advantages of digital age essay

Reflections on the digital age: 7 improvements that brought about a decade of positive change

The new digital age enabled billions of people to collaborate and mobilize to fight climate change. Image:  Photo by kazuend on Unsplash

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Don Tapscott C.M.

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved .chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, davos agenda.

Listen to the article

September 2030 . The early 2020s were full of dramatic turning points in global history.

Powerful new technologies like artificial intelligence, blockchain, the internet of things and the metaverse upended traditional systems, institutions and ways of life. Meanwhile, the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020-22 accelerated these trends as people everywhere moved much of their lives online. The pandemic also exposed deep problems in our governments and systems for everything from supply chains to public health data.

Moreover, the early 2020s were jolted by political upheaval. Notably, in January 2021, the American election was challenged, exacerbating deep fissures in the United States and emboldening populists and extremists around the world. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, global sanctions and significant disruptions to food supplies further convulsed the global economy and exacerbated tensions. These challenges, among others, created a perfect storm and resulted in extraordinary social anxiety and unrest.

Fortunately, a miracle of sorts occurred. Driven by a deep hope for a brighter future, people everywhere began to reimagine the relationship between government and civil society, ushering in a new societal framework for the digital age. This was not some kind of academic process but rather the result of mass mobilizations around broad change.

Reflecting on the digital age

Today, looking back a decade, let’s examine seven key improvements that stemmed from this period of positive change:

1. New models of prosperity and work

Given the bifurcation of wealth and structural unemployment in many economies engendered by the new digital age, expectations of employment shifted, with people understanding that the private sector cannot provide jobs and prosperous life for all. New rules and regulations were instituted that created a strong social safety net for workers. These reforms helped mitigate the gross inequality that plagued the early years of the 21 st century. New technologies also brought more underserved people into the global economy and readied workers for lifelong learning.

2. New models of digital identity

New regulations allowed individuals to own and benefit from the digital data they create. This ended the era of “digital feudalism,” which was characterised by a centralized group of “digital landlords” who collected, aggregated and profited from the data that collectively constituted our digital identities. Furthermore, Web3 gave people the ability to harvest their data trail and use it to plan their lives, enhancing their prosperity and protecting their privacy.

3. More informed digital age society

Through public and private partnerships, media systems were rebuilt in ways that safeguarded independence and free speech. New tools were implemented that enabled citizens to track the veracity and provenance of information. This helped reduce the ability of bad-faith actors to spread false information about everything from climate change to public health. Clear rules were also set that ensured large media companies were prohibited from supporting hate on their platforms in the digital age. These reforms helped us rebuild public education systems to ensure that every young person can function fully, not just as a worker or entrepreneur, but as a citizen. Media literacy programs were also introduced into schools to help young people develop their capabilities to handle the onslaught of information and discern the truth.

4. Renewed trust in government and democracy

Innovative technologies and other modern reforms enabled us to create a new era of democracy based on public deliberation, transparency, active citizenship and accountability. Technology also helped to embed electoral promises into smart contracts that allowed citizens to track and engage in their democracies through the mobile platforms they use every day. These reforms helped boost trust in politicians and the legitimacy of our governments as leaders are now more beholden to the people and not the powerful interests that funded their campaigns in the years prior. Moreover, these improvements helped stifle radical populists and extreme politicians on both the right and left.

5. A new commitment to justice

It was clear that new technologies exacerbated racial divides, so governments and organisations throughout civil society committed to ending racial inequities. In the United States, action was taken to end the era of mass incarceration and the financial hamstringing of minority groups. The criminal subjection of indigenous peoples as evidenced by Canada’s “Residential School System” was also readdressed. These steps helped move racism, class oppression and subjugation of all peoples into the dustbin of history, along with those who perpetrate these vile relics of the past. The reforms also went past the tropes about bad apples and forgiveness. They recognized that racism and oppression are systemic and must be addressed society-wide.

6. A deep commitment to sustainability

Through major reforms, the world is now on track to reduce carbon emissions by 90% by the year 2050. The new digital age enabled billions of people to collaborate and mobilize to fight climate change. This included not just governments but businesses large and small, commuters, vacationers, employees, students, consumers – everyone – from every walk of life. Public pressure and new regulations have also forced business executives to participate responsibly in the reindustrialization of our planet and embrace carbon pricing.

7. Global interdependence

The crises of the past decade—the COVID-19 pandemic, the political legitimacy crisis, the war in Ukraine and the climate catastrophes—demonstrated that no country could succeed fully in a world that is in trouble. And while significant national differences remain, countries have embraced common interests and an understanding of a common fate. The new way of thinking also allowed governments, companies and NGOs to better organise around solving major problems like public health, education, social justice, environmental stability and peace.

These positive changes did not bring about a utopia. But they were improvements—and ones that were achieved through bottom-up struggle.

Victor Hugo said there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come. In our case, there was nothing so powerful as ideas that had become necessities.

The World Economic Forum’s Platform for Shaping the Future of Digital Economy and New Value Creation helps companies and governments leverage technology to develop digitally-driven business models that ensure growth and equity for an inclusive and sustainable economy.

• The Digital Transformation for Long-Term Growth programme is bringing together industry leaders, innovators, experts and policymakers to accelerate new digital business models that create the sustainable and resilient industries of tomorrow.
• The Forum’s EDISON Alliance is mobilizing leaders from across sectors to accelerate digital inclusion . Its 1 Billion Lives Challenge harnesses cross-sector commitments and action to improve people’s lives through affordable access to digital solutions in education, healthcare, and financial services by 2025.

Contact us for more information on how to get involved.

This article is abridged from an major essay written by Don Tapscott called “A Declaration of Interdependence: Towards a New Social Contract for the Digital Age” and a recent short essay entitled “ Why We Built a Social Contract for the New Digital Age.”

Don Tapscott is author of 16 widely read books about technology in business and society, including the best-seller Blockchain Revolution , which he co-authored with his son Alex. His most recent book is Platform Revolution: Blockchain Technology as the Operating System of the Digital Age. He is Co-Founder of the Blockchain Research Institute , an Adjunct Professor at INSEAD, and Chancellor Emeritus of Trent University in Canada. He is a Member of the Order of Canada and drafted a framework for “ A New Social Contract for the Digital Economy.”

Have you read?

Why businesses must embrace change in the digital age, companies' esg strategies must stand up to scrutiny in the digital age, what is the role of government in the digital age, don't miss any update on this topic.

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

The Agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Davos Agenda .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

Global cooperation is stalling – but new trade pacts show collaboration is still possible. Here are 6 to know about

Simon Torkington

March 15, 2024

How messages of hope, diversity and representation are being used to inspire changemakers to act

Miranda Barker

March 7, 2024

AI, leadership, and the art of persuasion – Forum  podcasts you should hear this month

Robin Pomeroy

March 1, 2024

This is how AI is impacting – and shaping – the creative industries, according to experts at Davos

Kate Whiting

February 28, 2024

How deep-sea technology could transform life above water

Mattie Rodrigue and Diva Amon

February 23, 2024

3 trends set to drive cyberattacks and ransomware in 2024

Scott Sayce

February 22, 2024

Home — Essay Samples — Information Science and Technology — Digital Era — The Digital Information Age

The Digital Information Age

• Categories: Digital Era Information Age Internet

About this sample

Words: 1090 |

Published: Jun 5, 2019

Words: 1090 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Information Science and Technology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 717 words

2 pages / 936 words

1 pages / 497 words

1 pages / 594 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Digital Era

Clarke, Roger. 'Dataveillance by Governments: The Technique of Computer Matching.' In Information Systems and Dataveillance, edited by Roger Clarke and Richard Wright, 129-142. Sydney, Australia: Australian Computer Society, [...]

Pallasmaa J, Mallgrave HF, Arbib M. Architecture and Neuroscience. Tidwell P, editor. Finland: Tapio Wirkkala Rut Bryk Foundation; 2015.Colomina B, Wigley M. Are we human? notes on an archaeology of design. Netherlands: Lars [...]

Abel, J. P., Buff, C. L., & Burr, S. A. (2016). Social Media and the Fear of Missing Out: Scale Development and Assessment. Journal of Business & Economics Research (JBER), 14(1), 33-44. [...]

The excessive use of the internet has become a prevalent concern in today's digital age. The internet, once a revolutionary tool for communication and information, has now transformed into an integral part of our daily lives. [...]

We have all been interrupted during our TV show by the faces of neglected and homeless animals staring back at us. The ASPCA (The American Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals) commercial headlining Sarah McLachlan [...]

To understand the severity of how digital devices can affect our well-being whether it be in a positive way or negative; it is important to understand how present we have made these devises a part of our everyday activities. [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Privacy in the Digital Age Essay

Introduction, anonymity and the internet, anonymous servers, anonymous users, advantages and disadvantages of anonymity, controversies and responses.

Bibliography

Social, economic, and technological advances have dramatically increased the amount of information any individual can access or possess. Unfortunately, this has also brought about various challenges that must be addressed 1 . Generally, information is a vital treasure in itself, and the more one has the better. Having valuable, intellectual, economic, and social information creates enormous opportunities and advantages for any individual.

Even though information is a treasure, it can also be a liability. Besides constantly seeking ways to acquire, keep, and dispose of it, users of information also want to make sure that what is seen and heard privately does not become public without their consent. In the present technologically advanced society, a number of factors have contributed to the high demand for information and hence the need for anonymity, security, and privacy.

Increased public awareness of the potential abuse of digital communication, especially the Internet is one major concern for all stakeholders. To a large extent, most Internet users are concerned about privacy and do not want all the information they send or receive over the Internet to be connected to them by name 2 .

This paper presents arguments indicating that it is critical for governments to impose restrictions on Internet privacy. According to Kizza 3 anonymity refers to the state of being nameless or having no identity.

Since it is extremely difficult for anybody to live a meaningful life while being totally anonymous, there are different types of anonymity that exist including pseudo anonymity and untraceable identity.

Pseudo anonymity is where one chooses to be identified by a certain pseudonym or code while untraceable identity implies that one is not known by any name.

For many people, anonymity is one of the biggest worries as far as using the Internet’s is concerned. The virtual world may make it easier for dissidents to criticize governments, for alcoholics to talk about their problems and for shy people to find love 4 . However, anonymity also creates room for dishonest people to pose as children in chat rooms and criminals in order to hide from law enforcers.

As such, Internet anonymity seems to cut both ways. According to proponents, preserving anonymity on the Internet may be the cornerstone of safeguarding privacy and a vital part of the constitutionally protected right to free speech. Critics have, however, argued that online anonymity permits people to affect others and not be held responsible or accountable for their actions.

In general, the use of the Internet has created room for individuals to operate in secret, without any one being able to tell who they are. In particular, the Internet provides two channels through which anonymous acts can be carried out. These are anonymous severs and anonymous users.

With advances in software and hardware, anonymity on the Internet has grown through anonymous servers. These may be full anonymity servers or pseudonymous servers. When full anonymity servers are used, it is impossible to identify the packet headers.

In the case of pseudonymous servers, pseudonyms are usually placed inside packet headers to conceal identity. In the process, the actual identity gets hidden behind a pseudonym and any packets received thereafter are relayed to the real server. Anonymity servers are able to accomplish this through the use of encryption 5 .

Other options are also used to allow users to adopt false names to hide their identity as they use the Internet. With false names, they can proceed to use message boards or participate in chat rooms without being recognized by anyone.

This has sometimes led to sensitive or highly personal information being posted to user groups, news groups, and chat rooms. In addition, popular protocols are also used to provide anonymity to the users. Generally, these protocols accept messages relayed to servers with arbitrary field information.

To some extent, anonymity may be used to curb bad behavior and to warn culprits that they are being watched. This contributes greatly to ensuring that everyone in the organization behaves appropriately. Although whistle blowers are sometimes controversial, they are reliable in a number of occasions such as when there is abuse of office and resources. Secondly, anonymity can be useful to those in charge of national security.

It may be used by underground spies to gather useful information for national defense. Where there is intimidation and fear of punishment, anonymity may be used to reveal useful information. Anonymity is also good for strengthening relationships and the security of some people 6 .

One of the disadvantages has to do with the fact that anonymity can make it easy for criminals and fraudsters to commit crime. It can also make it difficult to access information that may be useful for settling disputes.

Anonymity, according to its defenders, is a right protected by the American Constitution. In a notable 1995 case concerned with the distribution of anonymous pamphlets, the Supreme Court noted that anonymity is some form of a shield for individuals. Enshrined in law or not, the power to remain anonymous is often taken for granted by members of democratic societies.

Many authors have written controversial works using pseudonyms, politicians comment confidentially using generic titles like a spokesperson, and one of the first principles of journalism is never to divulge the identity of an anonymous source. It is important to note that anonymity is central to free speech and free speech is central to democracy.

According to Lambert 7 , anonymity can be a weapon that damages or destroys reputations. Defenders of anonymity are always concerned that the idea of anonymity on the Internet is regarded differently from any other kind of anonymity.

If the Supreme Court recognizes that anonymous books and leaflets are a justified form of free speech, the argument goes that Internet communication should be treated the same. Where anonymity is concerned, radio and television are treated differently from books because they are broadcast media.

They are not disseminated the same way and are harder to ignore. Although critics charge that Internet anonymity should be subject to special regulation, one of the basic premises of devising laws for the Internet is that they should be technologically neutral.

According to law enforcers, the Internet’s built in anonymity makes it a safe haven not just for whistle blowers and dissidents but also for criminals and terrorists. In November 2002, newspapers reported that the Pentagon had briefly considered and rejected an idea called e-DNA, which would have tagged natural Internet traffic with personalized makers.

Since human DNA is unique to every individual, DNA samples taken from crime scenes can often be used to trap criminals. In much the same way, the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) hoped that Internet traffic tagged with e-DNA makers would be traceable to individuals and their computers. Had the plan not been scuttled, it would have outlawed most forms of Internet anonymity.

However, if anonymity is a cornerstone for democracy, as proponents allege, it would seem to be worth going to some lengths to defend. Apparently, this would require more than passing laws to protect Internet users who want to remain anonymous.

Ultimately, the recognition of the different kinds of anonymity might be necessary, followed by the treatment of the various forms of anonymity in different ways, including legal protection for uses of anonymity that are not connected to criminal behavior.

It may also be necessary to come up with ways to distinguish between those hiding behind their anonymity to commit crime and those using it for whistle blowing purposes. The distinction will help organizations to determine if it is necessary to allow anonymity in a given situation.

Strangely enough, anonymity may be complicated or simplified through the Internet given that communication via the Internet happens secretly and determining a user’s identity can not be done with absolute certainty.

As has been discussed in this paper, anonymity has its good and bad side. If left unchecked, innocent individuals in the society will be subjected to undeserved suffering. In a number of cases, therefore, it is necessary either for a local authority or national legislatures to pass laws that regulate when and who can use anonymity legally.

In the current environment of the Internet, there are serious debates on the freedoms of individuals on the Internet and how these freedoms can be protected when dealing with people on the Internet under the cover of anonymity.

Kizza, Joseph. Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age . Chattanooga, TN: Springer, 2010.

Lambert, Laura. The Internet: Biographies . Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2005.

Schwabach, Aaron. Internet and the Law: Technology, Society, and Compromises. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2006.

1 Joseph Kizza, Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age . (Chattanooga, TN: Springer, 2010), 23.

2 Aaron Schwabach, Internet and the Law: Technology, Society, and Compromises. (Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2006), 45.

3 Joseph Kizza, Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age . (Chattanooga, TN: Springer, 2010), 24.

4 Laura Lambert, The Internet: Biographies . (Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2005), 53.

5 Joseph Kizza, Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age . (Chattanooga, TN: Springer, 2010), 31.

6 Laura Lambert, The Internet: Biographies . (Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2005), 61.

7 Laura Lambert, The Internet: Biographies . (Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 2005), 65.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, January 21). Privacy in the Digital Age. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/

"Privacy in the Digital Age." IvyPanda , 21 Jan. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Privacy in the Digital Age'. 21 January.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Privacy in the Digital Age." January 21, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "Privacy in the Digital Age." January 21, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

IvyPanda . "Privacy in the Digital Age." January 21, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/privacy-in-the-digital-age-essay/.

• History of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)
• Advantages of Anonymity in New Media World
• Alcoholic Anonymous Meeting and Impact on Treatment
• Growing Compatibility Issues: Computers and User Privacy
• In Defense of Whistle Blowing
• E-Governments and the Environment of Anonymity
• Balancing Freedom of Speech and Responsibility in Online Commenting
• Organizational Ethics: Encouraging Whistle-blowing within Organizations
• Whistle-Blowing and Leadership
• Freedom of Expression on the Internet
• Demonstrations and Protests
• What Are Human Rights?
• Media Ethics and Law – Free Expression
• Immigrants and Human Rights
• Oppression of Women’s Rights Affects the Economy of the Middle East

Student Writing in the Digital Age

Essays filled with “LOL” and emojis? College student writing today actually is longer and contains no more errors than it did in 1917.

“Kids these days” laments are nothing new, but the substance of the lament changes. Lately, it has become fashionable to worry that “kids these days” will be unable to write complex, lengthy essays. After all, the logic goes, social media and text messaging reward short, abbreviated expression. Student writing will be similarly staccato, rushed, or even—horror of horrors—filled with LOL abbreviations and emojis.

In fact, the opposite seems to be the case. Students in first-year composition classes are, on average, writing longer essays (from an average of 162 words in 1917, to 422 words in 1986, to 1,038 words in 2006), using more complex rhetorical techniques, and making no more errors than those committed by freshman in 1917. That’s according to a longitudinal study of student writing by Andrea A. Lunsford and Karen J. Lunsford, “ Mistakes Are a Fact of Life: A National Comparative Study. ”

In 2006, two rhetoric and composition professors, Lunsford and Lunsford, decided, in reaction to government studies worrying that students’ literacy levels were declining, to crunch the numbers and determine if students were making more errors in the digital age.

They began by replicating previous studies of American college student errors. There were four similar studies over the past century. In 1917, a professor analyzed the errors in 198 college student papers; in 1930, researchers completed similar studies of 170 and 20,000 papers, respectively. In 1986, Robert Connors and Andrea Lunsford (of the 2006 study) decided to see if contemporary students were making more or fewer errors than those earlier studies showed, and analyzed 3,000 student papers from 1984. The 2006 study (published in 2008) follows the process of these earlier studies and was based on 877 papers (one of the most interesting sections of “Mistakes Are a Fact of Life” discusses how new IRB regulations forced researchers to work with far fewer papers than they had before.

Remarkably, the number of errors students made in their papers stayed consistent over the past 100 years. Students in 2006 committed roughly the same number of errors as students did in 1917. The average has stayed at about 2 errors per 100 words.

What has changed are the kinds of errors students make. The four 20th-century studies show that, when it came to making mistakes, spelling tripped up students the most. Spelling was by far the most common error in 1986 and 1917, “the most frequent student mistake by some 300 percent.” Going down the list of “top 10 errors,” the patterns shifted: Capitalization was the second most frequent error 1917; in 1986, that spot went to “no comma after introductory element.”

In 2006, spelling lost its prominence, dropping down the list of errors to number five.  Spell-check and similar word-processing tools are the undeniable cause. But spell-check creates new errors, too: The new number-one error in student writing is now “wrong word.” Spell-check, as most of us know, sometimes corrects spelling to a different word than intended; if the writing is not later proof-read, this computer-created error goes unnoticed. The second most common error in 2006 was “incomplete or missing documentation,” a result, the authors theorize, of a shift in college assignments toward research papers and away from personal essays.

Additionally, capitalization errors have increased, perhaps, as Lunsford and Lunsford note, because of neologisms like eBay and iPod. But students have also become much better at punctuation and apostrophes, which were the third and fifth most common errors in 1917. These had dropped off the top 10 list by 2006.

The study found no evidence for claims that kids are increasingly using “text speak” or emojis in their papers. Lunsford and Lunsford did not find a single such instance of this digital-era error. Ironically, they did find such text speak and emoticons in teachers’ comments to students. (Teachers these days?)

The most startling discovery Lunsford and Lunsford made had nothing to do with errors or emojis. They found that college students are writing much more and submitting much longer papers than ever. The average college essay in 2006 was more than double the length of the average 1986 paper, which was itself much longer than the average length of papers written earlier in the century. In 1917, student papers averaged 162 words; in 1930, the average was 231 words. By 1986, the average grew to 422 words. And just 20 years later, in 2006, it jumped to 1,038 words.

Why are 21st-century college students writing so much more? Computers allow students to write faster. (Other advances in writing technology may explain the upticks between 1917, 1930, and 1986. Ballpoint pens and manual and electric typewriters allowed students to write faster than inkwells or fountain pens.) The internet helps, too: Research shows that computers connected to the internet lead K-12 students to “conduct more background research for their writing; they write, revise, and publish more; they get more feedback on their writing; they write in a wider variety of genres and formats; and they produce higher quality writing.”

The digital revolution has been largely text-based. Over the course of an average day, Americans in 2006 wrote more than they did in 1986 (and in 2015 they wrote more than in 2006). New forms of written communication—texting, social media, and email—are often used instead of spoken ones—phone calls, meetings, and face-to-face discussions. With each text and Facebook update, students become more familiar with and adept at written expression. Today’s students have more experience with writing, and they practice it more than any group of college students in history.

Get Our Newsletter

Get your fix of JSTOR Daily’s best stories in your inbox each Thursday.

Privacy Policy   Contact Us You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking on the provided link on any marketing message.

In shifting from texting to writing their English papers, college students must become adept at code-switching, using one form of writing for certain purposes (gossiping with friends) and another for others (summarizing plots). As Kristen Hawley Turner writes in “ Flipping the Switch: Code-Switching from Text Speak to Standard English ,” students do know how to shift from informal to formal discourse, changing their writing as occasions demand. Just as we might speak differently to a supervisor than to a child, so too do students know that they should probably not use “conversely” in a text to a friend or “LOL” in their Shakespeare paper. “As digital natives who have had access to computer technology all of their lives, they often demonstrate in theses arenas proficiencies that the adults in their lives lack,” Turner writes. Instructors should “teach them to negotiate the technology-driven discourse within the confines of school language.”

Responses to Lunsford and Lunsford’s study focused on what the results revealed about mistakes in writing: Error is often in the eye of the beholder . Teachers mark some errors and neglect to mention (or find) others. And, as a pioneering scholar of this field wrote in the 1970s, context is key when analyzing error: Students who make mistakes are not “indifferent…or incapable” but “beginners and must, like all beginners, learn by making mistakes.”

College students are making mistakes, of course, and they have much to learn about writing. But they are not making more mistakes than did their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. Since they now use writing to communicate with friends and family, they are more comfortable expressing themselves in words. Plus, most have access to technology that allows them to write faster than ever. If Lunsford and Lunsford’s findings about the average length of student papers stays true, today’s college students will graduate with more pages of completed prose to their name than any other generation.

If we want to worry about college student writing, then perhaps what we should attend to is not clipped, abbreviated writing, but overly verbose, rambling writing. It might be that editing skills—deciding what not to say, and what to delete—may be what most ails the kids these days.

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

More Stories

A Body in the Bog

A Mughal Mosque in Kenya

Do You Own Your Body?

Jain Ascetics in a Material World

Recent posts.

• Shakespeare’s First Published Work
• Birth of the Corporate Person
• Svalbard: Seeds of Hope
• Total Solar Eclipse, 2024 Edition
• Marbled Money

Support JSTOR Daily

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

• Our Mission

How the Digital Age Is Affecting Students

Five books that give insight into how social media and technology are shaping today’s students and their learning.

Teachers don’t have to look far to see how changes in technology and social media are shaping students and influencing classrooms. We watch kids obsess over the latest apps as they chat before class. We marvel at the newest slang edging its way into student essays, and wonder at the ways constant smartphone communication is shaping students’ friendships, bullying, and even study habits.

To understand the internet-savvy students who fill our classrooms and the changing landscape of social media they inhabit, we need more than hot new gadgets or expensive educational software. The book list below is a starting point if you’re looking for insight into how the digital age is shaping students and ideas about how you can respond in the classroom.

Each book was chosen for its combination of research, story, and applicability to the classroom. Grab one or two to help you invent new strategies to reach students or reimagine your application of technology in your classroom.

Social Media

If you’ve ever wondered what students are doing with all their time on the internet, It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens  is for you. Author danah boyd dissects how and why kids rush to the online world. Using student interviews and stories, boyd describes the ways youngsters use social media to connect, escape, and eke out a little privacy away from their parents and teachers. She includes a chapter on how the internet has shaped young people’s understanding of personal and public spaces. Read this book if you want to help students optimize the knowledge and skills they already have as digital natives.

A clinical psychologist and researcher at MIT, Sherry Turkle isn’t against the smartphones our students love so much. But she is worried that the obsession with phones—and the texting and social media posting they enable—is impacting in-person discussion and deep conversation. In her book Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age , Turkle claims that students’ communication skills have changed. Her suggestions for taking back in-person conversation in a digital world can shape collaborative classrooms and guide teachers on how to help students improve peer-to-peer interactions.

Social media and the free flow of information have also influenced the language we use every day. In A World Without ‘Whom’: The Essential Guide to Language in the Buzzfeed Age , Emmy Favilla lays out a case for language shaped by the internet. This entertaining and informative 2017 book is peppered with pop culture examples ready for use in class, though like all pop culture references they’ll quickly become dated. Favilla’s writing is pragmatic; she offers advice on where to hold the line on traditional language and when readability and appeal to a new generation might be more important. As Favilla puts it, “We’re all just trying to be heard here.” The book is a timely reminder that social-media-fueled language innovation deserves some classroom discussion.

If you’re eager to understand larger trends affecting young students, pick up Jean Twenge’s iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy—and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood . Drawing from large data sets and longitudinal studies, Twenge examines everything from SAT scores to rates of loneliness. Her research-heavy book offers helpful hints about the impact of technology and other cultural changes. Read this book if you want to brainstorm about how to adapt classes and school structures to meet student needs. To bring students in on the conversation, consider using Twenge’s easy-to-read graphs as discussion kick-starters or as a way to provide historical context to current trends.

If you want to reimagine the way computers and video games might be used in the classroom, check out David Williamson Shaffer’s book How Computer Games Help Children Learn . A professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Shaffer believes that video games can help schools foster creative thinking, problem solving, and strategic decision making. After all, making mistakes and trying out innovative strategies are less risky in a game than in real life. And even reluctant learners will often dive eagerly into video games. A lot has changed since the book’s publication in 2007, but its ideas—about what students can learn from video games, how video games engage students, and what issues to avoid—can guide you toward thoughtful, effective video game use.

Our students are steeped in the internet, social media, and all types of technological innovations, and it’s time for schools and teachers to carefully examine how these things interact with curriculum and learning.

November 1, 2013

12 min read

The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: Why Paper Still Beats Screens

E-readers and tablets are becoming more popular as such technologies improve, but reading on paper still has its advantages

By Ferris Jabr

One of the most provocative viral YouTube videos in the past two years begins mundanely enough: a one-year-old girl plays with an iPad, sweeping her fingers across its touch screen and shuffling groups of icons. In following scenes, she appears to pinch, swipe and prod the pages of paper magazines as though they, too, are screens. Melodramatically, the video replays these gestures in close-up.

For the girl's father, the video— A Magazine Is an iPad That Does Not Work —is evidence of a generational transition. In an accompanying description, he writes, “Magazines are now useless and impossible to understand, for digital natives”—that is, for people who have been interacting with digital technologies from a very early age, surrounded not only by paper books and magazines but also by smartphones, Kindles and iPads.

Whether or not his daughter truly expected the magazines to behave like an iPad, the video brings into focus a question that is relevant to far more than the youngest among us: How exactly does the technology we use to read change the way we read?

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Since at least the 1980s researchers in psychology, computer engineering, and library and information science have published more than 100 studies exploring differences in how people read on paper and on screens. Before 1992 most experiments concluded that people read stories and articles on screens more slowly and remember less about them. As the resolution of screens on all kinds of devices sharpened, however, a more mixed set of findings began to emerge. Recent surveys suggest that although most people still prefer paper—especially when they need to concentrate for a long time—attitudes are changing as tablets and e-reading technology improve and as reading digital texts for facts and fun becomes more common. In the U.S., e-books currently make up more than 20 percent of all books sold to the general public.

Despite all the increasingly user-friendly and popular technology, most studies published since the early 1990s confirm earlier conclusions: paper still has advantages over screens as a reading medium. Together laboratory experiments, polls and consumer reports indicate that digital devices prevent people from efficiently navigating long texts, which may subtly inhibit reading comprehension. Compared with paper, screens may also drain more of our mental resources while we are reading and make it a little harder to remember what we read when we are done. Whether they realize it or not, people often approach computers and tablets with a state of mind less conducive to learning than the one they bring to paper. And e-readers fail to re-create certain tactile experiences of reading on paper, the absence of which some find unsettling.

“There is physicality in reading,” says cognitive scientist Maryanne Wolf of Tufts University, “maybe even more than we want to think about as we lurch into digital reading—as we move forward perhaps with too little reflection. I would like to preserve the absolute best of older forms but know when to use the new.”

Textual Landscapes Understanding how reading on paper differs from reading on screens requires some explanation of how the human brain interprets written language. Although letters and words are symbols representing sounds and ideas, the brain also regards them as physical objects. As Wolf explains in her 2007 book Proust and the Squid , we are not born with brain circuits dedicated to reading, because we did not invent writing until relatively recently in our evolutionary history, around the fourth millennium b.c. So in childhood, the brain improvises a brand-new circuit for reading by weaving together various ribbons of neural tissue devoted to other abilities, such as speaking, motor coordination and vision.

Some of these repurposed brain regions specialize in object recognition: they help us instantly distinguish an apple from an orange, for example, based on their distinct features, yet classify both as fruit. Similarly, when we learn to read and write, we begin to recognize letters by their particular arrangements of lines, curves and hollow spaces—a tactile learning process that requires both our eyes and hands. In recent research by Karin James of Indiana University Bloomington, the reading circuits of five-year-old children crackled with activity when they practiced writing letters by hand but not when they typed letters on a keyboard. And when people read cursive writing or intricate characters such as Japanese kanji , the brain literally goes through the motions of writing, even if the hands are empty.

Beyond treating individual letters as physical objects, the human brain may also perceive a text in its entirety as a kind of physical landscape. When we read, we construct a mental representation of the text. The exact nature of such representations remains unclear, but some researchers think they are similar to the mental maps we create of terrain—such as mountains and trails—and of indoor physical spaces, such as apartments and offices. Both anecdotally and in published studies, people report that when trying to locate a particular passage in a book, they often remember where in the text it appeared. Much as we might recall that we passed the red farmhouse near the start of a hiking trail before we started climbing uphill through the forest, we remember that we read about Mr. Darcy rebuffing Elizabeth Bennett at a dance on the bottom left corner of the left-hand page in one of the earlier chapters of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice .

In most cases, paper books have more obvious topography than on-screen text. An open paper book presents a reader with two clearly defined domains—the left- and right-hand pages—and a total of eight corners with which to orient oneself. You can focus on a single page of a paper book without losing awareness of the whole text. You can even feel the thickness of the pages you have read in one hand and the pages you have yet to read in the other. Turning the pages of a paper book is like leaving one footprint after another on a trail—there is a rhythm to it and a visible record of how far one has traveled. All these features not only make the text in a paper book easily navigable, they also make it easier to form a coherent mental map of that text.

In contrast, most digital devices interfere with intuitive navigation of a text and inhibit people from mapping the journey in their mind. A reader of digital text might scroll through a seamless stream of words, tap forward one page at a time or use the search function to immediately locate a particular phrase—but it is difficult to see any one passage in the context of the entire text. As an analogy, imagine if Google Maps allowed people to navigate street by individual street, as well as to teleport to any specific address, but prevented them from zooming out to see a neighborhood, state or country. Likewise, glancing at a progress bar gives a far more vague sense of place than feeling the weight of read and unread pages. And although e-readers and tablets replicate pagination, the displayed pages are ephemeral. Once read, those pages vanish. Instead of hiking the trail yourself, you watch the trees, rocks and moss pass by in flashes, with no tangible trace of what came before and no easy way to see what lies ahead.

“The implicit feel of where you are in a physical book turns out to be more important than we realized,” says Abigail J. Sellen of Microsoft Research Cambridge in England, who co-authored the 2001 book The Myth of the Paperless Office . “Only when you get an e-book do you start to miss it. I don't think e-book manufacturers have thought enough about how you might visualize where you are in a book.”

Exhaustive Reading At least a few studies suggest that screens sometimes impair comprehension precisely because they distort people's sense of place in a text. In a January 2013 study by Anne Mangen of the University of Stavanger in Norway and her colleagues, 72 10th grade students studied one narrative and one expository text. Half the students read on paper, and half read PDF files on computers. Afterward, students completed reading comprehension tests, during which they had access to the texts. Students who read the texts on computers performed a little worse, most likely because they had to scroll or click through the PDFs one section at a time, whereas students reading on paper held the entire texts in their hands and quickly switched between different pages. “The ease with which you can find out the beginning, end, and everything in between and the constant connection to your path, your progress in the text, might be some way of making it less taxing cognitively,” Mangen says. “You have more free capacity for comprehension.”

Other researchers agree that screen-based reading can dull comprehension because it is more mentally taxing and even physically tiring than reading on paper. E-ink reflects ambient light just like the ink on a paper book, but computer screens, smartphones and tablets shine light directly on people's faces. Today's LCDs are certainly gentler on eyes than their predecessor, cathode-ray tube (CRT) screens, but prolonged reading on glossy, self-illuminated screens can cause eyestrain, headaches and blurred vision. In an experiment by Erik Wästlund, then at Karlstad University in Sweden, people who took a reading comprehension test on a computer scored lower and reported higher levels of stress and tiredness than people who completed it on paper.

In a related set of Wästlund's experiments, 82 volunteers completed the same reading comprehension test on computers, either as a paginated document or as a continuous piece of text. Afterward, researchers assessed the students' attention and working memory—a collection of mental talents allowing people to temporarily store and manipulate information in their mind. Volunteers had to quickly close a series of pop-up windows, for example, or remember digits that flashed on a screen. Like many cognitive abilities, working memory is a finite resource that diminishes with exertion.

Although people in both groups performed equally well, those who had to scroll through the unbroken text did worse on the attention and working memory tests. Wästlund thinks that scrolling—which requires readers to consciously focus on both the text and how they are moving it—drains more mental resources than turning or clicking a page, which are simpler and more automatic gestures. The more attention is diverted to moving through a text, the less is available for understanding it. A 2004 study conducted at the University of Central Florida reached similar conclusions.

An emerging collection of studies emphasizes that in addition to screens possibly leeching more attention than paper, people do not always bring as much mental effort to screens in the first place. Based on a detailed 2005 survey of 113 people in northern California, Ziming Liu of San Jose State University concluded that those reading on screens take a lot of shortcuts—they spend more time browsing, scanning and hunting for keywords compared with people reading on paper and are more likely to read a document once and only once.

When reading on screens, individuals seem less inclined to engage in what psychologists call metacognitive learning regulation—setting specific goals, rereading difficult sections and checking how much one has understood along the way. In a 2011 experiment at the Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, college students took multiple-choice exams about expository texts either on computers or on paper. Researchers limited half the volunteers to a meager seven minutes of study time; the other half could review the text for as long as they liked. When under pressure to read quickly, students using computers and paper performed equally well. When managing their own study time, however, volunteers using paper scored about 10 percentage points higher. Presumably, students using paper approached the exam with a more studious attitude than their screen-reading peers and more effectively directed their attention and working memory.

Even when studies find few differences in reading comprehension between screens and paper, screen readers may not remember a text as thoroughly in the long run. In a 2003 study Kate Garland, then at the University of Leicester in England, and her team asked 50 British college students to read documents from an introductory economics course either on a computer monitor or in a spiral-bound booklet. After 20 minutes of reading, Garland and her colleagues quizzed the students. Participants scored equally well regardless of the medium but differed in how they remembered the information.

Psychologists distinguish between remembering something—a relatively weak form of memory in which someone recalls a piece of information, along with contextual details, such as where and when one learned it—and knowing something: a stronger form of memory defined as certainty that something is true. While taking the quiz, Garland's volunteers marked both their answer and whether they “remembered” or “knew” the answer. Students who had read study material on a screen relied much more on remembering than on knowing, whereas students who read on paper depended equally on the two forms of memory. Garland and her colleagues think that students who read on paper learned the study material more thoroughly more quickly; they did not have to spend a lot of time searching their mind for information from the text—they often just knew the answers.

Perhaps any discrepancies in reading comprehension between paper and screens will shrink as people's attitudes continue to change. Maybe the star of A Magazine Is an iPad That Does Not Work will grow up without the subtle bias against screens that seems to lurk among older generations. The latest research suggests, however, that substituting screens for paper at an early age has disadvantages that we should not write off so easily. A 2012 study at the Joan Ganz Cooney Center in New York City recruited 32 pairs of parents and three- to six-year-old children. Kids remembered more details from stories they read on paper than ones they read in e-books enhanced with interactive animations, videos and games. These bells and whistles deflected attention away from the narrative toward the device itself. In a follow-up survey of 1,226 parents, the majority reported that they and their children prefer print books over e-books when reading together.

Nearly identical results followed two studies, described this past September in Mind, Brain, and Education , by Julia Parrish-Morris, now at the University of Pennsylvania, and her colleagues. When reading paper books to their three- and five-year-old children, parents helpfully related the story to their child's life. But when reading a then popular electric console book with sound effects, parents frequently had to interrupt their usual “dialogic reading” to stop the child from fiddling with buttons and losing track of the narrative. Such distractions ultimately prevented the three-year-olds from understanding even the gist of the stories, but all the children followed the stories in paper books just fine.

Such preliminary research on early readers underscores a quality of paper that may be its greatest strength as a reading medium: its modesty. Admittedly, digital texts offer clear advantages in many different situations. When one is researching under deadline, the convenience of quickly accessing hundreds of keyword-searchable online documents vastly outweighs the benefits in comprehension and retention that come with dutifully locating and rifling through paper books one at a time in a library. And for people with poor vision, adjustable font size and the sharp contrast of an LCD screen are godsends. Yet paper, unlike screens, rarely calls attention to itself or shifts focus away from the text. Because of its simplicity, paper is “a still point, an anchor for the consciousness,” as William Powers writes in his 2006 essay “Hamlet's Blackberry: Why Paper Is Eternal.” People consistently report that when they really want to focus on a text, they read it on paper. In a 2011 survey of graduate students at National Taiwan University, the majority reported browsing a few paragraphs of an item online before printing out the whole text for more in-depth reading. And in a 2003 survey at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, nearly 80 percent of 687 students preferred to read text on paper rather than on a screen to “understand it with clarity.”

Beyond pragmatic considerations, the way we feel about a paper book or an e-reader—and the way it feels in our hands—also determines whether we buy a best-selling book in hardcover at a local bookstore or download it from Amazon. Surveys and consumer reports suggest that the sensory aspects of reading on paper matter to people more than one might assume: the feel of paper and ink; the option to smooth or fold a page with one's fingers; the distinctive sound a page makes when turned. So far digital texts have not satisfyingly replicated such sensations. Paper books also have an immediately discernible size, shape and weight. We might refer to a hardcover edition of Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace as a “hefty tome” or to a paperback of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness as a “slim volume.” In contrast, although a digital text has a length that may be represented with a scroll or progress bar, it has no obvious shape or thickness. An e-reader always weighs the same, regardless of whether you are reading Marcel Proust's magnum opus or one of Ernest Hemingway's short stories. Some researchers have found that these discrepancies create enough so-called haptic dissonance to dissuade some people from using e-readers.

To amend this sensory incongruity, many designers have worked hard to make the e-reader or tablet experience as close to reading on paper as possible. E-ink resembles typical chemical ink, and the simple layout of the Kindle's screen looks remarkably like a page in a paper book. Likewise, Apple's iBooks app attempts to simulate somewhat realistic page turning. So far such gestures have been more aesthetic than pragmatic. E-books still prevent people from quickly scanning ahead on a whim or easily flipping to a previous chapter when a sentence surfaces a memory of something they read earlier.

Some digital innovators are not confining themselves to imitations of paper books. Instead they are evolving screen-based reading into something else entirely. Scrolling may not be the ideal way to navigate a text as long and dense as Herman Melville's Moby Dick , but the New York Times , the Washington Post , ESPN and other media outlets have created beautiful, highly visual articles that could not appear in print because they blend text with movies and embedded sound clips and depend entirely on scrolling to create a cinematic experience. Robin Sloan has pioneered the tap essay, which relies on physical interaction to set the pace and tone, unveiling new words, sentences and images only when someone taps a phone or a tablet's touch screen. And some writers are pairing up with computer programmers to produce ever more sophisticated interactive fiction and nonfiction in which one's choices determine what one reads, hears and sees next.

When it comes to intensively reading long pieces of unembellished text, paper and ink may still have the advantage. But plain text is not the only way to read.

Ferris Jabr is a contributing writer for Scientific American . He has also written for the New York Times Magazine , the New Yorker and Outside .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Positive Effects of Digital Technology Use by Adolescents: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Aaron haddock.

1 Frances L. Hiatt School of Psychology, Mosakowski Institute for Public Enterprise, Clark University, Worcester, MA 01610, USA

2 School of Education, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521, USA

Nicole O’Dea

Associated data.

The data presented in the study is available upon request from the first author.

This study examines the research literature published from 2012 to 2022 on the relationship between increases in adolescent consumption of digital technologies and its impact on multiple areas of development, with a focus on how adolescent immersion in an increasingly ubiquitous digital world engenders positive outcomes in terms of brain, cognitive, and social-emotional development. The literature search yielded 131 articles, 53 of which were empirical studies of the relationship between increases in consumption of digital technology and brain development, cognitive development, or social-emotional development among adolescents. Overall, these studies identify positive outcomes for adolescents who use different types of digital tech, including the internet, social media, and video games.

1. Introduction

Today’s youth are growing up in a world in which digital technology is ubiquitous and integrated into nearly every aspect of life. Basic human activities, including those related to education, socialization, and recreation, increasingly take place on digital platforms which have spawned new modes of engagement (e.g., socialization via social media, recreation, and learning via video gameplay). According to a recent research report based on a nationally representative survey among a random sample of tweens (8- to 12-year-olds) and teens (13- to 18-year-olds) in the United States, digital media use among teens, which varies across multiple demographic variables (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, and household income), is on the rise, up nearly 17 percent since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 1 ]. It is estimated that, on average, adolescents today spend roughly eight and a half hours a day engaged with digital media, not including their use of digital technology for schoolwork [ 1 ]. The largest increases in digital media use have been in watching online videos, using social media, and browsing websites. Of these activities, both tweens (8- to 12-year-olds) and teens (13- to 18-year-olds) report that watching videos on YouTube is their favorite form of digital media activity, followed in order of preference by Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, Discord, Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Reddit, and Tumblr [ 1 ]. On average, teens spend close to an hour and a half a day on social media [ 1 ]. Around a quarter of teens play video games on a console or computer daily, but nearly half report playing mobile games daily [ 1 ]. In terms of time spent, teens spend the most time watching videos, followed by gaming on various platforms, social media, and browsing websites. In terms of gender differences, boys use more screen media than girls and enjoy video games more; girls enjoy social media more than boys do. In a nationally representative sample of 743 teens in the United States, 97 percent of boys said they play video games compared to 83 percent of girls [ 2 ]. About 20 percent of teens regularly listen to podcasts. In the 21st century, digital engagement via various technological devices, platforms, and tools has become necessary for youth to accomplish key developmental tasks.

The saturation of the environment with digital media has prompted adjustments to established theoretical paradigms and birthed the field of media ecology, which examines how interactions with technology in the media environment shape, affect, facilitate, and impede human development. Importantly for this review, media ecology looks specifically at the impact on adolescent development when key developmental activities and interactions are mediated by digital technologies [ 3 , 4 ]. To accomplish this, media ecology draws on research in developmental psychology and Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model of human development, a foundational paradigm for the fields of developmental psychology, applied psychology, pediatrics and childhood studies [ 5 , 6 ].

The bioecological model of human development views individuals as biosocial beings placed at the center of nested systems that reciprocally interact to inform developmental outcomes [ 6 , 7 ]. At the core of this theory is the focus on proximal processes, or the reciprocal interactions between the developing individual and persons, objects or symbols within the immediate ecological context [ 8 , 9 ]. Human development is thus characterized as a product of the transactional relationship between the developing individual as an active agent and drivers of development across ecological contexts [ 10 ]. Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model consists of five nested systems. The microsystem is the immediate environment in which the youth lives and includes any immediate relationships or organizations they interact with (i.e., caregivers, other immediate family members, school, or other places of care). Surrounding the microsystem is the mesosystem, which is essentially the different parts of the microsystem working together for the sake of the youth. For example, the mesosystem captures the interrelationships between the technologies youth engage with across home and school contexts. The exosystem includes other individuals and places that youth may not interact with directly but still influence development, including caregivers’ workplaces, extended family members, and the larger community context. Further, the macrosystem or outermost system of this model embodies sociocultural factors and ideologies that inform the ways in which youth development is supported across contexts [ 10 ]. This might include perceptions of tech engagement and misconceptions about influence that in turn dictate the extent to which youth engage with tech in the first place. Finally, the outermost system, or the chronosystem, captures the historical development of each system and the developing youth over time. This system is particularly important to consider given the historical advances in tech and the shifting discourse on digital tech effects on youth development.

Scholars are now updating the original bio-ecological framework to reflect how digital technology’s deep impingement into the microsystem and mesosystem impacts human development [ 11 , 12 ]. For example, Johnson and Puplampu [ 13 ] introduced the concept of the ecological techno-subsystem (see Figure 1 ). As a feature of the microsystem, this subsystem accounts for different types of technology and the interactions they support between the developing individual and others in their system (i.e., family, peers, teachers). This theoretical shift utilizes an ecological perspective to hone in on youth development while drawing from media ecology [ 14 ]. Media ecology focuses on the ways in which all types of media shape the psychosocial characteristics of individuals, recognizing the environment that media technologies provide for interaction and identity development [ 12 , 14 ]. Like the intent of this scoping review, a major question stemming from media ecology is how and why various forms of digital engagement facilitate or impede processes of development and in turn, developmental outcomes. Focusing on media ecology as part of the innermost nested subsystem of influence, the role of technology use in development becomes a critical element of consideration that warrants holistic exploration [ 12 ].

Ecological Techno-Subsystem.

As a generation known as “digital natives”, [ 12 , 15 ] youth have choice and control in the type and frequency of which they engage with technology across ecological contexts that is unparalleled. The need to account for an additional zone that “mediates [the] bidirectional interaction between the child and the microsystem” in the most immediate developmental context underscores the profound influence of digital technology on child development in the 21st century.

The Current Study

There is a growing body of research literature that identifies positive outcomes for youth who use different types of digital technologies, including the internet, social media, and video games. This study provides a scoping review of the extant literature examining adolescent consumption of digital technology and its impact on brain, cognitive, and social-emotional development, with a particular focus on how their immersion in an increasingly ubiquitous digital world engenders positive outcomes across these outcomes of interest.

2. Materials and Methods

In keeping with the research literature on digital engagement and media effects, this literature review employs the concept of digital media as a superordinate term that encompasses the broad category of types of digital technologies, applications, devices, platforms, and tools. Information and communication technologies (ICT) is another term frequently found in the literature that is synonymous with digital media. Similarly, Crone and Konijn [ 16 ] simply use the term media to describe the “media-saturated world, where media is used not only for entertainment purposes, such as listening to music or watching movies, but is also used increasingly for communicating with peers via WhatsApp, Instagram, SnapChat, Facebook, etc”. (p. 1).

This literature review employs the term digital engagement to capture youth’s “quotidian digital and online activity” and “the digital world”. Like digital media, digital engagement is “a broad concept of digital participation, which is not dependent on a specific technological device, platform, or tool” [ 17 ] (p. 102). An important aspect of adolescents’ and young adults’ digital engagement is captured by the concept of socio-digital participation (SDP) [ 18 ], which refers to participation in socio-digital activities via socio-digital technologies, defined as “the integrated systems of novel technological tools, social media, and the internet that enable constant and intensive online interaction with information, people, and artifacts” [ 19 ] (p. 16). Importantly, social-digital engagement is conceptualized as a participatory social practice reflective of adolescents’ lived experiences—and not merely acts of technology usage [ 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Typically, adolescents’ digital engagement activities are friendship-driven, interest-driven, or a combination of these digital engagement practices [ 21 ].

Search Strategies

PRISMA is an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. In alignment with the PRISMA guidelines [ 22 ], the authors conducted a scoping review to source all literature with relevance to technology engagement and youth development. Articles were identified for possible inclusion from five relevant databases PsycINFO, PubMed, Google Scholar, PLoS, and PsychARTICLES; additional searches were conducted using Academic Search Premier, a large database that includes 8500 journals that cut across a range of scientific disciplines. Search terms included: Adolescen*, brain development, cognitive development, college and career readiness, communication skills, digital media, digital technolog*, learning, neuroplasticity, social development, social emotional, technology, youth. All searches included one search term related to technology (i.e., digital technolog*, digital media, technology) and a term related to a developmental outcome of interest (e.g., brain development, cognitive development). Terms were combined using AND when searches were intended to be inclusive of all terms (i.e., adolescen* AND digital technolog* AND cognitive development), while terms that can be interchanged were combined using OR (e.g., adolescen* OR youth). Results were limited to articles that were peer- reviewed and published between 2012–2022.

The authors conducted an initial screening of all identified articles using the following inclusion criteria: (a) empirical study or review of the literature, (b) examines the effects of the use of digital technologies (i.e., internet, social media, video games) on at least one developmental domain of interest (i.e., brain development, cognitive development, social-emotional development, mental health/well-being). The initial search yielded 131 articles, of which 73 were excluded due to the criteria described above (see Figure 2 ). Fifty-three articles were fully reviewed between three of the authors. Inclusion decisions were made using a consensus approach where each article was discussed between at least three authors in a group format and then determined by the group to be included or not. Table 1 provides a summative overview of the selected articles organized by developmental domains of interest.

PRISMA Flow Diagram for Scoping Review.

Overview of Selected Articles.

4. Findings

The discourse on the impact of digital media on youth is an extension of an age-old cultural concern and debate over the impact of new forms of technology on youth [ 23 ]. As Orben [ 24 ] has traced, concern and, at times even panic, over the influence of technology on youth has a long history. For example, in the Phaedrus, written circa 370 BCE, Plato recorded Socrates’ concern that the invention of writing and reading would ruin young people’s ability to use their memory and make them seem well educated and wise when in fact they were ignorant and unwise. In more recent centuries, tech fears have ranged from the novel giving rise to reading addiction, reading mania, and risky, immoral behavior in the 18th century to concerns about the negative influence of radio, television, smartphones, video games, and social media in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Although research on media effects has established that youth’s engagement with digital media can drive both positive and negative outcomes [ 3 , 25 , 26 ], the public perspective has focused more on its potential harm than benefits. Despite the focus on the negative impacts of technology on child development, the evidence linking digital engagement and negative outcomes is frequently overstated, focused on extreme users, and supported by studies lacking requisite nuance and complexity to discern specific effects [ 27 , 28 ]. Since the literature is largely based on correlational self-report data instead of sophisticated experimental designs, the direction of effects between digital media use and negative outcomes remains unclear [ 29 , 30 ]. When factors such as the type and quality of digital engagement, the social and developmental context, age, and individual differences are taken into consideration, digital engagement can function as a resource or a demand [ 31 ]. While it is a commonly held belief that digital engagement displaces important alternate activities, like sleep, interacting with friends and family, reading, and physical activity, the extant research has not substantiated this concern [ 27 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. Conversely, the empirical evidence indicates that digital media facilitates peer communication, connection, and closeness (e.g., Davis [ 35 ]) and that engagement with tech at moderate levels is likely not deleterious [ 26 , 36 , 37 ] and may be promotive in a digital world (e.g., Giovanelli et al. [ 38 ]). For example, Lenhart et al. [ 39 ] found that social media use and collaborative gaming can facilitate friendships, social engagement, positive peer relations, and the provision of social support.

Digital media use is, according to Giedd [ 23 ], “in fact exquisitely aligned with the biology of the teen brain and our evolutionary heritage” (p. 128). Grounded in research on the neurobiological changes occurring during adolescence, Giedd clarifies how teens’ digital engagement is driven by changes in the brain’s reward system during puberty (dopamine, serotonin, GABA), teens’ efforts to accomplish key developmental tasks (e.g., Borca et al. [ 40 ]), and core features of the developing brain. fMRI studies on the adolescent brain demonstrate that, during adolescence, forming social connections becomes particularly salient and highly rewarding, which is reflected in their sensitized socio-affective brain circuits (Somerville, 2013). Given humans’ evolutionary history and the importance of strong connections with others, teens experience an existential drive for human connection, acceptance, and identification with groups (e.g., Crone & Dahl [ 41 ]; Blakemore & Mills [ 42 ]). Similarly, our evolutionary psychology predisposes humans to explore the environment, seek out adventure, and master threats—especially during the adolescent years when all social mammals exhibit increases in sensation seeking and risk taking. Adolescents also find experiences that enhance their affective development, or their emotional capacity to experience, recognize, and express a range of emotions and respond to others’ emotional cues, particularly reinforcing [ 41 ]. Developing the skills and aptitudes needed to transition to adulthood is highly motivating and rewarding for teens; whether these experiences take place in environments that are real or simulated matters little to the teen mind (e.g., Przybylski et al. [ 43 ]). Teens also exhibit a strong desire for information driven by evolutionary survival pressures and the human brain’s need for massive amounts of data from the environment for maturation (i.e., brain plasticity) and improved decision making. Thus, when it comes to digital technologies, what adolescents seek and find especially rewarding are opportunities to (1) face and overcome challenges, (2) connect and identify with a group, (3) grow emotionally, and (4) gain immediate access to actionable information.

4.1. Digital Tech & the Brain

While the research linking technology use and changes in the brain is still in its infancy, studies are emerging that indicate that digital engagement may positively (and negatively) influence human brains and behavior. For instance, studies utilizing brain imaging techniques have documented how intensive digital engagement can lead to changes in the brains of children and adolescents and affect brain functions, such as cognition, language, and visual perception (e.g., Firth et al. [ 44 ]; Hutton et al. [ 45 ]; Winnick & Zolna [ 46 ]).

4.1.1. Video Games

Several studies have examined the connection between playing video games and brain structure using structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI). In one such study involving 152 adolescent participants in Germany, Kühn et al. [ 47 ] found a positive association between the reported amount of time spent playing video games (of any type) and cortical thickness in the prefrontal areas of the left hemisphere (i.e., dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and frontal eye field). They concluded that the thickness of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was related to executive control and the thickness of the front eye field was related visual-spatial attention and visual-motor integration.

Additionally, some studies have employed functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine the connection between playing video games and brain activity. For example, Mosaila et al. [ 48 ] used fMRI scans to compare the performance of 167 adolescents and young adults in Finland, who varied in terms of how frequently they played video games, on a task with selective attention and working memory demands. Results showed that those who reported playing video games more frequently displayed enhanced working memory functioning and task-difficulty-dependent modulation in a network of frontal and parietal brain areas in both hemispheres.

4.1.2. Social Media/Internet

Studies have also documented specific brain regions engaged to build and maintain online social networks that are different from those used for offline social networks along with changes in the cortical volume of the brain stemming from engagement with peers via social media. Kanai et al. [ 49 ] found that, among participants in England, variation in online social network size strongly predicted gray matter volume and density in particular regions of the brain associated with social cognition, including navigating social networks and maintaining positive peer relationships, but not areas associated with understanding others’ actions, intentions, and perspectives. Kanai et al. [ 49 ] also found that online social network size was associated with areas of the brain responsible for remembering name-face associations. While this study was unable to determine the direction of the relationship between brain structure and participation in online social networks and whether friendships drive observed brain changes, scholars have pointed to these findings as evidence of adolescents’ and emerging adults’ sensitivity to the interpersonal dynamics involved when engaging with peers on social media.

4.2. Digital Tech & Cognitive Development

Cognitive development is best defined as the processes through which individuals acquire and organize new information or knowledge in order to apply it to novel situations [ 50 ]. Youth cognitive development is a salient domain when considering technology engagement. Often, engaging with technology like video games involves developing and sustaining problem-solving skills [ 51 ] and honing in on skills that enhance spatial recognition [ 52 ]. Below, we summarize findings that emphasize a positive relationship between tech engagement and both problem- solving and spatial skill development.

4.2.1. Social Media/Internet

Fitton and colleagues [ 53 ] examined the relationship between internet use and cognitive and psychosocial development among a cohort of adolescents in the United States (N = 128). Authors conducted semi-structured interviews to gather insight on youths’ use of technology, level of comfort engaging with it, and how they feel it influences their own development. Overall, technology was perceived by youth as an integral part of their daily lives and a positive influence on their development. Specifically, they emphasized noticeable increases in skills and competencies related to recognizing information that they need and finding it on their own. With that, they recognized enhanced abilities in acquiring knowledge and creative thinking.

4.2.2. Video Games

Uttal and colleagues [ 52 ] conducted a meta-analysis of studies that focused on trainings that aimed to improve spatial skills. Spatial skills of interest included: (1) spatial perception, or the ability to determine spatial relationships in relation to an individual’s own location even with distraction; (2) mental rotation, or the ability to visualize the movement of an object without any physical movement in order to make judgements; and (3): spatial visualization, or the ability to carry out a series of manipulations of stimuli that is spatially present [ 52 ]. Upon close examination of 217 studies involving diverse youth, authors concluded playing video games can be an effective training intervention to enhance spatial skills, where video game players across studies performed significantly better in tasks that require spatial attention and skill. Authors note, however, that the effectiveness of video game play as a spatial training intervention is based on personal characteristics, type of video game, and the duration and frequency of training sessions.

Kühn and colleagues [ 47 ] took a closer look at spatial skills by conducting a randomized comparative effectiveness trial with a sample of young adults in Germany (N = 48). The intervention arm, or video game training group, received instructions to complete various spatial tasks whereas the control group was instructed to freely explore during play. The training group engaged in video game training for at least 30 min a day for a span of two months using Super Mario 64, a widely known platformer game. Brain scans were conducted for both groups after the two- month training period. Results demonstrated significant differences between groups in brain imaging, showing an increase in gray matter in areas of the brain that are important for spatial navigation, strategic planning, and working memory. Overall, results supported the notion that video game training can be used to augment gray matter in the brain that are responsible for cognitive abilities.

4.3. Digital Tech & Social-Emotional Development

Social-emotional development is characterized by learning how to understand, manage, and express emotions in the context of learning about and building relationships with others [ 54 ]. Engaging with technology often involves a social context. Building on the social-emotional development literature, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) [ 55 ] has provided the most widely utilized definition of social and emotional learning (SEL): “SEL is the process through which all young people and adults acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions”. Studies outlined below emphasize aspects of social-emotional development that are enhanced by tech engagement. For a research-based review of potential ways technology can be leveraged to support SEL (see Slovák & Fitzpatrick [ 56 ]).

4.3.1. Digital Media

Przybylski and Weinstein [ 26 ] studied links between digital screen time (i.e., video games, computers, smartphones, films and other media) and mental well-being (i.e., happiness, life satisfaction, psychological functioning, and social functioning) in a sample of 120,115 15-year-olds in the United Kingdom. Female participants reported more engagement with smartphones, computers, and the internet, whereas male participants reported significantly more engagement with video games. Results indicated that moderate digital engagement (e.g., on a weekday, spending less than 1 h and 40 min playing video games or less than 1 h and 57 min using a smartphone) across device types is positively associated with mental well-being and does not appear to displace other activities that foster mental well-being. As the authors conclude, the study results suggest that, when used in moderation, digital technologies may “afford measurable advantages to adolescents” (p. 213), including providing opportunities for communication, creativity, and development.

It should be noted that the relationship between digital engagement and well-being among adolescents is still unclear and appears to vary by individual differences and the quantity and quality of digital media use. Studies have documented a variety of associations, including small, negative associations [ 28 , 57 , 58 ], no association [ 59 ], positive associations [ 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 ], and mixed results [ 64 , 65 , 66 ].

4.3.2. Social Media/Internet

Studies have documented how adolescents’ social media use enhance social development and enhance relationships and social connections. For example, Reid et al. [ 67 ] found that social media platforms facilitate teens’ access to and interactions with others different from themselves, which increases understanding and empathy. In a study of 200 adolescents and emerging adults in Israel, Ziv and Kiasi [ 68 ] found that Facebook use provided users with a positive community that supported their psychological well-being; these effects were particularly pronounced for users with lower social skills who may have struggled more with in-person interactions. In a quantitative 7-day diary study of 162 adolescent Facebook users in Germany, Wenninger et al. [ 63 ] documented the positive association between targeted communication activities on social media that evoke reciprocity, like chatting and exchanging feedback via comments and likes, and positive emotions. As previously noted, this is in part because the adolescent brain is particularly sensitive to forming and maintaining social connections and developing an identity in relation to others.

4.3.3. Video Games

Przybylski [ 69 ] examined the relationship between video game engagement and psychosocial adjustment (i.e., prosocial behavior, life satisfaction, and internalizing and externalizing problems) in a sample of 4899 10–15-year-olds from England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Analyses found small (<1.6% of variance) yet statistically significant positive associations between low levels of video game play and psychosocial adjustment. When compared to non-video game players, light video game play (i.e., less than one hour per day) was associated with positive psychosocial adjustment, including higher life satisfaction and prosocial behavior and lower levels of problems with peers, conduct problems, and emotional symptoms. No significant differences were detected for moderate levels of video game engagement (i.e., 1–3 h per day) when compared with nonplaying peers. However, heavy video game play (over 3 h daily) was associated with more negative psychosocial adjustment—indicating a possible dosage effect. Results suggest that playing video games responsibly provides youth with opportunities for socialization, identity development, and cognitive challenges that are facilitative of social-emotional development in a manner similar to more traditional forms of play.

In 2017, Adachi and Willoughby [ 70 ] reviewed the literature on the link between playing video games and positive youth outcomes, such as well-being, intrinsic motivation, learning, optimal functioning, and positive peer relationships. The review focuses on studies that apply self-determination theory (SDT) to explain how video games may create contexts that satisfy basic psychological needs (i.e., competence, autonomy, and relatedness) and, in turn, effectuate positive outcomes. Citing numerous studies published between 2000 and 2016, the authors argue convincingly that playing video games afford experiences of independence, interdependence, cooperation, exploration, and challenge that in turn foster enhanced autonomy, competence, human relatedness, and well-being. The review also establishes a link between playing video games and developing problem-solving skills (e.g., identify the problem, generate and evaluate possible solutions) that hold the potential to not only improve adolescents’ game play but also their peer relationships. This link is further buttressed by research on how playing online video games cooperatively with diverse youth enhances intergroup relations and feelings of social connection.

EmoTIC is an example of a game-based social-emotional program with demonstrated impact on adolescent social and emotional development [ 71 ]. The intervention has a science-fiction theme and is delivered via a digital app. Users participate in four classroom group sessions and complete twelve individual home activities focused on acquiring foundational SEL concepts (e.g., emotional skills, social skills, enhancing self-knowledge and self-esteem, and assessing growth. Results showed that adolescents in Madrid, Spain between the ages of 11 and 15 ( n = 119) who completed the program improved on several measures, including self-esteem, feelings of well-being, emotion regulation, and prosocial behavior.

4.4. Digital Tech & Mental Health/Well-Being

Youth mental health and well-being is an all-encompassing term that represents a balance of emotional, psychological, and social wellness [ 72 ]. It involves the ways in which youth handle stress, practice healthy habits, and maintain social engagement. Mental health and well-being are particularly important for youth as they are at the cusp of developmental milestones that heavily rely on mental, social, and emotional wellness.

4.4.1. Video Games

Video games possess the unique ability to enable adolescents to experiment with and “try on” different identities and experiences not available in their current life situation or developmental phase. In a study of emerging adults (nationality not provided) by Przybylski et al. [ 43 ], researchers found that when games facilitated alignment between players’ ideal-self characteristics and game-self characteristics, players experienced higher levels of intrinsic motivation and well-being. These results suggest that digital engagement experiences that enable adolescents and young adults to simulate and experience ideal aspects of themselves (e.g., helping others, graduating from college, having a desirable career) may enhance motivation to engage in the experience while offering virtual exposure experiences that promote self-exploration and goal identification and adoption.

Barr & Copeland-Stewart [ 73 ] examined video game play and youths’ overall well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using an online survey with closed and open-ended questions, authors measured game play habits and aspects of mental health and well-being among a large sample of youth (N = 781) during the pandemic. Results indicated that youth engaged in more frequent game play for longer segments of time, describing their extended engagement as an “escape from the pandemic”. This finding correlated with increased socialization during the lockdown advisory and decreased anxiety and depression. Further, respondents reported feeling as though engaging in video game play provided more feelings of control and agency during a particularly challenging time. Overall, this article emphasizes that video game play can provide support and relief that contributes to improved mental, social, and emotional wellness.

4.4.2. Social Media/Internet

Multiple studies have demonstrated that most people use social media to support, maintain, and enhance offline social relationships [ 74 , 75 , 76 ]. For instance, in a nationally representative survey of teens in the United States (743 youth between the ages of 13 and 17) by the Pew Research Center, 31 percent of teens said that social media has had a mostly positive impact, especially when it comes to connecting and staying in touch with friends and family [ 2 , 77 ]. Respondents also emphasized how their use of social media enabled them to meet and connect with others with similar interests, explore their identity and express themselves, garner peer support, and learn new things. Eighty one percent said social media makes them feel more connected to their friends; 69 percent said it helps them interact with a more diverse group of people; and 68 percent said it makes them feel as if they have people who will support them through tough times. Overall, teens associated social media use with positive emotions, including feelings of inclusion and confidence [ 2 ].

Kanai et al. [ 49 ] found that variability in the size of users’ offline social networks was correlated with variability in the size of users’ online networks. Building on this finding, Davis [ 61 ] examined the impact of digital media use and online peer communication on friendship quality in 2079 adolescents in Bermuda. Analyses revealed a positive association between more frequent online communications with friends and friendship quality. In discussing the findings, Davis noted that studies support the view that, despite the negative public perception, the existing evidence suggests that online peer communication is largely positive and serves to enhance peer relationships.

In a systematic review of the literature, which included large numbers of adolescents and emerging adults, Erfani and Abedin [ 78 ] found social media use led to increased well-being and had positive effects on users’ social support, communication, and connectedness. Meta-analyses have also found that connecting with others via social media enhances both social support and users’ perceived social resources [ 79 , 80 ].

There are some potential limitations concerning the results of this study. It is possible that the search terms used were not inclusive of all possible variants and the databases searched were not inclusive of all relevant journals, thus resulting in the exclusion of relevant studies. However, it is important to note that scoping reviews are not intended to be exhaustive [ 81 ]. In addition, it is possible that the synthesis literature included in this review suffers from the prevalent issue of non-independence of observations (i.e., overlap among primary-level studies). However, non-independence “may be fairly minimal” in reviews that draw from a broader body of literature that includes sources representing many different disciplines [ 82 ].

4.5. Conclusions

In sum, this scoping review of the empirical research literature on the relationship between digital engagement and positive youth development found evidence of specific positive effects on adolescent brain development, cognitive development, social-emotional development, and mental health and well-being. These included improvements in executive control, visual-spatial attention, visual motor integration, problem solving, working memory, strategic planning, and information gathering; increases in social-emotional learning, intrinsic motivation, socialization, social support, social connection, and creativity; and enhancements to autonomy, competence, communication skills, and well-being.

4.6. Recommendations for Leveraging Digital Tech Use to Promote Positive Outcomes for Adolescents

Given the documented impact of digital engagement on adolescent development, tech-based interventions demonstrate promising potential across domains of youth development. There is clearly a unique opportunity to leverage technology in a manner that will positively engage teens and intervene with them to help them learn about themselves, advocate for themselves, and explore careers. However, as evidenced by the scoping review, there is a limited number of articles that focus primarily on positive outcomes. The following recommendations are based on the findings of the scoping review, behavior change design principles, and insights from startup product development.

4.6.1. Employ an Intervention Design Process

When developing tech-based interventions, begin by carefully defining the problem to be solved, the outcomes of interest, the target users, and the target users’ relevant contexts. Then, explore a variety of potential solutions. When exploring solutions, consider (a) possible intervention designs and (b) possible tech-based delivery methods. The findings of this literature review are particularly pertinent to this phase of the design process and will help clarify which types of solutions are likely to be most effective. This can be visually represented in an outcome logic map or logic model. Program evaluators employ logic models to define the specific outcomes an intervention is intended to achieve, the activities (i.e., mechanisms of action) that will facilitate achievement of the targeted outcomes, and how the intervention’s results will be measured. When applied to tech-enabled interventions, it is especially important to clarify how the intervention will be implemented and used.

Employ a customer discovery approach to determine how best to meet potential users’ needs [ 83 ]. Interview target users to understand their perspective, motivations, priorities, values, goals, and identities. Explore their reasons for engaging with the intervention being developed. Ask them what tech product features and intervention components they think will help them achieve the target outcomes (e.g., increased self-knowledge, career exploration). If the intervention aims to change behavior, consider using the Behavior Change Wheel as a product design framework. Based on in-depth research on 19 behavior change frameworks, the Behavior Change Wheel helps product designers identify solutions that enhance users’ capability, opportunity, and motivation to change or engage in a particular behavior. See Michie, Atkins, & West’s practical guide to intervention design, The Behaviour Change Wheel: A Guide to Designing Interventions [ 84 ] and Bucher’s Engaged: Designing for Behavior Change [ 85 ].

4.6.2. Convene a Youth Advisory Board

If teens are the target users, engage teens at every phase of the design process to create a teen-centric intervention that connects their motivations with the target outcomes. Convene a diverse and inclusive teen advisory board to get their perspectives and solicit their guidance on what teens need, want, and will use. Once a beta version of the intervention is ready, relentlessly collect feedback from teens on what works and what needs to be changed.

Have the teen advisory board work closely with subject matter experts and technologists to ensure the interventions and experiences integrate into their lives and use language they will respond to. Like other popular forms of digital engagement, interventions will work best if they meet youth where they are at in familiar and fun ways.

Highlight teens involvement with the creation of the intervention and provide opportunities for teens to promote it.

4.6.3. Create Authentic and Engaging Digital Experiences

Youth are particularly sensitive and responsive to authentic social media messaging. Social media campaigns and initiatives will be most effective if developed and deployed by youth with the support of subject matter experts. Rallying authentic youth engagement (e.g., “likes”, “retweets”, etc.) and promotion of the campaign or message is key. For example, a social media campaign aimed at inspiring youth to consider pursuing a technical career as a possible alternative to college could begin by convening a teen advisory board charged with discovering, for example, teens’ questions about the decision to pursue a technical career. The youth advisory board’s process of gathering this information (e.g., through social media queries, focus groups, surveys, interviews, etc.) could be shared in creative social media posts, videos, and photos and serve to promote the campaign and create a community around the initiative online. This will build trust and buy-in.

Digital interventions that leverage social media should take into consideration the social norms of the platform. There is evidence to suggest that teens are increasingly reluctant to explore, experiment with, and express their identity or emerging identities on mainstream social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram, but continue to do so on YouTube and fanfiction sites and in microblogging communities [ 86 ]. Therefore, interventions that aim to facilitate identity exploration and development in the service of greater self-awareness and self-knowledge should keep this in mind and create online spaces where teens feel understood, experience camaraderie, and can be genuine and engage in authentic self-exploration [ 61 , 87 ]. Ideally, an online social network will engender positive growth, provide teens with social support, and connect them with the peers, experts, and professionals that will help them achieve their goals and the intervention’s target outcomes.

Tech-based interventions to facilitate self-knowledge, self-awareness, and identity development should provide youth with opportunities to explore different identities, including idealized versions of themselves, and contexts that are not currently accessible. For instance, a video game or virtual reality experience could enable users to try out different careers in a variety of roles (e.g., programmer, team leader, copywriter, marketing director). An app could help teens imagine their future self in college or a career coupled with an opportunity to set short- and long-term goals and create a detailed action plan aligned with their values. The app-based action plan could guide and support users as they take concrete steps toward their goals, offer timely tips and encouraging feedback, and celebrate and reward users when they reach important milestones on their journey.

If the digital intervention leverages a social component, provide users with choice. The research is clear that online social support can be beneficial for teens; however, not all users want to engage in a social aspect or have their activities be made public. Nevertheless, provide all users with the option to witness the social engagement of others, even if they do not participate. Research has shown that witnessing the online social engagement of others can be nearly as beneficial as active participation [ 85 ].

4.6.4. Leverage the Best Features and Most Popular Forms of Digital Engagement

Teens range freely across digital media platforms and tools. Design tech-enabled interventions that leverage the best features of gaming, social media, online videos, streaming, and digital content creation devices. Take teens’ favorite forms of digital media activity into consideration; among teens in the U.S., research indicates watching videos on YouTube is their favorite form of digital media activity, followed in order of preference by Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, Discord, Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Reddit, and Tumblr [ 1 ].

Leverage technological innovations to support SEL. For example, use mobile devices to provide youth with just-in-time prompts (e.g., to label emotions and practice emotion regulation skills when high levels of stress are detected by physiological sensors), reminders (e.g., to engage in activities that promote well-being or facilitate social connection), and scaffolding and support (e.g., how to use problem solving skills; prompts to track experiences to facilitate self-reflection and/or discussions at a later time). Use social media sites to support reflection, sharing of experiences, and social-emotional self-awareness. Online social networks can also be used for online support groups that provide, for instance, information on and support around college and career exploration or mental health. Natural language understanding technology is already being used by mental health professionals to monitor therapy sessions and glean evidence-based insights; a similar approach could be applied in everyday life to foster social-emotional development and communication skills.

While virtual reality’s (VR) ability to create powerfully immersive experiences continues to hold incredible promise for SEL, skill building, and mental health promotion and treatment [ 88 ], currently less than 20 percent of youth have access to VR headsets [ 1 ].

4.6.5. Use Video Games to Build Community, Provide Exposure Experiences, Explore Identity, and Enhance Perspective Taking

Video game play among youth is particularly high and thus provides a unique opportunity to engage their interests in a way that promotes development and engages them within the community. Offering opportunities for youth to engage in game play within the community, for example, in-person or virtual tournaments, provides youth with a platform that not only supports their cognitive development and psychosocial wellness, but also maintains social connection during the extended pandemic period. There is also evidence to suggest that interactive media experiences can facilitate perspective taking, communication skills, and collaboration.

When designing video game-based interventions, provide the player with enough challenge to make the game engaging, but not so challenging that the player feels the task is insurmountable. Game-based interventions that provide players with novel opportunities to embody and experience ideal aspects of themselves (i.e., how they would like to experience themselves) will enhance intrinsic motivation to play the game along with enjoyment [ 43 ].

4.6.6. Understand the Environment in Which Digital Interventions Are Implemented

Considering how technology now mediates interactions between the developing individual and others in their microsystem (i.e., family, peers, teachers), when designing tech-based interventions it is important to consider the role it will play in teens’ techno-subsystem. For example, how will this intervention integrate with what teens are already doing in their daily lives? How may the reciprocal interactions with other important individuals in the teens’ microsystem facilitate or impede intervention effectiveness? How might influential peers, parents, and mentors be recruited to support and amplify the aims of an intervention? Tech-based interventions that easily integrate with existing influential relationships in the youth’s microsystem will be most engaging and effective.

In light of changes in the brain occurring during adolescence, the most naturally engaging and effective digital interventions will: (a) be fun, engaging, and social; (b) foster emotional growth; (c) give teens agency over their education; (d) enable identity exploration and experimentation; (e) engage other influential people in teens’ developmental context; (f) help teens draw connections between their core values, priorities, and short- and long-term goals, (g) empower exploration and mastery of their environment; (h) facilitate achievement of key developmental tasks; and (i) provide immediate access to actionable information.

Funding Statement

This research was funded by American Student Assistance (ASA).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.H., N.W., R.Y. and N.O.; methodology, A.H., N.W., R.Y. and N.O.; formal analysis, A.H., R.Y. and N.O.; investigation, A.H., N.W., R.Y. and N.O.; writing—original draft preparation, A.H., N.W., R.Y. and N.O.; writing—review and editing, A.H., N.W., R.Y. and N.O.; visualization, R.Y. and N.O.; supervision, A.H. and N.W.; project administration, A.H. and N.W.; funding acquisition, N.W. and A.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Contact Sales Team
• Partner Portals

The Value of Writing in the Digital Age

Download Article

There’s something magical about putting pen to paper. Writing seems to spark connections, creativity and collaboration in a way that, even in the midst of the technology revolution, typing on digital devices doesn’t touch. Maybe that’s because research shows writing in the digital age  improves learning retention ,  can improve our mood  and engages networks in our brains, such as the  Reticular Activating System (RAS)  which filters information and directs attention, that typing doesn’t.

Regardless of the reason, in a world saturated by smartphones, tablets and laptops, notebook sales are on the rise. A favorite among many, the Milan-based notebook producer Moleskine saw a  double digit increase in sales  in 2016. This begs the question, in the age of digital, why are writing surfaces still so valuable?

PolyVision talked with Bill Livengood, Director of Surface Sales to dig deeper into this question and learn more about the power of writing surfaces.

PV:  Why in the age of digital is the physical act of writing so important?

BL:  The physical act of writing engages the brain in important ways. Cognitive mapping indicates that the act of writing (forming words and images) engages the mind and senses in a different way than typing on a keyboard or electronic device. Writing helps stimulate creativity and retention. It is not a choice between digital or analog, but a combination of both that forms effective learning and collaborative environments.

PV:  Do you think creativity and retention when writing are tied to the increase in notebook sales? Why do you think Millennials and Gen Z are increasingly going back to pen and paper?

BL:  Absolutely! Millennials and Gen Z are driving this trend. This may seem counterintuitive since they grew up in the digital age, but there is something satisfying about going to a meeting and taking notes, or writing a “to-do” list and crossing off each task once it is completed. Using a whiteboard to share thoughts and ideas during a teaching or collaboration session provides an experience that technology cannot duplicate. That is why so many whiteboards are in classrooms, conference rooms, and boardrooms around the world.

PV:  When most people think of vertical writing surfaces, they think of whiteboards. Why is this, and what other options are there out there for writing surfaces?

BL:  Writing surfaces  are part of our earliest learning experiences. Most classrooms, from kindergarten–12th grade to higher education, and corporate conference and training rooms use whiteboards.  Some teachers still use a chalkboard , but most everyone in a traditional classroom settings uses a whiteboard as part of the learning experience.

A “whiteboard” is a generic term, and as with most products, there are multiple options. Typical options include boards composed of glass, painted steel, melamine and CeramicSteel.

PV:  What are the top qualities someone should be looking for when selecting a writing surface?

BL:  There are several factors to consider, but I’ll narrow it down to eight.

• Durability: the ability to withstand heavy use over time and resist wear, breaking and scratching
• Visibility: the ease with which the reader can read what is printed on the surface
• Writability: how smoothly a marker glides across the surface
• Erasability: how well the surface can be erased
• Magnetic: the capability to use magnets on the surface
• Projection: the ability to see projected images on the surface
• Value: the usefulness of the product to the user over an extended period
• Environmental Impact:  the ability to be safely produced and used, recycled or composted, featuring an environmentally sound production process

PV:  Talk to us more about visibility. How important of a factor is visibility in learning and collaborative environments?

BL:  Visibility is a key factor to consider when choosing a writing surface. Some whiteboards are simply more visible than others. For example, look at the two images below. The same words are written on two different surfaces. The image on the left is a CeramicSteel whiteboard. The image on the right is a glass whiteboard. Notice the difference in the reader experience?

The text on the glass board is not as visible. The translucent nature of the surface is subject to reflection and glare causing distractions and potentially eyestrain to the user. Compare this to the image on the left. The CeramicSteel surface is clearly more visible and it is much easier for the observer to focus on the words rather than competing images caused by glare and reflections.

Think about a student in a classroom, or a member of a collaborative team involved in an all-day brainstorming session. Which surface would you want to look at for an extended period?

PV:  If you had to pick the best writing surface, which one would it be and why?

BL:  It is all about the user. If the qualities mentioned earlier are the most important factors to the user, CeramicSteel is the obvious choice. Yes, it’s my opinion, but it’s also backed by research. When you consider the lifetime warranty, the functionality of the product, combined with the factors mentioned earlier, CeramicSteel is clearly the best writing surface on the market today.

PV:  Thanks, Bill! Very insightful.

BL:  You’re welcome!

We would love to hear from you! Contact us for sales requests, career information, corporate information, or general questions.

Essay on Living in a Digital World

Students are often asked to write an essay on Living in a Digital World in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Living in a Digital World

Introduction to the digital world.

We live in a digital world, where technology impacts every aspect of our lives. From communication to education, shopping to entertainment, digital technology plays a crucial role.

Communication in the Digital World

Digital technology has transformed communication. We can now connect with people worldwide instantly, thanks to social media, emails, and video conferencing.

Education in the Digital World

Digital learning has made education more accessible. With online classes, students can learn from anywhere, anytime.

Shopping and Entertainment

Online shopping and digital entertainment have become a part of our daily lives, providing convenience and variety.

Living in a digital world has its challenges, but it also offers numerous opportunities and conveniences.

250 Words Essay on Living in a Digital World

The advent of the digital world.

The digital world we inhabit today is a creation of rapid technological advancements, fundamentally altering the way we live, work, and communicate. This transformation has been so profound that it has ushered in an era coined as the ‘Information Age’.

Impact on Communication

The digital world has revolutionized communication. Social media platforms and instant messaging apps have made it possible to interact with anyone, anywhere, at any time. This instantaneity, while fostering global connectivity, also challenges traditional notions of privacy and personal space.

Learning in the Digital World

Education has been democratized by the digital world. The internet offers a plethora of resources, enabling anyone with a connection to learn virtually anything. However, the digital divide still persists, highlighting the need for equal access to digital resources.

Work in the Digital Era

The digital world has reshaped the professional landscape as well. Remote work, digital nomadism, and gig economy are now viable career paths, thanks to digital technologies. Yet, these bring new challenges, such as job insecurity and work-life balance issues.

Living in a digital world is a double-edged sword. While it offers unprecedented opportunities, it also presents unique challenges. As digital citizens, it’s crucial to navigate this landscape mindfully, leveraging its advantages while mitigating its drawbacks.

500 Words Essay on Living in a Digital World

Introduction.

Living in a digital world is a reality that has become increasingly pervasive in the 21st century. This digital age, often referred to as the Information Age, is characterized by a shift from traditional industries to an economy based on the processing and manipulation of information. The digital world has transformed every aspect of our lives, from communication and education to entertainment and business.

The Digital Landscape

The digital landscape is dominated by the internet, mobile technology, and artificial intelligence. The internet has become a global platform for communication, information exchange, and commerce. Mobile technology has made the internet accessible anywhere and at any time, leading to an always-on culture. Artificial intelligence is automating tasks, making decisions, and even creating content, fundamentally changing the nature of work and leisure.

The digital world has revolutionized communication. Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram have transformed the way we interact with each other. They have made it possible to maintain relationships across vast distances, share moments instantly, and collaborate in real-time. However, this has also led to new challenges, such as online harassment, privacy concerns, and the spread of misinformation.

Impact on Education

Education has also been profoundly affected by the digital world. Online learning platforms, digital textbooks, and educational apps have democratized education, making it accessible to people regardless of their geographical location or socio-economic status. Yet, the digital divide, the gap between those who have access to technology and those who do not, threatens to exacerbate educational inequalities.

Impact on Entertainment and Business

The entertainment industry has been reshaped by the digital world. Streaming platforms like Netflix, Spotify, and YouTube have made it possible to consume entertainment on demand. Similarly, in the business world, digital technologies have disrupted traditional business models, leading to the rise of e-commerce, remote work, and digital marketing. However, these developments have also raised issues related to job displacement and data security.

Living in a digital world presents both opportunities and challenges. It has the potential to enhance communication, democratize education, revolutionize entertainment, and transform business. However, it also poses significant risks, such as privacy violations, misinformation, educational inequality, job displacement, and data breaches. Navigating this digital world requires a nuanced understanding of these dynamics and a commitment to addressing the associated challenges. As we continue to shape and be shaped by the digital world, it is crucial to ensure that it serves the interests of all, not just a privileged few.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Digital
• Essay on Digitalization
• Essay on Women’s Role in Economic Development

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

The Importance of Face-to-Face Communication in the Digital Age

Do you know how to improve your profile for college applications.

See how your profile ranks among thousands of other students using CollegeVine. Calculate your chances at your dream schools and learn what areas you need to improve right now — it only takes 3 minutes and it's 100% free.

In today’s digital age, it can be easy to avoid face-to-face interaction. As social media has become more and more popular in recent years, people can often find themselves having more and more interactions with friends online as opposed to in person. Job interviews can now be conducted through video chat platforms such as Skype, online classes are becoming more popular, and sometimes one can even find oneself working an entire job from online or making friends that are from far away thanks to the internet.

That being said, just because we may have computers and smartphones readily available to us, this does not necessarily mean that we should put face-to-face communication in the recycling bin. There are some cases in which it makes more sense—and will ultimately be more beneficial to you—to talk to someone in person as opposed to via email, text, or online chatting. To learn more about how to navigate interpersonal relationships with teachers, guidance counselors, potential recommenders or mentors, and more in the digital age, read on!

What are the advantages of digital communication?

There is no doubt that communicating digitally can offer a lot of benefits to everyone involved, and especially to those who are shy or experience anxiety when it comes to having high-stakes interactions in person. If the idea of asking your teacher a question in real life ties your stomach into knots and causes you to start sweating bullets, then it might be wise to take some pressure off of yourself by sending them an email.

Written online communication can also be helpful because you get the chance to think about what you are going to say and proofread it before you send it out into the world. When having a conversation in person with someone you might say something that you didn’t mean to say or even misspeak, while when communicating digitally there is less of a chance that your meaning will be skewed because you get the chance to actually edit and revise what you are meaning to say before the other person receives it.

Another benefit of online communication is that you can think in your writing about things like your tone and your vocabulary in a way that you wouldn’t get to during a face to face interaction happening in real time. If you’re someone who is particularly skilled with language, then having the chance to think about these elements of your communications with someone might offer you more control over how the interaction will progress. At the same time, as we will discuss later in this post, it is important to keep in mind that this doesn’t always mean that communicating via email or text will reduce the chance of having a miscommunication with someone.

What are the disadvantages of digital communication?

Obviously, while there are many upsides to communicating with people through email and other forms of nonverbal communication, there are also some downsides. To put it simply, email simply feels less personal than meeting with someone in person. As is mentioned above, miscommunications can sometimes happen as a result. When you are communicating via email, you can’t see the face of the other person (or people) that you are communicating with, so you might miss important body language cues or facial expressions that will clue you in to how your words and message are being received.

It is also easy to misinterpret tone in an email. If you’ve ever received a text from a friend that you falsely thought to be passive-aggressive because of something small—maybe the in which it was worded, or maybe even the absence or presence of certain punctuation marks—you’ll understand that miscommunications simply happen. It is often easier to remedy these miscommunications in person because you can address it immediately, as opposed to over a long period of time with an email correspondence.

Discover your chances at hundreds of schools

Our free chancing engine takes into account your history, background, test scores, and extracurricular activities to show you your real chances of admission—and how to improve them.

When does an interaction need to be face to face?

If you need to let a teacher know that you won’t be in class on a certain day because you’re sick, then it is probably okay just sending them an email. The same goes for asking a question about homework or sending a document (although obviously each interaction depends upon the circumstances and your prior history with said teacher).

There are certain interactions, however, that should always be held in person. When it comes to more serious matters like asking for a letter of recommendation, disputing a grade on a certain assignment, or even working out a conflict with a teacher, it is important to show your teacher respect by coming to speak with them face-to-face. When you asking for a letter of rec, for example, you are asking your teacher for a huge favor—for more tips and advice on this subject, take a look at this blog post: Getting the Best Recommendation Letter .

Discussing something like a grade that you don’t believe you deserve is another case in which you should definitely talk to your teacher in person. In cases like this, which so often result from a one-way or two-way misunderstanding, is it really important to be able to interpret the body language and nonverbal cues of your teacher. You don’t want to come off as insincere, sarcastic, snarky, or rude, especially if you plan on arguing that you deserved a higher grade than the one you actually received.

How do face to face communications help in the long run?

Overall, in choosing to communicate face to face as opposed to with email or text, your interlocutors are more likely to perceive you as professional. You will also build upon important communications skills that will remain relevant to you throughout your life, especially when you enter the workplace. Relying less on email will also give you more practice with face-to-face interaction and will ultimately make you less nervous to directly communicate going forward—after all, you will have had more experience!

Though email might seem like the best way to go for situations that are seemingly intimidating, there are some cases in which you should almost always talk to your teachers, supervisors, bosses, or other authority figures in person. Unnecessary miscommunications can often arise as a result of written communication, and being able to see someone’s body language and nonverbal cues can help you avoid this. Also, it is considered more courteous to talk to people in person when possible, and you will likely gain respect from doing so as well as valuable communications skills.

For more advice about talking to teachers and fostering good professional relationships, consider checking out CollegeVine’s Mentorship Service . The program will pair you with a student mentor who has been through it all, who will offer you helpful advice on everything from extracurriculars to college apps to scholarships.

Consider checking out the CollegeVine Zen Blog as well; this website focuses on the mental health of students applying to college and offers advice for people who might feel anxious talking to professors or other figures of authority.

For more advice on communicating effectively, check out these blog posts:

Dealing with Test Anxiety

5 Quick Tips for Composing a Professional Email

How to Address A Mental Health Issue or Disability On Your College Application

The Introvert’s Guide to Networking in High School

High School Graduation Year* 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Other

Can't see the form above? Subscribe to our newsletter here .

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

Home / Essay Samples / Sociology / Sociology of Media and Communication / Social Media

The Digital Age: Ways People Use Social Media

Essay details

Information Science and Technology , Sociology

Computer Science , Sociology of Media and Communication

Digital Era , Impact of Media , Social Media

• Words: 591 (1 page)

Please note! This essay has been submitted by a student.

Get quality help now

Prof. Johnson

Verified writer

Proficient in: Computer Science , Sociology of Media and Communication

+ 75 relevant experts are online

More Social Media Related Essays

With the advancement in technology marketers now have the ability to communicate with their customers via social media. The marketers follow a framework that could possible benefit them called “The 4E Framework for Social ...

Social media has revolutionized the way we communicate, enabling people to connect, share, and engage on a global scale. This essay explores the impact of social media on communication, its benefits and challenges, and its role ...

Perhaps, Generation Z has the worst mental health (feeling of loneliness, anxiety, and depression) compared to previous generations, detrimental emotional health could be caused by the unlimited and uncontrolled use of ...

The digital era has brought remarkable advancements that reshape how we interact and connect. However, the rise of social media has unveiled a paradoxical reality: while we are more connected than ever, we may also be less ...

Today in our era, social media has become a key factor. It is used across all platforms from reporting local team scores all the way to reporting international breaking headlines. Now when social media and politics get mixed ...

In Clive Thompson's book, Smarter than you think: How technology is changing our minds for the better, he talks about how the internet is actually encouraging people to write more and not just keep their thoughts bundled up ...

Whatever your background is, the first thing you do when you wake up in the morning is to instinctively reach your phone and open Instagram or Facebook. From the very beginning we open our eyes, we are immersing ourselves in a ...

Social media has lots of cons. One of the biggest main concerns is how social media aids the spread of hate groups and online bullying. Around 10,000 tweets per day contain racial slurs. Many children may endanger themselves ...

 “How different would people act if they couldn’t show off on social media? Would they still do it?” said author Donna Lynn Hope. She couldn’t have put it more straightforwardly. Social Media has taken over people’s lives like ...

This feature is still in progress, but don't worry – you can place an order for an essay with our expert writers

We use cookies to offer you the best experience. By continuing, we’ll assume you agree with our Cookies policy .

Choose your writer among 300 professionals!

You cannot copy content from our website. If you need this sample, insert an email and we'll deliver it to you.

Please, provide real email address.

This email is exists.

A generative AI reset: Rewiring to turn potential into value in 2024

It’s time for a generative AI (gen AI) reset. The initial enthusiasm and flurry of activity in 2023 is giving way to second thoughts and recalibrations as companies realize that capturing gen AI’s enormous potential value is harder than expected .

With 2024 shaping up to be the year for gen AI to prove its value, companies should keep in mind the hard lessons learned with digital and AI transformations: competitive advantage comes from building organizational and technological capabilities to broadly innovate, deploy, and improve solutions at scale—in effect, rewiring the business  for distributed digital and AI innovation.

About QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey

QuantumBlack, McKinsey’s AI arm, helps companies transform using the power of technology, technical expertise, and industry experts. With thousands of practitioners at QuantumBlack (data engineers, data scientists, product managers, designers, and software engineers) and McKinsey (industry and domain experts), we are working to solve the world’s most important AI challenges. QuantumBlack Labs is our center of technology development and client innovation, which has been driving cutting-edge advancements and developments in AI through locations across the globe.

Companies looking to score early wins with gen AI should move quickly. But those hoping that gen AI offers a shortcut past the tough—and necessary—organizational surgery are likely to meet with disappointing results. Launching pilots is (relatively) easy; getting pilots to scale and create meaningful value is hard because they require a broad set of changes to the way work actually gets done.

Let’s briefly look at what this has meant for one Pacific region telecommunications company. The company hired a chief data and AI officer with a mandate to “enable the organization to create value with data and AI.” The chief data and AI officer worked with the business to develop the strategic vision and implement the road map for the use cases. After a scan of domains (that is, customer journeys or functions) and use case opportunities across the enterprise, leadership prioritized the home-servicing/maintenance domain to pilot and then scale as part of a larger sequencing of initiatives. They targeted, in particular, the development of a gen AI tool to help dispatchers and service operators better predict the types of calls and parts needed when servicing homes.

Leadership put in place cross-functional product teams with shared objectives and incentives to build the gen AI tool. As part of an effort to upskill the entire enterprise to better work with data and gen AI tools, they also set up a data and AI academy, which the dispatchers and service operators enrolled in as part of their training. To provide the technology and data underpinnings for gen AI, the chief data and AI officer also selected a large language model (LLM) and cloud provider that could meet the needs of the domain as well as serve other parts of the enterprise. The chief data and AI officer also oversaw the implementation of a data architecture so that the clean and reliable data (including service histories and inventory databases) needed to build the gen AI tool could be delivered quickly and responsibly.

Our book Rewired: The McKinsey Guide to Outcompeting in the Age of Digital and AI (Wiley, June 2023) provides a detailed manual on the six capabilities needed to deliver the kind of broad change that harnesses digital and AI technology. In this article, we will explore how to extend each of those capabilities to implement a successful gen AI program at scale. While recognizing that these are still early days and that there is much more to learn, our experience has shown that breaking open the gen AI opportunity requires companies to rewire how they work in the following ways.

Figure out where gen AI copilots can give you a real competitive advantage

The broad excitement around gen AI and its relative ease of use has led to a burst of experimentation across organizations. Most of these initiatives, however, won’t generate a competitive advantage. One bank, for example, bought tens of thousands of GitHub Copilot licenses, but since it didn’t have a clear sense of how to work with the technology, progress was slow. Another unfocused effort we often see is when companies move to incorporate gen AI into their customer service capabilities. Customer service is a commodity capability, not part of the core business, for most companies. While gen AI might help with productivity in such cases, it won’t create a competitive advantage.

To create competitive advantage, companies should first understand the difference between being a “taker” (a user of available tools, often via APIs and subscription services), a “shaper” (an integrator of available models with proprietary data), and a “maker” (a builder of LLMs). For now, the maker approach is too expensive for most companies, so the sweet spot for businesses is implementing a taker model for productivity improvements while building shaper applications for competitive advantage.

Much of gen AI’s near-term value is closely tied to its ability to help people do their current jobs better. In this way, gen AI tools act as copilots that work side by side with an employee, creating an initial block of code that a developer can adapt, for example, or drafting a requisition order for a new part that a maintenance worker in the field can review and submit (see sidebar “Copilot examples across three generative AI archetypes”). This means companies should be focusing on where copilot technology can have the biggest impact on their priority programs.

Copilot examples across three generative AI archetypes

• “Taker” copilots help real estate customers sift through property options and find the most promising one, write code for a developer, and summarize investor transcripts.
• “Shaper” copilots provide recommendations to sales reps for upselling customers by connecting generative AI tools to customer relationship management systems, financial systems, and customer behavior histories; create virtual assistants to personalize treatments for patients; and recommend solutions for maintenance workers based on historical data.
• “Maker” copilots are foundation models that lab scientists at pharmaceutical companies can use to find and test new and better drugs more quickly.

Some industrial companies, for example, have identified maintenance as a critical domain for their business. Reviewing maintenance reports and spending time with workers on the front lines can help determine where a gen AI copilot could make a big difference, such as in identifying issues with equipment failures quickly and early on. A gen AI copilot can also help identify root causes of truck breakdowns and recommend resolutions much more quickly than usual, as well as act as an ongoing source for best practices or standard operating procedures.

The challenge with copilots is figuring out how to generate revenue from increased productivity. In the case of customer service centers, for example, companies can stop recruiting new agents and use attrition to potentially achieve real financial gains. Defining the plans for how to generate revenue from the increased productivity up front, therefore, is crucial to capturing the value.

Upskill the talent you have but be clear about the gen-AI-specific skills you need

By now, most companies have a decent understanding of the technical gen AI skills they need, such as model fine-tuning, vector database administration, prompt engineering, and context engineering. In many cases, these are skills that you can train your existing workforce to develop. Those with existing AI and machine learning (ML) capabilities have a strong head start. Data engineers, for example, can learn multimodal processing and vector database management, MLOps (ML operations) engineers can extend their skills to LLMOps (LLM operations), and data scientists can develop prompt engineering, bias detection, and fine-tuning skills.

A sample of new generative AI skills needed

The following are examples of new skills needed for the successful deployment of generative AI tools:

• data scientist:
• prompt engineering
• in-context learning
• bias detection
• pattern identification
• reinforcement learning from human feedback
• hyperparameter/large language model fine-tuning; transfer learning
• data engineer:
• data wrangling and data warehousing
• data pipeline construction
• multimodal processing
• vector database management

The learning process can take two to three months to get to a decent level of competence because of the complexities in learning what various LLMs can and can’t do and how best to use them. The coders need to gain experience building software, testing, and validating answers, for example. It took one financial-services company three months to train its best data scientists to a high level of competence. While courses and documentation are available—many LLM providers have boot camps for developers—we have found that the most effective way to build capabilities at scale is through apprenticeship, training people to then train others, and building communities of practitioners. Rotating experts through teams to train others, scheduling regular sessions for people to share learnings, and hosting biweekly documentation review sessions are practices that have proven successful in building communities of practitioners (see sidebar “A sample of new generative AI skills needed”).

It’s important to bear in mind that successful gen AI skills are about more than coding proficiency. Our experience in developing our own gen AI platform, Lilli , showed us that the best gen AI technical talent has design skills to uncover where to focus solutions, contextual understanding to ensure the most relevant and high-quality answers are generated, collaboration skills to work well with knowledge experts (to test and validate answers and develop an appropriate curation approach), strong forensic skills to figure out causes of breakdowns (is the issue the data, the interpretation of the user’s intent, the quality of metadata on embeddings, or something else?), and anticipation skills to conceive of and plan for possible outcomes and to put the right kind of tracking into their code. A pure coder who doesn’t intrinsically have these skills may not be as useful a team member.

While current upskilling is largely based on a “learn on the job” approach, we see a rapid market emerging for people who have learned these skills over the past year. That skill growth is moving quickly. GitHub reported that developers were working on gen AI projects “in big numbers,” and that 65,000 public gen AI projects were created on its platform in 2023—a jump of almost 250 percent over the previous year. If your company is just starting its gen AI journey, you could consider hiring two or three senior engineers who have built a gen AI shaper product for their companies. This could greatly accelerate your efforts.

Form a centralized team to establish standards that enable responsible scaling

To ensure that all parts of the business can scale gen AI capabilities, centralizing competencies is a natural first move. The critical focus for this central team will be to develop and put in place protocols and standards to support scale, ensuring that teams can access models while also minimizing risk and containing costs. The team’s work could include, for example, procuring models and prescribing ways to access them, developing standards for data readiness, setting up approved prompt libraries, and allocating resources.

While developing Lilli, our team had its mind on scale when it created an open plug-in architecture and setting standards for how APIs should function and be built.  They developed standardized tooling and infrastructure where teams could securely experiment and access a GPT LLM , a gateway with preapproved APIs that teams could access, and a self-serve developer portal. Our goal is that this approach, over time, can help shift “Lilli as a product” (that a handful of teams use to build specific solutions) to “Lilli as a platform” (that teams across the enterprise can access to build other products).

For teams developing gen AI solutions, squad composition will be similar to AI teams but with data engineers and data scientists with gen AI experience and more contributors from risk management, compliance, and legal functions. The general idea of staffing squads with resources that are federated from the different expertise areas will not change, but the skill composition of a gen-AI-intensive squad will.

Set up the technology architecture to scale

Building a gen AI model is often relatively straightforward, but making it fully operational at scale is a different matter entirely. We’ve seen engineers build a basic chatbot in a week, but releasing a stable, accurate, and compliant version that scales can take four months. That’s why, our experience shows, the actual model costs may be less than 10 to 15 percent of the total costs of the solution.

Building for scale doesn’t mean building a new technology architecture. But it does mean focusing on a few core decisions that simplify and speed up processes without breaking the bank. Three such decisions stand out:

• Focus on reusing your technology. Reusing code can increase the development speed of gen AI use cases by 30 to 50 percent. One good approach is simply creating a source for approved tools, code, and components. A financial-services company, for example, created a library of production-grade tools, which had been approved by both the security and legal teams, and made them available in a library for teams to use. More important is taking the time to identify and build those capabilities that are common across the most priority use cases. The same financial-services company, for example, identified three components that could be reused for more than 100 identified use cases. By building those first, they were able to generate a significant portion of the code base for all the identified use cases—essentially giving every application a big head start.
• Focus the architecture on enabling efficient connections between gen AI models and internal systems. For gen AI models to work effectively in the shaper archetype, they need access to a business’s data and applications. Advances in integration and orchestration frameworks have significantly reduced the effort required to make those connections. But laying out what those integrations are and how to enable them is critical to ensure these models work efficiently and to avoid the complexity that creates technical debt  (the “tax” a company pays in terms of time and resources needed to redress existing technology issues). Chief information officers and chief technology officers can define reference architectures and integration standards for their organizations. Key elements should include a model hub, which contains trained and approved models that can be provisioned on demand; standard APIs that act as bridges connecting gen AI models to applications or data; and context management and caching, which speed up processing by providing models with relevant information from enterprise data sources.
• Build up your testing and quality assurance capabilities. Our own experience building Lilli taught us to prioritize testing over development. Our team invested in not only developing testing protocols for each stage of development but also aligning the entire team so that, for example, it was clear who specifically needed to sign off on each stage of the process. This slowed down initial development but sped up the overall delivery pace and quality by cutting back on errors and the time needed to fix mistakes.

Ensure data quality and focus on unstructured data to fuel your models

The ability of a business to generate and scale value from gen AI models will depend on how well it takes advantage of its own data. As with technology, targeted upgrades to existing data architecture  are needed to maximize the future strategic benefits of gen AI:

• Be targeted in ramping up your data quality and data augmentation efforts. While data quality has always been an important issue, the scale and scope of data that gen AI models can use—especially unstructured data—has made this issue much more consequential. For this reason, it’s critical to get the data foundations right, from clarifying decision rights to defining clear data processes to establishing taxonomies so models can access the data they need. The companies that do this well tie their data quality and augmentation efforts to the specific AI/gen AI application and use case—you don’t need this data foundation to extend to every corner of the enterprise. This could mean, for example, developing a new data repository for all equipment specifications and reported issues to better support maintenance copilot applications.
• Understand what value is locked into your unstructured data. Most organizations have traditionally focused their data efforts on structured data (values that can be organized in tables, such as prices and features). But the real value from LLMs comes from their ability to work with unstructured data (for example, PowerPoint slides, videos, and text). Companies can map out which unstructured data sources are most valuable and establish metadata tagging standards so models can process the data and teams can find what they need (tagging is particularly important to help companies remove data from models as well, if necessary). Be creative in thinking about data opportunities. Some companies, for example, are interviewing senior employees as they retire and feeding that captured institutional knowledge into an LLM to help improve their copilot performance.
• Optimize to lower costs at scale. There is often as much as a tenfold difference between what companies pay for data and what they could be paying if they optimized their data infrastructure and underlying costs. This issue often stems from companies scaling their proofs of concept without optimizing their data approach. Two costs generally stand out. One is storage costs arising from companies uploading terabytes of data into the cloud and wanting that data available 24/7. In practice, companies rarely need more than 10 percent of their data to have that level of availability, and accessing the rest over a 24- or 48-hour period is a much cheaper option. The other costs relate to computation with models that require on-call access to thousands of processors to run. This is especially the case when companies are building their own models (the maker archetype) but also when they are using pretrained models and running them with their own data and use cases (the shaper archetype). Companies could take a close look at how they can optimize computation costs on cloud platforms—for instance, putting some models in a queue to run when processors aren’t being used (such as when Americans go to bed and consumption of computing services like Netflix decreases) is a much cheaper option.

Build trust and reusability to drive adoption and scale

Because many people have concerns about gen AI, the bar on explaining how these tools work is much higher than for most solutions. People who use the tools want to know how they work, not just what they do. So it’s important to invest extra time and money to build trust by ensuring model accuracy and making it easy to check answers.

One insurance company, for example, created a gen AI tool to help manage claims. As part of the tool, it listed all the guardrails that had been put in place, and for each answer provided a link to the sentence or page of the relevant policy documents. The company also used an LLM to generate many variations of the same question to ensure answer consistency. These steps, among others, were critical to helping end users build trust in the tool.

Part of the training for maintenance teams using a gen AI tool should be to help them understand the limitations of models and how best to get the right answers. That includes teaching workers strategies to get to the best answer as fast as possible by starting with broad questions then narrowing them down. This provides the model with more context, and it also helps remove any bias of the people who might think they know the answer already. Having model interfaces that look and feel the same as existing tools also helps users feel less pressured to learn something new each time a new application is introduced.

Getting to scale means that businesses will need to stop building one-off solutions that are hard to use for other similar use cases. One global energy and materials company, for example, has established ease of reuse as a key requirement for all gen AI models, and has found in early iterations that 50 to 60 percent of its components can be reused. This means setting standards for developing gen AI assets (for example, prompts and context) that can be easily reused for other cases.

While many of the risk issues relating to gen AI are evolutions of discussions that were already brewing—for instance, data privacy, security, bias risk, job displacement, and intellectual property protection—gen AI has greatly expanded that risk landscape. Just 21 percent of companies reporting AI adoption say they have established policies governing employees’ use of gen AI technologies.

Similarly, a set of tests for AI/gen AI solutions should be established to demonstrate that data privacy, debiasing, and intellectual property protection are respected. Some organizations, in fact, are proposing to release models accompanied with documentation that details their performance characteristics. Documenting your decisions and rationales can be particularly helpful in conversations with regulators.

In some ways, this article is premature—so much is changing that we’ll likely have a profoundly different understanding of gen AI and its capabilities in a year’s time. But the core truths of finding value and driving change will still apply. How well companies have learned those lessons may largely determine how successful they’ll be in capturing that value.

The authors wish to thank Michael Chui, Juan Couto, Ben Ellencweig, Josh Gartner, Bryce Hall, Holger Harreis, Phil Hudelson, Suzana Iacob, Sid Kamath, Neerav Kingsland, Kitti Lakner, Robert Levin, Matej Macak, Lapo Mori, Alex Peluffo, Aldo Rosales, Erik Roth, Abdul Wahab Shaikh, and Stephen Xu for their contributions to this article.

This article was edited by Barr Seitz, an editorial director in the New York office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier

Rewired to outcompete

Meet Lilli, our generative AI tool that’s a researcher, a time saver, and an inspiration

Landline users remain proudly ‘old-fashioned’ in the digital age

When millions of AT&T customers across the country briefly lost their cellphone service last month, Francella Jackson, 61, of Fairview Heights, Illinois, said she picked up her well-worn Southwestern Bell push-button landline phone and called her friends “just so we could laugh at the people who could not use their phones.”

“Why, isn’t it great that we can talk and have a great conversation?” she recalled saying. “We had a good laugh.”

Derek Shaw, 68, of York, Pennsylvania, said he has an Android mobile phone but prefers talking on his black cordless landline at home. The sound quality is better, he said, and the phone is easier to hold during long conversations. Shaw said he also likes talking to people face to face rather than on Zoom and never got rid of his vinyl record collection when CDs got hot in the 1990s.

“I’ve never even thought about giving up my landline,” he said. “I’ll go kicking and screaming when I have to.”

To many, landline phones have come to seem as essential as steamships and telegrams in the smartphone era. But to those who still use them, they offer distinct advantages. Prompted by the AT&T outage Feb. 22 and a push by AT&T to phase out traditional landlines in California, those who have them are speaking out in defense of their old phones.

To them, the landline is a lifeline during power outages; a welcome throwback to the era before doomscrolling and push alerts; and a more comfortable, better-sounding alternative to tinny, thin smartphones.

“I love my landline,” said Jackson, who has had hers since the 1980s. “People call me old-fashioned, but I’ll be old-fashioned.”

She has a cellphone but no internet at home, she said. She likes that she still remembers her friends’ phone numbers and never has a dropped call. “I’m a little nostalgic,” Jackson said. “With technology, although I embrace it, there are some things I like to hold on to.”

Some younger people also see upsides to landlines. Cory Sechrest, 32, of Chicago, said he and his girlfriend got a pink landline phone to use just in case the power goes out. He said he doesn’t know anyone else his age who has one.

When friends visit, “They take a pause, look at it and say, ‘What’s that?’ ” he said. “It gets a few chuckles.”

Landlines can feel like a portal to the preinternet era. Many Americans grew up with the classic rotary phone mounted on the kitchen wall that the whole family had to share, offering reliability but no privacy. Some got the burger phone in their teenage bedroom after begging their parents for weeks. Some coveted the football phone that came free with a subscription to Sports Illustrated.

Writer Charli Penn wrote in Apartment Therapy that, as a millennial, she got a landline phone because it gives her a break from her cellphone, is easier for her father to use and takes her back in time.

“If plaid miniskirts, ivy garland, and thick-soled combat boots can enjoy a welcome comeback, why can’t I cozy up to an hourslong conversation using my cordless house phone, just like I did back in my teen years and early 20s?” Penn wrote.

Some also like landline phones for aesthetic reasons. Mark Treutelaar, who is co-owner, with his wife, Galina, of the Old Phone Shop, which sells and repairs landline phones in Franklin, Wisconsin, said he has noticed an uptick in sales of brightly colored, rotary-dial wall and desk phones from the 1960s and ‘70s.

“We are selling more phones recently than ever before,” Treutelaar said. “People like them just because they remember them from when they were younger, and even if they don’t have a landline, they are buying them as just decoration or are hooking them to cellphones through Bluetooth.”

Others rely on landlines in rural areas with spotty cellphone coverage. Still, landline users are a distinct minority in the United States.

About 73% of American adults lived in a household with no landline but at least one cellphone in 2022, according to the most recent data collected by the federal government. Age, not surprisingly, was a key factor in phone use. Nearly 90% of Americans ages 25 to 29 reported that they used only cellphones, compared with less than half of Americans older than 65.

Citing the plummeting popularity of landlines, AT&T asked California regulators last year to be relieved of its obligation to maintain its traditional copper-wire phone network, the kind that connected American households for most of the past century.

AT&T said the number of copper landlines, known as plain old telephone service, or POTS, that it provides in California fell by 89% from 2000 to 2021. Customers generally pay about $34.50 a month for that service, according to the California Public Advocates Office.

But even most landline users rely primarily on their cellphones, according to AT&T.

“Like Blockbuster rentals and Kodak film, POTS has fallen from technological primacy to effective obsolescence in the course of a generation,” AT&T wrote in its application to the California Public Utilities Commission.

AT&T described the proposal as part of a multiyear effort to eventually move landline customers to mobile phones or to fiber-optic cables that carry internet and landline phone service. It says 20 other states have already allowed it to make that transition.

“No customer will be left without voice or 911 service,” Susan Johnson, executive vice president of wireline transformation for AT&T, said in a statement. “For customers who do not have alternative options available yet, we will continue to provide their existing voice service as long as is needed.”

Still, the proposal has unleashed a fierce blowback, with hundreds of landline users submitting public comments urging California to reject it. Many say the copper-wire system, because it is generally self-powered, is the most reliable way to reach emergency services if the power fails during a flood, wildfire or storm. AT&T says fiber cables are more resilient and easier to repair, although a fiber-optic phone will die without a backup battery in place.

“If we have health issues, especially, it’s the most important thing to be able to use our rotary phone,” said Francesca Ciancutti, who lives in Mendocino County, California. “It’s absolutely crucial. And all our neighbors feel the same way.”

Jackson said she worries about cyberattacks disrupting her cellphone service. But mostly, she said, her landline is just a nicer way to talk to people after work.

“I just like to chill and remember things how they were,” she said. “It’s relaxing for me to pick up and have a long conversation with my friends on my landline phone.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times .

Robotic heart surgery gives Donny Jones a rapid recovery, more energy

Donny Jones was born with a heart that was a little bit different.