3 posts tagged “facebook”

What about Facebook could possibly make you smarter? And on the flip side of the coin, what about Twitter could possibly make you dumber?

There are a few factors involved, according to Dr. Tracy Alloway.  A psychologist from the University of Stirling in Scotland says her studies show more brain activity on Facebook than on Twitter, as you are actively keeping up with multiple friends.  Twitter, on the other hand, requires less brain engagement as the context of Twitter activity is in more short-form.

Still skeptical?
<!--more-->
From my understanding of Dr. Alloway's study, this all boils down to brain activity and the creation of new neural connections.  In other words, the making of new neural connections means that you are learning something, which in turn makes you a smarter person.

The best way to learn is through experience, right? So having new experiences means that you're learning something.  The act of having an experience, remembering the actions involved and modifying future behavior from there is the process of learning.  This is the way in which we train and exercise our brains.  This is the way in which we steer clear from losing it from lack of using it.

In this regard, I understand where Dr. Alloway is coming from.  But it does seem a bit radical to apply these notions of learning to social networking in such a way.  It's an over-generalization of both Facebook and Twitter, turning to small averages of social networking use.

As is the case with any social science study, there is a difference between the average experience and the individual experience.  and since I haven't conducted any studies to replicate or refute Dr. Alloway's findings, I can only speak from anecdotal experiences that highlight individuals' social networking experiences.  In essence, it's up to each individual to glean their own experience from social networking.

If you're keeping up with 50 good friends on Twitter versus Facebook, then perhaps your brain engagement is at a similar level than what you would find on Facebook.  Or perhaps the fact that all your friends' relevant information is accessible directly on Facebook as opposed to Twitter, where you'd have to visit another site to read their latest "note" or view last weekend's photo album means that the social network's presence as a conduit is irrelevant towards the act of deeper brain engagement.

What I find particularly interesting with the implications of Dr. Alloway's study is that Facebook is currently striving to turn its newsfeeds into a more open format, similar to Twitter.  If information is more fluid and requires less time directly on Facebook's site, will its affect on our brain engagement remain the same?

It's easy enough to look at these two sites for comparison purposes when it comes to Dr. Alloway's study, but it's important to note that other sites were included as well.  YouTube, for instance, falls in the Twitter category of not requiring deep brain engagement for the average usage.  That undoubtedly leaves out the fact that you could be watching a documentary on YouTube, or an educational video on how to change the brakes on your car.

Again, that leaves things entirely up to the individual on how you'd like social networking and media sites to cater to you--take what you need from social networking sites and you'll have the experience you deserve.

This article was originally posted by Kristen Nicole on MultiSocialMedia.com

Facebook and MySpace have been at war for years now, with the two major social networks vying for world domination, claiming country by country, demographic by demographic.  A recent speech titled "The Not-So-Hidden Politics of Class Online" by Danah Boyd of the Harvard Berkman Center for Internet and Society begs the question, why does there seem to be a race and class divide when it comes to Facebook and MySpace?

Is Facebook really more elite, with MySpace having become the "ghetto" of online social networking?  It's an interesting question that forces us to look at social networks in a new light.  Chris Matyszczyk of CNET likens the shift from MySpace to Facebook to the white flight we see all too often when a once-established neighborhood becomes a little too diverse for its white residents. 

An interesting perspective, and one that's readily able to relate to in American culture.  It's a major part of our history and has been so even before the days of the modern suburbs.  But it also speaks to a long history of institutionalized classism as well as racism, which often go hand in hand.  Is that really the level of analysis we're ready to apply to online social networking?  If that's the case, then there are some serious questions we need to be directing to the founders, executives and investors of both MySpace and Facebook.

But first let's look at the Utopian side of things.  Both Facebook and MySpace are online social networks, meaning that they're virtual pieces of property and can be accessed by anyone that has an Internet connection.  Utopia, right?  Not really.  There was already the long-standing matter of Internet access as it applies to the race/class divide.  If you're a racial minority and economically deterred, then Internet access is a novelty.  You are relegated to public access Internet points and your mobile device, which may or may not be a smart phone capable of high functions for social networking.

While the technology divide is narrowing, it becomes less and less of an issue for the purposes of this particular case, but it cannot be entirely ignored, especially as it was still a factor when both MySpace and Facebook were launched and began to gain major traction.

But another factor I find noteworthy is the approach employed by each social network in question; MySpace began as an online tool for getting musicians set up with their own website, while Facebook began as an exclusive network for Harvard students.  MySpace came about when the only other major option for widespread social networking was Friendster, which also targeted the college-age demographic.  The tactic used for MySpace included posting photos of scantily clad users and enticing new sign ups.  Facebook required a confirmed .edu email address just to let you in the front door.

The two strategies towards growth, new user acquisition and existing user retention are vastly different and inherently attract different crowds.  So is this race/class divide self-selecting or in fact more institutional?  If the trend is self-selecting then we can attribute much of the world's view on these social networks to be indicative of current mentality for those that use the networks.  We can also expect to see some changes with both MySpace and Facebook.  Perhaps Facebook will too become a dated neighborhood, run down by the "wrong crowd" and witness another white flight to the next hot spot.  And that hot spot would likely be a revived and gentrified MySpace, full of nostalgia and gritty determination to be hip.

We'd also be able to apply these theories to other social networks, and I don't think online social networking has been around long enough to draw any solid conclusions in that regard.  This is mainly because very different strategies are applied to each social network that is launched, and many of the social networks we've seen in the past decade have been rather niche.  From LinkedIn to BlackPlanet, you can expect a different crowd no matter where you go.  There will almost always be a different crowd with a different objective.  Fortunately these are all factors that Boyd studies in her ongoing work and research in social media.

What's disappointing is the fact that these strategies can ultimately lead to an overwhelming sense of distinction based on race and class, especially when you think of the business concerns revolving around the spending power of the actual demographics on MySpace and Facebook versus the widespread perception that could either deter or encourage the stimulation of an economy around each network.  From developer apps to advertising campaigns, the affect that race and class distinctions have on any business is real.

This article was originally published here on KristenNicole.com

Xbox Live announced its upcoming support of Twitter sign-in and Facebook Connect this week, which just reminds us all of the power of social networking and its impact on so many aspects of media--traditional or otherwise.

I'm a believer in the ability of social networks to make an impact.  So I'm quite interested to see how Microsoft will be leveraging Facebook, one of its investments, for promoting its services and adding value to its end users.  From marketing to better competing with casual gaming, Microsoft is taking steps towards effectively leveraging existing social networks.

Nick has a great post about Xbox's Facebook Connect integration on AllFacebook, and I expounded on my above points on a Bublicious post.  Let me know your thoughts on Xbox's announcement!

Read more of my blog here, at KristenNicole.com