Teens worry they use phones too much
Andrew M. Seaman
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/news/teens-worry-they-use-phones-too-much-2251987/
Roughly half of U.S. teens say they spend too much time on their cellphones, according to research from Pew. About the same proportion of teens report taking steps to limit their use of the devices. Another survey found that about two-thirds of parents also worry their children spend too much time in front of screens; nearly 60% of parents report setting screen time restrictions for their children. The findings come as some technology companies introduce features to cut back on phone addiction.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A6438043256424054784?lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base%3BK6U2j7wPTx2kZp6R0t9WBg%3D%3D&licu=urn%3Ali%3Acontrol%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base-view_activity_details
http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/08/22/how-teens-and-parents-navigate-screen-time-and-device-distractions/
Amid roiling debates about the impact of screen time on teenagers, roughly half of those ages 13 to 17 are themselves worried they spend too much time on their cellphones. Some 52% of U.S. teens report taking steps to cut back on their mobile phone use, and similar shares have tried to limit their use of social media (57%) or video games (58%), a new Pew Research Center survey finds.
Overall, 56% of teens associate the absence of their cellphone with at least one of these three emotions: loneliness, being upset or feeling anxious. Additionally, girls are more likely than boys to feel anxious or lonely without their cellphone.
The vast majority of teens in the United States have access to a smartphone, and 45% are online on a near constant basis. The ubiquity of social media and cellphones and other devices in teens’ lives has fueled heated discussions over the effects of excessive screen time and parents’ role in limiting teens’ screen exposure. In recent months, many major technology companies, including Google and Apple, have announced new products aimed at helping adults and teens monitor and manage their online usage.
Girls are somewhat more likely than boys to say they spend too much time on social media (47% vs. 35%).
Meanwhile, 31% of teens say they lose focus in class because they are checking their cellphone – though just 8% say this often happens to them, and 38% say it never does.
Girls are more likely than boys to express feelings of anxiety (by a 49% to 35% margin) and loneliness (by a 32% to 20% margin) when they do not have their phone with them.
+++++++
more on contemplative computing in this iMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=contemplative+computing
ELI Webinar | The Rise of the iGeneration and Its Impact on Higher Education
Monday, May 07 | 1:00pm – 2:00pm ET | Online
https://events.educause.edu/eli/webinars/2018/the-rise-of-the-igeneration-and-its-impact-on-higher-education
Outcomes
- Explore how iGen compares to other generations
- Learn about iGen’s beliefs, preferences, and behaviors
- Connect these behaviors to program needs, marketing challenges, technology and workforce implications, and other factors
The iGeneration—the part of Generation Z that is high school or college age—has been estimated at 42 million strong. Due to recent events and the influence of families and social networks, this segment is finding its voice and power much quicker than its predecessors, the Millennials.
Speakers
-
Jim Fong Chief Research Officer, University Professional and Continuing Education Association (UPCEA)
+++++++++++++
more on Gen Z in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=gen+z
++++++++++++++
more on iGeneration
Don’t Call Me a Millennial — I’m an Old Millennial
By Jesse Singal April 24, 2017 http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/04/two-types-of-millennials.html
the Census Bureau’s definition (born 1982–2000) or Pew’s (about 1981–1997).
In 2015, for example, Juliet Lapidos — born the same year I was — may have put it best in a column for the New York Times headlined “Wait, What, I’m a Millennial?” “I don’t identify with the kids that Time magazine described as technology-addled narcissists, the Justin Bieber fans who ‘boomerang’ back home instead of growing up,” she writes.
Old Millennials, as I’ll call them, who were born around 1988 or earlier (meaning they’re 29 and older today), really have lived substantively different lives than Young Millennials, who were born around 1989 or later, as a result of two epochal events that occurred around the time when members of the older group were mostly young adults and when members of the younger were mostly early adolescents: the financial crisis and smartphones’ profound takeover of society. And according to Jean Twenge, a social psychologist at San Diego State University and the author of Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled—and More Miserable Than Ever Before, there’s some early, emerging evidence that, in certain ways, these two groups act like different, self-contained generations.
Millennials, we hear over and over again, are absolutely obsessed with social media, and live their entire social lives through their smartphones. I tweet too much, sure, but I’ve never blasted a ’gram (did I say that right?); even thinking about learning how to Snapchat makes me want to take a long, peaceful nap
“The Job-Hopping Generation,” says Gallup — and are much more likely, relative to previous generations when they were in their 20s, to live at home and to put off family formation for a long time.
last week Pew released some numbers suggesting millennials aren’t any job-hoppier than Generation X was at the same age.
The Library in the Life of the User. Engaging with People Where They Live and Learn
p. 18
Library staff
The roles of librarians change with changes in user needs and demands and the technology employed. A survey conducted for Research Libraries UK found skill gaps in nine key areas in which subject librarians could be supporting researchers’ needs. Even though many librarians may want to hire new staff with these skills, a survey found that the reality for most will be training existing staff.
Definitions of library services will change. We need to grow the ways users can engage with whatever they value from libraries, whether papyrus rolls, maker spaces or data management instruction.
p. 19
What is the Unique Selling Point (USP) of libraries vis-à-vis other information service providers?
p. 21
Librarians should measure the effectiveness of services based on the users’ perceptions of success. Librarians also should move beyond surveys of how library space is being used and should conduct structured observations and interviews with the people using the space. It is not enough to know that the various spaces, whether physical or virtual, are busy. Librarians need to understand when and how the spaces are being used.
p. 33 What is Enough? Satisficing Information Needs
Role theory explains that: “When people occupy social positions their behavior is determined mainly by what is expected of that position rather than by their own individual characteristics” (Abercrombie et al., 1994, p. 360).
Rational choice theory is based on the premise that complex social behavior can be understood in terms of elementary individual actions because individual action is the elementary unit of social life. Rational choice theory posits that individuals choose or prefer what is best to achieve their objectives or pursue their interests, acting in their self-interest (Green, 2002). Stated another way, “When faced with several courses of action, people usually do what they believe is likely to have the best overall outcome” (Scott, 2000).
When individuals satisfice, they compare the benefits of obtaining “more information” against the additional cost and effort of continuing to search (Schmid, 2004)
p. 38
This paper examines the theoretical concepts—role theory, rational choice, and satisficing—by attempting to explain the parameters within which users navigate the complex information-rich environment and determine what and how much information will meet their needs.
p. 39
The information-seeking and -searching research that explicitly addresses the topic of “what is good enough” is scant, though several studies make oblique references to the stopping stage, or to the shifting of directions for want of adequate information. Kraft and Lee (1979, p. 50) propose three stopping rules:
1. The satiation rule, “where the scan is terminated only when the user becomes satiated by finding all the desired number of relevant documents”;
2. The disgust rule, which “allows the scan to be terminated only when the user becomes disgusted by having to examine too many irrelevant documents”; and
3. The combination rule, “which allows the user to be seen as stopping the scan if he/she is satiated by finding the desired number of relevant documents or disgusted by having to examine too many irrelevant documents, whichever comes first.”
p. 42
Ellis characterizes six different types of information activities: starting, chaining, browsing, differentiating, monitoring and extracting. He emphasizes the information- seeking activities, rather than the nature of the problems or criteria used for determining when to stop the information search process. In a subsequent article, Ellis (1997) observes that even in the final stages of writing, individuals may continue the search for information in an attempt to answer unresolved questions or to look for new literature.
p. 43
Undergraduate and graduate students
Situations creating the need to look for information (meeting assignment requirements):
• Writing research reports; and
• Preparing presentations.
Criteria used for stopping the information search (fulfilling assignment requirements):
1. Quantitative criteria:
— Required number of citations was gathered;
— Required number of pages was reached;
— All the research questions were answered; and
— Time available for preparing.
2. Qualitative criteria:
— Accuracy of information;
— Same information repeated in several sources;
— Sufficient information was gathered; and
— Concept understood.
Criteria used for stopping the information search (fulfilling assignment requirements):
1. Quantitative criteria:
— Required number of citations was gathered;
— Required number of pages was reached;
— All the research questions were answered; and
— Time available for preparing.
2. Qualitative criteria:
— Accuracy of information;
— Same information repeated in several sources;
— Sufficient information was gathered; and
— Concept understood.
p. 44
Faculty
Situations creating the need to look for information (meeting teaching needs):
• Preparing lectures and presentations;
• Delivering lectures and presentations;
• Designing and conducting workshops;
• Meeting scholarly and research needs; and
• Writing journal articles, books and grant proposals.
Criteria used for stopping the information search (fulfilling teaching needs):
1. Quantitative criteria:
— Time available for: preparing lectures and presentations; delivering lectures
— And presentations; and designing and conducting workshops; and
— Fulfilling scholarly and research needs.
2. Qualitative criteria:
— Every possible synonym and every combination were searched;
— Representative sample of research was identified;
— Current or cutting-edge research was found;
— Same information was repeated;
— Exhaustive collection of information sources was discovered;
— Colleagues’ feedback was addressed;
— Journal reviewers’ comments were addressed; and
— Publisher’s requirements were met.
1. Quantitative criteria for stopping:
— Requirements are met;
— Time constraints are limited; and
— Coverage of material for publication is verified by colleagues or reviewers.
2. Qualitative criteria for stopping:
— Trustworthy information was located;
— A representative sample of sources was gathered;
— Current information was located;
— Cutting-edge material was located;
— Exhaustive search was performed; and
— Exhaustive collection of information sources was discovered.
p. 53
“Screenagers” and Live Chat Reference: Living Up to the Promise
p. 81
Sense-Making and Synchronicity: Information-Seeking Behaviors of Millennials and Baby Boomers
p. 84 Millennials specific generational features pertinent to libraries and information-seeking include the following:
Immediacy. Collaboration. Experiential learning. Visual orientation. Results orientation. Confidence.
Rushkoff (1996) described the non-linearity of the thinking patterns of those he terms “children of chaos,” coining the term “screenagers” to describe those who grew up surrounded by television and computers (p. 3).
p. 85
Rational choice theory describes a purposive action whereby individuals judge the costs and benefits of achieving a desired goal (Allingham 1999; Cook and Levi 1990; Coleman and Fararo 1992). Humans, as rational actors, are capable of recognizing and desiring a certain outcome, and of taking action to achieve it. This suggests that information seekers rationally evaluate the benefits of information’s usefulness and credibility, versus the costs in time and effort to find and access it.
Role theory offers a person-in-context framework within the information-seeking situation which situates behaviors in the context of a social system (Mead 1934; Marks 1996). Abercrombie, et al. (1994, p. 360) state, “When people occupy social positions their behavior is determined mainly by what is expected of that position rather than by their own individual characteristics.” Thus the roles of information-seekers in the academic environment influence the expectations for performance and outcomes. For example, faculty would be expected to look for information differently than undergraduate students. Faculty members are considered researchers and experts in their disciplines, while undergraduate students are novices and protégés, roles that place them differently within the organizational structure of the academy (Blumer, 2004; Biddle, 1979; Mead, 1934; Marks, 1996; Marks, 1977).
+++++++++++++++++
more on research in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=research
Levine, A. (2012).
Generation on a Tightrope: A Portrait of Today’s College Student (1 edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. as reported in the IMS blog of:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/01/08/visit-to-mankato-cetl/
Additional bibliography:
http://generationz.com.au/education/
Rosenfeld, E., & Loertscher, D. V. (2007). Toward a 21st-Century School Library Media Program. Scarecrow Press.
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=brLbpR6dI8sC&oi=fnd&pg=PA235&dq=generation+z&ots=9CSv7vT6Bn&sig=RAKh-H98EVQ8x61YbnExS02ZlV8#v=onepage&q=generation%20z&f=false
Jeff Feiertag, & Zane L. Berge. (2008). Training Generation N: how educators should approach the Net Generation.
Education + Training,
50(6), 457–464.
http://doi.org/10.1108/00400910810901782 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/00400910810901782
Malone, K. (2007). The bubble‐wrap generation: children growing up in walled gardens.
Environmental Education Research,
13(4), 513–527.
http://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701581612 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504620701581612
some of the changes in childhood environmental behaviours I explore children and parent relationships, in particular, the phenomena of ‘bubble‐wrapping’ children to appease the anxieties of some middle class parents.
Ivanova, A., & Ivanova, G. (2009). Net-generation Learning Style: A Challenge for Higher Education. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and Workshop for PhD Students in Computing (pp. 72:1–72:6). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
http://doi.org/10.1145/1731740.1731818 http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1731818
Ivanova, A., & Smirkarov, A. (2009). The New Generations of Students and the Future of e – Learning in Higher Education. Presented at the International Conference on e – Learni ng and the Knowledge Society – e – Learning’09. Retrieved from
http://www.iit.bas.bg/esf/docs/2009/thenewgenerationsstudentsfuturee-learninghigheredu.pdf
Montana, P., & Petit, F. (2008). MOTIVATING GENERATION X AND Y ON THE JOB AND PREPARING Z.
GLOBAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH,
2(2), 1–30.
http://www.theibfr.com/ARCHIVE/GJBR-V2-N2-2008.pdf
McCrindle, M. (n.d.).
Understanding Generation Y . The Australian Leadership Foundation. Retrieved from
http://emoneco.net/info_docs/UnderstandingGenY.pdf
Igel, C., & Urquhort, V. (2012). Generation Z, meet cooperative learning.
Middle School Journal,
43(4), 16–21.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41432109?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contentsLevickaite, R. (2010). Generations X, Y, Z: how social networks form the concept of the world without borders (the case of Lithuania)/Y, X, Z kartos: pasaulio be sienu idejos formavimas naudojantis socialiniais tinklais (Lietuvos Atvejis).
LIMES,
3(2), 170. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA250135086&v=2.1&u=stcloud_main&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w&asid=934b505505fbc57b849a3fb9eefe7871
Lynch, K., & Hogan, J. (2012). How Irish Political Parties are Using Social Networking Sites to Reach Generation Z: an Insight into a New Online Social Network in a Small Democracy.
Irish Communication Review,
13. Retrieved from
http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1124&context=buschmarart
Parker, K., Czech, D., Burdette, T., Stewart, J., Biber, D., Easton, L., … McDaniel, T. (2012). The Preferred Coaching Styles of Generation Z Athletes: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Coaching Education, 5(2), 5–97.
Greydanus, D. E., & Greydanus, M. M. (2012). Internet use, misuse, and addiction in adolescents: current issues and challenges.
International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health,
24(4), 283–289.
http://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh.2012.041
——————–
more on Generation Z in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=generation+z&submit=Search
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/09/19/gen-z/
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/03/27/who-is-coming-to-college-after-the-millennials/