Mcbride.mines.edu



iDisorder ExploredKathleen TomonColorado School of MinesHNRS 425: Hey Alexa, Are you my best friend?Dr. Colin TerryDecember 16, 2020Abstract: iDisorder and Attentional ControlTechnology has become a fundamental part of society. iPhones, computers and tablets have made their way into the majority of schools, companies and hands of people. In his book published in 2012, iDisorder, Dr. Larry Rosen examines how society’s obsession with technology has affected the psychological health of all. Dr. Rosen describes a new disorder, the iDisorder, that is a result of the “overreliance on gadgets and websites” (Rosen 2012) that has caused problems with mental wellbeing. Drawing on the parallels to cognitive psychology’s attentional control theory and the feedback from social psychology, Rosen is able to give strategies to reset the mind and avoid the utter dependence on technology.Rosen coins the term iDisorder which is a “new disorder that combines elements of many psychiatric maladies and is centered on the way we all relate to technology and media” (Rosen 2012). The book introduces several different disorders such as narcissism, attention deficit disorder, obsessive compulsion disorder, body dysphoria, depression, schizophrenia and more. He further examines how the disorders can be manifested in “normal” people through their use of technology by exhibiting traits of those with the disorder such as, for example, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, ADHD, which “causes people to have severe inattentiveness and lack impulse control” (Rosen 2012). Rosen talks about how the availability of the internet on our smart phones and constantly having the ability to stay connected makes us exhibit the behaviors of ADHD which can be seen through the increase in multitasking and continual checking of phones (Rosen 2012). Much like the ADHD example, Rosen explores all the other disorders and how through social and cognitive psychological studies’ results they can be connected to the diagnosed symptoms of diseases. At the end of each chapter, Rosen gives advice on how to break the cycle of technology dependence which all relate to taking a break from technology and interacting with nature and the world around the user. Rosen concludes not with the statement that technology is bad, but instead implores to not let technology control and influence the development and thoughts of people. By constantly having the brain stimulated, people are finding the “real world less stimulating than the virtual world” (Rosen 2012). He states that “interacting with the people who are right in front of you rather than those who are elsewhere” (Rosen 2012) can help squash a technology dependence. Rosen makes it clear that it is not about quitting technology all together, but instead about being aware and monitoring the influence of technology on behavior. The basis of Rosen’s work and argument relies heavily on cognitive and social psychology. The mechanism by which technology functions is attentional control. Attentional control is “the flexible modulation of neural activity so that behaviorally relevant stimuli can be processed more efficiently than competing distracters” (Byers 2012). Rosen argued that technology makes users change what is relevant stimuli and prioritize distractions. The top-down approach to attentional control asserts that the attentional processes seek to regulate the emotional responses (Byers 2012). The top-down approach values the schema driven motivation processes rather than the bottom-up approach which values stimulus-driven responses (Byers 2012). By utilizing both the top-down and bottom-up approach attentional perspective, engagement and selection can be examined and are pertinent in examining Rosen’s perspective on technology’s impacts on mental health and psychology. Rosen uses as an example that those who are working may try to be productive but are bombarded by distractions such as email notifications that cause them to lose focus and engage in multitasking (Rosen 2012).These emotional responses when dealing with technology is the feedback that is given from social peers whether good or bad. The social feedback mechanism relies heavily on the Uses and Gratification Theory and the Social Influence Theory. The Uses and Gratification Theory approach to exploring technology’s effects and responses is “based on which motives recipients use the media as well as which gratifications are obtained thereat” (Tanta 2014). This theory emphasizes how the user gains “positive motivation and active[ly] use[s] [] the media content [to] gratify [their] needs” (Tanta 2014). Where the Social Influence Theory is used to “offer[] an explanation of how individuals are influenced by the presence and the behavior of others” (Schaefers 2016). When the user fails at attentional control, it is a result from the neurological pathways in the brain deciding what to pay attention to. While the uses and gratifications that come from using technology prolong that failure, the social influence that comes from gaining likes, completing levels in games, or responding to emails reaffirms the attentional control deficits and reenforces patterns through pathways in the brain. Word Count: 741Dive Deeper: The Brain’s Dependence on Social MediaMany of the disorders that are manifested in users due to technology can be linked to social media use. Rosen’s research in iDisorder ends with the publication of the work in 2012, yet there has been a surge in the use and importance of social media since that time which has recently been amplified due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, the draw to social media depends on many neurological, attentional and social factors. Social media or social networking sites are communication platforms where individuals create profiles that allow for content to be posted and interacted with, create connections, and be introduced to content due to their network (Clark 2017). Rosen describes social media in multiple chapters. The most prevalent is discussing how social media and technology relate to the brain when he describes addiction. He asserts that social media leans heavily on uses and gratification theory that increases the grey matter in the user’s brain which leads to the addictive nature of social media (Rosen 2012). Social media is prevalent due to two major neurological factors: sustained attention and the social impact of other’s view. Sustained attention is the mechanism from cognitive psychology while the social impact is the result of the failure in attention from social psychology. The longer that apps like Instagram and Snapchat can sustain a user’s attention the more likely the user will become addicted and dependent on the app. Sustained attention is “the focus on performance on a single task over time” (Esterman & Rothlein 2019). There are three main neurological networks that control attention: alerting, orienting, and executive control (Fisher 2019). The alerting network is responsible for “achieving and maintaining sensitivity to incoming stimuli” (Fisher 2019) and is reliant on the thalamic and frontal-parietal regions. The orienting network responds to the “rapid strategic eye movements and … incoming stimuli from different modalities” (Fisher 2019) which is the work of the dorsal and ventral networks. Finally, the executive control network is a “frontoparietal network involved in moment-to-moment task switching and adjustments” (Fisher 2019) and the “cingulo-opercular network involved in maintenance of task goals” (Fisher 2019). The selective nature of attention deals with the orienting network while the sustained nature depends on the alerting network (Fisher 2019). The executive control network is present in both the select and sustained modalities to switch between the two and to switch between tasks. Attention occurs in fluctuations influenced by neurocognitive factors such as arousal that affects how information is processed from stimuli to motor functions (Esterman & Rothlein 2019). Arousal is due to the locus-coeruleus noradrenergic system, LC-NE, which through a series of neural chemical pathways activates the brain to allow for the intake of sensory information and then processes the information into behavioral functioning (Berridge 2003). The higher the arousal or stimuli that activates the brain through the LC-NE the higher the resulting attention to a task while lower arousal will have lower attention (Esterman & Rothlein 2019). Social media apps promote bright colors, lots of variable posts and content which allows for high arousal through the LC-NE and can cause users to have sustained attention on the app. Compared to books or nature, the arousal on the social media app is much higher and thus takes attention away from the natural world. Rosen describes attention in terms of multitasking and what is failing such as making careless mistakes, trouble keeping attention on tasks, being easily distracted, not listening, etc. which are all a result of technology’s influence on multitasking (Rosen 2012). Yet, in cognitive psychology, attention is often explored in conjunction with working memory. Working memory is “the mechanisms and processes that hold the mental representations currently most needed for an ongoing cognitive task available for processing” (Oberauer 2019). Attention is imperative to how working memory prioritizes, stores and recalls data and information. One way that social media controls user’s attention is through attraction mechanisms which is the overflow of information on the apps and internet (Firth 2019). The successful pieces of information “manage to capture [] attention (even superficially)” (Firth 2019) are logged and more information of the same topic is flooded towards the user which inhibits the working memory to prioritize the information it will need in the future. The failed pieces of information become overtaken and drowned out (Firth 2019). The flooding of information leads to multitasking which decreases working memory. Social media gains the users attention through “hyperlinks, notifications, and prompts providing a limitless stream of different forms of digital media” (Firth 2019) which encourages the user to interact shallowly with all the information that is being pushed their way (Firth 2019). This has adverse effects to cognitive health since those who perform in multitasking daily perform worse on tasks that require sustained attention (Firth 2019). Rosen went into great detail on how technology use can impact attention and exhibit symptoms of ADD and ADHD. In a 2020 study conducted by Maartje Boer and his associates, they examined how social media use impacted adolescents and ADHD. Their study was driven by the statistics that 45% of boys 13-17 in America are online constantly (Boer 2020). They examined over 500 adolescent boys from age 11-15 and measured the intensity of social media use and the effects on attention from the beginning of the study to the end over a three-year period (Boer 2020). They were asked a series of questions based on times and amounts of social media and instant messenger use while their responses were compared against the social media disorder scale and the ADHD-Questionnaire they filled out (Boer 2020). The researchers found that with social media use, ADHD symptoms increases (Boer 2020). Yet, the intensity of the social media use was not a factor in the problems dealing with attention (Boer 2020). Social media runs on likes and interactions with other profiles. Thus, the users are constantly thinking of how they can interact with someone and how others will interact with them which is often known as “mentalizing” (Schruz 2014). Through mentalizing, humans can “represent the mental states of the self and the other and the relationship between these mental states” (Frith 2006). This allows for the human connection and sharing of ideas to occur. When a task related to thinking about other’s mental states, or how they will react such as anticipating how a user’s network will react to a post, the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), precuneus and posterior cingulate cortex, temporoparietal junction (TPJ), and posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS) are activated (Schruz 2014). The medial prefrontal cortex’s purpose is to “learn associations between context, locations, events and corresponding adaptive responses, particularly emotional responses” (Euston 2012). Thus, the mPFC works to exhibit the right emotional or motoric response when in a specific situation (Euston 2012). The mPFC is the driving factor on how users disclose information about themselves online based on the past experiences and is the main component in the self-thought aspect of social media (Schruz 2014). The precuneus and posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) are the main areas in the brain that translate perception into action (Wang 2019). In Wang’s study conducted in 2019, they found that the precuneus and PCC were responsible for translating the visual and spatial information that one has to actions (Wang 2019). In the context of social media, the precuneus/PCC would be responsible for determining whether the user likes/interacts with another user’s post or instead posts a picture themselves due to their feed.The TPJ is responsible for understanding the stories that people are involved in, but also is involved in the reasoning about others to determine whether there is a belief in the story, if it plays a broader social role and if it involves moral cognition (Saxe 2003). The stimulus for the TPJ comes from the “representation of another person per se and a representation of that other person’s mental state” (Saxe 2003). Two common parts of the TPJ are the aRTPJ which is responsible for “attention-reorienting and false belief tasks” (Bitsch 2018) and the rTPJ which is responsible for “processing [] discrepancies between one’s own beliefs and the beliefs of others” (Bitsch 2018). The TPJ is important when evaluating whether the user believes another user’s post about their life, journey or story. This is pertinent in the rise and fame of social media influencers who are paid to promote products that need to be perceived as important and valuable. Lastly, the pSTS is responsible for “the association of 2 stimuli, respective of stimulus modality” (Hocking 2008). The modality of stimuli can be facial expressions and body motions (Oba 2020). The pSTS relates the facial expression to the emotion that it is expression or any other perceptual cue. The pSTS is one of the main components of social scene understanding and functioning for humans (Oba 2020). Thus, it is extremely important in social media when relating the expressions, body positions and captions on posts with the feelings and emotions of the opposite user. The interaction of words with the post creates social cues of how the user should interact with the post. Uses and Gratification Theory is used to understand “why people choose a specific type of medium” (Hossain 2019) in order to understand the motivations of the user. Social media is designed to exploit the Uses and Gratification Theory. Facebook and other platforms have a ‘like’ button that can be used to interact with another users post (Sherman 2018). The ‘like’ is registered in the brain as a reward which is used as a means of feedback to condition the user to continue to use the app (Sherman 2018). The ‘like’ draws directly on the mentalizing principles described above because through this modality, one user can interact with another and virtually reinforcing social norms (Sherman 2018). 90% of teens in America are active users on social media (Sherman 2016). In a study conducted by Dr. Lauren Sherman, fMRI was used to examine adolescents’ brains while viewing photos on social media (Sherman 2016). The study took thirty-four adolescents from 13-18 years old and a mix of female and male (Sherman 2016). Before the study started, they were told that 50 other adolescents had viewed the Instagram feed that they were about to view (Sherman 2016). They were exposed to 148 photos with a combination of risky and non-risky photos with different amounts of likes (Sherman 2016). The researchers found that the adolescents were more likely to like a photo if the photo had more likes to begin with no matter the context (Sherman 2016). When the adolescent viewed their own photo, they would have a higher neuro-response if they had more likes than photos that had less likes (Sherman 2016). This led to the conclusion that “quantifiable social endorsement is a simple… cue to learn how to navigate their social world” (Sherman 2016). In this study, social media and the likes followed the Uses and Gratification Theory where the likes that the adolescent received related to the perceived benefits that they established seen through the fMRI data. Yet, social influence theory is also at play. First, the researchers told the adolescents that 50 other peers had already been exposed to the same feed which implies a social presence of others. Next, the amount of likes that were already on the picture influenced whether the adolescent would like the picture because the more likes created the presence of a larger social influence surrounding that photo. Finally, the amount of likes that one received on their own photo made the impression that they were exhibiting the behavior of others. The propagation of iDisorder is not only due to the development and design of social media, but the neurological responses to external stimuli. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, online platforms have become imperative to delivering school, conducting jobs and gaining safe social interaction (Goel 2020). This has allowed for the use of internet, technology and social media to dramatically increase in order to stay connected. Social media has been an asset in staying connected and informed (Goel 2020) yet there is a large area for misinformation which draws on the attention of the user due to the stimuli that occurs when interacting with false or startling information (Goel 2020). Through the neurological responses to stimuli that is gained through technology and social media, the brain’s attention is constantly being pulled in different directions and prioritizing the virtual world over the real world. Cognitive theory of attentional theory is the mechanism that is failing while the social theories of uses and gratification and social influence theory reinforce the failure. This is extremely relevant in the age of the COVID 19 pandemic when internet presence has drastically increased and thus exposes users to more modes of becoming distracted and multitasking.Word Count: 2122Argue Against: The Stretch of the iDisorderRosen provides the framework for iDisorder which exhibits all different types of mental disorders and user’s manifestation of those disorders to be considered a disorder itself, the iDisorder. Yet, it goes beyond Rosen’s scope to suggest that an iDisorder can be classified as a new mental disorder. Rosen’s examination of the parallels between the amplification of disorders that are already present with technology use was well supported throughout his book, yet he lacked in providing substantial evidence that the brain patterns and activity can be consistent with technology use that could warrant a new disorder. A mental disorder is “a medical disorder whose manifestations are primarily signs or symptoms of a psychological (behavioral) nature, or if physical, can be understood only using psychological concepts” (Spitzer 2018). To be considered a mental disorder there are 4 criteria that must be met and upheld. First, the medical disorder must be in all environments and relate to a distress, disability or disadvantage (Spitzer 2018). The distress can be manifested or acknowledged by the individual with a common example being phobic disorders (Spitzer 2018). Distress is when there is an “impairment in functioning in a wide range of activities” (Spitzer 2018) which can be seen through mania and antisocial personality disorder. Lastly, disadvantage can occur mentally through impulse-driven behavior with painful consequences or being unable to make long lasting relationships such as someone with narcissistic personality disorder (Spitzer 2018). To fulfill these criteria of being a mental disorder, in all technological environments there must be either distress, disability, or disadvantage. At the very least, in the same platform such as social media, the same experiences and manifestations should occur. Yet, Rosen says that in different points and interactions with technology there will be different reactions and the manifestation of different disorders such as social isolation being present in symptoms of depression and schizophrenia.The second criteria are “the controlling variables tend to be attributed to being largely within the organism with regard to either initiating or maintaining the condition” (Spitzer 2018) and must not be reversed by either simple information or a non-technical intervention (Spitzer 2018). Thus, the fix Rosen describes of having a nature break to reset one’s mind when using technology would disqualify the iDisorder from being classified as a mental health disorder (Rosen 2012). The third criteria is that the conditions that are associated with distress, disability or any other disadvantage is a necessary price when obtaining a positive goal are excluded when considering if it is a disorder or not (Spitzer 2018). In the terms of technology, using social media to communicate for a group project even if there was distress associated around that communication would be considered a positive outcome and thus would not be considered as part of a disorder.The last criteria requires that the disorder is distinct from other conditions such as clinical phenomenology or response to treatment (Spitzer 2018). So the new disorder must be different than previous disorders and not be treated the same way. Thus in Rosen’s case, the iDisorder, is the manifestation of other disorders through the use of technology, but these aspects are already included in the original disorder. For example, when dealing with body dysmorphia, the manifestation and projection of the disorder is amplified through social media, but the underlying psychological conditions and responses are inherent to the disorder itself (Lewallen 2016). Rosen’s arguments at the beginning of the book are well documented and well within the scope of relating technologies effects on social media, while as the book goes on Rosen starts to expand his scope. For the disorders such as narcissism, OCD, addiction, ADD and ADHD, technology is not creating new disorders in users, but instead are manifesting what is already there and behaviors that are inherent to human beings.Like Rosen, research and data has shown that “social media provide[s] an opportunity for the expression of narcissism and subsequent social rewards for grandiose displays” (Barry 2018). Rosen prevents research that suggests more hours on social media result in more narcissistic tendencies (Rosen 2012). Yet, social media has become a part of the social culture of adolescents and young adults and is considered normative (Carlson 2011). Rosen’s work was at the early stages of social media use. In recent studies, there has been less of a connection shown between narcissism and using social media to establish an “openness to experience” (Skues, Williams, & Wise 2012) and to express feelings of loneliness to find support. The expression of one’s self should not be confused with narcissistic tendencies but instead a vulnerability that is common in social connection when in person and has now been translated to the virtual space (Abbasi 2019). Rosen makes the claim that the use of technology can make users exhibit different signs and symptoms of schizophrenia (Rosen 2012). Schizophrenia is a mental health disorder where “delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech or behavior, and impaired cognitive ability” (Patel 2014). Rosen focuses on six main manifestations of schizophrenia due to technology: social withdrawal, trouble connecting, odd thinking, delusional thinking, fixation on celebrities and paranoia (Rosen 2012). While these are effects of technology, to relate them solely to schizophrenia is out of the scope of Rosen’s research.In the social withdrawal section, Rosen details a computer programmer Alan who has schizoid personality disorder due to his want for isolation, exhibition of coldness, and lack of interest for other people (Rosen 2012). Rosen claims that the use of technology “may have caused some of his odd behaviors” (Rosen 2012), yet provides no research corroborating this claim. Social isolation is “disengagement from social ties, institutional connections, or community participation” (Primack 2018) and can either be objective where there is a physical lack of social interaction or subjective which is the perception of isolation (Whaite 2018). In a study conducted in the United States analyzed young adults from 19-32 and their social media use. The study examined the effects of the Big Five personalities of extraversion, neuroticism, conscientiousness, openness to experience and agreeableness (Whaite 2018). These personalities have been examined since the early 90s before social media and the major technological boom (Whaite 2018). From the study the researchers found that personalities of extraversion and agreeableness were at lower odds of social isolation while neuroticism was at significantly higher odds (Whaite 2018). Another study examined the correlation between schizophrenia and the Big Five personalities. They took 460 patients with schizophrenia and 486 healthy subjects and performed a meta-analysis to determine the personality traits of the subjects (Ohi 2016). Using a random-effect model, the researchers found that the patients with schizophrenia has a higher score for neuroticism and lower for extraversion (Ohi 2016). The patient profile was significantly different than the healthy subject’s personality profile (Ohi 2016). It was noted in the study that high aptitude for the neuroticism personality trait is common throughout many personality traits (Ohi 2016). Through the examination of these two studies, it is not that technology manifests schizophrenia which in turn leads to social isolation, but instead it amplifies the personality trait of neuroticism. Neuroticism is linked to many different disorders such as depression and anxiety which have been known to be increased due to technology (Ohi 2016). Thus, social isolation due to technology use has many different possible causes and cannot be pinpointed to support the claim of schizophrenia behaviors with the use of technology.The next area of discussion is the trouble of connecting and its relationship to schizophrenia. Rosen describes that a higher use of video games and more time spent online reveals the schizoid symptoms of social isolation and emotionally distant behavior (Rosen 2012). The key relationship that Rosen attempts to make is that people with “schizoid personality disorder have been described as unable to experience social warmth or to have deep feelings for others” (Rosen 2012) and that playing video games leads to “lower real-world empathy” 9Rosen 2012). However, in a study conducted in 2017 researchers sought to find a correlation between violent video games and lack of empathy using two groups, one exposed to violent video games and the other to non-violent video games (Gao 2017). They were then screened by a questionnaire for 200 video game experiences (Gao 2017). The participants in the study then underwent an fMRI machine that scanned their brain to record the reactions when viewing painful or non-painful stimuli (Gao 2017). When the violent video game group was compared to the non-violent video game group, there were no significant differences between the fMRI imaging disproving the belief that violent videos games cause desensitization. Rosen’s claim that playing video games can lead to lower real-world empathy is not necessarily true because those who already have lower real-world empathy can be drawn to video games to begin with. That combined with the study above makes it unreasonable for him to claim that video games and the perceived lack of empathy is a sign that schizophrenia is being manifested through the use of technology. The next aspect Rosen explores is odd thinking. A key aspect of schizophrenia is that people “often talk to imaginary people who they believe are commanding them to do something” (Rosen 2012). Rosen asserts that those who are talking on the phone through headphones in a public place or are following the directions of a GPS are exhibiting the symptoms of schizophrenia where they are believing that a person is next to them talking (Rosen 2012). The key difference between the person with schizophrenia versus the person talking on the phone is that there is another person at the other end of the phone. In Schizophrenia there is a connection between hyper reflexivity and diminished self-affection (Moe 2014). Hyper reflexivity is when “an exaggerated self-consciousness involving an individual experiencing the self or what would normally be an implicit aspect of the self, as extremely salient” (Moe 2014). Where diminished self-affection is one’s attention to their basic sense of self presence or the “lessening of the implicit sense of existing as a vital and self-possessed subject of awareness” (Moe 2014). Thus, when some who suffers from schizophrenia is engaging in an internal discussion, they “fail to recognize the self as the source of the internal speech” (Moe 2014) which is related to a diminished self-affection (Moe 2014). This speech is often very intrusive for people with schizophrenia which is a result of hyper reflexivity and they are unable to stop the inner voice from intruding on their thoughts (Moe 2014). Finally, they view the inner voice as being external to themselves (Moe 2014).When looking at the mechanism by which schizophrenia internal conversation occurs, the parallel between technology and schizophrenia behavior is almost nonexistent. When someone is talking in public using their headphones, there is a person on the other end of the line. That person is external to the person using the technology. There is no diminished self-affection due to the fact that the voice cannot be recognized as internal speech. Lastly, when engaging in the conversation, the user on one end of the phone is in control of the information and responses that the user at the other end of the phone receives thus degrading the claim of hyper reflexivity when using a smart phone. Delusion thinking was framed in the context of phantom vibration syndrome which is when users are so connected to phones and technology that the user checks for messages or answers phone calls when the phone has not vibrated which is a result of neuroplasticity (Rosen 2012). Neuroplasticity is “the brain’s ability to reorganize and generate new neuronal pathways in response to internal and external stimuli” (Bhandari 2016). Yet for people with schizophrenia, they have a disrupted neuroplasticity which would inhibit the ability to reorganize and generate pathways (Bhandari 2016). Since the delusion thinking that Rosen is trying to connect to schizophrenia is dependent on neuroplasticity, it is a stretch to relate the normal neuroplasticity that is developed due to the vibrations of phones to damaged neuroplasticity that accounts for delusion thinking in schizophrenia.Rosen starts to argue that those who use technology can exhibit symptoms of erotomania which is “a deep connection that they believe they have a romantic and spiritual relationship with the object of their delusion” (Rosen 2012). Erotomania occurs in conjunctions with schizophrenia in such that not all people suffering with schizophrenia will also experience erotomania and vice versa (Valandes 2020). Erotomania is not commonplace and thus there are few individual case studies studying the beliefs and behaviors of those who suffer from this disease (Valandes 2020). The relationship that those with erotomania believe to experience is one of reciprocity, that the person of their desire also desires them back (Valandes 2020). Rosen stretches the correlation to technology use. The difference is between admiration and obsession. Those who follow celebrities and other users on social media may do so because they admire their profile or appreciate the message that they spread (Sansone 2014). Yet, those who have erotomania are obsessed with those that they follow (Sansone 2014). Case studies surrounding erotomania and social media use concern individuals who suffer from erotomania and social media is used as amplification (Faden 2017). Thus, to relate that technology use can lead to a rare delusional disorder is a stretch without more evidence on behalf of Rosen. The last claim Rosen asserted was that social media and technology are making users exhibit paranoid schizophrenia where he drew on the conclusion that those who use social media are more likely to be jealous in romantic relationships (Rosen 2012). Since Rosen’s book, dating apps such as Tinder and Hinge have risen to the scene that allow for users to initially establish connections online and conflict is normal in relationships thus conflict will arise online (Arikewuyo 2020). Through the use of social media jealousy, infidelity and monitoring a user’s romantic partner allow for conflict to occur at more heightened rates (Arikewuyo 2020). Conflict and jealousy in relationships are normal to some extent because there will always be some difference between “opinions, views, belief, and ideology” (Arikewuyo 2020). Social media heightens and escalates conflict, but it did not create conflict in relationships and this correlation is very much a stretch to be considered as an example of how narcissism is manifested through technology. Technology does affect users through their mood, content exposure and interactions (Rosen 2012), yet Rosen overreaches on the extent of technology effects the user. To be considered a mental disorder there must be some unique cause or behavior but in the iDisorder, technology manifests other disorder behaviors without having a unique behavior or attribute. Rosen overreaches on the effect of technology when he compares users who are talking on the phone to those with schizophrenia because there is a consciousness behind talking on the phone. Among the other causes, this claim is not as well supported as explorations earlier in the book. Word Count:2480Section Word Count: 4602Further Research: Social Media and Mental HealthSince Rosen’s work on the effects of technology on the mental health of users, there has been an increase in the accessibility of the internet and technology worldwide. Thus, there are many opportunities to expand upon the effects of technology on the manifestation of mental health disorders, the number of risks that are associated with social media, and how these apps can be used to support mental health rather than inhibit it. While there has been extensive research on the effects on mental health there is still a lot of research that can be conducted. After an eight-year longitude study on social media’s impact on mental health it was found that time spent using social media was “not related to individual changes that occur in depression or anxiety” (Coyne 2020). While a cross-sectional approach shows a correlation, it lacks changes over time (Coyne 2020). Thus, further research would be beneficial by examining data that utilizes the data that tracks the amount of time spent on the app to examine the long-term effects of social media (Coyne 2020). A majority of the studies conducted over long periods of time require self-reporting symptoms and effects and thus future research should use a clinical method of assessing mental health (Coyne 2020).Another area of research can be identifying and treating the mental health symptoms earlier though the use of social media (Naslund 2020). This is becoming a new field called digital phenotyping which “captur[es] how individuals interact with their digital devices, including social media platforms, in order to study patterns of illness and identify optimal time points for intervention” (Naslund 2020). This is particularly relevant when examining the validity of iDisorders because digital phenotyping can find correlations based on data and patterns rather than having to make the assumptions based on theories. Thus, there should be more focus on digital phenotyping of social media to allow for the full effects of how social media can affect and exploit mental disorders. Lastly, another area of research is the effect of the COVID 19 pandemic on technology use and the manifestation of disorders such as depression. With the pandemic still occurring, there is a large opportunity for future research. Currently, there was a study that examined how mental health has been impacted due to COVID-19 and the manifestation of health anxiety. Health anxiety is “the misinterpretation of perceived bodily sensations and changes, can be protective in everyday life” (Rajkumar 2020). With the constant anxiety caused by fear of contracting and spreading the virus, the need for evidence-based research with the propagation of anxiety spread due to social media and technology is necessary for preserving mental health for future pandemics (Rajkumar 2020). Rosen’s work was a comprehensive overview of the rise of technology and early effects of how technology can impact mental health. Eight years after the publication, an update of the effects that technology can have on mental health in the ever-expanding online world, especially the increase in online course content, is pertinent. Word Count: 498Personal Connection: My Struggle with TechnologySince I got my first Nintendo Gameboy, I have been connected to technology and constantly have had it around. The technology evolved from an iPod touch, to a razor flip phone, Nintendo DS, iPhone, iPad and computer. With every passing year, I became more and more hooked on technology and the benefits that I get with technology from having my notes all in one place for class to reducing inflammation due to my scoliosis by decreasing the weight in my backpack. iDisorder shed light and reaffirmed all of my worst fears of technology but gave me ways to confront my technology use.When I was in elementary and middle school, I used to read all the time. Staying up late under the covers with a flashlight trying to figure out if Harry would defeat Voldemort. Once I got my Nintendo DS, then iPod and eventually my iPhone, instead of balancing a book and a flashlight I was under the covers playing whatever game I was addicted to or stalking someone’s social media to try to piece together pieces of an unknown social puzzle. When I was reading the stories that Dr. Rosen wrote at the beginning of each chapter, I started to see how I have manifested either very minimally or extremely certain disorders which have led to my mental health issues, social anxiety or overall lack of productivity. Immediately after I finished reading iDisorders, I started to incorporate the nature breaks in between classes and studying where I would walk by Clear Creek, alone or with my roommates, for 15-20 minutes when I felt the zoom fatigue hit. I also set limits on my technology use and saw my productivity increase while my screen time decreased. These are strategies that I am going to keep following while I am a student and especially during the pandemic. Making sure that I stand up and go outside to really reset and refocus my attention will make a positive impact on my mental health.Professionally, I can see how the overuse of technology in our personal lives will affect our technology use in the professional space. I am hoping to go into manufacturing engineering after graduation, which requires being constantly connected in case some major machine malfunction occurs. It is going to be hard to take breaks when working on a computer and machinery all day. Yet, taking walks in nature and limiting technology use to only essential tasks after work is going to be very important.While the research is inconclusive regarding whether the affects that technology has on our brains is reversible, I believe that limiting the amount of exposure can help with mental health and wellbeing. I will carry the facts and advice that I have gained from this book throughout my academic, professional and personal life.Word Count: 468Section Word Count: 966Paper Word Count: 6309ReferencesAbbasi, I. S. (2019). Social Media Addiction in Romantic Relationships: Does User’s Age Influence Vulnerability to Social Media Infidelity? Personality and Individual Differences. 139. 277-280. , A. O., Lasisi, T. T., Abdulbaqi, S. S., Omoloso, A. I., Arikewuyo, H. O. (2020). Evaluating the Use of Social Media in Escalating Conflicts in Romantic Relationship. Wiley. , C. T., McDougall, K. H. (2018). Social Media: Platform or Catalyst for Narcissism? Handbook of Trait Narcissism. 435-441.Berridge, C. W., Waterhouse, B. D. (2003). The Locus Coeruleus-Noradrenergic System: Modulation of Behavioral State and State-Dependent Cognitive Processes. Brain Research Reviews. 42(1). 33-84. (03)00143-7Bhandair, A., Voineskos, D., Daskalakis, Z. J., Rajji, T. K., Blumberger, D. M. (2016). A Review of Impaired Neuroplasticity in Schizophrenia Investigated with Non-invasive Brain Stimulation. Front Psychiatry. 7(45). , F., Berger, P., Nagels, A., Falkenberg, I., Straube, B. (2018). The Role of the Right Temporo-Parietal Junction in Social Decision-Making. Human Brain Mapping. 39(7). 3072-3085. , M., Gonneke, S., Finkenauer, C., van der Eijnden, R. (2020). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder-Symptoms, Social Media Use, Intensity, and Social Media Use Problems in Adolescents: Investigating Directionality. Child Development. 91(4). 853-865. , A., Serences, J. T., (2012). Exploring the Relationship Between Perceptual Learning and Top-Down Attentional Control. Vision Research. 74. 30-39. , E. N., Vazire, S., Oltmanns, T. F. (2011). You Probably Think this Paper’s About You: Narcissists’ Perceptions of Their Personality and Reputation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 101(1). 185-201. , J. L., Algoe, S. B., Green, M. C. (2017). Social Network Sites and Well-Being: The Role of Social Connection. SAGE Journals. 27(1). , S. M., Rogers, A. A., Zurcher, J. D., Stockdale, L., Booth, M. (2020). Does Time Spent Using Social Media Impact Mental Health?: An Eight Year Longitudinal Study. Computers in Human Behavior. 104. , M., Rothlein, D., (2019). Models of Sustained Attention. Current Opinion in Psychology. 29. 174-180. https//10.1016/j.copysyc.2019.03.005Euston, D. R., Gruber, A. J., McNaughton, B. L., (2012). The Role of Medial Prefrontal Cortex in Memory and Decision Making. Neuron. 76(6). 1057-1070. , J. Levin, J., Mistry, R., Wang, J. (2017) Delusional Disorder, Erotomanic Type, Exacerbated by Social Media Use. Case Reports in Psychiatry. , A. V. (2019). Selective Sustained Attention: A Developmental Foundation for Cognition. Current Opinion in Psychology. 29. 248-253. , J., Torous, J., Stubbs, B., Firth, J. A., Steiner, G. Z., Smith, L., Alvarez-Jimenez, M., Gleeson, J., Vancampfort, D., Armitage, C. J., Sarris, J. (2019). The “Online Brain”: How the Internet May be Changing Our Cognition. , C. D., Frith, U. (2006). The Neural Basis of Mentalizing. Neuron. 50(4). 531-534. , X., Pan, W., Li, C., Weng, L., Yao, M., Chen, A. (2017). Long-Time Exposure to Violent Video Games Does Not Show Desensitization on Empathy for Pain: An fMRI Study. Front Psychol. 8(650). , J. Price, C. J. (2008). The Role of the Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus in Audiovisual Processing. Cerebral Cortex. 18(10). 2439-2449. , A. (2019). Effects of Uses and Gratifications on Social Media Use: The Facebook Case with Multiple Mediator Analysis. PSU Research Review. 3(1).Lewallen, J., Behm-Morawitz, E. (2016). Pinterest or Thinterest?: Social Comparison and Body Image on Social Media. Social Media + Society. 1-9. , A. M., Docherty, N. M. (2014). Schizophrenia and the Sense of Self. Schizophr Bull. 40(1), 161-168. , J. A., Bondre, A., Torous, J., Aschbrenner, K. A. (2020). Social Media and Mental Health: Benefits, Risks, and Opportunities for Research and Practice. Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science. 245-257. , K., Sugiura, M., Hanawa, S., Suzuki, M., Jeong, H., Kotozaki, Y., Kikuchi, T., Nozawa, T., Nakagawa, S., Kawashima, R. (2020). Differential Roles of Amygdala and Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus in Social Scene Understanding. Social Neuroscience. 15(5). 516-529. , K. (2019). Working Memory and Attention – A Conceptual Analysis and Review. Journal of Cognition. 2(1). 36. , K., Shimada, T., Nitta, Y., Kihara, H., Okubo, H., Uehara, T., Kawaskai, Y. (2016). The Five-Factor Model Personality Traits in Schizophrenia: A Meta-Analysis. Psychiatry Research. 240. 34-41. , L., Cheever, N., Carrier, L. M. (2012). iDisorder: Understanding Our Obsession With Technology and Overcoming its Hold on Us. St. Martin’s Press. Patel, K. R., Cherian, J., Gohil, K., Atkinson, D. (2014). Schizophrenia: Overview and Treatment Options. Pharmacy and Therapeutics. 39(9). 638-645.Primack, B. A., Karim, S. A., Shensa, A., Bowman, B., Knight, J., Sidani, J. E., (2018). Positive and Negative Experiences on Social Media and Social Isolation. American Journal of Health Promotion. , R. P. (2020). COVID-19 and Mental Health: A Review of the Existing Literature. Asian Journal of Psychiatry. 52. , R. A., Sansone, L. A. “I’m Your Number One Fan” – A Clinical Look at Celebrity Worship. Innov Clin Neurosci. 11(1-2), 39-43. Saxe, R., Kanwisher, N. (2003). People Think About Thinking People: The Role of the Temporo-Parietal Junction in “Theory of Mind”. NeuroImage. 19(4). 1835-1842. (03)00230-1Schaefers, T. Schamari, J. (2016). Service Recovery via Social Media: The Social Influence Effects of Virtual Presence. Journal of Service Research. 19(2). 192-208. , M., Radua, J., Aichhorn, M., Richlan, F., Perner, J. (2014). Fractionating Theory of Mind: A Meta-analysis of Functional Brain Imaging Studies. Neuorscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 42. 9-34. , L. E., Hernandez, L. M., Greenfield, P. M., Dapretto, M. (2018). What the Brain ‘Likes’: Neural Correlates of Providing Feedback on Social Media. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. 13(7). 699-707. , L. E., Payton, A. A., Hernandez, L. M., Greenfield, P. M., Dapretto, M. (2016). The Power of the Like in Adolescence: Effects of Peer Influence on Neural and Behavioral Responses to Social Media. Psychol Sci. 27(7). 1027-1035. , J. L., Williams, B., & Wise, L. (2012). The effects of personality traits, self-esteem, loneliness, and narcissism on Facebook use among university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2414–2419.Spitzer, R. L., Endicott, J., Franchi, J. A. M. (2018). Medical and Mental Disorder: Proposed Definition and Criteria. Annales Medico-psychologiques, revue psychiatrique. 176(7). 656-665. , I., Mihovilovic, M., Sablic, Z. (2014). Uses and Gratification Theory – Why Adolescents Use Facebook? Medij. Istraz. 20(2). 85-110. Valadas, M. T. R. T, Bravo, L. E. A. (2020). De Clerambault’s Syndrome Revisited: A Case Report of Erotomania in a Male. BMC Psychiatry. 20(516). , Z., Fei, L., Sun, Y., Li, J., Wang, F., Lu, Z. (2019). The Role of the Precuneus and Posterior Cingulate Cortex in the Neural Routes to Action. Computer Assisted Surgery. 24(1). 113-120. , E. O., Shensa, A., Sidani, J. E., Colditz, J. B, Primack, B. A. (2018). Social Media Use, Personality Characteristics, and Social Isolation Among Young Adults in the United States. Personality and Individual Differences. 124. 45-50. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download