GSO/Guilford Pols

August 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

« Amok time | Main | Requiem for a CPA »

Aug 24, 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cc33e53ef014e8aea778c970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Correlation and causality:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

sean coon

who connects drugs/drinking with social media, either more or less? why don't they apply the same study to bowling? or snowboarding?

Lex

I believe video games make kids more violent, but my dataset consists of one 10-year-old.

michele

@Sean: The study was conducted by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. Their conclusions include suggestions that social networking site owners make changes in light of the data. I don't think that researchers, parents or anyone else is really concerned with lessening teen bowling or snowboarding. Teen substance abuse is a different story.

justcorbly

Contact with kids and adults who drink and make it look like fun for others kids is probably worth noticing, whether the contact is real or virtual.

Bill Yaner

Teen substance abuse is directly related to our culture's hypocrisy in dealing with the plain and simple truth that being high is fun. Europeans face this fact with honesty and therefore let their youths free to discoverr how to balance the pleasure with moderation.


john hayes

"Teen substance abuse is directly related to our culture's hypocrisy in dealing with the plain and simple truth that being high is fun. Europeans face this fact with honesty and therefore let their youths free to discoverr how to balance the pleasure with moderation."

Sobering (PI) truth. I can only find solace in your clarity in those observations compared to my perpetual cloudiness and flip-flopping, in the assumption that you have no children.

Billy Jones

My guess is that eighty-seven percent of parents are clueless, just as parents have always been.

tk solomon

billy: that was the red flag for me..

"87% of parents think...."

"89% of parents felt..."

there were more feelers than thinkers

my experience with my children in the 80's was their exposure to alcohol and drugs had the highest correlation with public schools. if the most expensive protection scheme in he world cannot keep drugs out of prisons, then there is no way in hell of keeping them out of schools. both systems provide captive clientele and protection for vendors. social networks make it impractical to interview all of your children's peers.

Ed Cone

My doubt is about the causality (..."make their child more likely..."), not the correlation.

Billy Jones

TK,
I was in school in the 70s and drugs were everywhere-- alcohol too. I was raising a child in the 80s and school was still a recent memory for me. He turned out better than his father.

Bill Yaner's comment rings very true with me:

"Teen substance abuse is directly related to our culture's hypocrisy in dealing with the plain and simple truth that being high is fun. Europeans face this fact with honesty and therefore let their youths free to discoverr how to balance the pleasure with moderation."

I can excuse my parents as they were simple mountain people who didn't even know these drugs existed until after I was using them. They were also products of one room school houses where supervision was much stricter than schools today. But today's parents have no excuses.

When my son was coming up I was very open with him about my own experiences with drugs and alcohol. I didn't allow him to use drugs but I also didn't lie to him about drugs. Sure, he tried some but not to the extent that I did.

Time to gut the grass... ah, I mean, lawn.

sean coon

Michelle, my point was that I don't believe that social networks cause teens to drink. Period. For a group to spend time researching it seems like a waste of time. Social angst, challenging authority, peer pressure, pre-adolescent shifts in hormones, lack of parental guidance (which only helps to the degree the former challenges don't). -- all of this has been going on *forever*. It just seems like a silly study, rather self-concluding.

JimC

I think there can be some statistical improvement to this study, using existing data. They are comparing teens who say they spend ANY time on social networking sites with those that spend no time. 1 minute per day is the equivalent to 1 hour per day. Plus the questioning is "In a typical day, how many hours do you spend on Facebook, MySpace or other social networking site? If you are usually not on a social networking site in a typical day, please answer 0; if usually less than one hour, use only minutes." In a TYPICAL day. So those zeros may not be really zeros for once in a while users who may also see pictures of friends drunk/high/passed out. Here is the breakdown of responses:
30% 0 minutes
22% 1-30 minutes
18% 31-60 minutes
7% 61-90 minutes
9% 91-120 minutes
13% More than 2 hours

I would imagine that there is a much higher correlation for drinking/drugs for the 1/8th of the survey who is on social networking > 2 hrs on a typical day than those in the 1-30 minute category. That seems to me to be a sign of boredom. I think the problem is that kids have the time to spend on social networking more than what they might actually see. I'd like to see a similar study done for adults. At my daughter's dance recital rehearsal I saw lots of smart phones on facebook.

Teen drug use is down since the 70's.

The comments to this entry are closed.