|What do you think? Is the Internet and use of social media affecting a generation? Head to our blog to read a follow-up post from Dr LaPorta and to share your thoughts.|
To Americans over 30, YouTube, Facebook, MySpace and Twitter are buzzwords that lack much meaning. But to those born between 1982 and 2001—often referred to as “millennials” or “Generation Y”—they are a part of everyday life. For the uninitiated, these Web sites are used for social networking and communication. They are also places where individuals can post pictures and news about themselves and express their opinions on everything from music to movies to politics. Some sites, such as YouTube, allow individuals to post videos of themselves, often creating enough “buzz” to drive hundreds and even thousands of viewers; in some instances, these videos create instant media stars—such as the Obama imitator, Iman Crosson.
The amount of content on these Web sites is overwhelming and the time Americans spend on them is on the rise. More than one-third of Internet use is devoted to social networking sites.1 We are now collectively spending 13.9 billion minutes on Facebook, and 5 billion minutes on MySpace. Twitter grew at a rate of more than 3700% in the past year, taking up 300 million minutes of our time.2
Although baby boomers and members of “Generation X” are signing up for these sites, it is the youth market that drives their appeal. While on the surface, they are touted as venues for networking and communication, they may, ultimately, be eroding real relationships and social contacts much as e-mail, instant messaging and “texting” have replaced cards, letters, and phone calls.
This technology may be interfering with the normal development of a generation, prolonging the “normal” narcissism of adolescence and preventing the establishment of mature relationships. Rather than learning critical lessons about emotional sensitivity to others and reciprocity in relationships, our youth are creating alternate, solipsistic realities where they are the focus of attention. Those who do not agree are simply excluded from their inner circle.3 Thus, these technological advances may be fostering a sense of isolation, alienation, and (at worst) promoting a tendency toward narcissism that may ultimately lead to an increase in violence and aggression.
A series of studies by Twenge and Campbell4 demonstrated that narcissists experienced more anger and aggression following perceived social rejection. The narcissists’ anger was not only manifested as direct aggression toward the person who slighted him or her but also as displaced aggression toward innocent third parties.4 It is indeed a disturbing finding, then, that more than half of teen profiles on MySpace mention risky and violent behaviors.
Even if it is just so much empty talk, the mere proliferation of these attitudes may produce desensitization. Ultimately, desensitization may encourage the acting out of these behaviors,5 as we have tragically seen in the case of Columbine and, more recently, the Pennsylvania health club shooting in which the perpetrators posted messages and videos on the Internet before the events.
What makes such sites appealing to “millennials”? Web pages posted on social networking sites tend to be filled with photographs and writings expressing the opinions of the individual. In some cases, they are examples of exhibitionism at its most extreme. Yet, the number of videos uploaded to YouTube and “tweets” sent on Twitter increase exponentially by the day. The prevailing assumption is that everyone has something to say that is worthy of the attention of the masses. This is a generation screaming for attention and recognition, seeking their promised “15 minutes of fame.” And millennials often go to great lengths to get it, posting suggestive and downright salacious photos of themselves or uploading outrageous videos. The reward for bad behavior is, it seems, instant fame as measured by “hits,” “views,” and “followers.”
It is no wonder, then, that the millennial generation has a reputation for being self-absorbed and narcissistic.6 Indeed, analyses of web page content on social networking sites has been shown to correlate with not only self-reports of narcissism but with the objective impressions of viewers.7,8 Use of sites such as Facebook are almost ubiquitous among college students and, while such widespread use suggests that it is a normal part of social interaction, the level of narcissism present indicates that, consistent with these traits, the emphasis is on quantity over quality.8 Not surprisingly, then, studies show that college students have increasingly endorsed narcissistic attitudes on standardized tests, such as the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Comparisons of students between 1982 and 2006 revealed that a full 30% had scored in the above average range by the end of the study period, earning this generation the additional designation of “Generation Me.”9 These results have been replicated in additional studies, which found that college students have steadily endorsed more narcissistic traits since 2000, making this, arguably, the most self-centered decade yet.10
These findings are not unique to cohorts of college students. Rather, they have been replicated in a nationally representative study of 35,000 Americans. Interviews conducted to determine the frequency of narcissistic traits demonstrated that only 3% of individuals over age 60 met criteria for narcissistic personality disorder but that 9% of those in their 20s did.11
1. Leggatt H. Time spent on social networking up 93%. BizReport. April 7, 2009. http://www.bizreport.com/2009/04/time_spent_social_networking_up_93.html. Accessed September 4, 2009.
2. Time spent on social networking sites nearly doubles in US: survey. June 2009. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-06/04/content_11483318.htm. Accessed September 4, 2009.
3. Elgan M. Does mobile and social technology breed narcissism? Computerworld. July 18, 2009. Accessed September 4, 2009.
4. Twenge JM, Campbell WK. “Isn’t it fun to get the respect we’re going to deserve?” Narcissism, social rejection, and aggression. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003;29:261-272.
5. Landau E. Study: teens on MySpace mention sex, violence. CNNHealth. January 2009. http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/01/05/myspace.teens/index.html. Accessed September 4, 2009.
6. Collins C. Has generation Y overdosed on self-esteem? Christian Science Monitor. March 2, 2007. http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0302/p01s01-ussc.html. Accessed September 4, 2009.
7. Buffardi LE, Campbell WK. Narcissism and social networking Web sites. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2008;34:1303-1314.
8. Study: Facebook profiles can be used to detect narcissism. Physorg.com. September 22, 2008. http://www.physorg.com/news141308850.html. Accessed September 4, 2009.
9. Twenge JM, Konrath S, Foster JD, et al. Egos inflating over time: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. J Pers. 2008;76:875-928.
10. Trzesniewski KH, Donnellan MB, Robins RW. Do today’s young people really think they are so extraordinary? An examination of secular trends in narcissism and self-enhancement. Psychol Sci. 2008;19: 181-188.
11. Twenge J, Campbell K, Trzesniewski K, Donnellan B. Narcissism in Gen Y: is it increasing or not? Two opposing perspectives. Twenge J, Campbell WK. Generation Me in the jury box. The Jury Expert. May 2009;21(3). http://www.astcweb.org/public/publication/article.cfm/1/21/3/Narcissism-in-Generation-Y-and-Litigation-Advocacy. Accessed September 4, 2009.
12. Lasch C. The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. London: WW Norton; 1979.
13. Million T, Davis R. Personality Disorders in Modern Life. New York: Wiley; 2000.
14. Braden N. The Psychology of Self-Esteem: A Revolutionary Approach to Self-Understanding That Launched a New Era in Modern Psychology. New York: Bantam;1969.
15. Mohler RA. The self-esteem movement backfires—when praise is dangerous. February 16, 2007. http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=876. Accessed September 4, 2009.
16. Bronson P. How not to talk to your kids: the inverse power of praise. New York Magazine. February 12, 2007. www.nymag.com/news/features/27840. Accessed September 4, 2009.
17. Baumeister RF, Campbell JD, Krueger JI, Vohs KD. Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2003;4:1-44.
18. Jayson S. Yep, life’ll burst that self-esteem bubble. USA Today. February 15, 2005. http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/2005-02-15-self-esteem_x.htm. Accessed September 4, 2009.
19. Gusnard DA, Ollinger JM, Shulman GL, et al. Persistence and brain circuitry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:3479-3484.
20. Ferster CB, Skinner BF. Schedules of Reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1957.
21. Williams R. Twitter your business? 20 April 2009. Articlesbase. http://www.articlesbase.com/networking-articles/twitter-your-business-875864.html. Accessed September 4, 2009.
22. Wintour P. Facebook and Bebo risk “infantilising” the human mind. The Guardian. February 24, 2009. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/feb/24/social-networking-site-changing-childrens-brains. Accessed September 4, 2009.
23. Chapman S. Have we raised a generation of narcissists? It’s 10 pm. Do you know how big your child’s ego is? Reasononline. May 21, 2007. http://www.reason.com/news/show/120293.html. Accessed September 4, 2009.
24. Kelley R. Generation Me. A new book says we’re in a narcissistic epidemic. Why you’re not so special. Newsweek. April 18, 2009. http://www.newsweek.com/id/194640/. Accessed September 4, 2009.
25. Rosen C. Virtual friendship and the new narcissism. The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology & Society. Summer 2007:15-31.
26. Finder A. For some, online persona undermines a résumé. New York Times. June 11, 2006. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/us/11recruit.html?pagewanted=print. Accessed September 4, 2009.
27. Weisbuch M, Ivcevic Z, Ambady N. On being liked on the web and in the “real world”: consistency of first impressions across personal webpages and spontaneous behavior. J Exper Soc Psych. 2009;45:573-576.