Internet Use Can Be Good For the Brain

ddelmonte writes "This Washington Post article examines a test conducted at UCLA. The test had two groups, young people who used the Internet, and older people who had never been online. Both groups were asked to do Internet searches and book reading tasks while their brain activity was monitored. 'We found that in reading the book task, the visual cortex — the part of the brain that controls reading and language — was activated,' Small said. 'In doing the Internet search task, there was much greater activity, but only in the Internet-savvy group.' He said it appears that people who are familiar with the Internet can engage in a much deeper level of brain activity. 'There is something about Internet searching where we can gauge it to a level that we find challenging,' Small said. In the aging brain, atrophy and reduced cell activity can take a toll on cognitive function. Activities that keep the brain engaged can preserve brain health and thinking ability. Small thinks learning to do Internet searches may be one of those activities."

i dunno

[ionix5891]

i found my attention span has gone to dogs since the advent of the internet and each year it gets worse

Or...

[cabjf]

Maybe the non-internet savvy people know that in order to get the most out of the internet, you can't treat it like a book? That seems like an obvious conclusion to me. If you treat an internet search like a puzzle to be solved (which anyone who searches the internet regularly does), then you aren't just reading what's on the page. That's just one of the obvious alternate conclusions one could jump to. But then, that was also just based on the summary, which is almost never an accurate representation of the actual article or study.

Hold the phone!

[Overzeetop]

You mean that young brains, when confronted with a familiar, engaging audio-visual medium stimulated more of the brain than when they tested elderly subjects who had essentially no concept of the depth of information that was available in that medium.

I am shocked with this discovery. Shocked, I tell you. We should spend much more on this research - maybe with animals - to determine the extent of this effect. Do you suppose these guys produce a newsletter?

Re:i dunno

[Chrisq]

So have I. I used to be able to concentrate for hours on a programming project. Once I try to "look something up on the internet" I get distracted and forget what I was doing

qwerty

[speroni]

When you're doing an internet search you have to actually give input. You have give google something to search for.

When you're reading a book or a given article you don't have to think about where to find the information, it will (or won't) be contained in the material directly in front of you. There's nothing to think about as far as looking information up. Just read whats there.

Also I wonder if some of the difference in brain activity due to age is part of the actual typing. If you sit someone down who can type 60 words a minute in front of google, they are going to used a much different and well used part of their brain to type than someone who has to stare at the keyboard and hunt and peck.

Personally I kind of enjoy that I can type fairly quickly, I even like the feel of utilizing the skill. I believe most of the internet savvy generation can type pretty well, but I think a fair amount of our parents generation are still at hunt and peck.

Re:Hold the ...

[TaoPhoenix]

Can I borrow your paragraph for a minute?

You mean that trained older auto-tech brains, when confronted with an familiar, engaging mechanical car engine stimulated more of the brain than when they tested young subjects who had essentially no concept of the depth of information that was available in that vehicle.

You mean that trained older doctor brains, when confronted with an familiar, engaging biochemical patient stimulated more of the brain than when they tested young subjects who had essentially no concept of the depth of information that was available in a person's anatomy.

I am shocked with this discovery. Shocked, I tell you. We should spend much more on this research - maybe with animals - to determine the extent of this effect. Do you suppose these guys produce a newsletter?

Sounds like a flawed study to me.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Highly interesting

[allcar]

This is typical poor reporting of a scientific study. From the evidence provided in the article, it's possible to provide several explanations of the observed results. Most obviously that younger people use more brain activity than older people when using a search engine. However, they have leapt to the conclusion that the key factor is whether or not the individuals are "internet savvy". Surely it would have been possible to obtain people from all walks of life with differnt levels of internet experience. There's plenty of older folk who have used Google!

Better then TV

[cyberm0nk]

Anything is better then watching Lame TV shows.......

How about older internet-savvy people?

[argent]

Seems like they're mixing up too many variables in this pot.

Correction

[The Tomer]

The summery above says that the internet savvy test subjects were younger than those who have never used it before, however, the article linked clearly mentions that all subjects were aged 55-76, and that "the groups were similar in age, gender and education."

Also, the test only included 24 subjects, which is not very much to base a theory on. A larger study showing similar results would be more reliable.

Re:Ob: Me Too!

[somersault]

I have in the past managed this feat by not replying to anything in my slashdot replies folder in Outlook, and purposely not browsing to /. before lunchtime.. I definitely have noticed an increase in productivity on those days.

The annoying thing is that occasionally slashdot can provide a work related article or comment that justifies reading.

Even more annoying is when I try to be 'good' by checking /. before going into work rather than at work and decide to post a comment, which can sometimes turn into a beast and cause me to be late.

This summary makes the study sound like a load of bollocks - as someone else said, they could have found older people who use the net too as a control group, because the whole thing might have nothing to do with age so much as experience or expectations (which are not always related).

Re:qwerty

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more than that though, it's really more of a puzzle that combines high level matching, value decisions, risk management and all kinds of skills.

Running through a search is like choosing between 50 people and taking the best few.

Skimming and speed reading are also crucial skills.

Re:Ob: Me Too!

[gregbot9000]

I didn't like the selection bias either.

The test had two groups, young people who used the Internet, and older people who had never been online.

But not really because of age. Even older people use the web extensively these days, hell my grand parents use it, doesn't mean it makes you smarter. Maybe people who aren't online just are dumber then web users? much like how someone who subscribes to a literary magazine would probably be smarter then someone who doesn't read.

Re:Highly interesting

[KillerBob]

Replying to you since I was late in reading this... that said, it does have something to do with what you're saying....

They compared old people to young people. That adds in another variable that TFS conveniently glosses over. It's entirely possible that the reduced brain activity is due to the age of the subjects and has absolutely nothing to do with Internet use. If they want to be able to conclude as TFS and TFA imply, then they need to compare people in the same age group. Or better yet, find people in a wide variety of demographics in both categories: those who have Internet, and those who don't.