce more exceptional grades and less below average
grades (KFF 2010). Also, it seems that moderate and light media users seem to
be more easily entertained, happy and are less mischievous (KFF 2010).
Ultimately, albeit the usage of such devices could create a sort of
sociological advantage when it comes to fitting in with the constructed high school
and middle school social classes, it seems that the microscopic advantage is
well hidden with the many psychological cons that come with being up to date
and manipulating social media to create, what one could call, a better form of
self. One could propose that heavy media users seem to be more distracted than
lighter users, based on the media they observe, that they tend to focus less at
school or school activities, producing less honorable results. Also, as young
minds are more subjected to media, their expectations seem to alter when it
comes to what entertains them. This is why more heavy users seem to present
more blasé characteristics, and are thus, less satisfied. As parents set out to
control more heavy-media-using kids, it seems that children are both influenced
from certain defiant characters, while also given less controlling measures,
that they present more deviant behavior, as well as higher expectations of
freedom to do whatever; with this constructed behavior, children learn to use
their smartphones more often, and with more friends, become more higher up in
the popularity hierarchy. As the heavier users are more defiant, with the use
of media, they become potential cyber-bullies as they sense less emotional
feedback and use what they have learned through media to pass on hurtful
repartees, without the consideration of the other person’s emotions. Thus, it
seems that handheld devices, such as the smartphone, would easily be able to
manipulate young minds, if precautionary steps aren’t taken by adults to limit
such technological consumption. Therefore one can say that power can be limited
by some sort of traditional authority, such as one’s parents.
 |
| Figure 2: KFF 2010 |
Speaking of social media, it seems that teenagers and
young adults who are socially accepted and engaged in their local society,
though maintain a social media connection with posts from a relatively large
number of friends, would experience an increase in anxious-depressive symptoms;
on the contrary, it seems that less socially accepted adolescents and young
adults with a large number of friends online would experience less depressive
symptoms (Szwedo, Mikami, and Allen 2012). Consequently, even though the less
socially accepted individuals are given an advantage with the use of social
media, it seems that the more socially accepted are left with two lives to
juggle with and perfect, creating unnecessary pressure to be at the top of the
social chain. In addition, since 91% of young users use their smartphones for
social media (PewResearchCenter 2015), it seems that the majority of
individuals are left with either a less socially accepted life but an online
bliss, or a stressful challenge to maintaining both sides of the yin and yang;
the anxiety would leave the user to either vacillate between the two lives or
merge them together; from McNeece’s personal perspective of when he was roaming
through the hallways and noticed, other than a small group of 3 or 4 people, “…everybody
else was sitting and focused on their smartphones, and completely ignoring
everything else that was going on”, one could say that the majority of individuals
did not solely choose reality. Moreover, even to the less socially accepted
people who feel like they have nothing to lose, social media could shine a
light into various other complications such as cyberbullying, hackers, and the
fact that what one usually exhibits in social media could now affect a person
outside of it, such as one’s job security or one’s initial perception of that
individual. It seems, ever since parents and more cognizant adults started to
use social media as a means of getting in touch with old friends and faraway
family members- the way social media was initially intended to be used- the
once reckless environment of trivial events has become a land mine of
authoritarian figures, of whom caused more serious observations to be taken by
a more rational sense of authority, such as the government or one’s employer.
This has led to fear over most developing teens as to what could be posted or
not, resembling a loss of power and control over their social media life.
According to an observational study, it seems that
simply the presence of a Smartphone could affect, almost always negatively, the
quality, trust and empathy of the conversation, whether casual or important (Przybylski
and Weinstein 2012). The results demonstrated that the smartphone’s presence
could have an even more magnified affect to the empathy of the conversation as
the topic became graver, thus, emphasizing how smartphones could distract
simple face-to-face conversation to the point where less zeal and emotion is
being received by the listener. In fact, 73% of young users admit feeling
distracted using such devices (PewResearchCenter 2015). The reason to such an
encumbering affect is mainly because our smartphones have now become “…a bridge
to another world” (McNeece 2015), so just the presence of it would implement
thoughts about one’s other life. However, if just the presence of a
Smartphone could affect basic conversation, what about if one was using it
while being engaged in a conversation? It is impossible for one to juggle
between two lives simultaneously and expect to focus fully in one conversation.
At the same time, it is too difficult for one to have a grave conversation
simply through text, as it is a vacuum that simply lacks social cues, leaving
both the sender and receiver curious on one’s reaction to help soothe the
conversation and make sure that both parties are comfortable.
Overall, an increasingly large number of growing teens
seem to have regressed their face-to-face social skills based on how usual
conversations on smartphones lack any sense of emotion, which is what they have
become accustomed to since they are deeply dependent on their smartphones, and
have become more anxious users in search of social acceptance. Though it seems
that the once control-free bridge of communication that teenagers once had has
recently turned into a Pegasus Bridge where the adults seemed to have regained
control, creating less of an escape for growing teens. No more could one simply
text message what they please or post what is really on their minds, and
it is this loss of power from teens and growing adolescents that resembles a
merge of social media with one’s personal life. Thus, the lack of power and the
narrowing disparity between one’s smartphone social media world and one’s
physical reality, has led to an impasse in where a growing teen could resort to
emotional dumping in society and what is seen as the socially accepted norm.
Where could socially powerless growing teens, who seem to be stuck between
being a child and an adult, go in order to practice their own form of power
through a socially constructed world? With the loss of social media control, it
seems that teenagers could either resort back to face-to-face socialization, or
good old fashioned text messages, and since text messaging applications seem to
be the new trend with young adults, it seems safe to predict that our growing
Americans aren’t going to be physically speaking with much emotion any more
than they do now. Will there be a savior to end this Phone Zombie apocalypse,
or will the last non-users standing be left for dead? For now, if adults could
take more precautionary measures and control the use of media in the household,
than we might be able to survive this generation and those after until a new
trendy, but less socially affective, invention becomes our beacon of hope.
Bibliography
Allen, Joseph, David Szwedo and Amori Yee Mikami. “Social
Networking Site Use Predicts Changes in Young Adults’ Psychological Adjustment”.
Journal of Research on Adolescence.
Volume 22. Issue 3 (September 2012): 453-466. Web. 10 November 2015. < http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3482112>
Published
on September 1st 2012, the authors took 89 participants and interviewed them
throughout a year to offer an observational, self-report and peer-report on the
status of each individual, while also looking at posted pictures as predictors
of psychological amendments overtime. Albeit the study could have been an
alteration on what reality could be due to a possible Hawthorn effect, it is
nevertheless reliable and relevant as it demonstrates how one seeks social
acceptance and how when reacts when acceptance has not been achieved
(depression).
File, Thom and Camille Ryan. “Computer and Internet
Use in the United States: 2013”. US
Consensus. November 2014. Web. 10 November 2015. <https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/acs-internet2013.pdf>
Published
on November 2014, the official US Census on the use of internet in the year
2013 offers an accurate, well as accurate as one can get, on the statistics of
internet usage in America. This would help to create a solid understanding on
the percentage of US residents who could be impacted socially by this progress
in technology. It also focuses on what parts of America have more or less
access and usage and how the population of the less progressive States may
contrast to their counterparts in certain areas.
Foehr, Ulla, Victoria Rideout and Donald Roberts. “Generation
M^2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year- Olds”. Kaiser Family Foundation. 1 January 2010. Web. 10 November
2015. <
https://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/8010.pdf>
Published
on January 1st 2010, The Kaiser Family Foundation focused its extensive study
on the youth of America (ages 8-18) and looked at the effect of technology on
young people’s daily lives; this was achieved through asking questions about
how children are using media, effects on social life, effects on their grades
at school, and even psychological questions, such as how they usually feel at
school and their relationship with their parents.
McNeece, William. "Interview with Professor
McNeece." Personal interview. 18 Nov. 2015.
A
personal interview with Professor McNeece of University of Michigan-Dearborn. The
Professor is well known at campus for his pluralism project and photographs
that have been known to be an impetus in Harvard’s pluralism project- since it
was the first of its kind. The professor has also taken part in an observational
and participant research with a flying saucer cult, only to discover that the
members were surprisingly ordinary individuals.
Przybylski, Andrew and Netta Weinstein. “Can you connect
with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences
face-to-face conversation quality”. Journal
of Social and Personal Relationships. Volume 30. Issue 3 (May 2013). 237-246.
Web. 10 November 2015. <http://spr.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/07/17/0265407512453827.full.pdf+html>
Published
on July 19th 2012, this study is the most important source of the bunch as it
focuses on the presence of such hand-held devices, its impact on normal
conversation, and one’s empathy based on observation to the given topic of
conversation at hand. The results are outstanding and are in favor of the
research question, and would outline how one’s relationship with the people
they care about is slowly swept away once they enter the dark realms of social
media.
Smith, Aaron. "US Smartphone Use in 2015". Pew Research Center. 1 April 2015. Web.
10 November 2015 <http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/03/PI_Smartphones_0401151.pdf>
A statistical report published on April
1st 2015 and conducted using a survey, this study demonstrated the new and
rising “Smartphone-dependent” population that rely on their Smartphones for
their internet connection, thus, multiplying the importance of such a device to
the user. It was also created based on several other studies, most of which
looks at more than 2000 test subjects. The Pew Research Center has said to have
been looking at the sociological impact of technology since the introduction of
the first millennium, proving to be an experienced source.
*Appendix A: Interview Questions
1. “How are you, professor?”
2. “I just wanted to know,
as my sociologist professor, how long have you been a sociologist?”
3. “Throughout all this time
(since 1967- the answer to the aforementioned question), are there any proud accomplishments
you’d like to put out there?”
4. “Now to get a little
deeper into the topic, and not asking you as a professor, but asking you as a
person outside of the class room, do you notice the use of smartphones at the
hands of young individuals nowadays?”
5. “Now as a professor, when
teaching in class, do you notice the use of it (smartphones) in class, as well?”
6. “Are you
seeing…smartphone use exceeding- is it getting worse like every year- are
people using more of their smartphone every year or is it just, you know, the
same number of people from last year to this year?”
7. “Well, now I’m going to
go a little deeper in this and say, as a person outside of the classroom and as
a professor, do you think… young students seem to be more engaged…in society…
or do you think that’s decreasing?”
8. “Now I’m going to go
straight into the actual question; the actual question I’m researching is:
could the use of smartphones in the hands of America’s adolescents regress
basic face-to-face socialization? What do you think?”
9. “Looking at some facts
that I have seen recently… it said that a hundred percent of users, that they
had conducted their research upon, said that they text… so a hundred percent
text message…and a lesser 93% use their smartphones to call…a great contrast to
what a cell phone was actually made for… what do you think about those numbers?”
10. “Based on people texting
rather than calling (since the interviewee was talking about writing short
texts instead of calling)… could the use of smartphones in such a way make some
of our growing teenagers…socially awkward in any way?”
11. “Overall, do you think
smartphones have a potential to be detrimental to our society? Or do you think
that we should resort to an alteration in smartphones to make it less
detrimental… what is your take?”
*The
following interview was taken in Professor McNeece’s office on campus at the
University of Michigan-Dearborn, during his office hours. The conversation, at
some time, was quite informal, and thus, so were some of the questions and the
way they were said, in order to make the interviewee feel more comfortable. The
questions were also asked in a way that seemed objective and not biased in any
way, for the sake of comfort and creating results out of true opinion.
**Appendix B: Summarized Results of Interview
-
Started
to major with sociology ’67-‘68
-
Proud
Accomplishments:
o
Participant
observational research on the flying saucer cult
§ Discovered that they were extraordinary people
o
Pluralism
Research
§ Photographs/Visual representation of change in religion in
Southeast Michigan- first to produce such a thing. Harvard pluralism used this
as an impetus.
-
Smartphone
use
o
As a
citizen
§ Informal visual survey
·
“…
Walking down the hall from my sociological theory class on Monday. Looking at
students between classes lots of them sitting them on the benches that are
aligned up there along the hallway. And there was one group at the very end of
the hallway of three or four persons who were having a conversation with each
other standing. Virtually everybody else was sitting and focused on their
smartphones, and completely ignoring everything else that was going on. And of
course, as you may know, I have a term for them- I call them Phone Zombies…” In fact one walked in
front of my car, I was driving into campus today and… a phone zombie walked
right in front of my vehicle as I’m driving down the roads… yes they’re
everywhere”.
o
As a
professor
§ No
·
“…because
I have strictly forbid it and students have learned; at one time it was a bit
of a problem, but there is really not that much of a problem. One student in
one of my classes sits near the back door who will go out of class to get the
phone and that’s in violation of my primary directive- that you don’t do that.
… Very disruptive to other students, which is the most important thing, it’s
distracting. They sit right in the back and they slip out the door, and they
don’t distract fairly many people… but clearly they do distract some as they’re
getting up and leaving”.
-
Is
it exceeding
o
“My
impression is that it has plateaued several years ago”
o
Flip
phones
§ “…literally you would see, cause the novelty of it, student with
flip phones… having conversations literally with: oh yes I’m walking down the
hall now. Yes I see you. Yes you’re waving to me. Yes I’ll wave to you too”.
o
Talking
to yourself (using your phone)
§ “…In the past, when people started to talk and there was nobody
around… people look at them as if, well, there may be something wrong with that
person. I have to get away from that person… Now it has become fairly normal,
that people talking out loud to nobody else who is around… it’s the new normal…
it seems to have leveled off, everyone seems to have one… the single most
important media device, bar none…”
o
Compares
is to 20’s and radio, and 60’s television
§ “…portal to the rest of the world…”
§ “…even in Haiti…”
-
More
engaged in society
o
“…they
are more engaged than previous generations”
§ “… A bit more oppressed than recent generations…”
§ “…stupid YouTube videos…or Angry Birds…”
-
The
ACTUAL QUESTION
o
“I
don’t think there is one answer to that question”
§ “…It really comes down to this in my view… whether or not… you use
the technology, or the technology uses you”
§ “...I get lost less often with this technology”
§ “…It does bother me though...”
o
“I
think that it is both”
§ “I think that once everybody gets used to the phone, that they’ll
use it for what it is meant for”.
§ Ubiquitous “…There is nothing you can do about it because it is
here…”
§ “When they get a Smartphone… have some power of influence… they’ll
be texting each other and not saying much of anything… but it’s training…
they’re discovering who they are… the question is to what degree does it
control us…”
-
Texting
vs Phone call
o
“…not
much difference between nighty three percent and a hundred percent…”
o
“… A
lot of it (text messages) may be useless...”
o
“…
To what degree is there a certain redundancy… it seems as if people can in the
past face to face they make plans… after class… and after class the Smartphones
come out… and start texting even though they know where they’re all going to
be- is that all necessary, and is it really important? That I don’t know.”
o
“…texting
is becoming a language of its own…”
-
Socially
Awkward
o
“No
I don’t think so”
o
“…boundaries
have pretty much gone away because of the Smartphone…”
o
“…I
suspect that it is not necessarily healthy (getting emails- no REAL vacation)…
rest is very very important.”
-
Detrimental
o
“You
have to understand the nature of the beast, and you have to, therefore, do
what’s necessary in order to modify it if it gets out of control…”
§ Compares it to automobile industry with suburban sprawl, pollution
·
“Would
you be willing to give up your car… there is no alternative.”
o
Mass
Transportation in Manhattan vs Detroit
** The
aforementioned, summarized data was not all that was said during the, approximately,
twenty seven minutes of interviewed material. Some material has been
summarized, accordingly and informally, and not to be taken by word, while
those in speech marks are. The actual word by time has not been included.
No comments:
Post a Comment