Emily Oster on observational studies; Paul Dobransky on boundaries; Jean Twenge on academic pressure; Bob Eisenbeis explains an odd feature of the Credit Suisse resolution;
I do not think this singling out of academic pressure is the most charitable framing of this critique by the phones and social media are the problem proponents. I would characterize it more as an elite phenomenon of over scheduling/stage managing/helicopter parenting during critical periods of identity development and formation in adolescence. This has been filtered down to become a middle class phenomenon for those with aspirations for their children in life centered on education. The farther it is filtered down the socioeconomic ladder it could affect those with fewer genetic cognitive lottery winnings and with fewer financial resources in increasingly deleterious ways. I did read the critique somewhere on substack that linked to many books that talked about mental health among youth that pre-dated smart phones and this seems closer to the critique to me than some focus on grades and homework alone. More accurately framed as achievement culture, which I would also couple with safetyism. This doesn't mean phones/social media doesn't exacerbate the problems and contribute in other ways to warping and changing the process of identity formation as well. It isn't really either or to me with regard to phones and I doubt there will be some root cause that can be singled out for some government solution.
"I don’t know how you would do this to answer this question. It might very well be true that women are happier married than unmarried, but this kind of study does not provide evidence for that."
To be nitpicky: the study does provide evidence, but it's weak evidence and it's definitely not a *proof* of a causal relationship.
Mental health - if "success" is defined as get a college degree, then I could see how those who struggle or fail to complete college might have mental health issues. That said, I don't know of any evidence supporting this hypothesis.
I am a bit baffled by the 3 questions Twenge proposes.
Q1 - Is this what Emily Oster wrote about? Why is homework the measure? What about extracurriculars taken on only to build the resume? Other pressures?
Q2 - Ok, this one seems relevant as long as one is aware of the weaknesses of surveys.
Q3 - Why only higher achieving teens? Wouldn't it more likely be the ones feeling pressured to do more than they feel capable of, regardless of what achievement level they are at? Or why isn't it the ones who have no expectation of college and (probably mistakenly) think they therefore have no future?
Good piece by Emily Oster. Interesting that she refers to the reasoning as "econometrics" as it is being applied to "economics" in the most "imperialistic" (a good thing from my POV) sense.
"Brendan Case and Ying Chen recently wrote in the WSJ that marriage makes women happier."
No it didn’t. ... It might very well be true that women are happier married than unmarried, but this kind of study does not provide evidence for that."
While it is correct to say it doesn't show marriage makes women happier, if it indeed shows marriage and happiness are correlated as implied in your blog post, it is wrong to say it doesn't provide evidence married women are happier.
I do not think this singling out of academic pressure is the most charitable framing of this critique by the phones and social media are the problem proponents. I would characterize it more as an elite phenomenon of over scheduling/stage managing/helicopter parenting during critical periods of identity development and formation in adolescence. This has been filtered down to become a middle class phenomenon for those with aspirations for their children in life centered on education. The farther it is filtered down the socioeconomic ladder it could affect those with fewer genetic cognitive lottery winnings and with fewer financial resources in increasingly deleterious ways. I did read the critique somewhere on substack that linked to many books that talked about mental health among youth that pre-dated smart phones and this seems closer to the critique to me than some focus on grades and homework alone. More accurately framed as achievement culture, which I would also couple with safetyism. This doesn't mean phones/social media doesn't exacerbate the problems and contribute in other ways to warping and changing the process of identity formation as well. It isn't really either or to me with regard to phones and I doubt there will be some root cause that can be singled out for some government solution.
Arnold - I think this is the article you are looking for, which was in the MR links on 3/14
https://biblioracle.substack.com/p/teen-mental-health-distress-didnt
"I don’t know how you would do this to answer this question. It might very well be true that women are happier married than unmarried, but this kind of study does not provide evidence for that."
To be nitpicky: the study does provide evidence, but it's weak evidence and it's definitely not a *proof* of a causal relationship.
Mental health - if "success" is defined as get a college degree, then I could see how those who struggle or fail to complete college might have mental health issues. That said, I don't know of any evidence supporting this hypothesis.
I am a bit baffled by the 3 questions Twenge proposes.
Q1 - Is this what Emily Oster wrote about? Why is homework the measure? What about extracurriculars taken on only to build the resume? Other pressures?
Q2 - Ok, this one seems relevant as long as one is aware of the weaknesses of surveys.
Q3 - Why only higher achieving teens? Wouldn't it more likely be the ones feeling pressured to do more than they feel capable of, regardless of what achievement level they are at? Or why isn't it the ones who have no expectation of college and (probably mistakenly) think they therefore have no future?
Not sure how it's consistent to buy into Haidt's social media hypothesis while denying that observational studies provide any evidence?
Good piece by Emily Oster. Interesting that she refers to the reasoning as "econometrics" as it is being applied to "economics" in the most "imperialistic" (a good thing from my POV) sense.
"Brendan Case and Ying Chen recently wrote in the WSJ that marriage makes women happier."
No it didn’t. ... It might very well be true that women are happier married than unmarried, but this kind of study does not provide evidence for that."
While it is correct to say it doesn't show marriage makes women happier, if it indeed shows marriage and happiness are correlated as implied in your blog post, it is wrong to say it doesn't provide evidence married women are happier.