Why a digital detox is bad for us | Ruth Whippman | Life and style | The Guardian

Negative emotions and anxiety exist for a reason. The rancid sense of rising terror that we often feel in response to the current news cycle is a crucial early-warning system that things are indeed not right. Rather than trying to ignore and appease those feelings of anxiety by disengaging, we should be listening to what they are telling us. We need to be more vigilant, not less.

Fuente: Why a digital detox is bad for us | Ruth Whippman | Life and style | The Guardian


How do I tell my daughter that her online ‘truth’ is a conspiracy theory? | Life and style | The Guardian

False claims abound on the internet and are snaring many children into believing them

Fuente: How do I tell my daughter that her online ‘truth’ is a conspiracy theory? | Life and style | The Guardian


Los “trolls” de Internet son sádicos, narcisistas y maquiavélicos – BioBioChile

Los “trolls” de Internet son sádicos, narcisistas y maquiavélicos – BioBioChile.

 

stupid_systemus (cc) / Flickrstupid_systemus (cc) / Flickr
Publicado por Eduardo Woo
¿Qué sientes con esta noticia?

  • felicidad
  • sorpresa
  • indiferencia
  • tristeza
  • enojo

Seguramente lo has visto en foros o en las zonas de comentario de noticias. Generan un extenso rechazo y generalmente se toman el tiempo de responder, cosa de seguir generando ruido. Esos son los denominados trolls de Internet.

Hasta ahora no se sabía mucho de lo que son este tipo de personas, sin embargo un estudio canadiense logró un acercamiento en la personalidad de estos personajes que abundan en la web.

Fue en la revista Personality and Individual Differences donde se publicó la investigación que tomó a 1.215 personas, quienes respondieron una encuesta de manera presencial y virtual, respectivamente.

En ella se hacían consultas como qué sitios web frecuentaban, horas en ella, si participaban de foros, en sitios de noticias o YouTube. Además se incluyó consultas que venían a medir la “Tétrada Oscura”, algo que los sicólogos usan para saber sobre el narcisismo, maquiavelismo, sicopatía y personalidad sádica, con opciones tales como “disfruto bromear a expensas de los demás” y “disfruto ser el villano en juegos y torturar a otros personajes”, informó CNN México.

Los resultados dieron con que quienes practicaban el trolleo eran precisamente los que cumplían con la “Tétrada Oscura”, es decir, sádicos, sicópatas y maquiavélicos (un desprecio por la moral y tendencia a manipular o explotar a otros). Lo que puede ser observado en este gráfico que expuso Phsycology Today


Is there any evidence of a link between violent video games and murder? | Pete Etchells and Chris Chambers | Science | theguardian.com

Is there any evidence of a link between violent video games and murder? | Pete Etchells and Chris Chambers | Science | theguardian.com.

Journalists need to stop repeating baseless claims and scientists need to stop bickering

A visitor plays
Research into the effects of video games on aggression hasn’t got to the point where it can tell us anything about murder. Photograph: Ina Fassbender/Reuters

In the wake of the killing of the schoolteacher Ann Maguire last week, the question has again been raised of whether playing violent video games could lead someone to commit murder. It’s a common link that we see suggested in the media whenever tragedies of this sort occur, but the scientific evidence simply doesn’t support these claims.

The most recent data that we have on the links between video game use and aggressive behavioural outcomes comes from a meta-analysis, published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin in January 2014. Researchers from the University of Innsbruck looked at 98 studies, testing nearly 37,000 participants since 2009. They found that, overall, video games do affect the social behaviour of players – violent video game use is linked to an increase in aggressive outcomes and a decrease in prosocial outcomes. On the other hand prosocial games show the opposite effect – they’re linked to a reduction in aggressive behaviour and an increase in prosocial, cooperative behaviour.

At first glance these findings might suggest that there is something to the suggestion that violent videogames encourage acts of violence, but the link is actually quite tenuous. Psychological studies on aggression and video games tend to rely on measures of aggression that are a far cry from murder. For example, one experimental test that’s often used is a modified version of the Taylor Competitive Reaction Time Task. Here the participants are first asked to play either a violent or non-violent video game. Afterwards, they’re asked to play a reaction time game against another, fictional player. If they win a particular encounter, they get to blast their opponent with a loud noise. The key manipulation is that the participants choose how loud the noise is, and how long it lasts for. Longer, louder noises are taken as a measure of increased aggression.


Shh, don't tell: secret-sharing apps are all the rage, but they're also full of lies | Emma Brockes | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Shh, don’t tell: secret-sharing apps are all the rage, but they’re also full of lies | Emma Brockes | Comment is free | theguardian.com.

Whisper and Secret feed our Facebook impulses to share all. Their anonymity grants license to fakery. As if that wasn’t a big enough problem online already

 

 

whisper finger
In the few months since the launch of Secret and apps like it, the bogusness of the postings has underlined the pursuit of anonymous fame Photograph: Alamy

 

There are two types of secrets. There are the ones you keep to protect your self-interest – I’m using company time to look for a new job, say, or I’m cheating on my spouse. And there are the sentimental secrets, which you keep because they break a social taboo – as in, I love one of my children more than the other, or I don’t give a toss about recycling.

To these staples of evasion we may now add a third category: the fake secret, given life this year, albeit accidentally, by apps like Secret and Whisper, which encourage users to amuse themselves and each other by sharing cute, shocking or whistle-blowing confidences, under the shield of anonymity and in even hotterpursuit of shares, likes and comments than on Facebook.

For example, from Secret: I sometimes drop acid during chemistry class. My secret: I’m the teacher.

And: I like to eat illegal black market horse meat.

As well as: I’m a famous celebrity and …

Yeah, but you’re not, though, are you? And you probably don’t eat horse meat, which is in any case legal in the US. And if you “drop acid” in your chemistry class, it’s probably the chemistry class of your mind, after binging on one too many hours of Breaking Bad.

On April Fools’ Day this week, as one cast an even more jaded eye than usual over the contents of the internet, it was these mobile indulgences built for attracting attention at all costs, that appeared to be comprised almost entirely of makey-uppy contributions by strangers chasing the thrill of approval.

We have come to expect fakery from every public forum, starting with the guests on TV chat shows, and ending with hoaxes on Twitter. But in the few months since the launch of Secret and apps like it, the bogusness of the postings has underlined that weird phenomenon, the pursuit of anonymous fame: a like is a like is a like. And it doesn’t much matter what you say to acquire it.