Self-Motivation
David Goggins
Former Navy Seal
Career Development
Bryan Cranston
Actor
Critical Thinking
Liv Boeree
International Poker Champion
Emotional Intelligence
Amaryllis Fox
Former CIA Clandestine Operative
Management
Chris Hadfield
Retired Canadian Astronaut & Author
Learn
from the world's big
thinkers
Start Learning

No, Smartphones Aren't Making Children Autistic

A psychiatrist has made headlines claiming smartphones are making children "borderline" autistic. Here's why that's rubbish:

Here we go again. This weekend, British newspapers: The Telegraph, The Independent and The Metro (a paper given out free on public transport right across the United Kingdom) all ran with the same diabolically misinformed headline that, "Smartphones are making children borderline autistic."


 

Ed Yong's (justifiably profane) response sums up the feeling of anyone who has looked into headlines such as these before. The cheerleader for the "technology causes autism" hypothesis, professor Susan Greenfield has been handed smackdown after smackdown by experts in their fields including Dr. Ben Goldacre and professor Dorothy Bishop (and half of the scientists on Twitter). One particularly obvious flaw in Greenfield's hypothesis was that autism appears long before children begin using computers (or smartphones for that matter) as Bishop explains:

"A cause has to precede its effect. This test of causality fails in two regards. First, demographically — the rise in autism diagnoses occurred well before internet use became widespread. Second, in individuals: Autism is typically evident by two years of age, long before children become avid users of Twitter or Facebook."

Enter Iain McGilchrist, the psychiatrist who is collecting Greenfield's "technology causes autism" baton. Like Greenfield before him, McGilchrist bases his entire case on nothing but the vaguest of anecdotes. Like Greenfield before him, he has done no research in this area whatsoever. Like Greenfield before him, the claims he is making are being made only in newspapers (rather than the correct place for a scientist to make such claims: a scientific journal). Like Greenfield before him, he fails to even cite any actual research, making his claims impossible to refute in the way we would normally refute an argument made by a scientist.

He does however make a single, extraordinarily vague reference to "research done in the US within the last decade that shows a decrease in empathy among college students and at the same time a rise in narcissism," but unhelpfully fails to provide any actual citation. Pedro De Bruyckere, a Ph.D student at the University of Antwerp, has tracked down the research that (we can only assume) McGilchrist must be referring to. Unsurprisingly, the research doesn't even remotely support McGilchrist's claim — according to this research, the vague trends that McGilchrist describes began way back in the '80s — long before the mobile phone, let alone the smartphone!

Incidentally, an enormous study of 19,993 Swedish twins just published in the British Medical Journal, found no evidence of any recent increase in the symptoms that are commonly associated with autism, once again attributing the changes in autism prevalence to administrative changes in how we diagnose and register prevalence of autism; providing yet more evidence (as if we needed more evidence) that this whole affair is one big wild goose chase.

It's almost as if history is repeating itself.

Follow Neurobonkers on TwitterFacebookGoogle+RSS, or join the mailing list. Image Credit: Shutterstock, The Telegraph.

References

Twenge J.M. Freeman, E.C. Campbell, W.K. (2012). Generational differences in young adults' life goals, concern for others, and civic orientation, 1966–2009., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102 (5) 1045-1062. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027408

Lundstrom S., Reichenberg, Anckarsäter, A. Lichtenstein, P. Gillberg, C. (2015). Autism phenotype versus registered diagnosis in Swedish children: prevalence trends over 10 years in general population samples, BMJ, 350 (apr28 2) h1961-h1961. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h1961

LIVE ON MONDAY | "Lights, camera, activism!" with Judith Light

Join multiple Tony and Emmy Award-winning actress Judith Light live on Big Think at 2 pm ET on Monday.

Big Think LIVE

Add event to calendar

AppleGoogleOffice 365OutlookOutlook.comYahoo

Keep reading Show less

Scientists see 'rarest event ever recorded' in search for dark matter

The team caught a glimpse of a process that takes 18,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years.

Image source: Pixabay
Surprising Science
  • In Italy, a team of scientists is using a highly sophisticated detector to hunt for dark matter.
  • The team observed an ultra-rare particle interaction that reveals the half-life of a xenon-124 atom to be 18 sextillion years.
  • The half-life of a process is how long it takes for half of the radioactive nuclei present in a sample to decay.
Keep reading Show less

The mind-blowing science of black holes

What we know about black holes is both fascinating and scary.

Videos
  • When it comes to black holes, science simultaneously knows so much and so little, which is why they are so fascinating. Focusing on what we do know, this group of astronomers, educators, and physicists share some of the most incredible facts about the powerful and mysterious objects.
  • A black hole is so massive that light (and anything else it swallows) can't escape, says Bill Nye. You can't see a black hole, theoretical physicists Michio Kaku and Christophe Galfard explain, because it is too dark. What you can see, however, is the distortion of light around it caused by its extreme gravity.
  • Explaining one unsettling concept from astrophysics called spaghettification, astronomer Michelle Thaller says that "If you got close to a black hole there would be tides over your body that small that would rip you apart into basically a strand of spaghetti that would fall down the black hole."

Space travel could create language unintelligible to people on Earth

A new study looks at what would happen to human language on a long journey to other star systems.

Cylindrical space colony.

Credit: NASA Ames Research Center.
Surprising Science
  • A new study proposes that language could change dramatically on long space voyages.
  • Spacefaring people might lose the ability to understand the people of Earth.
  • This scenario is of particular concern for potential "generation ships".
Keep reading Show less
Scroll down to load more…
Quantcast