REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

What Internet Habits Say about Mental Health

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Monday, August 20, 2012 12:39
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1275
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, August 19, 2012 7:11 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Okay, so as I've said before, I'm Bipolar II (like Jackson). That means we don't go all the way up to "mania", but get "hypomania", and share deep depression with Bipolar Is. So I found the possible correlaton between depression and internet usage interesting:
Quote:

Consider two questions. First: Who are you? What makes you different from your peers, in terms of the things you buy, the clothes you wear, and the car you drive (or refuse to)? What makes you unique in terms of your basic psychological make-up—the part of you that makes you do the things you do, say the things you say, and feel the things you feel? And the second question: How do you use the internet?

Although these questions may seem unrelated, they’re not. Clearly the content of your internet usage can suggest certain psychological characteristics. Spending a lot of late nights playing high stakes internet poker? Chances are you are a risk taker. Like to post videos of yourself doing karaoke on YouTube? Clearly an extravert. But what about the mechanics of your internet usage—how often you email others, chat online, stream media, or multi-task (switch from one application or website to another)? Can these behaviors—regardless of their content—also predict psychological characteristics? Recent research conducted by a team of computer scientists, engineers, and psychologists suggests that it might. Indeed, their data show that such analysis could predict a particularly important aspect of the self: the tendency to experience depression.

First, the research team asked over 200 volunteers to fill out a survey about “recent affective experiences;” what the volunteers didn’t know was that a well-known measure of depression—the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) scale—was embedded within this survey. The researchers then correlated scores on the hidden depression scale with individual trends in internet usage, grouped into three categories: “aggregate,” which indicated how much information was being sent and received over a network, “application,” which indicated the broad category of program that was being used (e.g., email, surfing the web, downloading media), and “entropy,” which indicated the degree of randomness in information flow (essentially, the extent to which someone was sending and receiving information to multiple net-based resources at once).

Again, researchers didn’t know what people were looking at on the internet (for example, depression support groups—a dead giveaway), but merely how they were using the internet. None of the data categories gave specific information about what websites people were visiting, the content of their emails or chats, or the types of files being downloaded—they simply indicated the extent to which people used different broad categories of net-based resources, as well as differences in people’s tendency to use many resources at once.

It turns out that very specific patterns of internet use are reliably related to depressive tendencies. For example, peer-to-peer file sharing, heavy emailing and chatting online, and a tendency to quickly switch between multiple websites and other online resources all predict a greater propensity to experience symptoms of depression. Although the exact reasons that these behaviors predict depression is unknown, each behavior corresponds with previous research on depression. Quickly switching between websites may reflect anhedonia (a decreased ability to experience emotions), as people desperately seek for emotional stimulation. Similarly, excessive emailing and chatting may signify a relative lack of strong face-to-face relationships, as people strive to maintain contact either with faraway friends or new people met online.

These data are particularly important for several reasons. Depression is both prevalent and dangerous. Recent estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicate that around 10 percent of adults in the United States currently suffer from clinical depression—depression that consists of symptoms such as disruptions in eating, sleeping, and concentration patterns, lack of interest in daily activities, and consistently feeling like a failure. These estimates are even higher for other segments of the population; for example, a 2011 report by the American College Health Association found that 30 percent of college students have “felt so depressed that it was difficult to function” within the past year.

Despite the serious negative consequences of living with depression, the condition is notoriously hard to diagnose. Estimates suggest that as many as two thirds of people living with depression do not realize that they have a treatable condition and, as a result, do not seek treatment. Even those who do seek treatment—either voluntarily or at the request of friends, family members, or doctors—are often ashamed to admit to their symptoms. Any diagnosis relying on self-report—whether it be a self-administered test or a clinical interview in a doctor’s office—is prone to selective reporting. No one wants to be depressed and, as a result, many people suffering from depression may answer from the perspective of how they want to feel, rather than how they actually feel.

In this way, diagnosing people at risk for depression is similar to diagnosing people at risk for committing suicide. Those most vulnerable —the people who actually intend to carry out the act—are unlikely to reveal this information. As a result, clinical psychologists have developed ways to test for suicidal intentions that circumvent self-report issues; for example, by using implicit methods that may reveal intentions of which the patients themselves are unaware.

Perhaps the most exciting implication of the data linking internet usage to depression is the possibility that clues of depressive tendencies can also be identified early, not only before the opportunity for professional diagnosis but perhaps also before people are aware of it themselves. An intervention as simple as tracking internet use may allow depression, a prevalent and dangerous illness, to be discovered and treated earlier, more effectively, and for more people. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-internet-habits-
say-about-mental-health


I found the two underlined parts specifically pertain to me. It doesn't FEEL like anything I do on line makes me depressed, but certainly those two things do apply to me (if you substitute "posting" for "chatting"), Given I walk around wiht a propensity for depression anyway, it's something I'd like to know more about.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, August 19, 2012 8:28 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


This seems ... a little ... overboard to me, doesn't sound all that conclusive, too vague to really matter much in my opinion.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 20, 2012 4:47 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.


Interesting, if a little vague.

Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Despite the serious negative consequences of living with depression, the condition is notoriously hard to diagnose. Estimates suggest that as many as two thirds of people living with depression do not realize that they have a treatable condition and, as a result, do not seek treatment. Even those who do seek treatment—either voluntarily or at the request of friends, family members, or doctors—are often ashamed to admit to their symptoms. Any diagnosis relying on self-report—whether it be a self-administered test or a clinical interview in a doctor’s office—is prone to selective reporting. No one wants to be depressed and, as a result, many people suffering from depression may answer from the perspective of how they want to feel, rather than how they actually feel.


This really struck me. This is exactly why testing neurotransmitter levels should be the diagnostic tool, rather than checklists. Not only would diagnosis be more accurate, but so would treatment; less with things like giving someone with a dopamine imbalance an SSRI, or someone with bipolar tendencies a norepinephrine booster.
It also points to a possible problem with the test. It's difficult with the current system to diagnose depression, but a single marker for depression was all they used in this study?


What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 20, 2012 6:07 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I'm not defending the article, I just found it an intriguing idea.

Oh, Rose, you have no idea. We would LOVE some kind of "real" test, it's one of the single biggest frustrations of having a mental illness!!! So many of us are misdiagnosed; so many kids are OVERdiagnosed, etc., etc., not to mention it would help our self-esteem to less often feel like "I'm not really sick, I'm just fooling myself". That's one reason people go off their meds; when on meds, often people feel "normal" and think it was just a passing thing...then they go off them and WHAM! Also, SO many, like me, are misdiagnosed depressive and put only on anti-depressants, which can spike us into a manic episode if taken without mood stabilizers.

There are just soooo many things that would be improved for us if we had some kind of physical tests. Supposedly they DO, now, down at Stanford, but you have to be part of the study to get 'em, they're not available to the public (yet). How I wish!




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 20, 2012 12:39 PM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
There are just soooo many things that would be improved for us if we had some kind of physical tests. Supposedly they DO, now, down at Stanford, but you have to be part of the study to get 'em, they're not available to the public


That's some nonsense; I've had a full neurotransmitter profile done. With a kit I could use at home, too. The tests are easy and widely available, they're just not used for diagnostic purposes in the mental health field. I see this as highly negligent, for all the reasons we've both stated.


What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Wed, November 6, 2024 02:38 - 4559 posts
The predictions thread
Wed, November 6, 2024 01:46 - 1182 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Wed, November 6, 2024 01:38 - 640 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Tue, November 5, 2024 23:43 - 4679 posts
With apologies to JSF: Favorite songs (3)
Tue, November 5, 2024 23:39 - 69 posts
Election fraud.
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:19 - 39 posts
Multiculturalism
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:16 - 53 posts
Funny Cartoon sparks Islamic Jihad !
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:12 - 248 posts
Elon Musk
Tue, November 5, 2024 16:57 - 32 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Tue, November 5, 2024 16:55 - 40 posts
What kind of superpower could China be?
Tue, November 5, 2024 16:02 - 54 posts
End of the Democratic Party (not kidding)
Tue, November 5, 2024 14:18 - 56 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL