Abstract
This essay examines whether social networking sites are beneficial to the cognitive development of adolescents. It considers the cognitive development of adolescents to include; the development of thought processes such as remembering, problem solving, and decision-making; the development of abstract thinking; the development of the power of thought; the development of cognitive skills such as literacy and numeracy. The current most popular SNS among adolescents are identified, along with the three most popular activities within these SNS – all of which are found to benefit adolescent’s cognitive development. The further possibilities of how SNS can be utilised to assist adolescent’s cognitive development are evaluated, and the increased flexibility, forums to promote critical thinking, and variety of forms of content, are all identified as ways that benefit the cognitive development of adolescents as shown by evidence. It is concluded that both in the ways SNS are currently being utilised, and could further be utilised, are both beneficial to the cognitive development of adolescents.
Introduction
Participation in social network sites (SNS) is an integral activity in the day-to-day life of a modern adolescent. Considered to be the age group most likely to use an SNS (Lenhart et al., 2010), 95% of adolescents now report they have a smartphone or access to one, and nearly half of adolescents say they are online on a near-constant basis (Anderson & Jiang, 2018). Although recent trends reveal that the most popular social networks among adolescents are changing – YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat are now more popular among adolescents than Facebook (Anderson & Jiang, 2018) – one trend that is out of the question is that adolescents will simply stop using these networks.
Literature in this area has warned about the detrimental effects that SNS may have on adolescents’ cognitive development (Bryant, 2018), further propagating the mounting worry among parents that they should refrain their children from participating in SNS at all. In the unlikelihood that adolescents will be refraining from SNS anytime soon, this essay will argue that it is incorrect to suggest that the activities adolescents are currently engaging in have no benefits to their cognitive development. In fact, SNS can even be further utilised to consciously assist education in ways that no other medium can. To address these arguments, the essay will firstly define cognitive development, with specific relevance to the period of adolescent years. It will then move to discuss the most popular activities on SNS among adolescents currently, and the benefits these can offer in assisting their cognitive development. In understanding that it is idealistic to assume adolescents are using SNS already in ways that assist education, this essay will then move to discuss further ways that SNS can enhance their education, through educational groups and discussions. Against this background of evidence, it will be henceforth be concluded that SNS are in fact beneficial to the cognitive development of adolescents.
Cognitive Development Defined
For the purposes of this essay, cognitive development will be defined as the ‘construction of thought processes – including remembering, problem solving, and decision-making – from childhood through to adulthood’ (Saghir et al., 2016). The age range of adolescents has been defined as being from 10 to 19 years of age (World Health Organization, 2019). Jean Piaget remains to be a dominant voice in the field of adolescent cognitive development. He asserts that in the adolescent stage of cognitive development (the Formal Operational Stage), adolescents gain the ability to think in an abstract manner by manipulating ideas in their head, without any dependence on concrete manipulation’ (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958). They will furthermore be ‘actively constructing their own cognitive worlds and organising their experiences’ (Santrock, 2015), by developing their power of thought (Bryant, 2018). With respect to this research, this essay will examine the advantages of SNS in assisting; the development of adolescents’ memory, problem solving, and decision-making abilities; Piaget’s abstract and imaginative thinking expected of an adolescent; as well as the development of cognitive skills such as literacy and numeracy paramount to adolescents’ academic ventures (Meadows, 2017). This essay will now move to discuss the ways SNS are already assisting the development of adolescents’ cognitive development, in the ways they are currently being utilised.
How the Ways Social Network Sites are Currently Being Used Benefit Adolescents’ Cognitive Development
SNS are defined as sites that ‘support the maintenance of pre-existing social networks and/or help strangers connect based on shared interests, political views, or activities’ (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). The current most popular SNS among adolescents are Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, and Facebook (including Facebook messenger) (Anderson & Jiang, 2018).
‘Sending private messages to Facebook friends’ was the single most popular activity to do on Facebook in the U.S. in 2017 (Statista). This is consistent with previous results found in a 2014 study concerned with adolescents’ activity alone (Vlachopoulou & Boutsouki, 2014). Although these studies were primarily based on Facebook (and Facebook messenger), 25% of Instagram users used Instagram Direct Message in a month in 2014 (Fortune, 2014), which is expected to have increased as adolescents are now more likely to be connecting over Instagram than Facebook (Anderson & Jiang, 2018). Snapchat also has messaging features. There are various underlying cognitive advantages associated with sending private messages – firstly, research depicts that technological messages can assist adolescents with the development of their literary skills. This is evidenced not only in research concerning foreign students, where SNS enabled them to practice English in a safe and interactive environment (Greehow, 2008; Pattanapichet & Wichadee, 2015), but also in research concerning English-speaking adolescents. A 2013 analysis concluded there to be mostly a positive correlation between texting and/or instant messaging, and the child’s literacy skills (Verheijen, 2013). This was later solidified by a 2016 study examining 10-13 year olds, which found children who engaged in texting messages had higher written language skills and grammar abilities (Van Dijk et al., 2016), and another 2013 study that found young people who had used Facebook for more than a year had higher scores in tests of verbal ability, working memory, and spelling, compared to their peers who had used it for a shorter period (Alloway, Horton, Alloway, Dawson, 2013). However, messaging online has been shown to not only assist in the development of literary skills, but also to give all adolescents a voice. This assists the development of their ‘power of thought’ (Piaget, 1970), as individuals feel freer to express their thoughts, sometimes more than they would in person (Nguyen & Kellogg, 2005). Although researchers highlight the social implications in giving everyone an online voice (Bryant, 2018) – such as increased online conflict and the permanence of online posting – it cannot be denied that the development of an online voice assists adolescents’ cognitive development both in developing their ‘power of thought’, but also in the development of basic cognitive thought processes. By considering possible implications before sending messages, adolescents are forced to employ complex decision-making skills when messaging online, and consider abstract concepts such as their identity, online identity, and the permanency of their digital footprint (Ribble, 2016).
From January to October 2015, posts from U.S. brands were liked, shared, or commented on 65 billion times (Yuki, 2015), making this the second most popular SNS activity. Concerning adolescents alone, a research study revealed 52% of its young adolescent participants stated that liking or sharing content they liked was their main activity on social networking sites (Vlachopoulou & Boutsouki, 2014). This refers to not only Facebook, but also Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube. However, are adolescents likely to share/like anything on their news feed without much thought? Evidence suggests otherwise. A 2015 study examined both the most shared Facebook posts, and surveyed SNS users regarding their likelihood to share particular content (Yuki, 2015). The results illustrate that social-media users engage in a deep form of decision-making, which considers abstract concepts such as identity, other’s perceptions of their self and subsequently their online activity, and the type of value within the content that is shared. The value of ‘social currency’ was frequently discussed in this study, an abstract concept that considers ‘will the most-shared posts likely be content that make the sharer look…’ (Yuki, 2015, p. 461). Interestingly, regarding social currency questions, the younger participants were most concerned about whether the posts made them either ‘look good’, or ‘look intelligent’ (Yuki, 2015). Additionally, 42% of participants agreed that ‘usefulness’ was a significant factor among the most shared content (Yuki, 2015, p. 464), which took to include publishing posts such as newspaper articles, online publications, etc. This study thus indicates that when sharing or liking content, social media users engage in a deep level of decision making, which concerns numerous abstract and imaginative concepts considered by Piaget to be paramount to adolescents’ cognitive development.
Finally, a survey has indicated an increase in the presence of news-related posts on SNS (Shearer & Gottfried, 2017), making ‘reading, watching or sharing information about the world’ the third most popular activity on an SNS (Statista, 2017). Throughout the course of August 2017, ‘67% of Americans reported that they get at least some of their news on SNS (Shearer & Gottfried, 2017), which was an increase from the previous year. This is also not just based on Facebook, but also includes Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat and Instagram – most of which, as previously stated, are sites that are known to be popular among adolescents (Shearer & Gottfried, 2017). With the rising popularity of news content on SNS, it promotes interest among adolescents in the news, because they’re constantly exposed to news-based discussions. This assists adolescents’ cognitive development because the news is inherently complex and abstract – issues that are raised have multiple perspectives to consider, and include abstract concepts such as democracy, diplomacy, etc. Knowing about the news also promotes discussion and debate among students and their family and peers, where these concepts are further unpacked. Additionally, by seeing how the news has become more central to social media, it supports the notion that social media ‘restores reading and writing as central activities in our culture’ (Shirky, 2010). Reading is essential for adolescents’ development, as it helps Piaget’s goals be rehearsed in the context of reading. Middle school students should ‘be active constructors of meaning in their reading, both individually and in socially structured settings’ (Farnan, 1996), which will enable them to realise Piaget’s idea that ‘adolescents must construct their own knowledge’ (1970). Furthermore, the increased news-based content on SNS restores news-based concepts and discussion, and reading and writing, as central activities in adolescent life.
How the Social Network Sites Could be Further Used to Actively Benefit Adolescents’ Cognitive Development
SNS have the potential to specifically assist the education and cognitive development of adolescents in a way that no other medium has ever done before. This belief has been widely reinforced by educators, and many schools and universities are already incorporating online discussion pages and other SNS to assist classes. Research within this area also dictates this to be the case.
A 2015 study examined whether Facebook can enhance students’ critical thinking skills (Pattanapichet, Wichadee, 2015). Undergraduate students in the experimental group explored Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, through posting answers in a Facebook group, and getting feedback from peers and teachers through the same group. The results were statistically significant, and concluded that students who used Facebook to assist their learning, had higher critical thinking abilities than those who had not used social media (Pattanapichet, Wichadee, 2015). This was consistent with earlier findings by Yang and Ahn (2007), where they found that ‘synchronous online discussion promotes critical thinking’ (Sherman, 2013, p. 9). Although these studies do concern Facebook more than the other SNS commonly used among adolescents as discussion groups are a common Facebook feature, these studies highlight the significant affect that online discussion forums specifically designed to assist education have on assisting the development of cognitive skills such as critical thinking.
SNS also host a variety of forms of content – such as text, visuals, audio, video, and graphic organizers. This is clear in all SNS considered to be popular among adolescents. This variety, when utilised with the hope of assisting adolescents’ education, help cater to wide range learning styles. Sherman (2013) illustrated this in his research, which concluded that if the experience of learning is interactive, and combines text with other forms of medium, the students increase their higher-order thinking skills more dramatically. This poses a very exciting prospect for educators – if half of adolescents say they are online on a near-constant basis (Anderson & Jiang, 2018), SNS accounts designed to spread a variety of educational content in various forms could really aid adolescents’ studies and cognitive development, as it exposes them to diverse educational forms of content on a regular basis. Content could be designed not only to promote higher-order thinking in general, but also basic thought processes, abstract thinking, and literacy and numeracy. Increased exposure to such content might spark thinking on a subconscious or conscious level, or even spark discussions/debates among adolescents.
Finally, SNS also allows for flexibility – research by Nguyen and Kellog (2005) highlights the advantages such flexibility have from an education perspective, by revealing that the flexibilities in online communication enabled students to interact flexibly, but also to take on roles that might be less likely to take on in other kinds of interactions. They’re able to engage with teachers, peers, or information at any time they would like – and subsequently have a wealth of resources at their touch.
Conclusion
It is unrealistic to expect adolescents to refrain from using SNS anytime soon. Previous research has declared SNS to be detrimental for adolescents’ cognitive development, which has ignited worry among parents of their children’s involvement in SNS. This essay, however, explored a wealth of modern research, that ruled this statement to be false.
Cognitive development was defined as being the ‘construction of thought processes – including remembering, problem solving, and decision-making – from childhood through to adulthood’ (Saghir et al., 2016), and was placed in the context of Piaget’s expectations of adolescent development to evaluate research in this area. The current ways that SNS are already assisting the development of adolescents’ cognitive development were firstly evaluated. A variety of research illustrated that the three most popular SNS activities among adolescents all benefited their cognitive development; messaging, interactions with posts, and interactions with news content, all were evidenced as supporting the development of the basic thought processes, Piaget’s expectations of abstract thinking, and adolescents’ literacy skills. The essay then progressed to discuss the future possibilities SNS pose for educators, and the ways these can continue to benefit the cognitive development of adolescents even further. The tangible benefits of these future possibilities were demonstrated in supporting research.
It is thus incorrect to suggest that SNS is completely detrimental to adolescents’ cognitive development. Research in this area not only indicates that the opposite occurs, but also that educators should instead accept that SNS is an integral activity in the day-to-day life of a modern adolescent, and that it could be incorporated into education and further assist the cognitive development of adolescents in ways never seen previously. Furthermore, this essay finds that SNS are indeed beneficial to the cognitive development of adolescents.
References
Ahn, J. (2011). The effect of social network sites on adolescents’ social and academic development: Current theories and controversies. Journal Of The American Society For Information Science And Technology, 62(8), 1435-1445. doi: 10.1002/asi.21540
Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018. Retrieved from https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/
Bryant, A. (2018). The Effect of Social Media on the Physical, Social Emotional, and Cognitive Development of Adolescents. The Honors Program Senior Capstone Merrimack College.
Cognitive Development – Stages, Meaning, Average, Definition, Description, Common problems. (2019). Retrieved from http://www.healthofchildren.com/C/Cognitive-Development.html
Mcleod, S. (2019). Formal Operational Stage | Simply Psychology. Retrieved from https://www.simplypsychology.org/formal-operational.html
Pattanapichet, F., & Wichadee, S. (2015). Using Space in Social Media to Promote Undergraduate Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. Turkish Online Journal Of Distance Education, 0(0). doi: 10.17718/tojde.94170
Piaget’s Theory of Adolescent Cognitive Development – Liberty University – Course Apps. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.liberty.edu/courseapps/book/psychology-201/module-5/section-1-title-2/article-title-1/
Ribble, M. (2015). Digital Digital Citizenship in Schools: Nine Elements All Students Should Know. International Society for Technology in Education.
Shearer, E., & Gottfried, J. (2017). News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2017. Retrieved from https://www.journalism.org/2017/09/07/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2017/
Sherman, K. (2013). How social media changes our thinking and learning. The Language Teacher Online, Jalt-Publications.Org/Tlt. Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.org/files/pdf-article/37.4tlt_plenary3.pdf
U.S. Facebook user activities 2017 | Statistic. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/275788/share-of-facebook-user-activities/
Van Dijk, C., van Witteloostuijn, M., Vasić, N., Avrutin, S., & Blom, E. (2016). The Influence of Texting Language on Grammar and Executive Functions in Primary School Children. PLOS ONE, 11(3), e0152409. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152409
Verheijen, L. (2013). The Effects of Text Messaging and Instant Messaging on Literacy. English Studies, 94(5), 582-602. doi: 10.1080/0013838x.2013.795737
Vlachopoulou, E., & Boutsouki, C. (2014). Facebook usage among teenagers – the effect of personality and peer group pressure; an exploratory study in Greece. International Journal Of Internet Marketing And Advertising, 8(4), 285. doi: 10.1504/ijima.2014.067661
Yuki, T. (2015). What Makes Brands’ Social Content Shareable on Facebook? Journal Of Advertising Research, 55(4), 458-470. doi: 10.2501/jar-2015-026
Zebroff, D. (2017). Youth texting: Help or hindrance to literacy? Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 341-356. doi: 10.1007/s10639-017-9606-1
Hi MFranklin
This paper is very well written and articulated and was a pleasure to read. I like how you said that trends make known that the most popular social networks among adolescents are changing. Personally, I find that most adolescent now are more on Snapchat and Instagram than on YouTube. It is also intriguing how some young adolescents of age 10 get access to those social media platforms. You have also shown how adolescent will stop using these social media platforms. It was an interesting paper overall.
Feel free to check my paper:
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2019Curtin/2019/05/05/social-media-platforms-turn-out-to-be-a-narcissistic-trait-for-young-adults/
Hi VIttoo,
Thanks so much for your feedback! I’m really glad to hear you enjoyed my paper, and that it triggered some thoughts for you! Yes I definitely can see why you think Snapchat and Instagram are more popular. It would be interesting to see whether these numbers take into consideration how many times a site is accessed in a day – I can definitely see adolescents opening up Snapchat and Instagram many more times in a day than Youtube, but perhaps more to send a quick few messages. Whereas they might only be going on Youtube once a day, but get absorbed in a couple long videos, or they could even just be using it to play music in the background. So thanks for that – made me consider these statistics in a less black-and-white fashion!
Definitely think it would be really worthwhile to study more young adolescent use of these platforms who are 10 or even younger. Obviously their cognitive goals are a lot different to that of an adolescent – perhaps social networking sites aren’t so beneficial for them. Definite interest for further research!
Thanks again, and I look forward to reading your paper.
Miranda
Hi MFranklin
This paper was a really excellent read! Your argument is very informative, clear and concise. You have also incorporated some impressive research and study results that you have skillfully used to prove your argument.
There are a lot of key points within this paper that I really liked and made a note of. In particular, I found your discussion around the development of complex decision-making skills when sending a message or making a comment online and also the development of literary skills very compelling. However, do you think that the use of abbreviations, acronyms and unusual sentence structures online such as “doin’ me a frighten” do impact some of the younger SNS users and their development of literacy skills?
Looking forward to your reply,
Thanks,
Devyn 🙂
Check out my paper here, if you’d like:
https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2019Curtin/2019/05/05/active-now-how-web-2-0-allows-for-the-formation-of-online-communities-capable-of-initiating-change-through-activism/
Hi Devyn,
Thanks so much for your feedback! I’m glad you enjoyed my paper.
I found your point really interesting, and it really sparked more curiosity for me about the research I unpacked. Admittedly, that is what I expected to find in my research – I didn’t expect to find that online messaging actually benefits the development of literacy skills!
I think that the colloquial language references you mentioned might impact some younger SNS users, however I would argue most users (who are learning at school how to write formally/properly) are making the conscious decision to use this type of language to appear a certain way – and they therefore know that it is not grammatically correct. “doin’ me a frighten” Might be used comically, or to appear relaxed, or simply because it’s what the other users are sounding like – so is intentionally used, rather than subconsciously used because the user thinks it is correct. Obviously I am completely guessing here! I think it would be a really interesting point to address in further research.
I also definitely think I could be idealistic here, and some younger uses might be impacted negatively by the constant use of such abbreviations. However, at least SNS get them writing daily – and possibly using written language far more than they would be if online messaging didn’t exist.
Thanks so much again, and I look forward to reading your paper!
Miranda
Hi MFranklin,
This was a very well-written paper, I think it’s interesting to hear the side of the argument that says SNS are beneficial, and you argue this very convincingly. I agree with your point that it would be very difficult for people (particularly adolescents) to stop using SNS.
The point you make about critical decision making being used when interacting with or sharing posts is also very interesting, do you think a downside to this though might be that people will worry about sharing certain things they are interested in because they’re worried about how it will be perceived by their friends?
Your points about news and current affairs being prominent on Facebook and other SNS sites was very interesting as well, I definitely agree that exposure to this is helping adolescents and our generation to keep up-to-date, do you think social media has made us more aware of news and world events more than previous generations? I think it definitely has as I sometimes find things out as soon as I open Twitter or Facebook up in the morning.
Great paper,
Louis
Hi Louis,
Thanks so much for your feedback! I’m glad you found my paper interesting.
Regarding your thoughts on how people will worry about sharing certain things they are interested in because of how they will be perceived, I definitely do think this is a legitimate concern. However, I also think that this process is very important for their cognitive and perhaps even social (I use this lightly, as social development was not something I explored in depth) development. Cognitive, because the individual will have to unpack complex decision making relevant to the abstract idea of their identity – to decide whether they want their ‘authentic’ identity to be in-line with their social identity. Socially, because all adolescents even offline without the internet face decisions of whether to change their behaviour to appear a certain way among their peers – they might choose sports or act a certain way to ‘fit in’. Usually in these cases, as the individual gets older and has a secure support group, they are likely to be more authentic with their friends. I would also say that on a practical level, the amount of online and anonymous forums around so many topics/interests would also enable the individual to explore these interests hopefully elsewhere.
Regarding your point about news and current affairs, I definitely agree. I’ll be honest – when I first read that reading news-based content was such a popular online activity, I believed these statistics to be a little idealistic. But after reading other articles in this conference regarding online activism, I definitely think that social media really helps adolescents become more aware of global issues.
Thanks so much for your thoughts!
Miranda
Hello Miranda,
I found your paper really interesting as mine discuss about the negative side of social networking sites and how it affects adolescents’ mental health and self-esteem. However, I would agree that social media is beneficial to some extent. Your paper is well researched and I like how you incorporated statistics to support your arguments. I did not expect to find many key points highlighting the benefits of social media. Your paper really enlightened my thoughts about the benefits of social networking sites and allowed me to see a completely different perspective.
Thank you for sharing your paper.
Kind Regards,
ABhackaurally
Hi ABhackaurally
Thanks so much for your feedback! I’m glad you found it interesting, and you could observe a different perspective to your own paper. I think it would be fascinating for future research to examine the issues raised in both of our papers – and find whether the encouragement of critical thinking and other cognitive processes on social networks (as I suggest) will help combat some of the social harms you highlighted. For example, will the honing of critical thinking enable adolescents to see unrealistic online identities as being just that – unrealistic?
Thanks so much !
Miranda
Hi MFranklin,
This was a really interesting paper to read!
The majority of media discussion about adolescent use of SNSs tends to highlight its negative effects (which are important to discuss), but I think you provided some good evidence that there may be enough pros to outweigh the cons (at least in terms of benefits to cognitive development).
However, I would like to know your thoughts on whether these benefits extend to adolescents with cognitive disabilities. For my paper, I discussed web accessibility issues for different groups of people with disability. Some of the literature that informed my research for it mentioned that people with cognitive disability have increased difficulty using features like text-based communication (e.g. Facebook Messenger) on SNSs because they require literacy levels much higher than that of (most) people with cognitive impairment. Do you think that the cognitive development benefits may potentially be more limited for this group?
If you would like to read my paper to familiarise yourself with some of the web accessibility issues that people with cognitive disability (and other types of disability) face, you can check out my paper here: https://networkconference.netstudies.org/2019Curtin/2019/05/06/web-accessibility-issues-for-people-with-disability/
Thanks,
Petra
Hi PMwenda,
Thanks so much for your feedback! I’m glad you liked my paper – that’s exactly what I was hoping to achieve!
That’s a really good question, and has spurred some really interesting thinking for me. I had a read of your paper, and was really interested in the issues you presented. I definitely think that – after reading your paper – the ways social media is currently being utilised, is less beneficial for people with cognitive disability’s cognitive development. However, in saying that, I also think that in the ways social media could be further utilised in the future, Social Media could have the same – or even more – benefits for individuals with cognitive disabilities.
This is because, as you mentioned in your paper, social media sites are unlikely to include ‘video content with closed captions for people with hearing impairment, websites designed specifically for readers who are visually impaired, and websites that utilise non-abstract language to make it easier for people with certain cognitive disabilities’. Social media sites could, in the future, be reconfigured to consider these limitations – subsequently making sites more accessible to individuals who are impaired – to provide them with the similar benefits as those who aren’t impaired. Also, I somewhat audaciously say these sites could benefit impaired individuals ‘more’, because of the ways they could be further designed in the future to help overcome the social exclusions that you mention. I discussed the benefits found in social media ‘groups’ and ‘online discussion forums’, and I believe we could expect similar results in groups designed for impaired individuals. These groups would not only assist their learning in a supportive, flexible environment that utilised various forms of content designed to assist different learning styles, but it would also promote impaired individuals to connect with others who are similarly impaired – helping them feel less isolated and develop their cognitive skills further.
Either way, more research could be done in this area concerning impaired individuals – and it would be really interesting!
Thanks,
Miranda
Hi MFranklin,
I really enjoyed reading your paper. The points you’ve raised were very insightful and well presented. I agree that SNS can be an informal learning platform for many students as they can be a forum for interpersonal communication and group collaboration for students. SNS thus provide a possibility to create a sense of presence, community-building, and learner participation in interactive discussions. I also think that using SNS for educational platforms can place some students at a disadvantage if they have limited Internet access. In the least developed countries, the incorporation of SNS in education may not be a coherent method.
Thanks,
Shameema
Hi Shameema,
Thanks so much for your feedback. I really like the way you put it there: it really does act as an ‘informal learning platform’, and allows for ‘interactive’ discussions.
I completely agree that it puts students without internet access at an unfair disadvantage. I think, furthermore, that it should only be considered on a ‘all or nothing’ approach in a class – if everyone has internet then online forums and groups could be utilised, but definitely if someone doesn’t have access to the internet, then online forums should not be utilised.
Thanks again,
Miranda
Hi MFranklin,
Thank you for your contribution with your paper. I find it fascinating that as you mentioned, many adolescents have smartphones nowadays, I remembered that I did not own one in the past until I could afford my own! In regards to your paper, I like how you highlighted that SNS provide a voice for adolescents and it builds their literacy skills, I think this is an incredible point to highlight because it is during those years that they peak in confidence (or not), so having an extra option of an online space can be an extension for their voices to be heard, when recognised it can lead to positive confidence growth. I also greatly appreciate that you have presented this topic and argument, countering many stereotypical sceptics that perceive smart phones or SNS to be bad. You have challenged this by saying that it develops rationale thinking within adolescents by getting them to think before sending messages, “consider abstract concepts such as their identity, online identity and the permanency of their digital footprint”. As the digital age is an incredible period of time we live in now and possibly will be here to stay for quite a period of time, it’s crucial for adolescents to learn about these. They may not be aware of what a digital footprint is or the implications from it, but if they develop cognitive skills and good SNS skills such as consideration before hitting send or posting of content, it sets them up for a strong digital footprint, being more aware of it when they grow up and finally understand this term. I also agree when you said that “news reading allow to have deeper political knowledge and awareness of real world happenings”. As a journalism student, I find this incredibly important. With good education on journalism in schools, adolescences can identify which sources of news is quality and which is not objective. The beauty of SNS in comparison to traditional print is that, news is no longer getting shoved down our throat, adolescences can now cherry pick who they want to follow and if they choose to follow good quality and trustworthy sources, they can develop deeper political knowledge of this world much quicker than a semester’s worth of studying on politics in school can do. This can also help them make better decisions, critical thinking about our governments, a room for potential in advocating positive societal changes in future.
If there was one thing I could provide constructive feedback to regarding this paper, I would suggest moving the part where you defined the age range for adolescences to the start of the introduction, before you state “95% of adolescents now have smartphones”. Also, I would like to leave you with this link which could be related to your argument. This is a study on how youths engage in participatory behaviours and utilised digital tools to communicate and learn from each other, this proved much more beneficial and efficient than regular learning. https://dmlcentral.net/wp-content/uploads/files/THSpring09WhatisLearning.pdf
I also have 1 question I want to leave you with:
– When Facebook first emerged and gain popularity within adolescents, it used to be normal to rant, post unprofessional pictures (e.g. cringy selfies) and basically just spam newsfeeds with statuses updates. This is incredibly reduced nowadays and like you highlighted, many have migrated onto Instagram leaving Facebook somewhat redundant. Why do you think that is?
Thanks for you time!
Chris.
Hi Chris,
Thanks so much for your feedback! It was a pleasure to read your comments on my paper.
I’m glad you enjoyed the alternative perspective to how SNS can in some ways be beneficial; I, myself, sometimes find myself absorbed in all the harms it can cause, but as that’s not likely to change, I do think it’s important to consider the positives.
Thanks for the constructive feedback – will take that on-board as I think most people believe adolescents to be simply the ‘teens’ period, and not the younger years. So I agree that this should be reinforced early on in my article. Also, I appreciate the fascinating additional research you found – I unfortunately missed it in my research for this article, as I only looked at research from the past 8 years (so 2011 was my cut-off), but I agree that that article offered some insights that are still very relevant.
Good question! I’d like to answer it in two parts – why Instagram has taken over from Facebook among adolescents, and why adolescents are less likely to post unprofessional pictures and spam newsfeeds. Firstly, I think adolescents have migrated to Instagram firstly because it’s more mobile friendly (Instagram originated as a mobile app). As we know, many adolescents have smartphones nowadays and spend more and more time on them daily, and I believe this has made them more likely to use their phone for SNS rather than their computers – thus favouring Instagram because it’s easier to access. I also think that ‘stories’ and ‘live stories’ on Instagram also entice adolescents, which I don’t believe Facebook has been able to replicate as successfully.
Secondly, I think adolescents are less likely to post unprofessional pictures and spam newsfeeds firstly because of this ‘story’ capability of Instagram and Snapchat – these are generally where the ‘spamming’ and ‘unprofessional’ pictures occur, as they are more short-lived. Thinking perhaps too optimistically – I also would like to think that adolescents now have learnt from the previous decade of adolescents, an are subsequently more aware of digital permanency and this ‘cringyness’.
Thanks again, and I hope I answered your question!
Miranda