Internet Use Is Associated With Greater Wellbeing, Global Study Finds 47
According to a new study published in the journal Technology, Mind and Behavior, researchers found that internet use is associated with greater wellbeing in people around the world. "Our analysis is the first to test whether or not internet access, mobile internet access and regular use of the internet relates to wellbeing on a global level," said Prof Andrew Przybylski, of the University of Oxford, who co-authored the work. The Guardian reports: [T]he study describes how Przybylski and Dr Matti Vuorre, of Tilburg University in the Netherlands, analysed data collected through interviews involving about 1,000 people each year from 168 countries as part of the Gallup World Poll. Participants were asked about their internet access and use as well as eight different measures of wellbeing, such as life satisfaction, social life, purpose in life and feelings of community wellbeing.
The team analyzed data from 2006 to 2021, encompassing about 2.4 million participants aged 15 and above. The researchers employed more than 33,000 statistical models, allowing them to explore various possible associations while taking into account factors that could influence them, such as income, education, health problems and relationship status. The results reveal that internet access, mobile internet access and use generally predicted higher measures of the different aspects of wellbeing, with 84.9% of associations between internet connectivity and wellbeing positive, 0.4% negative and 14.7% not statistically significant.
The study was not able to prove cause and effect, but the team found measures of life satisfaction were 8.5% higher for those who had internet access. Nor did the study look at the length of time people spent using the internet or what they used it for, while some factors that could explain associations may not have be considered. Przybylski said it was important that policy on technology was evidence-based and that the impact of any interventions was tracked.
The team analyzed data from 2006 to 2021, encompassing about 2.4 million participants aged 15 and above. The researchers employed more than 33,000 statistical models, allowing them to explore various possible associations while taking into account factors that could influence them, such as income, education, health problems and relationship status. The results reveal that internet access, mobile internet access and use generally predicted higher measures of the different aspects of wellbeing, with 84.9% of associations between internet connectivity and wellbeing positive, 0.4% negative and 14.7% not statistically significant.
The study was not able to prove cause and effect, but the team found measures of life satisfaction were 8.5% higher for those who had internet access. Nor did the study look at the length of time people spent using the internet or what they used it for, while some factors that could explain associations may not have be considered. Przybylski said it was important that policy on technology was evidence-based and that the impact of any interventions was tracked.
Modern science in a nutshell (Score:5, Insightful)
From the paper:
"Nevertheless, our conclusions are qualified by a number of factors. First, we compared individuals to each other. There are likely myriad other features of the human condition that are associated with both the uptake of internet technologies and well-being in such a manner that they might cause spurious associations or mask true associations. For example, because a certain level of income is required to access the internet and income itself is associated with well-being, any simple association between internet use and well-being should account for potential differences in income levels. While we attempted to adjust for such features by including various covariates in our models, the data and theory to guide model selection were both limited."
These chucklefucks used internet access as a proxy for wealth, and concluded that more wealthy people have more wellbeing.
Data came from gallup 2006-2022.
This is why so much of the modern science is absolute garbage. If you read the paper, they will usually tell you they're bullshitting you. You just need to read through most of it first.
Re: (Score:2)
These chucklefucks used internet access as a proxy for wealth, and concluded that more wealthy people have more wellbeing.
Well, did or didn't they?
The summary says, they took that (well known) dependency into account:
explore various possible associations while taking into account factors that could influence them, such as income, education, health problems and relationship status.
Re:Modern science in a nutshell (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, that is why it's bullshit. They say that in summary to attract attention. Summary is marketing for the paper.
Then you go read the details on what they did to actually do that, and you get the citation I provided above. They know that most people won't read the actual fine print, and just take the summary. And some people who are particularly ignorant of how writing scientific papers works such as yourself, will actually cite the summary over the detailed description from the study from which summary is... summarized. I.e. "things we don't want to be easily seen are cut off, read the fine print to find out more". I gave you the fine print. On a silver platter. And you went for the marketing blob instead as if that disproves the detailed description of what they actually did.
This is why we can't have nice things. People will actually cite fucking marketing blob as evidence against actual detailed description that said marketing blob was derived from.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you're claiming they were too honest?
They told you what they did and the limitations they faced.
Are you crying because you thought scientists should be all knowing? Or that you want them to just pretend that they are? Seems you're looking for religion instead.
Re:Modern science in a nutshell (Score:4, Insightful)
It's one thing to make a claim, it's another thing entirely to actually have that claim backed up by hard evidence. One is an easy bar to clear, the other has much stricter standards which the GP is asserting haven't been met.
Correlation not causation - media rants on (Score:2)
It's odd how the media, politicians, social media addicts need a daily stream of 'simplistic enough for a 4 year old' short talking points and 'reasons' to keep the media wheels turning.
Blaming everything on the easiest 'reason' and blaming everything on the thing that 'they don't have to exert effort to fix' is the game and jobs program for them;
- Violent person attacks X people -> (simple reason) -> too much video games -> instead of that they are mentally ill since admitting it as mental illness
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You extrapolate from this study to the rest of science? How about you tell us how mathematics (although mathematics is not technically a science, much research is done in it), physics, chemistry, biology, materials science, etc. is all tainted. Don't hold back, lay it on us!
Re: (Score:2)
Are you suggesting that basic scientific principles change field to field?
That's one hell of an accusation to make. Go ahead. Elaborate.
Re: (Score:2)
This study is merely one xample of many and we all can share anecdotes about similar things we have encountered. There are studies being done that say we're not really progressing at the moment. Sabine Hossenfelder made a video about that a few weeks ago. She's a pretty disillusioned phycisist.
Correlation is not causation (Score:3)
From the last paragraph of the summary: "The study was not able to prove cause and effect"
So, let me be the first to cite the well-known slashdot slogan, "correlation is not causation."
I wouldn't cite this as flaw in modern science, though. I'd use this as one more example of how much of social sciences use the tools of science, like statistics, but really aren't science.
Re: (Score:2)
It actually doesn't prove direct correlation either. They themselves state that they could not control for wealth as the primary correlation, to which both "internet access" and "well being" correlate.
I.e. pools and murder rate in specific location don't directly correlate. They correlate through wealth, in that wealth correlates both with pools and with low murder rate. This is why you need controls in correlation, which they specifically state they failed to do. I.e. you need a region where there are pool
Social Science (Score:3)
I would qualify that with social science being garbage. The people running the LHC aren't using quantitative analysis to guesstimate the mass of subatomic particles.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm reminded of all the room temperature superconductivity papers as an example against "but my hard sciences are safe from this".
Re: (Score:2)
I'm reminded of all the room temperature superconductivity papers as an example against "but my hard sciences are safe from this".
And most physicists were dubious of them. You heard about them because the media was picking them up, and hucksters were trying to get startup capital. This stuff is *rampant* in the social sciences.
I worked for a professor whom was looked down on by his peers because he only published one or two papers per year. The difference is that he did actual experiments, bringing people in and evaluating them in a controlled environment. The other professors in his department would plug demographic data into SPSS, p
Re: (Score:2)
This is another massive case of scientific illiteracy. Science is not a democracy, nor can it be one. It is utterly irrelevant what "most" "majority", "some" "all credible" etc think.
All that matters is hypothesis and proving it.
If science was a democracy, we'd still live in belief that Sun goes around the Earth. Because "most astronomers" should've completely nullified Galileo.
I don't know about that (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Care to share the nice communities you've found?
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, definitely invite nice wholesome Slashdot into your comfortable spaces.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
follow your interests and you'll find some little forum or similar space that caters to that. I'd just recommend getting off the huge social media sites, or severely limit their use in general.
The problem is that so many of the "little forums" have been abandoned for facebook groups or discord. So now it's not a nice little forum, you have to accept all the social media baggage and get a facebook account in order to participate. The facebook and discord groups are also impossible to to search, so if you're looking for some info that was posted a while ago about an obscure car, or old computer, or how to do an obscure sewing task, you're out of luck.
I like messing about with old Amiga computers. T
Re: (Score:1)
Statistically speaking... (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, at every school where they've effectively banned mobile phone use, they've experienced better behaviour, better social & emotional well-being, & better academic performance. Those kids will go on to have measurably happier more successful lives as a direct result of this.
Posted a bit late (Score:4, Funny)
April 1st was last month.
Improving my well being (Score:2)
Uh sure, great study, you can go to trending hash tags on Twitter to see countless people who are increasing their well being.
They should also have correlated internet use... (Score:3)
Internet vs. Social Media. (Score:3)
Like trying to convince the uninformed back in the day that AOL keywords weren’t really the same thing as an internet search, there is a significant difference between “the internet” and social media. Which is why everyone from parents to psychologists are laughing at the notion that the internet is generally “good for you.”
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Sorry your post contained too many words and I zoned out half way through the first sentence, can you convey what you said in a 15 second interpretive dance and post it on TikTok so everyone can understand?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry your post contained too many words and I zoned out half way through the first sentence, can you convey what you said in a 15 second interpretive dance and post it on TikTok so everyone can understand?
How right you are. What was I thinking in more than 140 characters?
(Still blows me away that Vine couldn’t even manage to entertain this generation with a six second time limit. Even bull riders expect a longer performance.)
No internet access (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It stands to reason that people who cannot afford internet access are probably short on other amenities which contribute to their wellbeing.
You've got to be pretty poor not to have any access to the internet this day and age. It's at the point where most people in developing countries have a phone and Wifi access isn't rare even if they cant afford to put data on the phone.
Correlation, not Causation (Score:3, Informative)
Misery Loves Company. (Score:2)
So is masturbation. (Score:2)
Go figure.