Older People Who Use Smartphones 'Have Lower Rates of Cognitive Decline' (theguardian.com) 52
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Fears that smartphones, tablets and other devices could drive dementia in later life have been challenged by research that found lower rates of cognitive decline in older people who used the technology. An analysis of published studies that looked at technology use and mental skills in more than 400,000 older adults found that over-50s who routinely used digital devices had lower rates of cognitive decline than those who used them less. It is unclear whether the technology staves off mental decline, or whether people with better cognitive skills simply use them more, but the scientists say the findings question the claim that screen time drives what has been called "digital dementia".
"For the first generation that was exposed to digital tools, their use is associated with better cognitive functioning," said Dr Jared Benge, a clinical neuropsychologist in UT Health Austin's Comprehensive Memory Center. "This is a more hopeful message than one might expect given concerns about brain rot, brain drain, and digital dementia." Benge and his colleague Dr Michael Scullin, a cognitive neuroscientist at Baylor University in Texas, analysed 57 published studies that examined the use of digital technology in 411,430 adults around the world. The average age was 69 years old and all had a cognitive test or diagnosis. The scientists found no evidence for the digital dementia hypothesis, which suggests that a lifetime of using digital technology drives mental decline. Rather, they found that using a computer, smartphone, the internet or some combination of these was associated with a lower risk of cognitive impairment. The details have been published in Nature Human Behaviour. "Using digital devices in the way that we use televisions -- passive and sedentary, both physically and mentally -- is not likely to be beneficial," said Scullin. "But, our computers and smartphones also can be mentally stimulating, afford social connections, and provide compensation for cognitive abilities that are declining with ageing. These latter types of uses have long been regarded as beneficial for cognitive ageing."
"For the first generation that was exposed to digital tools, their use is associated with better cognitive functioning," said Dr Jared Benge, a clinical neuropsychologist in UT Health Austin's Comprehensive Memory Center. "This is a more hopeful message than one might expect given concerns about brain rot, brain drain, and digital dementia." Benge and his colleague Dr Michael Scullin, a cognitive neuroscientist at Baylor University in Texas, analysed 57 published studies that examined the use of digital technology in 411,430 adults around the world. The average age was 69 years old and all had a cognitive test or diagnosis. The scientists found no evidence for the digital dementia hypothesis, which suggests that a lifetime of using digital technology drives mental decline. Rather, they found that using a computer, smartphone, the internet or some combination of these was associated with a lower risk of cognitive impairment. The details have been published in Nature Human Behaviour. "Using digital devices in the way that we use televisions -- passive and sedentary, both physically and mentally -- is not likely to be beneficial," said Scullin. "But, our computers and smartphones also can be mentally stimulating, afford social connections, and provide compensation for cognitive abilities that are declining with ageing. These latter types of uses have long been regarded as beneficial for cognitive ageing."
Or maybe the other way around... (Score:5, Informative)
Older people who have lower rates of cognitive decline, are more likely to use smartphones.
I can certainly see this in my own parents, who are in their 80s. My father-in-law has dementia, and can't figure out how to use a smartphone. My mother-in-law is doing fine, and loves hers.
Re:Or maybe the other way around... (Score:5, Insightful)
I do agree that it could be interpreted to mean causation, but it doesn't.
It could perhaps better be word as: Cell phone usage inversely correlated with cognitive decline in older people.
The important part, however, is that it casts serious doubt on the idea that use of these things causes cognitive decline, since the correlation is in fact the inverse.
Re: (Score:2)
Does the study actually use smart phones?
The summary says "digital devices".
Does that include desktop/laptop computers?
Or both? Are they differentiated?
Re: (Score:2)
My use of the term "smart phone" came from the parent's post. Unintentional subject shift.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TVs, credit cards and washing machines are also digital devices.
Theoretically so is a Morse code keyer.
Re: (Score:2)
And old light switches that have just on/off states.
Having the last, last, last word (Score:2)
Oddly, there's probably a social media topic board with a dozen or so elderly people in a 10 year discussion, where each one has to have the last, last, last word.
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly, there's probably a social media topic board with a dozen or so elderly people in a 10 year discussion, where each one has to have the last, last, last word.
Shit, I might be getting random push notifications from Reddit about that. I'm waiting for them to taper off.
Scientific studies on that... (Score:2)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.go... [nih.gov]
Psychosom Med . 2001 Jul-Aug;63(4):517-22. doi: 10.1097/00006842-200107000-00001.
Word use in the poetry of suicidal and nonsuicidal poets S W Stirman 1 , J W Pennebaker
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine whether distinctive features of language could be discerned in the poems of poets who committed suicide and to test two suicide models by use of a text-analysis program.
Method: Approximately 300 poems from the early, middle, and late periods of nin
Re: (Score:2)
How was "decline" or lack thereof measured?
How was a baseline established for the participants?
Maybe people who use "digital devices" (whatever that means) were higher functioning beforehand, and did decline. Just not as much as people who did not use digital devices.
What other confounding factors or other correlations could be made? What was the health of the people? Did they use these "digital devices" to interact with their friends and family? Did these people exercise or do other things out of the house
Re: (Score:2)
What I can say, is that they appear to have handled your concerns pretty well, except for perhaps the ambiguity in "digital devices" you seem to be hinting that you take exception with.
Sadly, it wasn't clear if the participants were exposed to Pirates, or why that particular proper noun would be capitalized.. Are we German?
Re: (Score:2)
Are we German?
We are devo.
At least we were before that mode was trademarked....
Re:Or maybe the other way around... (Score:5, Insightful)
The important part, however, is that it casts serious doubt on the idea that use of these things causes cognitive decline, since the correlation is in fact the inverse.
No, it doesn't actually do that. You're ignoring the possibility that they could be codependent variables in some interesting way.
At this point, almost everyone owns a smartphone, and they use them to communicate with family and friends. And clearly, sufficient amounts of cognitive decline would clearly prevent the use of a smartphone. So we cannot say with any certainty whether the people who stopped using smartphones and declined more quickly got worse because of their lack of smartphone use or stopped using smartphone use because they were biologically inclined to decline more quickly.
We can assume that nearly everyone will keep using a smartphone until they can no longer do so. Thus, to determine whether the use of a smartphone could accelerate cognitive decline, you would need to create an experiment group who start at a similar level of cognitive function as the control group (or use a case-control approach) where you deliberately convince them to stop using the smartphones, not because of cognitive decline, but rather arbitrarily.
Without that, it is entirely possible that using the smartphone accelerates cognitive decline beyond what would otherwise have occurred in a given individual, but that people who are declining more quickly for other reasons are more likely to stop using a smartphone sooner because of some sort of precursor decline that interferes with working memory before it starts interfering in ways that are more easily detected, or something like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Without that, it is entirely possible that using the smartphone accelerates cognitive decline beyond what would otherwise have occurred in a given individual, but that people who are declining more quickly for other reasons are more likely to stop using a smartphone sooner because of some sort of precursor decline that interferes with working memory before it starts interfering in ways that are more easily detected, or something like that.
I never said it wasn't possible, I said it casts serious doubt.
As a population, it is simply a fact that over the baseline of those whom none of which used digital devices, because they did not exist, and today's mixed population (and it IS mixed- your statement that "almost everyone owns a smartphone, and they use them to communicate with family and friends" is simply patently false for this age group) the overall risk of cognitive decline is not higher, and is in fact lower among those that use digital
Re: (Score:2)
I think what the parent says is it doesn't even cast doubt let alone serious doubt. Nothing about the study would be unexpected if cell phones caused mental decline. Also digital device use in older people takes much more mental effort than digital device use in younger people since they where not raised with them.
If you want to cast doubt do a study that shows causality.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to cast doubt do a study that shows causality.
Huh?
Shows causality... for what? The digital dementia hypothesis can't show causality... finding a lack of evidence is all it takes to cast doubt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's another possible twist to this.
I have a number of friends whose parents have begun to decline both cognitively and physically. Some of those elderly individuals give up on physical activity because it's become uncomfortable, and on mental activity because it's become more difficult to concentrate. These people get into a slowly accelerating decline in both areas. Others fight to remain as active as they are able to, and don't decline nearly as fast.
Studies [psypost.org] have shown that people who engage in activ
Re: (Score:1)
The study doesn't claim a direction for the causality- it merely points out the correlation.
The study briefly admits that, but then they go out of their way and use language that for most people reading it would have the opposite meaning: "For the first generation that was exposed to digital tools, their use is associated with better cognitive functioning" and "This is a more hopeful message than one might expect given concerns about brain rot, brain drain, and digital dementia" and "they found that using a computer, smartphone, the internet or some combination of these was associated with a lower
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is, none of these statements are true. They did not check groups that have never used smartphones against group that have. They only proved some correlation that is pretty obviously not causation. Claiming "lower risk" is flawed. FWIW, instinctively I am not a fan of the digital dementia hypothesis, but this meta-analysis claims to prove things that it doesn't.
They did check groups that have, and have not. They also did not claim a lower risk. They claimed an association with a lower risk.
Ultimately, I'm gonna have to disagree with you here. They're pretty clear that they've proven nothing.
I think in your mind, the phrase "associated with" is doing a lot more lifting than in mine. There's simply no causation implied with it.
I don't think the wording about a "hopeful message" is particularly helpful, but I can't overall disagree with it.
The paper concludes th
Re: (Score:2)
That's some pretty creative interpretation on your part.
"For the first generation that was exposed to digital tools, their use is associated with better cognitive functioning"
Associations are correlations.
"they found that using a computer, smartphone, the internet or some combination of these was associated with a lower risk of cognitive impairment"
Again, association is correlation.
ALSO, these quotes are from the article, which is not "the study."
Re: (Score:2)
> "Nevertheless, this work challenges alarmist ideas about so-called ‘digital dementia’ and instead suggests that using digital technology can be good for brain health."
That is a very clear claim of causality. Right after the professor stated that they have not demonstrated causality.
I call bad science, or at least bad science communication.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very clear claim of causality.
Ya, 100%- that's a pile of shit.
or at least bad science communication.
No argument there.
Re: (Score:2)
The important part, however, is that it casts serious doubt on the idea that use of these things causes cognitive decline, since the correlation is in fact the inverse.
And yet there are studies showing a definitive link with cognitive decline in younger smartphone users [biomedpharmajournal.org].
"Need-based smartphone use may be causing cognitive failure in young individuals, including forgetfulness, distractibility, and false triggering. Excessive smartphone use has been linked to a higher risk of cognitive impairment."
Is it possible regular smartphone use is good for one age group and bad for another? Maybe. Maybe since kid brains are still developing, that has something to do with it. Of course
Re: (Score:2)
No scientist had ever even considered the idea of causation does not equal correlation! It's very important that Slashdot users post it every single time a science article comes up...the public needs to be reminded!
Re: (Score:2)
The important part, however, is that it casts serious doubt on the idea that use of these things causes cognitive decline, since the correlation is in fact the inverse.
That's true for this particular population, but perhaps not true in general. A person who is 69 today would have been in their 50s when most people were getting their first smartphones. They already had a lifetime of habits that didn't involve smartphones and that are different from people now growing up with them. They tend to have more in-person social interaction and to rely a lot less on phones to mediate their interactions. They likely have more offline activities generally. They spend less time o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My Theory (Score:2)
I don't let my phone replace my brain, I use it to keep it occupied and to find out things that, pre-Internet and pre-mobile Internet, I would probably never have been able to find out.
I'm keeping my brain active. Active brains aren't pruning connections from lack of use. I assume I'm still losing brain cells with age, but I'm not just letting them slip away from neglect.
Re: My Theory (Score:1)
In other words you're on the trivia treadmill. Name something you "found out" last week, without checking your phone again.
You're as much a Borg as Locutus now.
Re: My Theory (Score:2)
Guess what, buttercup? You don't need a phone for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Guess what, buttercup? You don't need a phone for that.
No, but you CAN use a phone for that. There's a difference between looking things up because you're curious, and idly letting random content wash over you like a couch potato languishing in front of the boob tube. When I was a kid, I was a voracious reader, and I spent a lot of time looking things up in the Funk & Wagnalls encyclopedia my mother brought home from the Ralph's grocery store each week. I still do a lot of reading, but now I look things up on my phone or computer instead of reaching for an
Sure if we define "cognitive" (Score:1)
As regurgitating propaganda and trivia as "cognition", sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, on the other hand... (Score:2)
Older people who use smartphones have less disposable income because they eventually get to the point where they just direct deposit their social security checks into their Candy Crush wallets.
Can confirm (Score:2)
...Or Can Lead to Alzheimers (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe there is a cutoff date, but one of the presumed triggers of Alzheimers [wikipedia.org] is stress and to someone who didn't grow up playing with digital electronics, Smartphones are the worst thing.
I knew someone who was in their early 70s and was talked into going from a semi-smartphone to an iPhone. Couldn't wrap his head around it. Sure, he could make calls and text but it was visibly "work" for him and obviously wasn't intuitive; pocket dials, accidental texts, emails as texts and vise-versa, things like that. Now add in that most everyone and most everything practically requires you to have a smartphone to do anything these days, and you're forcing a level of non-intuitive stress on people like him.
He had some minor surgery that needed to get done which wouldn't have normally been a big deal, but I'm convinced that it combined with the daily stress he was experiencing with having to use a smartphone flipped the switch and he died within two years from complications related to Alzheimers.
So I'm sure it is probably measuring people in the 50-65 range, but the people 70+ weren't "wired that way" and struggle with technology as it is. From the few people I've known who got dementia, it was stress related.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe you need to have "grown up playing with digital electronics" to be comfortable with using them, but it certainly helps to have been a user since they were introduced. I'm an old fart, with more than my share of the infirmities associated with aging. I was 32 years old when IBM introduced the PC, and 58 when the first iPhone came out. The only stress I experience when using either has nothing to do with the device, and everything to do with what I'm using it for. The computer is a tool, and s
Its not smarthphones .. (Score:4, Insightful)
Slashdot (Score:2)
I'm a 71 year old engineer (Score:2)
I have been writing code since 1972. I am currently studying AI programming in python. I try to learn something new every day
I am definitely not a technophobe!
I find smartphones to be mostly useless. Yes, I can use one in a dire emergency, but overall, I dislike them.
The tiny screen and tiny text require me to find my most powerful reading glasses. The tiny touchscreen is almost unusable and it takes a lot of fumbling and mistyping to slowly compose anything.
Yes, the processing power is exceptional, but the
Not just smartphones... (Score:2)
The title of TFS mentions smartphones, but the story itself includes "digital devices".
As an old fart I feel inclined to point this out. I don't spend nearly as much time on my phone as most people do, but I spend a LOT of time on my laptop...
Wheras younger people using smartphones (Score:2)
Can't function at *all* without it. Zombies, all of you.
Why is it always a decline? (Score:2)
How do we get a cognitive incline? And I don't mean that nootropic woo.
Smartphones fears .. (Score:2)
The real fear is that putting young kids on smart devices will actually cause retardation of intellectual development.
--
This content may violate our usage policies.
meaningless (Score:2)
Older people who have cognitive decline find it too hard to use a smartphone.
That means (Score:2)
Get Off My Lawn!
Damn buncha acid-droppin, dope smokin hippies!