{"id":427,"date":"2019-05-06T10:03:29","date_gmt":"2019-05-06T02:03:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/?p=427"},"modified":"2019-05-07T13:17:33","modified_gmt":"2019-05-07T05:17:33","slug":"social-networking-sites-are-beneficial-to-the-cognitive-development-of-adolescents","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/2019\/05\/06\/social-networking-sites-are-beneficial-to-the-cognitive-development-of-adolescents\/","title":{"rendered":"Social Networking Sites are Beneficial to the Cognitive Development of Adolescents"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

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 \u2013 all of which are found to benefit adolescent\u2019s cognitive development. The further possibilities of how SNS can be utilised to assist adolescent\u2019s 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. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

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 \u2013 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. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Literature in this area has warned about the detrimental effects that SNS may have on adolescents\u2019 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. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cognitive Development Defined<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the purposes of this essay, cognitive development will be defined as the \u2018construction of thought processes – including remembering, problem solving, and decision-making \u2013 from childhood through to adulthood\u2019 (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\u2019 (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958). They will furthermore be \u2018actively constructing their own cognitive worlds and organising their experiences\u2019 (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\u2019 memory, problem solving, and decision-making abilities; Piaget\u2019s abstract and imaginative thinking expected of an adolescent; as well as the development of cognitive skills such as literacy and numeracy paramount to adolescents\u2019 academic ventures (Meadows, 2017). This essay will now move to discuss the ways SNS are already assisting the development of adolescents\u2019 cognitive development, in the ways they are currently being utilised. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

How the Ways Social Network Sites are Currently Being Used<\/em> Benefit Adolescents’ Cognitive Development<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

SNS are defined as sites that \u2018support the maintenance of pre-existing social networks and\/or help strangers connect based on shared interests, political views, or activities\u2019 (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). The current most popular SNS among adolescents are Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, and Facebook (including Facebook messenger) (Anderson & Jiang, 2018). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Sending private\nmessages to Facebook friends\u2019 was the single most popular activity to do on\nFacebook in the U.S. in 2017 (Statista). This is consistent with previous\nresults found in a 2014 study concerned with adolescents\u2019 activity alone (Vlachopoulou\n& Boutsouki, 2014). Although these studies were primarily based on Facebook\n(and Facebook messenger), 25% of Instagram users used Instagram Direct Message\nin a month in 2014 (Fortune, 2014), which is expected to have increased as\nadolescents are now more likely to be connecting over Instagram than Facebook\n(Anderson & Jiang, 2018). Snapchat also has messaging features. There are\nvarious underlying cognitive advantages associated with sending private\nmessages – firstly, research depicts that technological messages can assist\nadolescents with the development of their literary skills. This is evidenced\nnot only in research concerning foreign students, where SNS enabled them to\npractice English in a safe and interactive environment (Greehow, 2008;\nPattanapichet & Wichadee, 2015), but also in research concerning English-speaking\nadolescents. A 2013 analysis concluded there to be mostly a positive\ncorrelation between texting and\/or instant messaging, and the child\u2019s literacy\nskills (Verheijen, 2013). This was later solidified by a 2016 study examining\n10-13 year olds, which found children who engaged in texting messages had\nhigher written language skills and grammar abilities (Van Dijk et al., 2016),\nand another 2013 study that found young people who had used Facebook for more\nthan a year had higher scores in tests of verbal ability, working memory, and\nspelling, compared to their peers who had used it for a shorter period (Alloway,\nHorton, Alloway, Dawson, 2013). However, messaging online has been shown to not\nonly assist in the development of literary skills, but also to give all\nadolescents a voice. This assists the development of their \u2018power of thought\u2019\n(Piaget, 1970), as individuals feel freer to express their thoughts, sometimes\nmore than they would in person (Nguyen & Kellogg, 2005). Although researchers\nhighlight the social implications in giving everyone an online voice (Bryant,\n2018) \u2013 such as increased online conflict and the permanence of online posting \u2013\nit cannot be denied that the development of an online voice assists adolescents\u2019\ncognitive development both in developing their \u2018power of thought\u2019, but also in\nthe development of basic cognitive thought processes. By considering possible\nimplications before sending messages, adolescents are forced to employ complex\ndecision-making skills when messaging online, and consider abstract concepts\nsuch as their identity, online identity, and the permanency of their digital\nfootprint (Ribble, 2016). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

From January to\nOctober 2015, posts from U.S. brands were liked, shared, or commented on 65\nbillion times (Yuki, 2015), making this the second most popular SNS activity.\nConcerning adolescents alone, a research study revealed 52% of its young\nadolescent participants stated that liking or sharing content they liked was\ntheir main activity on social networking sites (Vlachopoulou & Boutsouki,\n2014). This refers to not only Facebook, but also Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube.\nHowever, are adolescents likely to share\/like anything on their news feed\nwithout much thought? Evidence suggests otherwise. A 2015 study examined both\nthe most shared Facebook posts, and surveyed SNS users regarding their\nlikelihood to share particular content (Yuki, 2015). The results illustrate\nthat social-media users engage in a deep form of decision-making, which\nconsiders abstract concepts such as identity, other\u2019s perceptions of their self\nand subsequently their online activity, and the type of value within the\ncontent that is shared. The value of \u2018social currency\u2019 was frequently discussed\nin this study, an abstract concept that considers \u2018will the most-shared posts\nlikely be content that make the sharer look\u2026\u2019 (Yuki, 2015, p. 461).\nInterestingly, regarding social currency questions, the younger participants\nwere most concerned about whether the posts made them either \u2018look good\u2019, or\n\u2018look intelligent\u2019 (Yuki, 2015). Additionally, 42% of participants agreed that\n\u2018usefulness\u2019 was a significant factor among the most shared content (Yuki,\n2015, p. 464), which took to include publishing posts such as newspaper articles,\nonline publications, etc. This study thus indicates that when sharing or liking\ncontent, social media users engage in a deep level of decision making, which\nconcerns numerous abstract and imaginative concepts considered by Piaget to be\nparamount to adolescents\u2019 cognitive development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, a\nsurvey has indicated an increase in the presence of news-related posts on SNS (Shearer\n& Gottfried, 2017), making \u2018reading, watching or sharing information about\nthe world\u2019 the third most popular activity on an SNS (Statista, 2017). Throughout\nthe course of August 2017, \u201867% of Americans reported that they get at least\nsome of their news on SNS (Shearer & Gottfried, 2017), which was an\nincrease from the previous year. This is also not just based on Facebook, but\nalso includes Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat and Instagram \u2013 most of which, as\npreviously stated, are sites that are known to be popular among adolescents\n(Shearer & Gottfried, 2017). With the rising popularity of news content on\nSNS, it promotes interest among adolescents in the news, because they\u2019re\nconstantly exposed to news-based discussions. This assists adolescents\u2019\ncognitive development because the news is inherently complex and abstract \u2013\nissues that are raised have multiple perspectives to consider, and include\nabstract concepts such as democracy, diplomacy, etc. Knowing about the news\nalso promotes discussion and debate among students and their family and peers,\nwhere these concepts are further unpacked. Additionally, by seeing how the news\nhas become more central to social media, it supports the notion that social\nmedia \u2018restores reading and writing as central activities in our culture\u2019\n(Shirky, 2010). Reading is essential for adolescents\u2019 development, as it helps\nPiaget\u2019s goals be rehearsed in the context of reading. Middle school students\nshould \u2018be active constructors of meaning in their reading, both individually\nand in socially structured settings\u2019 (Farnan, 1996), which will enable them to\nrealise Piaget\u2019s idea that \u2018adolescents must construct their own knowledge\u2019\n(1970). Furthermore, the increased news-based content on SNS restores\nnews-based concepts and discussion, and reading and writing, as central\nactivities in adolescent life. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

How the Social Network Sites Could be Further Used <\/em>to Actively Benefit Adolescents’ Cognitive Development<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

SNS have the\npotential to specifically assist the education and cognitive development of\nadolescents in a way that no other medium has ever done before. This belief has\nbeen widely reinforced by educators, and many schools and universities are\nalready incorporating online discussion pages and other SNS to assist classes. Research\nwithin this area also dictates this to be the case. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A 2015 study\nexamined whether Facebook can enhance students\u2019 critical thinking skills\n(Pattanapichet, Wichadee, 2015). Undergraduate students in the experimental\ngroup explored Revised Bloom\u2019s Taxonomy, through posting answers in a Facebook\ngroup, and getting feedback from peers and teachers through the same group. The\nresults were statistically significant, and concluded that students who used\nFacebook to assist their learning, had higher critical thinking abilities than\nthose who had not used social media (Pattanapichet, Wichadee, 2015). This was consistent\nwith earlier findings by Yang and Ahn (2007), where they found that\n\u2018synchronous online discussion promotes critical thinking\u2019 (Sherman, 2013, p.\n9). Although these studies do concern Facebook more than the other SNS commonly\nused among adolescents as discussion groups are a common Facebook feature, these\nstudies highlight the significant affect that online discussion forums\nspecifically designed to assist education have on assisting the development of\ncognitive skills such as critical thinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SNS also host a\nvariety of forms of content \u2013 such as text, visuals, audio, video, and graphic\norganizers. This is clear in all SNS considered to be popular among adolescents.\nThis variety, when utilised with the hope of assisting adolescents\u2019 education, help\ncater to wide range learning styles. Sherman (2013) illustrated this in his\nresearch, which concluded that if the experience of learning is interactive,\nand combines text with other forms of medium, the students increase their\nhigher-order thinking skills more dramatically. This poses a very exciting\nprospect for educators \u2013 if half of adolescents say they are online on a\nnear-constant basis (Anderson & Jiang, 2018), SNS accounts designed to\nspread a variety of educational content in various forms could really aid\nadolescents\u2019 studies and cognitive development, as it exposes them to diverse\neducational forms of content on a regular basis. Content could be designed not\nonly to promote higher-order thinking in general, but also basic thought\nprocesses, abstract thinking, and literacy and numeracy. Increased exposure to\nsuch content might spark thinking on a subconscious or conscious level, or even\nspark discussions\/debates among adolescents. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, SNS also allows for flexibility \u2013 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\u2019re able to engage with teachers, peers, or information at any time they would like \u2013 and subsequently have a wealth of resources at their touch. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is\nunrealistic to expect adolescents to refrain from using SNS anytime soon. Previous\nresearch has declared SNS to be detrimental for adolescents\u2019 cognitive\ndevelopment, which has ignited worry among parents of their children\u2019s\ninvolvement in SNS. This essay, however, explored a wealth of modern research,\nthat ruled this statement to be false. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cognitive\ndevelopment was defined as being the \u2018construction of thought processes –\nincluding remembering, problem solving, and decision-making \u2013 from childhood\nthrough to adulthood\u2019 (Saghir et al., 2016), and was placed in the context of\nPiaget\u2019s expectations of adolescent development to evaluate research in this\narea. The current ways that SNS are already assisting the development of\nadolescents\u2019 cognitive development were firstly evaluated. A variety of research\nillustrated that the three most popular SNS activities among adolescents all benefited\ntheir cognitive development; messaging, interactions with posts, and interactions\nwith news content, all were evidenced as supporting the development of the\nbasic thought processes, Piaget\u2019s expectations of abstract thinking, and adolescents\u2019\nliteracy skills. The essay then progressed to discuss the future possibilities\nSNS pose for educators, and the ways these can continue to benefit the cognitive\ndevelopment of adolescents even further. The tangible benefits of these future\npossibilities were demonstrated in supporting research. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is thus incorrect to suggest that SNS is completely detrimental to adolescents\u2019 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ahn,\nJ. (2011). The effect of social network sites on adolescents’ social and\nacademic development: Current theories and controversies. Journal Of\nThe American Society For Information Science And Technology<\/em>, 62<\/em>(8),\n1435-1445. doi: 10.1002\/asi.21540<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Anderson,\nM., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018.\nRetrieved from\nhttps:\/\/www.pewinternet.org\/2018\/05\/31\/teens-social-media-technology-2018\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bryant,\nA. (2018). The Effect of Social Media on the Physical, Social Emotional, and\nCognitive Development of Adolescents. The Honors Program Senior\nCapstone Merrimack College<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cognitive\nDevelopment – Stages, Meaning, Average, Definition, Description, Common\nproblems. (2019). Retrieved from http:\/\/www.healthofchildren.com\/C\/Cognitive-Development.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mcleod,\nS. (2019). Formal Operational Stage | Simply Psychology. Retrieved from\nhttps:\/\/www.simplypsychology.org\/formal-operational.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pattanapichet,\nF., & Wichadee, S. (2015). Using Space in Social Media to Promote\nUndergraduate Students\u2019 Critical Thinking Skills. Turkish Online\nJournal Of Distance Education<\/em>, 0<\/em>(0). doi: 10.17718\/tojde.94170<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Piaget’s\nTheory of Adolescent Cognitive Development – Liberty University – Course Apps.\n(2019). Retrieved from https:\/\/www.liberty.edu\/courseapps\/book\/psychology-201\/module-5\/section-1-title-2\/article-title-1\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ribble, M. (2015). Digital Digital Citizenship in Schools: Nine Elements All\nStudents Should Know<\/em>. International Society\nfor Technology in Education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shearer, E., & Gottfried, J. (2017). News Use\nAcross Social Media Platforms 2017. Retrieved from\nhttps:\/\/www.journalism.org\/2017\/09\/07\/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2017\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sherman, K. (2013). How social media changes our\nthinking and learning. The Language Teacher Online,\nJalt-Publications.Org\/Tlt<\/em>. Retrieved from https:\/\/jalt-publications.org\/files\/pdf-article\/37.4tlt_plenary3.pdf<\/a>\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

U.S. Facebook user activities 2017 | Statistic. (2017).\nRetrieved from\nhttps:\/\/www.statista.com\/statistics\/275788\/share-of-facebook-user-activities\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Van\nDijk, C., van Witteloostuijn, M., Vasi\u0107, N., Avrutin, S., & Blom, E.\n(2016). The Influence of Texting Language on Grammar and Executive Functions in\nPrimary School Children. PLOS ONE<\/em>, 11<\/em>(3), e0152409.\ndoi: 10.1371\/journal.pone.0152409<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Verheijen,\nL. (2013). The Effects of Text Messaging and Instant Messaging on\nLiteracy. English Studies<\/em>, 94<\/em>(5), 582-602. doi:\n10.1080\/0013838x.2013.795737<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vlachopoulou,\nE., & Boutsouki, C. (2014). Facebook usage among teenagers – the effect of\npersonality and peer group pressure; an exploratory study in Greece. International\nJournal Of Internet Marketing And Advertising<\/em>, 8<\/em>(4), 285. doi:\n10.1504\/ijima.2014.067661<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yuki,\nT. (2015). What Makes Brands’ Social Content Shareable on Facebook? Journal\nOf Advertising Research<\/em>, 55<\/em>(4), 458-470. doi:\n10.2501\/jar-2015-026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Zebroff,\nD. (2017). Youth texting: Help or hindrance to literacy? Education and\nInformation Technologies<\/em>, 23<\/em>(1), 341-356. doi:\n10.1007\/s10639-017-9606-1<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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… Continue reading Social Networking Sites are Beneficial to the Cognitive Development of Adolescents<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[88,21,52],"class_list":["post-427","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-social","tag-adolescents","tag-social-media","tag-social-networking-sites"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/427","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/29"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=427"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/427\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":511,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/427\/revisions\/511"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=427"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=427"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/networkconference.netstudies.org\/2019Curtin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=427"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}