9 | Majoring in YouTube?

As strange as it may seem, I’ve noticed an unusual amount of YouTube viewing at our beloved libraries. At first, I thought it must be a new major: you only go to the library to do school work, right? Well, after some investigation I found that Cornell doesn’t offer a YouTube major, and all this movie watching is really one big distraction!

YouTube distraction only follows hypotheses 2 and 3 of Caplan’s study. While Caplan found psychosocial problems initiate the problematic internet usage loop, school work stress triggers the cycle and fuels a need to get away from the library. From my own experiences and observations, students working many hours at a time feel breaks are necessary every now and then. However, what plans to be a 5 minute YouTube break could end up lasting hours. Once the student gets a taste, he or she follows Caplan’s hypothesis 2 and allows the preference to unfold into problematic usage. YouTube is a very addicting site, with links to popular and related videos everywhere. Just like potato chips, its almost impossible to see/eat just one! For example, I dare anyone to look at this video and not look at all the hilarious remixes and spinoffs for another half hour.

In accordance with hypothesis 3, the unanticipated distraction worsens one’s problem as the night progresses in Uris Library, and the student suffers more sleep deprivation than usual (if possible). However, contrary to Caplan's model, this procrastination only mitigates the problem, and doesn’t lead back to hypothesis 1. As the night progresses and hours are wasted, the student realizes its time to buckle down as the deadline approaches and will avoid YouTube breaks and use more discretion.

Although YouTube is a social community as Caplan describes, it isn't necessary to socialize on the site. A good deal of addiction occurs just by lurking and viewing lots of videos, not interacting with the community. This explains why hypothesis 1 doesn’t hold for YouTube distraction: there’s no required social interaction to appease social problems in the real world. Instead, YouTube offers a highly addicting escape from monotony, regardless of social interactivity.

Caplan’s study captures the social path to internet addiction while YouTube offers an entertainment route. Regardless of how they enter hypothesis 2 and 3, Caplan accurately defines addiction in terms of excessive and compulsive use. YouTube distraction is excessive because each session eats away much more time than expected. It’s also compulsive because it’s easy to start watching one video spontaneously and become hooked. Additionally, YouTube viewing is a complete waste of time compared to social interactions. An addiction to a social space may reduce FtF interaction time, but is used to maintain social connections, especially weak ties. However, YouTube doesn’t simultaneously achieve anything, and only drains more time from the day. Although Caplan pinpoints the immediate effects of problematic internet use, he confines the argument on the social aspects of the web, while online content and one’s work habits can also play significant roles in problematic use.

Comment 1
Comment 2

9 "But...my guild needs me!"

When it comes to Problematic Internet Use (PIU), the first activity that comes to mind, for myself, is Online Role Playing Games, or MMORPGs (Massive Multiplayer Online RPGs). Unlike pornography, where you can get your fix either online, at an adult website, or offline, by locking yourself in the bathroom with your favorite issue of Playboy, there is only one place where you can get your MMORPG fix: the Internet. It's very nature is tied to Internet use; without it, it wouldn't exist.

I've lost some friends - many temporarily and some, unfortunately, permanently - to MMORPGs like World of Warcraft and Everquest. These are online games that involve the user in the creation of a personal avatar that is used to interact with other players and the game world that has been created for them. Many games involve the user "leveling" their character, a process of developing their attributes and strengths that takes a massive amount of time - bringing a character in World of Warcraft to level 70 took my one friend 4 months (and this was after already leveling 4 other characters to 70). Many of these games are actually incredibly fun to play - some might argue that they are TOO FUN to play and that they are therefore AFRAID to play them. Playing in the game world is full of virtual rewards for accomplishments and fun and challenging scenarios. And, as part of its appeal, the more you play an MMORPG, the more fun it becomes.

This 'time-sink' involves the user with the game so deeply, that they begin to steal time from other (sometimes healthy) activities, so that they can continue to play the game. While playing, they can socialize with other players and often join guilds, building a comfortable social circle within the virtual world--friends that now have more in common with the user's interests than do their FtF friends. As the user becomes more involved with the game, they begin to reject FtF, preferring more the CMC that they experience in the online space--their social comfort is shifting to CMC. This can lead to a halt - or even a decline - in an individual's social abilities and the disintegration of their FtF friendships.

In my opinion, these factors are consistent with Caplan's overview of Problematic Internet Use. Excessive use, in this case, is demonstrated in the massive amount of time that a user puts into the development of their character and their social life within the virtual world. When this time begins to eat into other activities deemed important to the user's life, then this should be considered excessive. Compulsive use is demonstrated by the user in ALLOWING for this activity to eat into their time doing other things - a great example is my friend telling me that he will miss our mutual friend's birthday party because he has "to raid a dungeon with his guild" (the "My guild needs me!" argument). These two issues serve to create psychosocial problems within the individual that are demonstrated in their lack of social competence - addicted user's just don't "get out enough" and this begins to dull their social abilities in FtF. Noticing this, they retreat to their online space, where they are more comfortable, because their anonymity affords greater control over their self-presentation and less perceived social risk and responsibility.

9| DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT $200!

Although Problematic Internet Use (PIU) may not be treated with the same gravity as some other addiction disorders (i.e. alcohol, gambling, etc.), it is a problem that grows with increased adoption of the internet. Problematic Internet Use relates to too much time spent online that results in problems at school, work, or at home. This is characterized by compulsive use, or the inability to control online activity and guilt about this inability, as well as excessive use, in which the amount of time actually spent online exceeds the amount of time that was intended. There are several areas on the internet that lend themselves to such problematic internet usage, including online gambling sites, porn sites, and the Facebook newsfeed. Gaming sites in particular have an “addicted” user base, and one such site includes games.com, a site on which you can play games like Monopoly.

Anyone who has played Monopoly in real life knows that it is a time-consuming game. Individuals who are lonely and depressed might turn to an online form of a familiar face-to-face (FtF) social game like Monopoly. Caplan’s Theory of Problematic Internet Use and Psychosocial Well-Being suggests that this is because their loneliness and depression leads to perceived social incompetence, causing these individuals to prefer online interaction since it is less threatening. Socializing successfully online at a game which translates to “real life” allows these users to feel more efficacious than they do in a FtF environment. This rewarding feeling can lead to conditioning by which users are encouraged to spend even more time online, causing a spiral of increased internet usage, which can have negative academic and social outcomes.

This particular version of Monopoly has features which include a player rating and a chat box. The chat box facilitates in greater perceived social competence in that players feel less threatened due to affordance of the internet such as greater anonymity and greater control over self presentation. However, two of the internet affordances described by Caplan, less perceived social risk and responsibility, do not play out in this particular space. This is due to the unique property of player ratings on this internet space. It is true that there is less social responsibility in the sense that you can be more aggressive and competitive in the game. However, if you are in the middle of a game and decide you’ve had enough and want to leave, if you quit the game and leave the other player hanging your player rating will decrease. Therefore, this mechanism actually acts as a means by which to discourage/penalize users from logging off until the game is over, which is especially disadvantageous in a game that has no foreseeable end, like Monopoly. Therefore, in addition to the other factors causing users to be “addicted” to the internet, there is actually a formal mechanism in place that contributes to even more internet usage. Although you are anonymous, there is an implied social responsibility in that “bad sports” who log off in middle of game do so at the risk of a lower rating, so others in this “society” are discouraged from playing with that person. Perhaps ostracizing internet addicts in this way will force them back into the realm of FtF!

Comments:

http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/11/9-tv-online.html
http://comm245brown.blogspot.com/2007/11/1day12hours4min-9.html

9 -- You're not THAT important.

Away Status

studying
class
din din
studying
HILLS!
Call me!! <3

Away Status

running outside....eventhough its soooo windy....if u wanan see us we will b running circle and hills are stuart field

Away Status

Tell me that you're sorry, didn't think I'd turn around and say
That it's too late to apologize, too late
It's too late to apologize, too late

***

As we have often discussed in class, the internet can often be very deceiving in that one may either think he is being viewed by the entire internet community, or that no one would take the time to view his actions, or his behavioral residue. In the medium that I am going to address, increased internet use reveals the individual's belief that many more people than is likely are actually paying attention to his actions.

This week, I will be talking about what I like to refer to as compulsive away-message changing. This relates somewhat to earlier class discussions of away-message checking, but is more closely in accordance with one's self-presentation, and his perceptions about the internet world. I would describe compulsive away-message changing as the constant and detailed online activity of updating one's message to the world, usually addressing what he is doing at that particular moment. In other words, if someone engaged in compulsive away-message changing, he would log onto AIM before he left his room in the morning and put up an away message like "at class", then as soon as he got home from class, change it to "at the library", or "out with friends", or even sometimes a more detailed message like "bookstore, hw, meeting, desperate housewives, more hw". Not that the latter was my away message last night or anything...

The nature of AIM definitely could be, at least in part, facilitating PIU (problematic internet use). Because there are pretty much always "buddies" online that may or may not be looking at your away message, people might be more likely to believe that people are reading their messages when they probably aren't. In relation to Caplan’s model, we can look at this activity in light of themes of his “Theory of Problematic Internet Use and Psychological Well-Being”. Firstly, we should examine whether or not this internet space proves that people with psychosocial problems hold negative views about their social competence. In this area, I’m not sure that Caplan’s theory is proved because we are only able to view a small sample of internet users, and it is difficult to determine self-esteem from a short away message. However, the idea that people with psychosocial problems prefer online interaction to interpersonal attraction may have some distinct evidence as seen in the detailed messages people leave. For example, people who put up emotionally charged song lyrics, as seen in my third example above, may be trying to cry out for attention in a way that would be too bold to actually act out in “real life”. Such away messages with clearly well thought-out wording may include hidden messages. In this case, the away-message changer clearly believes that people will spend the time to not only read his or her message, but to de-code it as well. In reality, this is probably quite unlikely, save for the people who are seriously procrastinating. Even then, they probably have better things to do than sit and de-code away messages.

If people do engage in such compulsive away-message changing, they probably feel the need to be at their computer more often in order to update the world on their activities. This would, in accordance with Caplan’s theory, ensue more time online, and probably less social capability when they aren’t at the computer. In my opinion, those people who feel the need to share their every action with the world probably aren’t having as much fun as they are trying to convey.

In other words, instead of “talking” all the time about exactly what you’re doing, it’s probably healthier to just go out and do it – without caring who knows and who cares.

9: IMaddict has now signed online

Instant Messenger is an activity that humans of all ages, nationalities, religions, political preferences (I could go on…) can participate in. Instant messaging programs began to appear in the 1970’s on certain operating systems, but have since been enormously expanded. Users can chat on AOL Instant Messenger, ichat, Adium, Trillium, MSN, and Yahoo, just to name a few. I enjoy using ichat because it allows me to chat with multiple friends from home who I don’t always have time to call. I am also able to communicate with friends and classmates about assignments and activities going on at Cornell. My mom also created a screen name last year soon after I left for college so that she could keep tabs on me and talk to me more frequently.

The majority of those who use IM use it for the reasons I’ve listed above. It is a simple, free, convenient way to talk to your friends. The trouble may start, however, when a person is at their computer for hours a day, only talking online. First of all, people who spend this much time online are clearly not going to be able to complete their homework or other work that needs to be done. The locus is on the internet as well as the user, as IM would not be possible without the internet, yet not all users abuse the program. Operant conditioning plays a role because as people continue to frequent certain chat rooms, they will want to see if other users are there. If they know that a certain person that they like talking to usually comes on around 8, they will probably disregard other things to go and talk to that person. Along with operant conditioning, comes maintenance of presence. If you are always present in a certain chat room then people will grow to respect your opinion more than a new person’s.

IM fits within the theory of PIU as well as Caplan’s theory. Many people who are engaging in abusive IM chat are probably doing so because they feel more comfortable on the Internet. For example, a boy that went to my high school and was in a couple of my classes would instant message me every time I came online. The conversation would usually end after “Good, how are you?” but he still acknowledged me online. In school, however, he would not say anything. I believe that he was more socially comfortable talking to me online, because that is where he seemed to spend so much time.

IM is unique in that it can be a synchronous form of communication with either your best friend, or a complete stranger. IM is generally a great thing, but it is important to remember that as silly as it sounds, people can get addicted.

Facebook Fever

Facebook has been widely recognized as a major player in the domain of mainstream technological time-eaters. Though sites such as YouTube, MySpace, and CollegeHumor all boast impressive time-gobbling capacities, Facebook was recently awarded the distinction of “most popular site among college students” by BizReport. This could stem, in part, from the tendency of many students to stay logged in for long periods of time, just in case something interesting happens. For most, the Facebook habit is manageable and minimally disruptive. However, in some cases, this constant need to stay connected could lead to dependence, siphoning valuable time that would ordinarily be devoted to schoolwork or even real-world socializing.

According to Caplan, problematic internet use is distinguished by two factors: excessive use and compulsive use. When an internet user spends copious amounts of time on an online activity despite intentions to limit usage, their behavior is demonstrative of problematic internet use (PIU). Many college students probably experience a compulsion to log onto Facebook, knowing that their time would be better spent studying. Caplan has also identified a typical chain reaction associated with PIU. When someone experiences psychosocial problems such as depression or loneliness, they often hold negative impressions of their social competence. This can lead to a preference for internet interactions, which seem more efficacious and less threatening. This internet preference can then take a toll on their already-suffering real-world social interactions. Caplan has attributed the lure of the internet to its capacity to offer greater anonymity, greater control over self-presentation, more intense and intimate self-disclosure, less perceived social risk, and less social responsibility.

While the domino effect outlined by Caplan applies to many instances of PIU, Facebook-mania may be an exception. It seems that depression and loneliness are not prerequisites for developing a problematic affinity for Facebook. In fact, people who are well-connected in the real world are often also well-connected on Facebook. Having a large number of Facebook friends could serve as an impetus for spending extensive time on the site in order to virtually keep in touch with all of these contacts, whether passively (i.e. browsing their profile) or actively (i.e. writing on their wall). In this case, highly socially competent individuals could be at greater risk than those who view themselves as socially inept. While a preference for Facebook may be amplified by its ability to provide efficiency in a non-threatening atmosphere, these two factors are also not necessarily the primary catalysts triggering a Facebook obsession. This may be partly because the factors leading to an internet preference, as described by Caplan, do not all hold true for this unique social networking site. Facebook seems to offer degrees of anonymity, perceived social risk, and social responsibility that are equivalent to those experienced in the real world, since most students use the site primarily to communicate with people they already know outside of cyberspace. However, Facebook does seem to offer greater control over self-presentation and, sometimes, more intense and intimate self-disclosure. When combined with Facebook’s capacity to function as an entertainment center (via applications), soap box, and social network management tool, these factors inspire heightened attachment to the site and have helped to put Facebook on the PIU map.

Perez Hilton Can Cause PIU

PerezHilton.com

The advent of the internet has brought about both positive and negative social consequences since its manifestation. A negative consequence of the internet that has recently arisen is that of internet addiction. As Wallace states in The Psychology of the Internet, “in the mid-1990s, the notion that people could become addicted to the internet was often greeted with howling laughter” (1999, p. 178). Now however, internet addiction is not a joke. In his article “Preference for Online Social Interaction”, Scott Caplan uses the term PIU to describe problematic internet use, “to characterize those maladaptive cognitions and behaviors involving internet use that result in negative consequences” (Caplan, 2003). I believe the online activity of reading gossip blogs (such as PerezHilton.com) facilitates PIU.
As mentioned in lecture, there are many qualities of the internet that can lead to an addiction. PerezHilton.com exhibits several of these factors. One of the most important factors that this gossip blog has is affordability. In the past, people obtained their celebrity news and gossip from magazines and newspapers, both of which must be bought. However, access to online gossip blogs is free. Another factor apparent in gossip blogs is that you can visit PerezHilton.com anonymously. You don’t have to subscribe to it and no one knows you read it unless you make your presence known. This leads to the factor of interactivity. If you choose, you can post comments on blog posts and thus make your online presence known by interacting with the blog site. Yet another factor PerezHilton.com exhibits is browsability because you can search for news about a specific celebrity.
These factors also relate to Caplans internet affordances of anonymity and less social risk. People will not feel guilty reading gossip blogs because of these factors. PerezHilton.com can also offer a few of Caplan’s variables used to predict problematic internet use. PerezHilton can alter the mood of a reader by making them feel better about himself/herself when they read it and thus putter the reader in a better mood.
It is reasonable to ask the question as to whether it is qualities of gossip blogs that can have an additive power, or qualities of the individual reader that would cause this online space to become addictive. I would estimate that it is a mixture of both the aspects of gossip blogs and specific characteristics of an individual that can lead people to become addicted to them. It is likely that people who seek out gossip blogs to read place a large emphasis on being “in the know”. They probably have a high need for social acceptance and might believe that by being on top of celebrity new might help them to gain approval of their peers. Yet, there are also several intrinsic characteristics of gossip blogs that may lead people to become addicted to them including, their timely updates, easy accessibility, affordability, and anonymity.
Caplan hypothesizes three main points in his study: that individuals with psychosocial problems hold negative perceptions of their social competence, they prefer CMC because it is less threatening, and this in turn leads to excessive and compulsive interactions which worsens problems they already have. Although I do believe reading gossip blogs can lead to problematic internet use, I do not think that gossip blogs have the power to cause as extreme negative consequences as Caplan predicts.