benefits of digital world essay

Essay on Digital World

Students are often asked to write an essay on 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 Digital World

What is the digital world.

The digital world is like a giant playground online. It’s where we use computers, smartphones, and the internet to talk to friends, play games, and learn new things. It’s made up of websites, apps, and videos that we can see on screens.

Learning Online

Schools are now in our homes too, thanks to the internet. We can watch lessons, do quizzes, and even talk to our teachers through our computers. It’s like having a classroom at your fingertips!

Fun and Games

Playing games has never been easier. With a click, we can join adventures, solve puzzles, or compete in sports on our devices. It’s all fun, and we can play with people from all over the world.

Staying Safe

While the digital world is exciting, we must stay safe. This means setting strong passwords, not talking to strangers online, and always telling an adult if something seems wrong or makes us uncomfortable.

Also check:

• Advantages and Disadvantages of Digital World
• Speech on Digital World

250 Words Essay on Digital World

The digital world is like a huge playground on the internet. It’s full of websites, apps, and all sorts of fun and useful things that we can see and do using computers, smartphones, and other gadgets. Just like in a real playground, you can meet friends, play games, learn new stuff, and share stories.

Learning and School

In this digital playground, you can go to a place called ‘online school’ where you can learn about anything from dinosaurs to how to solve math problems. It’s like having a library that never ends, with books and videos that can teach you about every single thing in the world.

Playing and Having Fun

Games are a big part of the digital world. There are games that let you build cities, play sports, or go on adventures. And the cool thing is, you can play with people from all over the world, not just your neighborhood.

But remember, just like any playground, you need to be safe in the digital world. This means not talking to strangers, not sharing personal information, and telling an adult if something doesn’t feel right.

So, the digital world is a place where you can learn, play, and do lots of exciting things. But always be careful and use it in a way that is safe and good for you. It’s like a big city that’s always awake, always buzzing with new things to discover, but you should know the rules to stay safe and enjoy it to the fullest.

500 Words Essay on Digital World

The digital world is like a giant, invisible playground that exists on computers, phones, and other electronic devices. It is made up of all the information that we can send, receive, and share using technology. This includes everything from the videos we watch, the messages we send to our friends, to the games we play.

Communication in the Digital World

One of the biggest parts of the digital world is how we talk to each other. Long ago, people had to send letters that took days or even weeks to arrive. Now, we can send a message to someone on the other side of the planet, and they’ll get it in seconds! Social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram let us share what we’re doing and see what others are up to.

Learning and the Internet

Schools are also a part of the digital world. Many classrooms use computers and the internet to help students learn. You can find information about almost any topic online. There are also special programs and games that make learning fun and interesting.

Entertainment Everywhere

Entertainment in the digital world is endless. We can watch movies, listen to music, or play games whenever we want. Websites like YouTube have millions of videos on every topic you can think of. And with smartphones and tablets, we can enjoy all these things not just at home, but anywhere we go.

Shopping with a Click

Shopping has also changed because of the digital world. Instead of going to a store, we can buy things online. This can be anything from clothes and toys to groceries. We pick what we want, pay online, and then wait for it to arrive at our door.

Staying Safe Online

While the digital world is fun and useful, it’s important to stay safe. We should keep our personal information private and think carefully before we share something online. Remember, once something is on the internet, it can be hard to remove it completely.

Jobs and the Digital World

Many people work in the digital world. They create websites, make apps, and help keep all the information online safe and organized. These jobs are important because they keep the digital world running smoothly for everyone to enjoy.

The Future of the Digital World

The digital world is always growing and changing. New inventions and ideas appear all the time. We might not know exactly what the future holds, but it’s sure to be exciting. We’ll see new ways to learn, play, and talk to each other.

In conclusion, the digital world is a big part of our lives. It helps us communicate, learn, have fun, shop, and work. As long as we use it wisely and stay safe, the digital world will continue to be a place where we can discover and explore new things every day.

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 Marketing
• Essay on Digital Life
• Essay on Determinism

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.

Search the United Nations

• Issue Briefs
• Commemoration
• Branding Package
• Our Common Agenda
• Press Releases

The Impact of Digital Technologies

Technologies can help make our world fairer, more peaceful, and more just. Digital advances can support and accelerate achievement of each of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals – from ending extreme poverty to reducing maternal and infant mortality, promoting sustainable farming and decent work, and achieving universal literacy. But technologies can also threaten privacy, erode security and fuel inequality. They have implications for human rights and human agency. Like generations before, we – governments, businesses and individuals – have a choice to make in how we harness and manage new technologies.

A DIGITAL FUTURE FOR ALL?

Digital technologies have advanced more rapidly than any innovation in our history – reaching around 50 per cent of the developing world’s population in only two decades and transforming societies. By enhancing connectivity, financial inclusion, access to trade and public services, technology can be a great equaliser.

In the health sector, for instance, AI-enabled frontier technologies are helping to save lives, diagnose diseases and extend life expectancy. In education, virtual learning environments and distance learning have opened up programmes to students who would otherwise be excluded. Public services are also becoming more accessible and accountable through blockchain-powered systems, and less bureaucratically burdensome as a result of AI assistance.Big data can also support more responsive and accurate policies and programmes.

However, those yet to be connected remain cut off from the benefits of this new era and remain further behind. Many of the people left behind are women, the elderly, persons with disabilities or from ethnic or linguistic minorities, indigenous groups and residents of poor or remote areas. The pace of connectivity is slowing, even reversing, among some constituencies. For example, globally, the proportion of women using the internet is 12 per cent lower than that of men. While this gap narrowed in most regions between 2013 and 2017, it widened in the least developed countries from 30 per cent to 33 per cent.

The use of algorithms can replicate and even amplify human and systemic bias where they function on the basis of data which is not adequately diverse. Lack of diversity in the technology sector can mean that this challenge is not adequately addressed.

THE FUTURE OF WORK

Throughout history, technological revolutions have changed the labour force: creating new forms and patterns of work, making others obsolete, and leading to wider societal changes. This current wave of change is likely to have profound impacts. For example, the International Labour Organization estimates that the shift to a greener economy could create 24 million new jobs globally by 2030 through the adoption of sustainable practices in the energy sector, the use of electric vehicles and increasing energy efficiency in existing and future buildings.

Meanwhile, reports by groups such as McKinsey suggest that 800 million people could lose their jobs to automation by 2030 , while polls reveal that the majority of all employees worry that they do not have the necessary training or skills to get a well-paid job.

There is broad agreement that managing these trends will require changes in our approach to education, for instance, by placing more emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and maths; by teaching soft skills, and resilience; and by ensuring that people can re-skill and up-skill throughout their lifetimes. Unpaid work, for example childcare and elderly care in the home, will need to be better supported, especially as with the shifting age profile of global populations, the demands on these tasks are likely to increase.

THE FUTURE OF DATA

Today, digital technologies such as data pooling and AI are used to track and diagnose issues in agriculture, health, and the environment, or to perform daily tasks such as navigating traffic or paying a bill. They can be used to defend and exercise human rights – but they can also be used to violate them, for example, by monitoring our movements, purchases, conversations and behaviours. Governments and businesses increasingly have the tools to mine and exploit data for financial and other purposes.

However, personal data would become an asset to a person, if there were a formula for better regulation of personal data ownership. Data-powered technology has the potential to empower individuals, improve human welfare, and promote universal rights, depending on the type of protections put in place.

THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

Social media connects almost half of the entire global population . It enables people to make their voices heard and to talk to people across the world in real time. However, it can also reinforce prejudices and sow discord, by giving hate speech and misinformation a platform, or by amplifying echo chambers.

In this way, social media algorithms can fuel the fragmentation of societies around the world. And yet they also have the potential to do the opposite.

THE FUTURE OF CYBERSPACE

How to manage these developments is the subject of much discussion – nationally and internationally – at a time when geopolitical tensions are on the rise. The UN Secretary-General has warned of a ‘great fracture’ between world powers, each with their own internet and AI strategy, as well as dominant currency, trade and financial rules and contradictory geopolitical and military views. Such a divide could establish a digital Berlin Wall. Increasingly, digital cooperation between states – and a universal cyberspace that reflects global standards for peace and security, human rights and sustainable development – is seen as crucial to ensuring a united world. A ‘global commitment for digital cooperation’ is a key recommendation by the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation .

FOR MORE INFORMATION

The Sustainable Development Goals

The Age of Digital Interdependence: Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation

ILO | Global Commission on the Future of Work

Secretary General’s Address to the 74th Session of the UN General Assembly

Secretary General’s Strategy on New Technology

PDF VERSION

Download the pdf version

This is the digital future we need

We must make technology work for everyone. Image:  REUTERS/Tyrone Siu

.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);} Jim Smith

Lynn st. amour.

.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;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} The Digital Economy is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.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 with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, the digital economy.

Today almost half of the world’s population are connected to the Internet, fifty years since it was invented and thirty since the creation of the World Wide Web. Regardless of whether we see this as a success story or terribly slow progress, the questions are: Where do we go from here? What is the digital future we need?

Countless volunteers, activists, entrepreneurs, businesses and governments made the Internet and the digital world it enables. A wave of new technologies, sensors embedded in physical products, machine learning and next generation networks allow us to gather, engage, process and act on information in real-time at global scale. Technology has the potential to transform how we stay healthy, how we travel, how we produce and consume goods and how we tackle environmental and development challenges.

It is one of the great ironies of the immense potential of digital technology that we are no longer dealing with just a question of technology – 60% of global GDP is expected to be digitized by 2022 and there is increasingly little distinction between the digital economy and the ‘real’ economy, between digital society and ‘real’ society. As a result, we must address larger issues that are forcing their way onto the global agenda.

Inclusion and trust

First, there is growing realization that digital divides based on factors such as geography, economy, gender, disability and age are growing. The digital divides exist both between countries and within countries. Despite connecting half the planet, growth in new internet users is now slowing and the most vulnerable today may be the hardest to reach under current models. Exclusion or inclusion becomes self-reinforcing as we regularly see a rise in economic inequality and market concentration in connected economies.

Secondly, for those that do participate today, trust is in decline. In a recent survey, less than half of the people surveyed across ten major economies, felt that technology would make their lives better. Concerns about privacy , security, personal prospects, and belief that businesses and governments act in their best interests are increasingly widespread.

Unless we address these fundamental issues of inclusion and trust, we risk technology becoming a force for greater division and discord rather than a boon for human progress.

The pace, scale, distributed and intertwined nature of change is complex. At the same time individuals have a greater voice, more opportunity to act collectively and higher expectations of engagement in many of these deliberations and processes; all this is challenging traditional institutions.

Have you read?

How the digital finance revolution can drive sustainable development, this is what the cities of the future could look like.

Shared goals for our digital future

Over the past 18 months, we have had the opportunity to chair a process that brought together practitioners, experts and leaders across a wide range of digital issues to identify the digital future we need. We identified six priorities that need our attention and action:

1. Leave no person behind: ensuring high-quality internet access for all

2. Choice and empowering users through digital identities: ensuring that everyone can participate in the digital society through identity and access mechanisms that empower the user

3. Make business work for people: helping companies navigate digital disruption and evolve to responsible business models and practices

4. Keep everyone safe and secure: shaping norms and practices that enable a digital ecosystem that is secure and resilient

5. Build new rules for a new game: developing new flexible, outcome based and participatory governance mechanisms to complement traditional policy and regulation

6. Break through the data barrier: developing innovations that allow us to benefit from data while protecting the interests and privacy of all stakeholders

In the year ahead, dozens of global organizations and institutions, including the G20, the UN General Assembly, the Internet Governance Forum, the Wuzhen Internet Conference, Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace, the UN High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation and the World Economic Forum will convene communities around these topics. These efforts are mirrored and enriched through regional, national and local efforts.

We stand at a pivotal moment in the creation of our digital world. We urge leaders, practitioners and experts from all sectors and countries to contribute to and support these processes. We further encourage recognition of the tremendous potential gains to be secured through deeper collaboration and cooperation based on shared goals.

Shared goals, whether the ones above or others, give us the opportunity to avoid fragmented and siloed discussions; instead creating a series of stepping-stones where different stakeholders can make complementary contributions towards an inclusive, trustworthy and sustainable digital future .

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.

Related topics:

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 Emerging Technologies .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .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

Solar storms hit tech equipment, and other technology news you need to know

Sebastian Buckup

May 17, 2024

Generative AI is trained on just a few of the world’s 7,000 languages. Here’s why that’s a problem – and what’s being done about it

Madeleine North

Critical minerals demand has doubled in the past five years – here are some solutions to the supply crunch

Emma Charlton

May 16, 2024

6 ways satellites are helping to monitor our changing planet from space

Andrea Willige

How can GenAI be optimized for people and processes?

May 15, 2024

This is how AI can empower women and achieve gender equality, according to the founder of Girls Who Code and Moms First

Kate Whiting

May 14, 2024

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Stories From Experts About the Impact of Digital Life
• 3. Fifty-fifty anecdotes: How digital life has been both positive and negative

Table of Contents

• 1. The positives of digital life
• 2. The negatives of digital life
• About this canvassing of experts
• Acknowledgments

A number of these experts wrote about both sides of the story, taking the time to point out some of the ways in which digital life is a blessing and a curse. A selection of these mixed-response anecdotes follows.

James M. Hinton , an author, commented, “Having grown up in the pre-internet era, my childhood was spent in a substantial monoculture. There was a single shared set of values and beliefs that everyone was expected to conform to. As someone who did not fit into that set of shared expectations (and only grew further apart from them as I aged) this created a substantial sense of isolation and even oppression. The advent of internet technologies – and particularly the ability to communicate instantly, inexpensively, across the planet – has given me access to like-minded individuals who have eased that sense of isolation. This makes it sound as though my answer should have been that these technologies have created, and will continue to create, a substantial improvement for my well-being. However, the very technologies that have created these opportunities have exposed me to even more of the general hostility of the surrounding culture to those like myself. Rather than a small, local community isolating me, now there is sense that a substantial portion of the world, establishment and orthodox belief systems are actively opposed to my positions. Perhaps, to take things to a bit of an extreme, I could compare it to being sent to the Warsaw Ghetto. I am, at last, surrounded by a large number of people like myself, but with an impending sense of dread at what is waiting just beyond the fence to eventually come down and wipe us out.”

Technology improves the lives of people who can avoid being dominated by it and forced into debilitating addictions to it. Frank Kaufmann

Frank Kaufmann , a scholar, educator, innovator and activist based in North America, commented, “Technology improves the lives of people who can avoid being dominated by it and forced into debilitating addictions to it. Technology allows me to grow and benefit from loving relationships among friends and family who can now be close despite geographical distance. Tragically it prevents the addicted from growing and benefiting from the most exquisite types of encounter, namely being in the physical and personal presence of another.”

Eric Royer , a professor based in North America, said, “Digital technology has fundamentally reshaped higher education, to the point where lectures are being replaced with online courses and information is readily available at the click of fingertip. This means that knowledge is no longer the domain of the ‘Ivory Tower’; however, I hold concerns over the effect of the internet on actual learning and a love for education itself. As a consequence of digital technology, education has become a commodity, and students view it as a means to an end.”

Sasha Costanza-Chock , associate professor of civic media at MIT, said, “On the one hand, digital technology has been used by progressive social movements to rapidly organize an enormous mobilization wave after the election of Trump. We’ve seen digital media used as a key tool to turn out hundreds of thousands of people with very short notice to protest the Muslim ban, attacks on LGBTQ rights, immigrant rights, the Women’s March, #MeToo, continued #BlackLivesMatter mobilizations, and more. At the same time, digital media are also used to surveil social movement actors in increasingly sophisticated ways; to propagate well-funded disinformation campaigns; and they are also used by far right movements.”

Barry Chudakov , founder and principal of Sertain Research and Streamfuzion Corp., wrote, “As a researcher with colleagues in the communications sphere, I hear a recurring conversation about the new world realities of ‘Me, Inc.,’ made possible by ubiquitous digital technology. The good news is that concept-generation, creativity, programming, publishing or musical performance is no longer in the hands of indifferent gatekeepers – the greybeard editors of various industries who decided which voice and talent was worthy. But this coin has another side.

“Digital technology has, in many areas, hollowed out apprenticeship and expertise. Anyone with a tool (a digital camera or smartphone, editing software, some programming chops) can now be an expert and build an app or a reputation. Older communicators may marvel that newer digital tech tools enable fresh ideas, ingenious approaches and direct versus staged or canned presentations. On the other hand, in the ‘Here Comes Everybody’ world of digital tool mayhem, just having the tool is readily equated with expertise. Many people see in this the breakdown of ‘guild wisdom’ – learning a craft that took years of mentorship and trial and error, which results in reduced standards of excellence and quality. Often there simply are no standards. When there are no real experts, everyone can present her/himself as an expert.

“The impact on workers’ well-being is profound: from relying on buzz words to explain approaches that are highly conceptual but lack experience, to relying on data summations that cannot be clearly articulated as beneficial to outcomes but provide a cloud of information that appears to be relevant – I see a high degree of insecurity and a struggle for clarity and standards. Whether you call yourself a designer, a programmer, a social media expert, a storyteller, a data analyst, a market research professional – you can now go through any door that is near you to get a job or build a career. But the mentors, for many, are gone. You will come up with brilliant insights that were ho-hum years ago; you will propose fuzzy solutions that appear to you clearly superior but are hollow as a dead tree; you will eventually consider your career and brand far more important and worth spending time on than your client’s job – following the dictum that ‘Me, Inc.’ means Me First.

“My friends’ lives in regard to well-being feel permanently insecure. The framework of progression, succession and apprenticeship is gone. ‘Me, Inc.’ rules. It’s me and my software and my digital technology. But, of course, a new apprenticeship will likely appear and then gatekeepers and filter governors will once again be part of the scene, albeit in different form – probably algorithms. This is because newer digital tools enable cooperation and increased socialization, even if it happens through screens, platforms and crowds.”

[the beaten trail]

Seth Finkelstein , consulting programmer at Finkelstein Consulting, wrote, “When the Net was younger, many users of it were easily able to have *substantive* open forums where anyone could join. I very much enjoyed being able to have discussions with people who were at a status level far greater than I could have communicated with beforehand. On the other hand, that meant people at a correspondingly higher status level could be personally offended by what I wrote. In retrospect, for me, the trade-off was not worth it. This is now writ large in social media today. There’s much more of a potential for becoming internet-famous, which can be a blessing or a curse. But it’s possible that there are many more and powerful curses around than blessings.”

Christian Huitema , a technology developer/administrator based in North America, appreciates the internet but commented that being disconnected is still occasionally quite important, “We now have a new checklist item before going out to dinner: We make sure that none of us is carrying a phone.”

Our greatest strength can also be our greatest weakness, and our human relationship with technology is a classic testament to that. Andie Diemer

Andie Diemer , journalist and activist user, wrote, “I use technology in almost every aspect of my life, as everyone I know does. It helps me make quicker, more-informed decisions and it can connect me to anything or anyone at any given moment. However I’ve also noticed the compulsions that come along with having technology so engrained in my life; the dopamine hit when you see you are receiving likes, the soothing feeling that can come from looking at photos of baby animals. Technology can make us feel anything whenever we want – all we need to do is hit search. As much as it’s great to plug in and be connected and feel limitless, there is no real total opposite of that in our society anymore. There is no way to totally shut it off or opt out. Most jobs require you to be computer-literate or to have a cellphone that can be on your person at all times. Our greatest strength can also be our greatest weakness, and our human relationship with technology is a classic testament to that.”

Colin Tredoux , a professor of psychology at the University of Cape Town, commented, “The advantages of digital technology are clear, but there are also disadvantages. One memorable advantage was being able to track and keep in contact with my two young children, ages 12 and 7, when they were lost on a train in Germany. I was able to get them to approach passersby, and get them onto a train that would get them to a designated location even though I was in Cape Town at the time. However, I can also tell stories about how much the ubiquity of digital technology has made everybody feel unsafe – the slightest disappearance of children or friends or adults from instant communication makes everybody highly anxious, almost always for no good reason (last year my daughter, now 20, went offline in Paris, and we spent six hours fretting, worrying, etc.). In other words, we need to weigh up the cost of worrying versus the benefit of making safe. My sense is that the former occurs with 100-times-greater frequency than the latter, so then the important question is what weight to put to the two.”

Simeon Yates , professor of digital culture at the University of Liverpool, wrote, “Digital life can be dominated by email and time-management tools. Even using these well leads to a significant increase in workload. This is not matched by changes in organisational structure and management practice to address this workload. This has long-term health impacts. But digital life is also good. Nearly everything we do for enjoyment has been helped by tools and apps: Going climbing (using an app for route guidebook), reading (endless access to books), music (endless access to music), film (endless access to film and TV), keeping in touch with friends and family, organising time together. All of these are much easier.”

Daniel Schultz , senior creative technologist at the Internet Archive, commented, “This morning I rolled out of bed to see a note from a constituent on Twitter, an email from a public school think tank about the extreme need for more effective communication with parents, I logged onto Slack to catch up on notes from my coworkers and friends, and received a FaceTime from my daughter downstairs as a reminder that it was time to eat breakfast with her. The end of this story actually captures both the benefits and risks of technology. I was immediately drawn into my phone after waking up – I got information, some of it adding to my pile of tasks and increasing my stress, some of it enabling human connection, but it was also at the expense of spending my first moments with my family. My life would not exist in its current form without digital technology. I work from home, and as a result I am able to see my family any time of the day. My professional collaborations are coordinated and executed online. A large portion of my civic engagement and advocacy is done through the creation or use of technology to share a message or make a point.”

Leora Lawton , lecturer in demography and sociology and executive director of the Berkeley Population Center at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote, “In positive ways I have close friends that I met online through email lists, colleagues that I communicate with and the ease of doing business or personal matters no matter where I am in the world. I love being able to check things in Google on my iPhone as the thought occurs. I like apps on my phone. I get to listen (or watch) baseball and other sports anywhere. However, I dislike the continuing demise of radio and print newspapers. Online sources are a different experience. They have their pluses, but there’s a reason why people still like vinyl over CDs. I feel the same way about radio. I take 25 hours off each week from the digital world – sometimes more – for religious reasons. Without the religious imperative I’m not sure I would do it, but I’m so glad I do. It’s such a relief! My co-religionists all agree. Even the teens often agree (not always of course, but they are teens).”

Daniel Berleant , author of “The Human Race to the Future,” commented, “We all remember the days when any group was subject to interruptions as someone’s cellphone rang. Text messaging and email have made communication even easier, while alleviating the interruption factor imposed by a ringing phone. At the same time, it has presented a disadvantage: people often will not answer a phone call, especially young people. This has produced an adjustment problem in my own experience, whereby I would sometimes like to call a family member on the phone, but cannot get through because they prefer a text message that does not interrupt them. I, and others, need to adjust expectations and tactics to the realities of modern cellphone-based communication.”

Charles Ess , professor, department of media and communication at the University of Oslo, said, “An obvious example is the use of digital technologies to communicate with family and friends around the globe. On the one hand, all of this makes it wonderfully easy and convenient to stay in touch – including during critical life moments such as the birth of a new grandson, a sibling’s loss of a job, a serious illness or death, et cetera. At the same time – as someone who grew up writing letters, e.g., the ones I wrote to my parents while working and then traveling through Germany and Europe in 1971 – I’m acutely aware of what is NOT communicated through digital channels (researcher Sherry Turkle addresses this more eloquently). First of all, such a letter demanded extended attention and focus – and, as research over the past 10 years or so has confirmed, the process of handwriting slows one down so as to open up silences and spaces for reflection that we elide quickly over if only using a keyboard. There is also the materiality of the letter. To not only see the words – but to hold in one’s hand a piece of paper that existed with me and then with those close to me at a specific time and place decades ago – is utterly distinctive. I receive hundreds of emails a day and write 10 to 20 or more. My professional and personal life turn on them, along with many other digital and communication technologies, of course. But I strongly doubt that my children will be interested in or find much value in trawling through even just the emails sent to them after I am gone. While they have their own affordances – first of all, speed and convenience – they also suffer from a kind of immateriality and, usually, brevity. By contrast, I suspect they’ll find my physical letters to be far more valuable and precious. I don’t think this is just nostalgia. Rather, it resonates with the so-called ‘death online’ research, which – alongside evidence for the many benefits of grieving and mourning via social media, memorial sites, etc. – also documents how for some number of people, precisely young people, there is the discovery that grief requires embodied co-presence. This is ramified by the unpleasant sides of online grief, e.g., postings from ‘friends’ who ignore you the next day, etc. Again, there is some indication of not necessarily rejecting ‘the digital’ entirely in favor of ‘the analogue’ (with all the caveats those terms require) – but rather of attempting to find a better balance.”

Nathalie Coupet , an internet advocate based in North America, said, “My first thought in the morning, having just awaken, is: ‘Do I have any emails?’ The internet has taken over my life and made me a 24-hour-a-day-connected pod to its mother ship. Without my smartphone, I dare not venture in the Big World out there. What if someone was trying to contact me? Ironically, I still remember the day when, sitting comfortably in a tram in Zurich, I had vowed to never carry a cellphone with me. To jealously safeguard my independence. To daydream in peace and be deliciously idle. Not to be so engaged all the time in a stressful awareness of place and time, people and events. To be left alone. It has now become a goal.”

Craig J. Mathias , principal for the Farpoint Group, wrote, “I’ve benefitted from email, other messing services including voice and video communications, access to a wide array of information via the Web, and access to many services I use regularly, like banking and health care. All of these are good, but I do worry about security and privacy, which still receive far too little attention. Stronger penalties are required for those who compromise these vital requirements.”

Kathleen Hayes , a technology specialist based in North America, commented, “For the good, my 91-year-old mom checks emails and uses her tablet when she travels so she can stay connected. She uses the caller ID on her home phone to ward off robo calls. For the not-so-good, on her new car some of the controls were difficult for her to figure out. What used to be a knob is now a screen with a vague description of what it may or may not do.”

A professor at a major U.S. state university said, “I am able to share information with my family who live in other states more easily. We are able to see photos and share news to groups that would have taken longer in the past. I do often wonder if we really want photos of our children online, however. I feel concern about safety and well-being of children.”

Theodora Sutton , a Ph.D. candidate at the Oxford Internet Institute, wrote, “… Digital technology is interwoven into my daily life as it is with everyone I know. The first thing I do when I wake up is usually check my iPhone for messages and news or scroll through Twitter on my laptop to help wake myself up. I find it to be an extremely useful and relaxing way to see what’s happening in the world without necessarily engaging. I also often use resources online when I’m struggling to fall asleep, as there is a rich library of calming content and most of it is free. A problem that I have with my digital technology is the way that boundaries are blurred. For example, context collapse on social networking sites, which make posting content a minefield, and can cause unnecessary anxiety. Another way that similar boundaries are blurred is in the activities I use the laptop for – both working and relaxing can be provided by the same ‘portal’ of my laptop screen, which I find unhelpful, as when I’m working there is always a distraction available, and when I’m relaxing it’s always possible to quickly check my work email, both things which can hinder the task at hand.”

Richard Padilla , a retired system administrator, said, “Tech has changed the development of the lives of everyone. A need to refine its processes for better growth is now the requirement.”

Michele Walfred , a North American communications specialist, said, “I have witnessed family members unable to join conversations, sit at a table and not bring their phones with them, etc. Social media platforms have provided everyone with a forum to express views, but, as a whole, conversations are more polarized, tribal and hostile. With Facebook for instance, there has been a huge uptick in fake news, altered images, dangerous health claims and cures, and the proliferation of anti-science information. This is very distressing and disturbing. People are too willing to share without doing their due diligence and fact-checking first. People now get their news from sources that are only aligned with their belief systems or ‘tribe’ and freely shut out any information that they don’t like or agree with. On a positive note, if one is interested in diverse opinions and views, the ability to make informed opinion and decisions is at one’s fingertips. I learn something new on the internet every day. GPS, maps, navigation have transformed my personal transportation. It has changed the way I shop, source local materials, find out what is going on in my own community, or – when I travel – immediately connect me to inside information about a new town or city. I used to bring along a Rand McNally map. Now I use Google Maps and, while I miss looking at maps, the technology now is so accurate and convenient. I am an avid photographer, and the multitude of editing apps is astounding. I have 40 installed on my iPad and they have transformed my artistic efforts. My grandson lives three and a half hours away in a very large city – not a pleasant drive for me, so being able to FaceTime him is a development I treasure.”

Timothy Leffel , a research scientist at the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, one of the largest independent social research organizations in the U.S., said, “I probably spend more waking hours looking at a screen than not. And this seems to be the new normal, which is a bit jarring. If you’d told me 10 years ago that this is what everyday life would be like today, I’m not sure what I’d think. I’m not sure what I think today, even. I have superficial knowledge of any topic at my fingertips, which is incredible. But with that knowledge comes a highly addictive and hidden reward system that probably leads me to overestimate the positive impact of computers on my life.”

Bouziane Zaid , an associate professor at Al Akhawayn University in Ifrane, Morocco, wrote, “Changes in quality of life, whether positive or negative, cannot be reduced to our uses of technology. It is a human tendency to idealize a past that probably was never as good as we think it was. Well-being is improved and lessened due to hyperconnectivity.”

Kathleen Harper , an editor for HollywoodLife.com, said, “GPS has changed my life – for the better. It sounds dramatic, but I honestly don’t know what I would do without it. I am what they call ‘directionally challenged,’ and I’d forever be lost without my handy-dandy smartphone (and my backup portable charger of course). Living in New York City can be intimidating, and it’s quite easy to get lost. Without step-by-step GPS and my subway app, I definitely wouldn’t be able to explore the city, attend events, and try new things as much as I do. Playing devil’s advocate though, maybe without it, I’d be forced to actually learn and/or memorize the city, which would in turn expand that part of my brain and make me a more well-rounded person.”

Mark Richmond , an internet pioneer and systems engineer for the U.S. government, wrote, “Twenty years ago my daughter met a man 8,000 miles away. Yes, it was via internet. They married and she has lived there ever since. Despite the distance we are able to stay in regular contact, including routine video chatting. My other children and grandchildren use social media either very little, or sometimes way too much. It helps to keep up with what everyone is doing, the joys and pains in their lives, but it also exacerbates things, especially for the younger ones. Every minor disagreement seems to be a major production, lived out on a stage. I am hopeful that as they learn, they will also learn moderation.”

I love meeting many new people from across the world through digital mediums. But I have noticed culturally a decrease in actual face-to-face human interaction or even a voice phone call with emotion and true connection, accuracy and depth. John Senall

John Senall , founder of Mobile First Media Group, said, “Digital technology has offered additional career opportunities and advancement to me. However, the type of career opportunities for me and countless others usually involve sitting at a computer screen, working more hours and being stuck to a smartphone. All have made communication more seamless and constant, but have, in part, played a role in decreasing my health quality. I love meeting many new people from across the world through digital mediums. But I have noticed culturally a decrease in actual face-to-face human interaction or even a voice phone call with emotion and true connection, accuracy and depth. I ponder what it all may mean for my young children and their friends and classmates, down the road when there will be deeper technology and more communication changes. The benefits of a hyperconnected life are amazing and rewarding. Yet, I think many of us yearn, at least occasionally, for a simpler, less digital time.”

William J. Ward , president of DR4WARD, said, “After spending a lot of time on digital I found my physical and mental health declining. I now spend much less time on digital and much greater time doing physical activity like yoga to counteract the damage to the body that spending too much screen time inevitably causes. I also invest more time in face-to-face and social activities and finding a balance where digital is helpful but does not distract from relationships.”

Cliff Zukin , a professor and survey researcher at Rutgers University, commented, “The only way I can reach my children is by texting; this is disjointed asynchronous communication, not conversation. However, I can walk out of the house not knowing how to get where I’m going or needing a map, which I love.”

Christopher Wilkinson , internet pioneer, wrote, “I do not agree with the epithet ‘hyperconnected.’ We are far from it. Life-changing events: 1) Word processor spell/grammar checkers in several languages. 2) Sending SMS by Skype (disgracefully discontinued by Microsoft). 3) Negative: Demise of the handwritten letter.”

A selection of anonymous responses

An internet activist from Europe said, “Great for keeping in touch across oceans, but across the city people’s tendencies to substitute text for voice is not always good. It is great to be able to look things up instantly, but this may lead to shallow understanding of answers.”

An internet pioneer and social and digital marketing consultant commented, “On one hand, I can be in close communication with my 12-year-old daughter and not have to wonder where she is as she goes about her day, and can remind her to bring things home from school. I can also be in contact with friends through social media, which helps as I live in a city where I don’t have many social outlets. On the other hand, I’ve found that too much time spent online, particularly on Facebook, can make me feel depressed. Either I catch myself comparing my life to the posts that others make, or I get overwhelmed by the toxic political atmosphere currently playing out.”

A senior lecturer in media studies wrote, “There are both positive and negative consequences from being always-on. Being always-on means that I can be in constant contact with my family who live on the other side of the world, but it also means that I receive work emails all throughout the day.”

A senior lecturer based in Southeast Asia said, “Time wasted on social media is negatively affecting well-being; positively, social media helps to bring people close, so that it helps to make a lively environment with intimate people. In education, it has been a good platform as well as a resource.”

A chief of staff for a nonprofit organization wrote, “FOMO (fear of missing out) is a problem, but digital life is also useful for communicating with loved ones far away.”

A retired professor and research scientist said, “Good impacts of digital life: Immediate and extensive answers and how-to advice; quick, easy access to books and movies. Bad impacts: Reduced conversations with wife, especially at mealtime – just Google it.”

A vice president at a major entertainment company in the United States commented, “Clearly, collective action (good or bad) happens with much more ease and speed. I marvel at the ease of organizing things that result in greater connectivity with my family – from renting a house in a far-away place for vacation to helping my children.”

A research scientist said, “On the one hand, I can communicate with friends who decades ago I would not be able to stay in touch with. On the other hand, we have a white supremacist in the White House.”

A professor of English wrote, “What has been positive is the ability to follow along with positive facets of others’ lives – birthdays, anniversaries, etc. This has been positive. Yet, again, a birthday card, a phone call, a conversation would be more meaningful.”

A futurist based in North America wrote, “Generally, very positive is the access to information. It is easier to do research, find out about current events, etc. Among the negatives are kids immersed in digital devices; staring at a screen as an acceptable activity.”

A professor from North America said, “I’ve cut off from lots of digital media. I realized it was consuming lots of my time. It didn’t make me feel good – what I was seeing and reading made me mostly angry and depressed. It was feeding negativity. I am happier without it. However, a friend who has a child with a chronic medical condition has monitoring so that medical personnel are notified when parameters are exceeded so interventions can occur rapidly. The child gets fast feedback, too, so they can change behavior or take action in a way that would not have been possible five years ago.”

An entrepreneur based in North America wrote, “I feel like technology has made our life better (instant access to information) and worse (instant access to entertainment).”

A professor based in Europe wrote, “When I replaced my mobile I gave the used, but still quite powerful one to my granddaughter aged 10. She made nice pictures with it, which I appreciated. But she also got obsessed with certain internet games, leading to conflicts.”

An assistant professor of political science at an Ivy League university wrote, “As a parent this is easy. My kids (ages 4 and 7) are steeped in technology. They have iPads in their classrooms (which help with engaging them and I think are a net good), but they also want to be on iPads at home (which may not be as good). They think every screen is a touch screen. Even at 4 years old, my son’s first instinct when he doesn’t know something bit of information is to Google it or ask Siri. My kids love to read books on Kindle (and much prefer it to paper books) so even the educational activity of reading is now deeply intertwined with technology. In some ways that is good, on Kindle they can highlight the words they don’t know as they read and – something that has proven very important for my 7-year-old – they cannot see how thick the book is, so they tend to read more without lamenting about length. At the same time, they have little interest in libraries and miss out on books that are not available via Kindle. They can FaceTime family who live far away, but sometimes they see that as a substitute for actual visits. In short, there is good and bad but there is little doubt that technology structures our daily life in profound ways.”

An executive director of a tech innovation firm said, “Looking at my kids; they’re connected and informed. And they spend too much time online.”

A director of technology based in North America wrote, “In a positive way it has allowed me to keep in touch more easily with friends that live far away. In a negative sense it has provided a distraction to what is happening in the moment.”

A professor based in Europe wrote, “My working days are longer! I wake up and check email and I am habituated like one of Pavlov’s dogs to check my email regularly throughout the day and into the evening. Even though my boss has banned us from sending work emails after 6 p.m., I still check my email. As a result, I never truly feel disconnected from work – even during vacations.”

A professor from North America said, “For me (in my 50s) digital life has been positive – a way to keep up with old friends. However, for my teens, it can create sadness and feelings of being/having less than peers.”

An associate professor at a U.S. university said, “My ability to stay connected to family and friends brings me great joy. And I’m able to connect to other academics when I am not on campus, which is more often than not. However my husband feels that I am too connected! In this regard it may be hurting our relationship. At times using technology can border on addiction. For me that is.”

A North American researcher wrote, “Technology has changed my life because I now work for a company in a different state. My contributions are made at my home, via telecommuting. This is both good and bad – on the good side, I’m able to help take care of my disabled son and to help my wife through a battle with cancer. But, on the down side – there’s no opportunity for the water cooler discussions that can speed up development work. There’s no opportunity for facetime with managers and VPs to get that all-important rapport with senior management. In other words, there are no opportunities to exercise and grow the ‘soft skills’ necessary to progress in the organization.”

An anonymous respondent wrote, “It has made work communication easier but often less thoughtful since constant connectivity fuels the expectation of an immediate response. It also has diminished the opportunities to disconnect from work for a proper break, but it does give me flexibility to not be tied to my office.”

A college student said, “I am not too proud to admit that I also suffer from the FOMO (fear of missing out) that comes from living a hyperconnected lifestyle. I hold lengthy Snapchat streaks with friends to bond with them, I check my social media accounts for approximately three to four hours daily. Daily I catch myself peering at my phone the moment I awake to learn about the events I may have missed while I slept. While my Snap streaks do provide a satisfying, quick dopamine hit each time I respond, overall, I cannot say that living a hyperconnected lifestyle has enhanced my life in any way. But I would also argue that it has not hurt my mental well-being either. While I am willing to admit I struggle in certain areas to balance my digital distractions with the important things in life; overall, I don’t think that it has had a negative effect on my life. I do think that some people are negatively impacted, but most will work to find a balance after some trial and error as new tools for digital life continue to appear and we adjust.”

A clinical assistant professor at a major U.S. university wrote, “I am old enough to see the effects that cellphones have had on family dinners. In a positive light, some arguments are resolved more quickly – Wikipedia can often provide resolution to many debatable points and repair faulty recollection, leading to much more productive conversations. More negatively, the interruptions caused by text messaging and email often divide the attention of those dining together and can sometimes diminish the quality of time spent together.”

In the negative, the ‘always-on’ capabilities are big triggers for my anxiety around perfectionism and performance. In the positive, when working with my therapist on ways to bring myself more forward in relationships, social media was a key tool. A teen library specialist

A teen library specialist wrote, “I have had both positive and negative impacts in my personal mental health courtesy of hyperconnection of digital connectivity. In the negative, the ‘always-on’ capabilities are big triggers for my anxiety around perfectionism and performance. In the positive, when working with my therapist on ways to bring myself more forward in relationships, social media was a key tool. She described Facebook (at the time that was the dominant tool) as disastrous for her work with narcissists but a dream for working with folks like me. I have grown more comfortable with expressing myself and I feel more visible in this format than in others within my communities. And I don’t mean that I have more friends online than I have in the real world. I mean my ‘real-world’ relationships are richer because I share with the people in my workplace or family or church via social media in a way I never before did and still rarely do face to face.”

An anonymous respondent commented, “We are able to keep in touch with family all around the globe. On the other hand, our family wouldn’t have been so spread out in the first place without the internet.”

An academic leader based in Australia wrote, “Digital technology has provided unthinkable access to information. Systems for doing business have enabled us to perform tasks and obtain and share information like never before. At the same time, digital transformation has meant each individual spends a lot more time navigating systems and doing work that previously would have been performed by other experts.”

[The good:]

There is so much pressure to publish research even when it’s greatly flawed… Moreover, in many ways our techniques and standards of rigor have improved over time, so I don’t want to sound completely hopeless about scientific progress in my field. A research scientist based in North America

A research scientist based in North America commented, “I’m 26, so the internet changed pretty much everything, right? It grew up with me, more or less. In fifth grade, I remember writing a research report about the gray whale. We had to go through all these crazy steps – finding books, writing down facts on notecards, putting them in those little clicky boxes that held notecards. Now, when was the last time you saw one of those? We were allowed to have internet sources, I think, but there were all these requirements about what constituted an appropriate source, as well as strict limits on how many internet sources could be used. The assumption was that somehow, finding information on the internet did not constitute real research, and this was our teacher’s way of preparing us for the research we would be doing in the future. Fast forward to now, where I’m finishing up my Ph.D., and I do research practically every day. Do you know how often I have to seek out resources that I can’t find online? It’s never. Literally never. My dissertation uses about two, neither of which I sought out – just some books my advisor just unceremoniously handed me one day. Admittedly, my academic field is quite young comparatively, and there may be fields with more emphasis on works that cannot be found online, but still, this is mostly a good thing for my well-being, as well as for the productivity of my field. However, there are also more insidious consequences of the increased volume and availability of research. The most prominent consequence I observe is that there is simply more research than we as a field are able to deal with. There is so much research that is redundant or contradictory, and our field doesn’t currently have the structure in place to reconcile it all. Hundreds of papers are published every day, and most of these will never be read, let alone cited (and that’s assuming people are actually reading what they cite – ha!). There is so much pressure to publish research even when it’s greatly flawed, as well as to frame every finding with a theoretical impact it cannot actually have. Instead of a gradual forward trajectory, we’re sitting on an unmanageable mound of contradictions. This research machine I live in is so unimaginably wasteful, with such deeply entrenched and utterly misguided incentives that I do not know how we will ever overcome it. This is not to suggest that this is entirely the fault of digital technology, although it certainly has enabled this trend. Moreover, in many ways our techniques and standards of rigor have improved over time, so I don’t want to sound completely hopeless about scientific progress in my field. I think to an outside observer my field is flourishing, and we have much to offer the world. However, if we do not find ways to restructure and rethink what progress looks like, we will be crushed by our own weight.”

A solutions consultant based in North America wrote, “Hyperconnection via text messaging has helped in a world where physical proximity and time constraints make it more difficult to connect. For me, a quick text, letting my husband know that I’m thinking about him or giving him a heads-up on something important – is amazingly positive, and helpful. And it does so without detracting from my day. Same when I communicate with my son, who spends 50% of his time at his father’s house, and 50% with me. It helps us stay in touch and positively connected. But we also do not overuse it – perhaps we are not as ‘hyperconnected’ as other users of technology, although, my mother, who is 80, says that the text messaging is ‘just too much!’ She believes that is hyperconnectivity.”

[Advanced Research Projects Agency Network]

An anonymous respondent wrote, “Twitter is the greatest time-sink ever but a great source of interesting news and entertainment. However, I waste too much time on it when I could be reading the newspaper or a book.”

A post-doctoral fellow at Stanford University commented, “My family and I use our smartphones to send photos, video chat and send text messages on a daily basis, allowing us to stay in contact more frequently we did back when letter writing and telephone calls were our ways to stay in touch. On the negative side, I look at headlines way too much as a form of stimulus any time I have a second to spare – even when I’m with my children. I’d say I’m less present, less able to focus on reading long form text, than I was before my smartphone came into my life.”

A series of scenarios tied to potential future concerns of digital life

Peter and Trudy Johnson-Lenz, owner-operators of Pathfinding Smarter Futures and participants in this canvassing, submitted in response to the request for anecdotes the following series of scenarios they wrote in 2005 in order to spark discussions of potential issues.

Auto Angel I: Your commute co-pilot

You’re yawning as you slowly merge into the through lane on the long ride home. Your comfy biofueled hybrid-electric car is programmed to keep you alert and relaxed. The new ATM (autonomous traffic management system) keeps everything flowing smoothly without slow-downs or jam-ups, but you still have miles to go before you sleep. The music seems to keep pace with the flow of traffic, and you slip into a kind of driving flow state. The ATM is intelligent, but not smart enough to have autonomous lanes to do the driving for humans, nor do most people want that. Crack! The burst of sound and light, and the gentle spray on your face, with the aroma of peppermint, eucalyptus, and rosemary, brings you back to full alertness. Damn! You’d nodded off again. Fortunately, it was only a second, thanks to Auto Angel, your co-pilot on the two-hour commute from the agile economy enterprise zone to the only affordable housing in the tri-county area. Too bad your insurance doesn’t cover that latest wakefulness drug that’s all the rage.Auto Angel advises you to pull over as soon as possible and take a short power nap. You can set Angel’s alarm so you won’t sleep longer than 20 minutes and get groggy. You start looking for a safe place to stop and rest.

Auto Angel II: The high price of Drowsiness

The e-alert from your doctor’s office is surprising.“We’re concerned. Please come in at your earliest convenience. Press star for an immediate appointment.” What could possibly be the matter? What do they know that you don’t?At the clinic, you’re confronted with a stark, unforgiving choice. Auto Angel has reported one too many instances of drowsiness for your automobile insurance company to allow you to continue to drive under your existing policy. Either you must get the much more expensive hazardous driver rider or be treated immediately for “driving drowsiness” (suspected narcolepsy or sleep apnea, now on your medical and insurance e-records).If you’re actually diagnosed with narcolepsy, your doctor must report it to the department of motor vehicles. You’ll be subject to random monitoring for treatment compliance.Your health insurance doesn’t fully cover this treatment because driving is now considered an elective activity. There are drugs available, but they’re not on your formulary list. You’re advised to take public transportation.Of course, some can still afford fully private transportation, just they can afford health care and higher insurance premiums. You’re not one of them. And the public transit system doesn’t extend all the way out to your community yet.

HealthGuardian

You’re in Mexico City on your way to your next business appointment. “Señor, amigo, come with us — NOW! You’re at risk for a heart attack. We’re from HealthGuardian. We’ll get you to the hospital pronto.” Your HealthGuardian biosensors are supposed to provide alerts of impending medical emergencies.Uniformed men with insistent voices grab you by both arms and hustle you toward an official-looking van. Are they really from your HealthGuardian monitoring service, or are they kidnappers? How can you verify their identity? Are you really in danger?!?Your heart races and your head spins. You feel pressure in your chest, and it’s hard to breathe. What’s going on?!?

Alexi, ever-faithful e-valet

Soft chimes announce his voice. “Sir?” Alexi, your e-valet, continues close to your ear. “May I suggest that you eat something soon? You’re moving into your danger zone.” His interruption irritates you as you walk briskly along the crowded sidewalk. “Sir, the bistro four doors up on the right fits your dining profile and has two very nice specials today. Or I can recommend the Thai restaurant around the next corner.” Your blood sugar level is dropping precipitously close to where even deciding to eat, let alone where, is becoming a chore. “Sir?” “OK, OK, Alexi,” you say to yourself. Your gait slows, you check the bistro menu in the window, and go inside. What ever would you do without Alexi’s constant and respectful attentiveness?

Your privacy – priceless!

[radio-frequency identification]

Scrambling your identity

At WuMart’s self-service checkout, you’re fuming. You’ve ducked into the store on your lunch hour to pick up a few essentials for this afternoon’s flight, and you’re in a real hurry. Nothing is scanning right. The dental care travel kit scans as reading glasses, vitamin C as laxatives, and deodorant as antacid. You call loudly for a supervisor. The young man sighs. “Yeah, it looks like somebody in the store hacked our RFID tags again and scrambled the data. It’ll get straightened out when the machines go through their data consistency and reliability power cycle in about 10 minutes. Sorry about that.” He puts an obviously used, dog-eared “Out of order – please try again later” sign on the scanner. “If you’ll just step through the electronic gate over there, we’ll have you on your way in no time.” You stride through the metal archway with your goods, and the human checker enters the products numbers to ring up your purchases. The finger touch system debits your account. Finally! You have just enough time to get back to the office. Later, when you try to enter the restricted area to get the data reports you need for your trip, you’re stopped cold. Your implanted VeriChip doesn’t properly authenticate your identify, and security forces are there in moments. Missing your flight will be the least of your problems.

The mall knows you better than you do

As you stroll through the environmentally controlled mall, your mobile flashes a steady stream of personalized messages from nearby merchants. “Jeans tops – 30% instant discount!” “Free skin-care consultation!” “Shakira CDs all on sale!”The automated ads have no way of knowing that the RFID-tagged jeans, derma-repair cream, and pop diva CD in your shopping bag are purchases for other members of your extended family. You’re not interested in more purchases like them or to go with them. You’re done.Nearby, the animated window display of dancing cookware catches your eye, and you linger a few moments, watching with great amusement. Flying frying pans? Flipping spatulas? Spinning plates? What were they thinking?!? The mall looks more like an amusement park every time you come here.But now the stream of messages is all for cookware, tableware, stemware, cooking schools, and related products and services. You’re beginning to feel you’re being stalked instead of enticed with great offers. How did they know what you were looking at? What else do they know about you? And how do they know it?!?This is creepy.

Who is responsible?

The distinctive ring on your mobile is your daughter’s. “Waaah! The bus didn’t come, and it’s our last practice before Saturday’s big match! You’ve gotta drive me NOW. Plueeease???” Just then the mobile beeps twice. “Just a sec, sweetie.” It’s an automated request for you to approve entry of your new drug prescription into the GVS Registry database. You’ll deal with that later. “OK, I’m back. I’ll try to get someone to cover for me. Pick you up in 15 minutes, OK?”The next evening in a heavy rainstorm, a drunk driver ploughs into your Viridian hybrid. As they stabilize you on the way to the Trauma Center, the EMTs read your implanted VeriChip to get your updated medical information.In the ER, your condition suddenly worsens in a most peculiar way, and the doctors suspect a bad drug interaction. But how could that have happened? Did the EMTs make a mistake? Were you taking something they didn’t know about?Right now they’ll save your life. What happened and who’s responsible will come later.

Shopper’s Revenge

“Undecided shopper’s discount! Pick up prod, put back 2x, RFID shelf reader -> instant 25% off coupon.” Intrigued by this alert from Shopper’s Revenge (“Don’t get mad – get bargains!”) on your mobile screen, you check for something you actually want, walk over to the right shelf, pick it up, and put it back. Rinse, repeat. Voila! This is too easy. … A month later, the store catches on and raises the bar. You still get the coupon if you pick up the product, wait for over a minute, and put it back three times. A little tedious, but worth it for some pricier items. That works for three more weeks. A few days later, your Shopper’s Revenge e-coach tells you to vary the pattern so you’ll look more “natural” – to fit the store’s learning agent’s evolving model of an undecided shopper. Thanks to Shopper’s Revenge, you’re saving money, outwitting the technology, and looking more and more like a very hesitant shopper every day.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Emerging Technology
• Future of the Internet (Project)
• Online Privacy & Security
• Platforms & Services
• Privacy Rights
• Religion & Social Values
• Social Media
• Technology Adoption

A quarter of U.S. teachers say AI tools do more harm than good in K-12 education

Many americans think generative ai programs should credit the sources they rely on, americans’ use of chatgpt is ticking up, but few trust its election information, q&a: how we used large language models to identify guests on popular podcasts, computer chips in human brains: how americans view the technology amid recent advances, most popular, report materials.

• Shareable quotes from experts about the impact of digital life

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Teens in a Digital World

• Posted August 19, 2022
• By Jill Anderson
• Counseling and Mental Health
• Families and Community
• Human Development
• Technology and Media

Harvard researchers and Carrie James  are bridging the gap between adults and teens by providing a teen-level view of what it means to grow up digital today. 

In their new book, Behind Their Screens: What Teens are Facing (And Adults are Missing) , they share data from a multiyear survey of more than 3,500 teens across the United States. Their research delves into complex topics like how teens are using social media to be politically active and engaged (and the challenges that arise), what they think about sexting, and the ways that their online behavior and friendship dilemmas change over time.

Weinstein and James — both principal investigators at  Project Zero , based at the Harvard Graduate School of Education — argue that adults need to move beyond blaming screens and instead empathize with what it means to be a teen in a digital world. Educators, especially, can play a unique role in helping teens navigate their complex digital lives. 

“Teens were clear with us that they want and need more support around so many issues they’re facing behind their screens,” Weinstein says. “But even adults with the best of intentions — parents, teachers, coaches, and more — too often misunderstand what teens are up against and then miss the mark when they try to help.”

We spoke with Weinstein and James, who elaborated on their findings and shared ways in which educators can lead in helping teens navigate their digital worlds.

We hear a lot of parental concern about what to do when it comes to teens and social media. But what about the unique role of educators in this conversation?   Carrie James: Educators can create space for young people to explore the real tensions and digital dilemmas they routinely face in their connected lives. Teens told us about everyday decision points that give them pause: When a friend is struggling and reaching out for support at all hours, what’s the right boundary between being an available, “good” friend and disconnecting for my own self care? In a digital context where performative posts and over-the-top comments are the norm, how can I be authentic? What should I do if someone I really like is asking me to share a sexy picture? Should I re-share violent videos to raise awareness about what’s happening in the world, even if the videos will be triggering or harmful to peers?

Questions like these, that reflect teens’ actual pain points, are powerful entry points for relevant learning and classroom discussion. The ways students navigate these situations in their real lives have implications for school climate, too. Over the last few years, we’ve been working closely with Common Sense Education to translate key insights from our research with teens into usable classroom lessons that lean into the thorny dilemmas they face. We’re especially proud of the Thinking Routines and Digital Dilemmas hub we co-developed with specific resources to address digital habits, social emotional scenarios, and civic dilemmas.

“Teens were clear with us that they want and need more support around so many issues they’re facing behind their screens. But even adults with the best of intentions — parents, teachers, coaches, and more — too often misunderstand what teens are up against.”

In recent years, we’ve witnessed a trend in “challenges” taking place on social media that are sometimes hurtful and disruptive to children’s lives or even to others. When do these trends become harmful, and when should teachers or school administrators act?

Emily Weinstein: It feels like there’s always a new and dangerous social media “challenge” to warn against, whether it involves sunburn art, climbing up milk crates, planking in dangerous places, or attempting to eat Tide Pods. As with so many things, social media contributes to the rapid spread of a new and, in this case, dumb ideas.

We shouldn’t wait for a new trend to emerge to act, though. We need to talk early and often about “challenges” and other kinds of harmful content and information students come across online. We want to have these conversations before students are in the position of trying to decide whether or not to take on the latest challenge themselves. Talk to students about how they make sense of content they see on their feeds: How do they think about viral challenges? But also, how do they make sense of emerging news and information? How do they decide if something is real or fake, wise or foolish, worth trying or important to avoid? 

When we open up conversations like these, we create opportunities for teens to identify for themselves where their go-to approaches might be falling short — leaving them misinformed or even at risk. From there, we can support needed skills and the dispositions to be alert to digital misinformation, dares, and more — and to make careful decisions. 

Your research recognizes the importance of adults using empathy when it comes to teens and social media. What does this practice look like for educators and school administrators as they try to balance distractions in the classroom?

James: We talk about the principle of “empathy over eye-rolling” because we’ve seen its power again and again. The impulse to roll our eyes when we see teens tethered to their phones or obsessing about a social media post is real. But our research gave us a deep appreciation for what teens are up against — these technologies collide with developmental impulses to explore their own identities, to connect with peers, to be liked in ways that are genuinely hard.

When we can authentically tap into empathy for what it’s like to grow up with social media and smartphones, it changes the tone and tenor of our conversations. It creates a natural impulse to get curious (“Why did you post that picture?”; “Why did you decide to livestream that fight from the parking lot?”). Again and again, we’ve found that students’ answers reveal dimensions of complexity that we as adults just hadn’t considered. We can and should hold clear boundaries about appropriate school behavior. But when our conversations, rules, and decisions are informed by a real sense of empathy and understanding, we’re more likely to design interventions that work.

"Talk to students about how they make sense of content they see on their feeds: How do they think about viral challenges? But also, how do they make sense of emerging news and information? How do they decide if something is real or fake, wise or foolish, worth trying or important to avoid?"

Do you see a role for social media in the classroom or in schools, particularly when it comes to civic engagement and activism?

Weinstein : Absolutely! One of our most surprising and interesting set of findings connects to the complex tensions around civic activism and social media. Our research captured a profound shift over the last almost decade in the ways teens experience politics online. Teens in 2013 told us being political online was optional. Now, that’s no longer the case. Today it can feel expected and essential — and what’s harder, there are so many ways to get it wrong. Teens can be “punished” by peers for expressing the “wrong” opinion on an issue, or for sharing the “right” perspective on an issue at the wrong time because another issue is more urgent. Posting “regular” content, like pics from hanging out at the beach, when a national crisis is unfolding can be grounds for being called out of touch, and even for being cancelled. 

If we think about the role of schools in preparing students to become engaged citizens, it’s obvious we can’t ignore the ways social media is a facet of civic engagement that requires attention as part of civic learning. There are obvious topics, like misinformation and filter bubbles. But there are also less visible puzzles that teens face on social media where the civic and interpersonal collide: Teens told us that friendships can be at stake based on what they do or do not say online about hot button issues, from Black Lives Matter to abortion rights to presidential politics. 

We’ve tackled some of these issues in collaboration with our colleagues at Common Sense. They have a few brand new lessons that lean into digital civic dilemmas, including cancel culture, conspiracy theories, and algorithms. 

How can educators help teens develop agency in their digital lives? Why is this important?

James: In so many areas of digital life, we saw evidence from teens of a struggle to feel and to be in control. Examples teens shared include when they are told to take care of their digital footprints, but they can’t prevent peers from posting things they would never want online; when someone asks for nudes and they feel like every decision including saying “no” is a lose-lose for reasons adults may not recognize; when they care about a struggling friend but also want to disconnect. And the list goes on. 

Digital agency is an undercurrent in many of the struggles we heard young people describe. This is notable because of the connection we know exists between feelings of agency and overall well-being. People cope better with stressful issues when they believe they have some agency and control. 

When we talk directly with students about tech-related dilemmas and struggles, we create the occasion to build skills, strategies, and confidence for our students to manage situations that arise in their real lives.    An educator we interviewed in the course of our research captures the spirit of what we’re looking to support — specifically, teens’ decision-making “at 10 o’clock on a Saturday night.” This can mean having go-to language to respond to a snap from a romantic interest asking for a nude or to kindly (but firmly) set a boundary with a friend whose texting has become overwhelming.

The reality is that so many of the ways we currently approach digital life in our schools and in our classrooms fall short. We’re not leaning into today’s challenges, and as a result we’re not meeting them. But this doesn’t have to be the case. When we better understand what our students are facing in their connected lives, we’re better positioned to meet their actual needs. 

Additional resources:

• Lesson Plans for Civics and Digital Life
• Digital Dilemmas and Thinking Routines to Empower Students
• About "Behind Their Screens," by Emily Weinstein and Carrie James
• Harvard EdCast: The Complex World of Teens and Screens

Usable Knowledge

Connecting education research to practice — with timely insights for educators, families, and communities

Related Articles

Center for Digital Thriving Launches to Support Teen Well-Being

Based at Project Zero, the center will offer new evidence-backed resources to support teens in a technology-filled world

Want to Talk to Your Students About Their Online Dilemmas?

Askwith Education Forum Highlights Teen Well-Being in a Tech-Filled World

U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy detailed the struggle many adolescents have with social media and what can be done to help

EDITORIAL article

Editorial: growing up in a digital world - social and cognitive implications.

• 1 Department of Behavioral Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
• 2 Faculty of Arts and Education, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
• 3 Department of Education, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
• 4 Department of Psychology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States

Editorial on the Research Topic Growing Up in a Digital World - Social and Cognitive Implications

Digital media availability has surged over the past decade. Most of us regularly check our emails, video chat, follow social media, search for new information, and play games. We frequently swap the real world for the digital world. It is the new “normal!” Children growing up today use digital media for learning and entertainment and to make social connections. The increasing usage of digital media has caused grave concern among parents and teachers. Rapid growth in access has been accompanied by similarly rapid growth in research on the effect of digital media. A search conducted in early July 2021 that included four major databases—Scopus, PubMed, PsycInfo, and ERIC—returned 1,777 hits when combining the search terms “digital media” and “screen time” with the age specifiers “infancy” and “preschool” (see Figure 1 ). A vast majority of the identified output, 1,269 hits, is from publications dated January 2016 to December 2020. Phrased differently, the mean average number of publications per year was 0 during the 1990s, 13 during the first decade of the twenty first century, and 176 from 2011 to the end of 2020. However, these publications often failed to consider the family context and socio-cognitive implications of digital media. As a result, there are many unanswered questions such as: What role do factors like content, context, and culture play in determining the impact of digital media, for good or for ill, on children's learning and development? The current Research Topic aims to tackle some of these questions.

Figure 1 . Returned hits from a search combining the terms “digital media” and “screen time” with “preschool” or “infancy.” Search date July 3, 2021.

The book includes 18 papers organized into three sections, one that focuses on book reading and language, one that covers potential risks associated with early media use, and one group of studies brought together under an umbrella we call New Developments. Some papers cut across sections and could have been included in more than one section. We are pleased to report that a majority of the papers result from international collaborations representing work conducted in nine countries. Six papers are from North America (Canada and USA), 10 from Europe (Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and United Kingdom), and two from Asia (Israel and Singapore).

Book Reading and Language

Digital media lends itself to storytelling, leading to an expansion in the ways children encounter stories. Apart from oral and traditional print books, even the youngest children have unprecedented access to film, apps, and games. The result is that most young children come across stories in formats other than traditional paper books. Therefore, it is not surprising that quite a few contributions focused on how these newly formatted stories relate to traditional book reading.

The current set of studies targets several sub-questions inherent to the new ways of encountering stories. The Courage et al. study tests whether 2- and 3-year-olds can operate a tablet purposefully to achieve a goal and, for instance, learn new information from a picture book app compared to a matched paper book. Others focus on the impact the digital book has on adult guidance. Müller-Brauers et al. zoom in on the narrative potential of a commercial digital picture book app and found that despite the helpful narrative animations provided by the app, most parents failed to fully exploit the narrative potential. In the same vein, Hoel et al. explore how early childhood educators prepare young children to participate in a shared digital-book reading session before the session and how successful they are in using typical features of digital books.

Crawshaw et al. explore a new storytelling technique, the film-like format, and how that contributes to story comprehension; to this end, they compare what children retain from a story after sharing a wordless picture book with the parent or watching a video of the same wordless story. Gaudreau et al. wonder how vital the physical presence of the adult is for comprehending a picture book. They compare the effects of a prerecorded pseudo-contingent condition with a video chat or live condition and report that 4-year-old children can comprehend a book equally well when read over video chat than when presented live.

Potential Risks

Contributors examined how the content and context of media exposure were associated with decreases in the quality of play and language interactions, sleep, and focused attention. Two short-term longitudinal studies by Gueron-Sela and Gordon-Hacker and McHarg et al. examined multiple dimensions of media exposure that predicted later poorer attention and executive functioning outcomes. The use of longitudinal designs and the more detailed media exposure measures are important current directions.

Three studies used the CAFE media assessment questionnaire, which is part of the CAFE set of tools described by Barr et al. In Italy, Bellagamba et al. found that Italian children were exposed to media at similar levels to English speaking children from the US and the UK. Higher levels of media exposure were associated with poorer sleep habits. In Sweden, Sundqvist et al. examined how a 2-year-old's language use across the day is associated with daily media use. More direct exposure to media without active parent involvement was associated with poorer language outcomes. However, joint media engagement and book reading were associated positively with language. In Germany, Konrad et al. found that parental quality decreased when parents received a message on their phone during a free play session. Some parents also completed a paper version of the questionnaire and the change in interactional quality was the same suggesting that texting may be similar to other everyday interruptions. These findings suggest that complex patterns of media usage are associated with several domains.

New Developments in Digital Media Research

This broad heading does not imply absolute uniqueness, but it is our view that these papers represent new and evolving subfields. Sun and Yin discuss how variation in input affects bilingual children's language learning. For bilingual children in Singapore, multimedia resources are more important for Mandarin learning than for English. This finding is explained by an unbalanced bilingual environment that provides poorer input for Mandarin learning than for English.

How do children evaluate information from different types of digital media? Hassinger-Das et al. studied this in a group of 117 children aged 3- to 8-years. YouTube videos are more attractive than smartphone or TV videos. This occurred despite the finding that the children tended to believe the YouTube information to a lesser degree.

Three studies focus on new aspects of co-media use. First, in an innovative study, Dore et al. analyses non-linear dynamics of how joint media engagement (JME) affects language development in 6- to 8-year-old children. Surprisingly, it is not until the number of hours children spend with digital stories (films, games, apps) exceeds 5 h per day that new media have a demonstrably negative impact on language development. Their findings pave the way for a more nuanced perspective on the effect of digital media in young children.

Low JME seems to be especially detrimental for children with high media use. In an experimental study of 2-year-olds, Heimann et al. report that JME did support learning from 2D media although not to the level of a 3D presentation. Finally, Ochoa and Reich show the influence of income and education in an interview study of Latin families. Parents graduated from high school stress the importance of co-using media but not parents with lesser education.

A different and new aspect of how children are affected by digital information is presented by Tolksdorf et al. who compared 4–5-year-old children's social interaction with a social robot and a human person. The children used social referencing in both interactions but significantly more so when interacting with the robot.

Future Directions and Theoretical Implications

In sum, the papers demonstrate both the potential risks and benefits of early media exposure. If the content and context are right, digital media might provide a rich window to learning in new and exciting ways; to explore the world and social connections. Studies on the role of JME suggest promising avenues in which to work with families to use media effectively. The content also matters. Books, for instance, take new exciting formats due to technology and new storytelling techniques may open up opportunities to enjoy and comprehend stories.

Due to rapid technological advances, however, there remain several gaps in the literature. For example, modern media are mobile, interactive, and often short in duration, making them difficult to remember when parents, teachers, relatives, or older children respond to questions about media use. Although standardized measures of media usage are still being developed, it was encouraging that many of the included studies used more comprehensive multi-dimensional exposure measure. But researchers should also move beyond the exclusive use of parent reports and integrate direct observation of behavioral, physiological, or neural responses and use longitudinal approaches to capture the trajectory of exposure patterns.

Although we were able to solicit manuscripts from multiple countries, the samples recruited for the Research Topic were still WEIRD. Thus, we need to know more about cultural variation and for whom does media work. Notably, only Ochoa and Reich and Sun and Yin directly examined cultural implications. Future research should consider how patterns of media use are similar and differ between countries as a function of different parenting practices and include detailed multiple-dimensional media measurement.

Digital media provides exciting new opportunities for learning that have not been fully explored. In the current Research Topic, researchers examined different approaches to storytelling and social interactions. However, most research is based on standard materials and does not experiment with new technology-enabled possibilities. For instance, most contributions to this collection of papers targeting book reading do not control the enhancements in the target books but use what the commercial market offers. The fact that commercial design is more or less accidental may partly explain why findings are often inconsistent and hard to interpret. Digital book reading research will improve if researchers use materials grounded on conceptual frameworks. For example, Kucirkova and Littleton attempt to advance the digital-book format by theorizing about the distance between the familiar and the novel words of the story and propose to narrow the gap between reality and the interpretations of reality by adding other senses (e.g., taste and smell).

Instead of materials available on the commercial market, it might be essential to create materials that align a conceptual framework. None of the studies produced new technology to explore the hidden potential of technology. Research grounded in multimedia learning that tests how the format optimally benefits young children's story comprehension and incidental word learning is sorely needed. To achieve that goal, we need new collaborations between app developers, computer specialists, literacy educators, and specialists in digital learning, which seem indispensable to forward our insights on effective use of technology during early childhood.

Finally, we hope that the collection of papers will serve as a window to our current state of knowledge, inspire new researchers to enter the field, and motivate new collaborations among those already active.

Author Contributions

MH, AB, and RB contributed equally to the writing of the Editorial and all authors approved the submitted version.

This research was in part supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (2016-00048) to MH.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Keywords: early childhood, digital media, learning, language, book reading, joint media engagement, technoference, robotics

Citation: Heimann M, Bus A and Barr R (2021) Editorial: Growing Up in a Digital World - Social and Cognitive Implications. Front. Psychol. 12:745788. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.745788

Received: 22 July 2021; Accepted: 06 September 2021; Published: 30 September 2021.

Edited and reviewed by: Christiane Lange-Küttner , University of Bremen, Germany

Copyright © 2021 Heimann, Bus and Barr. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Mikael Heimann, mikael.heimann@liu.se

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

You are using an outdated browser. Upgrade your browser today or install Google Chrome Frame to better experience this site.

• IMF at a Glance
• Surveillance
• Capacity Development
• IMF Factsheets List
• IMF Members
• IMF Timeline
• Senior Officials
• Job Opportunities
• Archives of the IMF
• Climate Change
• Fiscal Policies
• Income Inequality

Flagship Publications

Other publications.

• World Economic Outlook
• Global Financial Stability Report
• Fiscal Monitor
• External Sector Report
• Staff Discussion Notes
• Working Papers
• IMF Research Perspectives
• Economic Review
• Global Housing Watch
• Commodity Prices
• Commodities Data Portal
• IMF Researchers
• Annual Research Conference
• Other IMF Events

IMF reports and publications by country

Regional offices.

• IMF Resident Representative Offices
• IMF Regional Reports
• IMF and Europe
• IMF Members' Quotas and Voting Power, and Board of Governors
• IMF Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific
• IMF Capacity Development Office in Thailand (CDOT)
• IMF Regional Office in Central America, Panama, and the Dominican Republic
• Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU)
• IMF Europe Office in Paris and Brussels
• IMF Office in the Pacific Islands
• How We Work
• IMF Training
• Digital Training Catalog
• Online Learning
• Our Partners
• Country Stories
• Technical Assistance Reports
• High-Level Summary Technical Assistance Reports
• Strategy and Policies

For Journalists

• Country Focus
• Chart of the Week
• Communiqués
• Mission Concluding Statements
• Press Releases
• Statements at Donor Meetings
• Transcripts
• Views & Commentaries
• Article IV Consultations
• Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP)
• Seminars, Conferences, & Other Events
• E-mail Notification

Press Center

The IMF Press Center is a password-protected site for working journalists.

• Login or Register
• Information of interest
• About the IMF
• Conferences
• Press briefings
• Special Features
• Middle East and Central Asia
• Economic Outlook
• Annual and spring meetings
• Most Recent
• Most Popular
• IMF Finances
• Additional Data Sources
• World Economic Outlook Databases
• Climate Change Indicators Dashboard
• IMF eLibrary-Data
• International Financial Statistics
• G20 Data Gaps Initiative
• Public Sector Debt Statistics Online Centralized Database
• Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves
• Financial Access Survey
• Government Finance Statistics
• Publications Advanced Search
• IMF eLibrary
• IMF Bookstore
• Publications Newsletter
• Essential Reading Guides
• Regional Economic Reports
• Country Reports
• Departmental Papers
• Policy Papers
• Selected Issues Papers
• All Staff Notes Series
• Analytical Notes
• Fintech Notes
• How-To Notes
• Staff Climate Notes

Finance & Development

The Long and Short of The Digital Revolution

MARTIN MÜHLEISEN

Download PDF

Three Days at Camp David: How a Secret Meeting in 1971 Transformed the Global Economy

Smart policies can alleviate the short-term pain of technological disruption and pave the way for long-term gain

Martin Mühleisen

Digital platforms are recasting the relationships between customers, workers, and employers as the silicon chip’s reach permeates almost everything we do—from buying groceries online to finding a partner on a dating website. As computing power improves dramatically and more and more people around the world participate in the digital economy, we should think carefully about how to devise policies that will allow us to fully exploit the digital revolution’s benefits while minimizing job dislocation.

This digital transformation results from what economists who study scientific progress and technical change call a general-purpose technology—that is, one that has the power to continually transform itself, progressively branching out and boosting productivity across all sectors and industries. Such transformations are rare. Only three previous technologies earned this distinction: the steam engine, the electricity generator, and the printing press. These changes bring enormous long-term benefits. The steam engine, originally designed to pump water out of mines, gave rise to railroads and industry through the application of mechanical power. Benefits accrued as farmers and merchants delivered their goods from the interior of a country to the coasts, facilitating trade.

Adopt—but also adapt

By their very nature, general-purpose technological revolutions are also highly disruptive. The Luddites of the early 19th century resisted and tried to destroy machines that rendered their weaving skills obsolete, even though the machines ushered in new skills and jobs. Such disruption occurs precisely because the new technology is so flexible and pervasive. Consequently, many benefits come not simply from adopting the technology, but from adapting to the technology. The advent of electricity generation enabled power to be delivered precisely when and where needed, vastly improving manufacturing efficiency and paving the way for the modern production line. In the same vein, Uber is a taxi company using digital technology to deliver a better service.

An important component of a disruptive technology is that it must first be widely adopted before society adapts to it. Electricity delivery depended on generators. The current technological revolution depends on computers, the technical backbone of the Internet, search engines, and digital platforms. Because of the lags involved in adapting to new processes, such as replacing traditional printing with online publishing, it takes time before output growth accelerates. In the early stages of such revolutions, more and more resources are devoted to innovation and reorganization whose benefits are realized only much later.

For example, while James Watt marketed a relatively efficient engine in 1774, it took until 1812 for the first commercially successful steam locomotive to appear. And it wasn’t until the 1830s that British output per capita clearly accelerated. Perhaps it is no wonder that the digital revolution doesn’t show up in the productivity statistics quite yet—after all, the personal computer emerged only about 40 years ago.

But make no mistake—the digital revolution is well under way. In addition to transforming jobs and skills, it is also overhauling industries such as retailing and publishing and perhaps—in the not-too-distant future—trucking and banking. In the United Kingdom, Internet transactions already account for almost one-fifth of retail sales, excluding gasoline, up from just one-twentieth in 2008. And e-commerce sites are applying their data skills to finance. The Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba already owns a bank and is using knowledge about its customers to provide small-scale loans to Chinese consumers. Amazon.com, the American e-commerce site, is moving in the same direction.

Meanwhile, anonymous cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin are posing challenges to efforts to combat money laundering and other illicit activities. But what makes these assets appealing also makes them potentially dangerous. Cryptocurrencies can be used to trade in illegal drugs, firearms, hacking tools, and toxic chemicals. On the other hand, the underlying technology behind these currencies (blockchain) will likely revolutionize finance by making transactions faster and more secure, while better information on potential clients can improve the pricing of loans through better assessment of the likelihood of repayment. Regulatory frameworks need to ensure financial integrity and protect consumers while still supporting efficiency and innovation.

Looking forward, we may see even more disruption from breakthroughs in quantum computing, which would facilitate calculations that are beyond the capabilities of traditional computers. While enabling exciting new products, these computers could undo even some new technologies. For example, they could render current standards in cryptology obsolete, potentially affecting communication and privacy on a global level. And this is just one aspect of threats to cyber security, an issue that is becoming increasingly important, given that almost all essential public services and private information are now online.

Avoiding a race to the bottom

Given the global reach of digital technology, and the risk of a race to the bottom, there is a need for policy cooperation similar to that of global financial markets and sea and air traffic. In the digital arena, such cooperation could include regulating the treatment of personal data, which is hard to oversee in a country-specific way, given the international nature of the Internet, as well as intangible assets, whose somewhat amorphous nature and location can complicate the taxation of digital companies. And financial supervisory systems geared toward monitoring transactions between financial institutions will have trouble dealing with the growth of peer-to-peer payments, including when it comes to preventing the funding of crime.

The importance of cooperation also implies a role for global international organizations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. These institutions, with their broad membership, can provide a forum for addressing the challenges posed by the digital revolution, suggest effective policy solutions, and outline policy guidelines. To be successful, policymakers will need to respond nimbly to changing circumstances, integrate experiences across countries and issues, and tailor advice effectively to countries’ needs.

The digital revolution should be accepted and improved rather than ignored and repressed. The history of earlier general-purpose technologies demonstrates that even with short-term dislocations, reorganizing the economy around revolutionary technologies generates huge long-term benefits. This does not negate a role for public policies. On the contrary, it is precisely at times of great technological change that sensible policies are needed. The factories created by the age of steam also ushered in regulations on hours of work, juvenile labor, and factory conditions.

Similarly, the gig economy is causing a reconsideration of rules: for example, what does it mean to be self-employed in the age of Uber? To minimize disruptions and maximize benefits, we should adapt policies on digital data and international taxation, labor policies and inequality, and education and competition to emerging realities. With good policies and a willingness to cooperate across borders, we can and should harness these exciting technologies to improve well-being without diminishing the energy and enthusiasm of the digital age.

MARTIN MUHLEISEN  is director of the IMF’s Strategy, Policy, and Review Department.

Opinions expressed in articles and other materials are those of the authors; they do not necessarily reflect IMF policy.

References:

Fair, Ray C. 2018. “ Presidential and Congressional Vote-Share Equations: November 2018 Update. ” Yale Department of Economics Paper, Yale University, New Haven, CT.

Goodman, Peter S., Katie Thomas, Sui-Lee Wee, and Jeffrey Gettleman. 2010. “ A New Front for Nationalism: The Global Battle against a Virus. ” New York Times , April 10.

Related Features

• On Central Bank Independence by Paul Tucker
• Interview with Finance Minister Abdirahman Dualeh Beileh

You might also like

• Measuring Money in the Digital Age: Jim Tebrake
• Unleashing Mideast Fintech
• Embracing Artificial Intelligence
• Live Long and Prosper
• The Next Big Thing
• Helping African Farmers from the Sky
• F&D HOMEPAGE

Latest Issues

December 2023

September 2023

• About F&D Magazine

Social Media

• F&D on Facebook
• F&D on LinkedIn

F&D STAFF

• Gita Bhatt, Editor-In-Chief
• Maureen Burke, Managing Editor
• Peter J. Walker, Senior Editor
• Jeff Kearns, Senior Editor
• Nicholas Owen, Senior Editor
• Smita Aggarwal, Assistant Editor
• Andrew Stanley, Assistant Editor
• Bruce Edwards, Multimedia Content
• Noha Elbadawy, Multimedia content
• Melinda Weir, Production Manager
• Rekia Ennaboulssi, Web Manager
• Marta Doroszczyk, Digital Marketing
• Kwabena Akuamoah-Boateng, Social Media Editor

From Science to Arts, an Inevitable Decision?

The wonderful world of fungi, openmind books, scientific anniversaries, simultaneous translation technology – ever closer to reality, featured author, latest book, the impact of the internet on society: a global perspective, introduction.

The Internet is the decisive technology of the Information Age, as the electrical engine was the vector of technological transformation of the Industrial Age. This global network of computer networks, largely based nowadays on platforms of wireless communication, provides ubiquitous capacity of multimodal, interactive communication in chosen time, transcending space. The Internet is not really a new technology: its ancestor, the Arpanet, was first deployed in 1969 (Abbate 1999). But it was in the 1990s when it was privatized and released from the control of the U.S. Department of Commerce that it diffused around the world at extraordinary speed: in 1996 the first survey of Internet users counted about 40 million; in 2013 they are over 2.5 billion, with China accounting for the largest number of Internet users. Furthermore, for some time the spread of the Internet was limited by the difficulty to lay out land-based telecommunications infrastructure in the emerging countries. This has changed with the explosion of wireless communication in the early twenty-first century. Indeed, in 1991, there were about 16 million subscribers of wireless devices in the world, in 2013 they are close to 7 billion (in a planet of 7.7 billion human beings). Counting on the family and village uses of mobile phones, and taking into consideration the limited use of these devices among children under five years of age, we can say that humankind is now almost entirely connected, albeit with great levels of inequality in the bandwidth as well as in the efficiency and price of the service.

At the heart of these communication networks the Internet ensures the production, distribution, and use of digitized information in all formats. According to the study published by Martin Hilbert in Science (Hilbert and López 2011), 95 percent of all information existing in the planet is digitized and most of it is accessible on the Internet and other computer networks.

The speed and scope of the transformation of our communication environment by Internet and wireless communication has triggered all kind of utopian and dystopian perceptions around the world.

As in all moments of major technological change, people, companies, and institutions feel the depth of the change, but they are often overwhelmed by it, out of sheer ignorance of its effects.

The media aggravate the distorted perception by dwelling into scary reports on the basis of anecdotal observation and biased commentary. If there is a topic in which social sciences, in their diversity, should contribute to the full understanding of the world in which we live, it is precisely the area that has come to be named in academia as Internet Studies. Because, in fact, academic research knows a great deal on the interaction between Internet and society, on the basis of methodologically rigorous empirical research conducted in a plurality of cultural and institutional contexts. Any process of major technological change generates its own mythology. In part because it comes into practice before scientists can assess its effects and implications, so there is always a gap between social change and its understanding. For instance, media often report that intense use of the Internet increases the risk of alienation, isolation, depression, and withdrawal from society. In fact, available evidence shows that there is either no relationship or a positive cumulative relationship between the Internet use and the intensity of sociability. We observe that, overall, the more sociable people are, the more they use the Internet. And the more they use the Internet, the more they increase their sociability online and offline, their civic engagement, and the intensity of family and friendship relationships, in all cultures—with the exception of a couple of early studies of the Internet in the 1990s, corrected by their authors later (Castells 2001; Castells et al. 2007; Rainie and Wellman 2012; Center for the Digital Future 2012 et al.).

Thus, the purpose of this chapter will be to summarize some of the key research findings on the social effects of the Internet relying on the evidence provided by some of the major institutions specialized in the social study of the Internet. More specifically, I will be using the data from the world at large: the World Internet Survey conducted by the Center for the Digital Future, University of Southern California; the reports of the British Computer Society (BCS), using data from the World Values Survey of the University of Michigan; the Nielsen reports for a variety of countries; and the annual reports from the International Telecommunications Union. For data on the United States, I have used the Pew American Life and Internet Project of the Pew Institute. For the United Kingdom, the Oxford Internet Survey from the Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, as well as the Virtual Society Project from the Economic and Social Science Research Council. For Spain, the Project Internet Catalonia of the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3) of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC); the various reports on the information society from Telefónica; and from the Orange Foundation. For Portugal, the Observatório de Sociedade da Informação e do Conhecimento (OSIC) in Lisbon. I would like to emphasize that most of the data in these reports converge toward similar trends. Thus I have selected for my analysis the findings that complement and reinforce each other, offering a consistent picture of the human experience on the Internet in spite of the human diversity.

Given the aim of this publication to reach a broad audience, I will not present in this text the data supporting the analysis presented here. Instead, I am referring the interested reader to the web sources of the research organizations mentioned above, as well as to selected bibliographic references discussing the empirical foundation of the social trends reported here.

Technologies of Freedom, the Network Society, and the Culture of Autonomy

In order to fully understand the effects of the Internet on society, we should remember that technology is material culture. It is produced in a social process in a given institutional environment on the basis of the ideas, values, interests, and knowledge of their producers, both their early producers and their subsequent producers. In this process we must include the users of the technology, who appropriate and adapt the technology rather than adopting it, and by so doing they modify it and produce it in an endless process of interaction between technological production and social use. So, to assess the relevance of Internet in society we must recall the specific characteristics of Internet as a technology. Then we must place it in the context of the transformation of the overall social structure, as well as in relationship to the culture characteristic of this social structure. Indeed, we live in a new social structure, the global network society, characterized by the rise of a new culture, the culture of autonomy.

Internet is a technology of freedom, in the terms coined by Ithiel de Sola Pool in 1973, coming from a libertarian culture, paradoxically financed by the Pentagon for the benefit of scientists, engineers, and their students, with no direct military application in mind (Castells 2001). The expansion of the Internet from the mid-1990s onward resulted from the combination of three main factors:

• The technological discovery of the World Wide Web by Tim Berners-Lee and his willingness to distribute the source code to improve it by the open-source contribution of a global community of users, in continuity with the openness of the TCP/IP Internet protocols. The web keeps running under the same principle of open source. And two-thirds of web servers are operated by Apache, an open-source server program.
• Institutional change in the management of the Internet, keeping it under the loose management of the global Internet community, privatizing it, and allowing both commercial uses and cooperative uses.
• Major changes in social structure, culture, and social behavior: networking as a prevalent organizational form; individuation as the main orientation of social behavior; and the culture of autonomy as the culture of the network society.

I will elaborate on these major trends.

Our society is a network society; that is, a society constructed around personal and organizational networks powered by digital networks and communicated by the Internet. And because networks are global and know no boundaries, the network society is a global network society. This historically specific social structure resulted from the interaction between the emerging technological paradigm based on the digital revolution and some major sociocultural changes. A primary dimension of these changes is what has been labeled the rise of the Me-centered society, or, in sociological terms, the process of individuation, the decline of community understood in terms of space, work, family, and ascription in general. This is not the end of community, and not the end of place-based interaction, but there is a shift toward the reconstruction of social relationships, including strong cultural and personal ties that could be considered a form of community, on the basis of individual interests, values, and projects.

The process of individuation is not just a matter of cultural evolution, it is materially produced by the new forms of organizing economic activities, and social and political life, as I analyzed in my trilogy on the Information Age (Castells 1996–2003). It is based on the transformation of space (metropolitan life), work and economic activity (rise of the networked enterprise and networked work processes), culture and communication (shift from mass communication based on mass media to mass self-communication based on the Internet); on the crisis of the patriarchal family, with increasing autonomy of its individual members; the substitution of media politics for mass party politics; and globalization as the selective networking of places and processes throughout the planet.

But individuation does not mean isolation, or even less the end of community. Sociability is reconstructed as networked individualism and community through a quest for like-minded individuals in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace and the local space. Individuation is the key process in constituting subjects (individual or collective), networking is the organizational form constructed by these subjects; this is the network society, and the form of sociability is what Rainie and Wellman (2012) conceptualized as networked individualism. Network technologies are of course the medium for this new social structure and this new culture (Papacharissi 2010).

As stated above, academic research has established that the Internet does not isolate people, nor does it reduce their sociability; it actually increases sociability, as shown by myself in my studies in Catalonia (Castells 2007), Rainie and Wellman in the United States (2012), Cardoso in Portugal (2010), and the World Internet Survey for the world at large (Center for the Digital Future 2012 et al.). Furthermore, a major study by Michael Willmott for the British Computer Society (Trajectory Partnership 2010) has shown a positive correlation, for individuals and for countries, between the frequency and intensity of the use of the Internet and the psychological indicators of personal happiness. He used global data for 35,000 people obtained from the World Wide Survey of the University of Michigan from 2005 to 2007. Controlling for other factors, the study showed that Internet use empowers people by increasing their feelings of security, personal freedom, and influence, all feelings that have a positive effect on happiness and personal well-being. The effect is particularly positive for people with lower income and who are less qualified, for people in the developing world, and for women. Age does not affect the positive relationship; it is significant for all ages. Why women? Because they are at the center of the network of their families, Internet helps them to organize their lives. Also, it helps them to overcome their isolation, particularly in patriarchal societies. The Internet also contributes to the rise of the culture of autonomy.

The key for the process of individuation is the construction of autonomy by social actors, who become subjects in the process. They do so by defining their specific projects in interaction with, but not submission to, the institutions of society. This is the case for a minority of individuals, but because of their capacity to lead and mobilize they introduce a new culture in every domain of social life: in work (entrepreneurship), in the media (the active audience), in the Internet (the creative user), in the market (the informed and proactive consumer), in education (students as informed critical thinkers, making possible the new frontier of e-learning and m-learning pedagogy), in health (the patient-centered health management system) in e-government (the informed, participatory citizen), in social movements (cultural change from the grassroots, as in feminism or environmentalism), and in politics (the independent-minded citizen able to participate in self-generated political networks).

There is increasing evidence of the direct relationship between the Internet and the rise of social autonomy. From 2002 to 2007 I directed in Catalonia one of the largest studies ever conducted in Europe on the Internet and society, based on 55,000 interviews, one-third of them face to face (IN3 2002–07). As part of this study, my collaborators and I compared the behavior of Internet users to non-Internet users in a sample of 3,000 people, representative of the population of Catalonia. Because in 2003 only about 40 percent of people were Internet users we could really compare the differences in social behavior for users and non-users, something that nowadays would be more difficult given the 79 percent penetration rate of the Internet in Catalonia. Although the data are relatively old, the findings are not, as more recent studies in other countries (particularly in Portugal) appear to confirm the observed trends. We constructed scales of autonomy in different dimensions. Only between 10 and 20 percent of the population, depending on dimensions, were in the high level of autonomy. But we focused on this active segment of the population to explore the role of the Internet in the construction of autonomy. Using factor analysis we identified six major types of autonomy based on projects of individuals according to their practices:

a) professional development b) communicative autonomy c) entrepreneurship d) autonomy of the body e) sociopolitical participation f) personal, individual autonomy

These six types of autonomous practices were statistically independent among themselves. But each one of them correlated positively with Internet use in statistically significant terms, in a self-reinforcing loop (time sequence): the more one person was autonomous, the more she/he used the web, and the more she/he used the web, the more autonomous she/he became (Castells et al. 2007). This is a major empirical finding. Because if the dominant cultural trend in our society is the search for autonomy, and if the Internet powers this search, then we are moving toward a society of assertive individuals and cultural freedom, regardless of the barriers of rigid social organizations inherited from the Industrial Age. From this Internet-based culture of autonomy have emerged a new kind of sociability, networked sociability, and a new kind of sociopolitical practice, networked social movements and networked democracy. I will now turn to the analysis of these two fundamental trends at the source of current processes of social change worldwide.

The Rise of Social Network Sites on the Internet

Since 2002 (creation of Friendster, prior to Facebook) a new socio-technical revolution has taken place on the Internet: the rise of social network sites where now all human activities are present, from personal interaction to business, to work, to culture, to communication, to social movements, and to politics.

Social Network Sites are web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.

(Boyd and Ellison 2007, 2)

Social networking uses, in time globally spent, surpassed e-mail in November 2007. It surpassed e-mail in number of users in July 2009. In terms of users it reached 1 billion by September 2010, with Facebook accounting for about half of it. In 2013 it has almost doubled, particularly because of increasing use in China, India, and Latin America. There is indeed a great diversity of social networking sites (SNS) by countries and cultures. Facebook, started for Harvard-only members in 2004, is present in most of the world, but QQ, Cyworld, and Baidu dominate in China; Orkut in Brazil; Mixi in Japan; etc. In terms of demographics, age is the main differential factor in the use of SNS, with a drop of frequency of use after 50 years of age, and particularly 65. But this is not just a teenager’s activity. The main Facebook U.S. category is in the age group 35–44, whose frequency of use of the site is higher than for younger people. Nearly 60 percent of adults in the U.S. have at least one SNS profile, 30 percent two, and 15 percent three or more. Females are as present as males, except when in a society there is a general gender gap. We observe no differences in education and class, but there is some class specialization of SNS, such as Myspace being lower than FB; LinkedIn is for professionals.

Thus, the most important activity on the Internet at this point in time goes through social networking, and SNS have become the chosen platforms for all kind of activities, not just personal friendships or chatting, but for marketing, e-commerce, education, cultural creativity, media and entertainment distribution, health applications, and sociopolitical activism. This is a significant trend for society at large. Let me explore the meaning of this trend on the basis of the still scant evidence.

Social networking sites are constructed by users themselves building on specific criteria of grouping. There is entrepreneurship in the process of creating sites, then people choose according to their interests and projects. Networks are tailored by people themselves with different levels of profiling and privacy. The key to success is not anonymity, but on the contrary, self-presentation of a real person connecting to real people (in some cases people are excluded from the SNS when they fake their identity). So, it is a self-constructed society by networking connecting to other networks. But this is not a virtual society. There is a close connection between virtual networks and networks in life at large. This is a hybrid world, a real world, not a virtual world or a segregated world.

People build networks to be with others, and to be with others they want to be with on the basis of criteria that include those people who they already know (a selected sub-segment). Most users go on the site every day. It is permanent connectivity. If we needed an answer to what happened to sociability in the Internet world, here it is:

There is a dramatic increase in sociability, but a different kind of sociability, facilitated and dynamized by permanent connectivity and social networking on the web.

Based on the time when Facebook was still releasing data (this time is now gone) we know that in 2009 users spent 500 billion minutes per month. This is not just about friendship or interpersonal communication. People do things together, share, act, exactly as in society, although the personal dimension is always there. Thus, in the U.S. 38 percent of adults share content, 21 percent remix, 14 percent blog, and this is growing exponentially, with development of technology, software, and SNS entrepreneurial initiatives. On Facebook, in 2009 the average user was connected to 60 pages, groups, and events, people interacted per month to 160 million objects (pages, groups, events), the average user created 70 pieces of content per month, and there were 25 billion pieces of content shared per month (web links, news stories, blogs posts, notes, photos). SNS are living spaces connecting all dimensions of people’s experience. This transforms culture because people share experience with a low emotional cost, while saving energy and effort. They transcend time and space, yet they produce content, set up links, and connect practices. It is a constantly networked world in every dimension of human experience. They co-evolve in permanent, multiple interaction. But they choose the terms of their co-evolution.

Thus, people live their physical lives but increasingly connect on multiple dimensions in SNS.

Paradoxically, the virtual life is more social than the physical life, now individualized by the organization of work and urban living.

But people do not live a virtual reality, indeed it is a real virtuality, since social practices, sharing, mixing, and living in society is facilitated in the virtuality, in what I called time ago the “space of flows” (Castells 1996).

Because people are increasingly at ease in the multi-textuality and multidimensionality of the web, marketers, work organizations, service agencies, government, and civil society are migrating massively to the Internet, less and less setting up alternative sites, more and more being present in the networks that people construct by themselves and for themselves, with the help of Internet social networking entrepreneurs, some of whom become billionaires in the process, actually selling freedom and the possibility of the autonomous construction of lives. This is the liberating potential of the Internet made material practice by these social networking sites. The largest of these social networking sites are usually bounded social spaces managed by a company. However, if the company tries to impede free communication it may lose many of its users, because the entry barriers in this industry are very low. A couple of technologically savvy youngsters with little capital can set up a site on the Internet and attract escapees from a more restricted Internet space, as happened to AOL and other networking sites of the first generation, and as could happen to Facebook or any other SNS if they are tempted to tinker with the rules of openness (Facebook tried to make users pay and retracted within days). So, SNS are often a business, but they are in the business of selling freedom, free expression, chosen sociability. When they tinker with this promise they risk their hollowing by net citizens migrating with their friends to more friendly virtual lands.

Perhaps the most telling expression of this new freedom is the transformation of sociopolitical practices on the Internet.

Communication Power: Mass-Self Communication and the Transformation of Politics

Power and counterpower, the foundational relationships of society, are constructed in the human mind, through the construction of meaning and the processing of information according to certain sets of values and interests (Castells 2009).

Ideological apparatuses and the mass media have been key tools of mediating communication and asserting power, and still are. But the rise of a new culture, the culture of autonomy, has found in Internet and mobile communication networks a major medium of mass self-communication and self-organization.

The key source for the social production of meaning is the process of socialized communication. I define communication as the process of sharing meaning through the exchange of information. Socialized communication is the one that exists in the public realm, that has the potential of reaching society at large. Therefore, the battle over the human mind is largely played out in the process of socialized communication. And this is particularly so in the network society, the social structure of the Information Age, which is characterized by the pervasiveness of communication networks in a multimodal hypertext.

The ongoing transformation of communication technology in the digital age extends the reach of communication media to all domains of social life in a network that is at the same time global and local, generic and customized, in an ever-changing pattern.

As a result, power relations, that is the relations that constitute the foundation of all societies, as well as the processes challenging institutionalized power relations, are increasingly shaped and decided in the communication field. Meaningful, conscious communication is what makes humans human. Thus, any major transformation in the technology and organization of communication is of utmost relevance for social change. Over the last four decades the advent of the Internet and of wireless communication has shifted the communication process in society at large from mass communication to mass self-communication. This is from a message sent from one to many with little interactivity to a system based on messages from many to many, multimodal, in chosen time, and with interactivity, so that senders are receivers and receivers are senders. And both have access to a multimodal hypertext in the web that constitutes the endlessly changing backbone of communication processes.

The transformation of communication from mass communication to mass self-communication has contributed decisively to alter the process of social change. As power relationships have always been based on the control of communication and information that feed the neural networks constitutive of the human mind, the rise of horizontal networks of communication has created a new landscape of social and political change by the process of disintermediation of the government and corporate controls over communication. This is the power of the network, as social actors build their own networks on the basis of their projects, values, and interests. The outcome of these processes is open ended and dependent on specific contexts. Freedom, in this case freedom of communicate, does not say anything on the uses of freedom in society. This is to be established by scholarly research. But we need to start from this major historical phenomenon: the building of a global communication network based on the Internet, a technology that embodies the culture of freedom that was at its source.

In the first decade of the twenty-first century there have been multiple social movements around the world that have used the Internet as their space of formation and permanent connectivity, among the movements and with society at large. These networked social movements, formed in the social networking sites on the Internet, have mobilized in the urban space and in the institutional space, inducing new forms of social movements that are the main actors of social change in the network society. Networked social movements have been particularly active since 2010, and especially in the Arab revolutions against dictatorships; in Europe and the U.S. as forms of protest against the management of the financial crisis; in Brazil; in Turkey; in Mexico; and in highly diverse institutional contexts and economic conditions. It is precisely the similarity of the movements in extremely different contexts that allows the formulation of the hypothesis that this is the pattern of social movements characteristic of the global network society. In all cases we observe the capacity of these movements for self-organization, without a central leadership, on the basis of a spontaneous emotional movement. In all cases there is a connection between Internet-based communication, mobile networks, and the mass media in different forms, feeding into each other and amplifying the movement locally and globally.

These movements take place in the context of exploitation and oppression, social tensions and social struggles; but struggles that were not able to successfully challenge the state in other instances of revolt are now powered by the tools of mass self-communication. It is not the technology that induces the movements, but without the technology (Internet and wireless communication) social movements would not take the present form of being a challenge to state power. The fact is that technology is material culture (ideas brought into the design) and the Internet materialized the culture of freedom that, as it has been documented, emerged on American campuses in the 1960s. This culture-made technology is at the source of the new wave of social movements that exemplify the depth of the global impact of the Internet in all spheres of social organization, affecting particularly power relationships, the foundation of the institutions of society. (See case studies and an analytical perspective on the interaction between Internet and networked social movements in Castells 2012.)

The Internet, as all technologies, does not produce effects by itself. Yet, it has specific effects in altering the capacity of the communication system to be organized around flows that are interactive, multimodal, asynchronous or synchronous, global or local, and from many to many, from people to people, from people to objects, and from objects to objects, increasingly relying on the semantic web. How these characteristics affect specific systems of social relationships has to be established by research, and this is what I tried to present in this text. What is clear is that without the Internet we would not have seen the large-scale development of networking as the fundamental mechanism of social structuring and social change in every domain of social life. The Internet, the World Wide Web, and a variety of networks increasingly based on wireless platforms constitute the technological infrastructure of the network society, as the electrical grid and the electrical engine were the support system for the form of social organization that we conceptualized as the industrial society. Thus, as a social construction, this technological system is open ended, as the network society is an open-ended form of social organization that conveys the best and the worse in humankind. Yet, the global network society is our society, and the understanding of its logic on the basis of the interaction between culture, organization, and technology in the formation and development of social and technological networks is a key field of research in the twenty-first century.

We can only make progress in our understanding through the cumulative effort of scholarly research. Only then we will be able to cut through the myths surrounding the key technology of our time. A digital communication technology that is already a second skin for young people, yet it continues to feed the fears and the fantasies of those who are still in charge of a society that they barely understand.

These references are in fact sources of more detailed references specific to each one of the topics analyzed in this text.

Abbate, Janet. A Social History of the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.

Boyd, Danah M., and Nicole B. Ellison. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, no. 1 (2007).

Cardoso, Gustavo, Angus Cheong, and Jeffrey Cole (eds). World Wide Internet: Changing Societies, Economies and Cultures. Macau: University of Macau Press, 2009.

Castells, Manuel. The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. 3 vols. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996–2003.

———. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

———. Communication Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

———. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2012.

Castells, Manuel, Imma Tubella, Teresa Sancho, and Meritxell Roca.

La transición a la sociedad red. Barcelona: Ariel, 2007.

Hilbert, Martin, and Priscilla López. “The World’s Technological Capacity to Store, Communicate, and Compute Information.” Science 332, no. 6025 (April 1, 2011): pp. 60–65.

Papacharissi, Zizi, ed. The Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Networking Sites. Routledge, 2010.

Rainie. Lee, and Barry Wellman. Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012.

Trajectory Partnership (Michael Willmott and Paul Flatters). The Information Dividend: Why IT Makes You “Happier.” Swindon: British Informatics Society Limited, 2010. http://www.bcs.org/upload/pdf/info-dividend-full-report.pdf

Selected Web References.   Used as sources for analysis in the chapter

Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento. “Observatório de Sociedade da Informação e do Conhecimento (OSIC).” http://www.umic.pt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3026&Itemid=167

BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT. “Features, Press and Policy.” http://www.bcs.org/category/7307

Center for the Digital Future. The World Internet Project International Report. 4th ed. Los Angeles: USC Annenberg School, Center for the Digital Future, 2012. http://www.worldinternetproject.net/_files/_Published/_oldis/770_2012wip_report4th_ed.pdf

ESRC (Economic & Social Research Council). “Papers and Reports.” Virtual Society. http://virtualsociety.sbs.ox.ac.uk/reports.htm

Fundación Orange. “Análisis y Prospectiva: Informe eEspaña.” Fundación Orange. http://fundacionorange.es/fundacionorange/analisisprospectiva.html

Fundación Telefónica. “Informes SI.” Fundación Telefónica. http://sociedadinformacion.fundacion.telefonica.com/DYC/SHI/InformesSI/seccion=1190&idioma=es_ES.do

IN3 (Internet Interdisciplinary Institute). UOC. “Project Internet Catalonia (PIC): An Overview.” Internet Interdisciplinary Institute, 2002–07. http://www.uoc.edu/in3/pic/eng/

International Telecommunication Union. “Annual Reports.” http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/sfo/annual_reports/index.html

Nielsen Company. “Reports.” 2013. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/reports/2013.html?tag=Category:Media+ and+Entertainment

Oxford Internet Surveys. “Publications.” http://microsites.oii.ox.ac.uk/oxis/publications

Pew Internet & American Life Project. “Social Networking.” Pew Internet. http://www.pewinternet.org/Topics/Activities-and-Pursuits/Social-Networking.aspx?typeFilter=5

Related publications

• How the Internet Has Changed Everyday Life
• How Is the Internet Changing the Way We Work?
• Hyperhistory, the Emergence of the MASs, and the Design of Infraethics

Download Kindle

Download epub, download pdf, more publications related to this article, more about technology, artificial intelligence, digital world, visionaries, comments on this publication.

Morbi facilisis elit non mi lacinia lacinia. Nunc eleifend aliquet ipsum, nec blandit augue tincidunt nec. Donec scelerisque feugiat lectus nec congue. Quisque tristique tortor vitae turpis euismod, vitae aliquam dolor pretium. Donec luctus posuere ex sit amet scelerisque. Etiam sed neque magna. Mauris non scelerisque lectus. Ut rutrum ex porta, tristique mi vitae, volutpat urna.

Sed in semper tellus, eu efficitur ante. Quisque felis orci, fermentum quis arcu nec, elementum malesuada magna. Nulla vitae finibus ipsum. Aenean vel sapien a magna faucibus tristique ac et ligula. Sed auctor orci metus, vitae egestas libero lacinia quis. Nulla lacus sapien, efficitur mollis nisi tempor, gravida tincidunt sapien. In massa dui, varius vitae iaculis a, dignissim non felis. Ut sagittis pulvinar nisi, at tincidunt metus venenatis a. Ut aliquam scelerisque interdum. Mauris iaculis purus in nulla consequat, sed fermentum sapien condimentum. Aliquam rutrum erat lectus, nec placerat nisl mollis id. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

Nam nisl nisi, efficitur et sem in, molestie vulputate libero. Quisque quis mattis lorem. Nunc quis convallis diam, id tincidunt risus. Donec nisl odio, convallis vel porttitor sit amet, lobortis a ante. Cras dapibus porta nulla, at laoreet quam euismod vitae. Fusce sollicitudin massa magna, eu dignissim magna cursus id. Quisque vel nisl tempus, lobortis nisl a, ornare lacus. Donec ac interdum massa. Curabitur id diam luctus, mollis augue vel, interdum risus. Nam vitae tortor erat. Proin quis tincidunt lorem.

The Internet, Politics and the Politics of Internet Debate

Do you want to stay up to date with our new publications.

Receive the OpenMind newsletter with all the latest contents published on our website

OpenMind Books

• The Search for Alternatives to Fossil Fuels
• View all books

About OpenMind

Connect with us.

• Keep up to date with our newsletter

Quote this content

Ethics in the digital world: Where we are now and what’s next

Kate gromova, yaroslav eferin.

Will widespread adoption of emerging digital technologies such as the Internet of Things and Artificial Intelligence improve people’s lives? The answer appears to be an easy “yes.” The positive potential of data seems self-evident. Yet, this issue is being actively discussed across international summits and events. Thus, the agenda of Global Technology Government Summit 2021 is dedicated to questions around whether and how “data can work for all”, emphasizing trust aspects, and especially ethics of data use. Not without a reason, at least 50 countries are grappling independently with how to define ethical data use smoothly without violating people’s private space, personal data, and many other sensitive aspects.  

Ethics goes online

What is ethics per se? Aristotle proposed that ethics is the study of human relations in their most perfect form. He called it the science of proper behavior. Aristotle claimed that ethics is the basis for creating an optimal model of fair human relations; ethics lie at the foundation of a society’s moral consciousness. They are the shared principles necessary for mutual understanding and harmonious relations.

Ethical principles have evolved many times over since the days of the ancient Greek philosophers and have been repeatedly rethought (e.g., hedonism, utilitarianism, relativism, etc.). Today we live in a digital world, and most of our relationships have moved online to chats, messengers, social media, and many other ways of online communication.  We do not see each other, but we do share our data; we do not talk to each other, but we give our opinions liberally. So how should these principles evolve for such an online, globalized world? And what might the process look like for identifying those principles?  

Digital chaos without ethics

2020 and the lockdowns clearly demonstrate that we plunge into the digital world irrevocably. As digital technologies become ever more deeply embedded in our lives, the need for a new, shared data ethos grows more urgent. Without shared principles, we risk exacerbating existing biases that are part of our current datasets.  Just a few examples:

• The common exclusion of women as test subjects in much medical research results in a lack of relevant data on women’s health. Heart disease, for example, has traditionally been thought of as a predominantly male disease. This has led to massive misdiagnosed or underdiagnosed heart disease in women.
• A study of AI tools that authorities use to determine the likelihood that a criminal reoffends found that algorithms produced different results for black and white people under the same conditions. This discriminatory effect has resulted in sharp criticism and distrust of predictive policing.
• Amazon abandoned its AI hiring program because of its bias against women. The algorithm began training on the resumes of the candidates for job postings over the previous ten years. Because most of the applicants were men, it developed a bias to prefer men and penalized features associated with women.

These examples all contribute to distrust or rejection of potentially beneficial new technological solutions. What ethical principles can we use to address the flaws in technologies that increase biases, profiling, and inequality? This question has led to significant growth in interest in data ethics over the last decade (Figures 1 and 2). And this is why many countries are now developing or adopting ethical principles, standards, or guidelines.

Figure 1. Data ethics concept, 2010-2021     

Figure 2. AI ethics concept, 2010-2021

Guiding data ethics

Countries are taking wildly differing approaches to address data ethics. Even the definition of data ethics varies. Look, for example, at three countries—Germany, Canada, and South Korea—with differing geography, history, institutional and political arrangements, and traditions and culture.

Germany established a Data Ethics Commission in 2018 to provide recommendations for the Federal Government’s Strategy on Artificial Intelligence. The Commission declared that its  operating principles were based on the Constitution, European values, and its “cultural and intellectual history.” Ethics, according to the Commission, should not begin with establishing boundaries. Rather, when ethical issues are discussed early in the creation process, they may make a significant contribution to design, promoting appropriate and beneficial applications of AI systems.

In Canada, the advancement of AI technologies and their use in public services has spurred a discussion about data ethics. The Government of Canada’s recommendations focuses on public service officials and processes. It provided guiding principles to ensure ethical use of AI and developed a comprehensive Algorithmic Impact Assessment online tool to help government officials explore AI in a way that is “governed by clear values, ethics, and laws.”

The Korean Ministry of Science and ICT, in collaboration with the National Information Society Agency, released Ethics Guidelines for the Intelligent Information Society in 2018. These guidelines build on the Robots Ethics Charter. It calls for developing AI and robots that do not have “antisocial” characteristics.” Broadly, Korean ethical policies mainly focused on the adoption of robots into society, while emphasizing the need to balance protecting “human dignity” and “the common good ."  

Do data ethics need a common approach?

The differences among these initiatives seem to be related to traditions, institutional arrangements, and many other cultural and historical factors. Germany places emphasis on developing autonomous vehicles and presents a rather comprehensive view on ethics; Canada puts a stake on guiding government officials; Korea approaches questions through the prism of robots. Still, none of them clearly defines what data ethics is. None of them is meant to have a legal effect. Rather, they stipulate the principles of the information society. In our upcoming study, we intend to explore the reasons and rationale for different approaches that countries take.

Discussion and debate on data and technology ethics undoubtedly will continue for many years to come as digital technologies continue to develop and penetrate into all aspects of human life.   But the sooner we reach a consensus on key definitions, principles, and approaches, the easier the debates can turn into real actions. Data ethics are equally important for government, businesses, individuals and should be discussed openly. The process of such discussion will serve itself as an awareness and knowledge-sharing mechanism.

Recall the Golden Rule of Morality: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. We suggest keeping this in mind when we all go online.

• The World Region

Digital Development Consultant, Co-founder of Women in Digital Transformation

Digital Development Consultant

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• 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.

How artificial intelligence is transforming the world

Subscribe to techstream, darrell m. west and darrell m. west senior fellow - center for technology innovation , douglas dillon chair in governmental studies john r. allen john r. allen.

April 24, 2018

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a wide-ranging tool that enables people to rethink how we integrate information, analyze data, and use the resulting insights to improve decision making—and already it is transforming every walk of life. In this report, Darrell West and John Allen discuss AI’s application across a variety of sectors, address issues in its development, and offer recommendations for getting the most out of AI while still protecting important human values.

Table of Contents I. Qualities of artificial intelligence II. Applications in diverse sectors III. Policy, regulatory, and ethical issues IV. Recommendations V. Conclusion

• 49 min read

Most people are not very familiar with the concept of artificial intelligence (AI). As an illustration, when 1,500 senior business leaders in the United States in 2017 were asked about AI, only 17 percent said they were familiar with it. 1 A number of them were not sure what it was or how it would affect their particular companies. They understood there was considerable potential for altering business processes, but were not clear how AI could be deployed within their own organizations.

Despite its widespread lack of familiarity, AI is a technology that is transforming every walk of life. It is a wide-ranging tool that enables people to rethink how we integrate information, analyze data, and use the resulting insights to improve decisionmaking. Our hope through this comprehensive overview is to explain AI to an audience of policymakers, opinion leaders, and interested observers, and demonstrate how AI already is altering the world and raising important questions for society, the economy, and governance.

In this paper, we discuss novel applications in finance, national security, health care, criminal justice, transportation, and smart cities, and address issues such as data access problems, algorithmic bias, AI ethics and transparency, and legal liability for AI decisions. We contrast the regulatory approaches of the U.S. and European Union, and close by making a number of recommendations for getting the most out of AI while still protecting important human values. 2

In order to maximize AI benefits, we recommend nine steps for going forward:

• Encourage greater data access for researchers without compromising users’ personal privacy,
• invest more government funding in unclassified AI research,
• promote new models of digital education and AI workforce development so employees have the skills needed in the 21 st -century economy,
• create a federal AI advisory committee to make policy recommendations,
• engage with state and local officials so they enact effective policies,
• regulate broad AI principles rather than specific algorithms,
• take bias complaints seriously so AI does not replicate historic injustice, unfairness, or discrimination in data or algorithms,
• maintain mechanisms for human oversight and control, and
• penalize malicious AI behavior and promote cybersecurity.

Qualities of artificial intelligence

Although there is no uniformly agreed upon definition, AI generally is thought to refer to “machines that respond to stimulation consistent with traditional responses from humans, given the human capacity for contemplation, judgment and intention.” 3  According to researchers Shubhendu and Vijay, these software systems “make decisions which normally require [a] human level of expertise” and help people anticipate problems or deal with issues as they come up. 4 As such, they operate in an intentional, intelligent, and adaptive manner.

Intentionality

Artificial intelligence algorithms are designed to make decisions, often using real-time data. They are unlike passive machines that are capable only of mechanical or predetermined responses. Using sensors, digital data, or remote inputs, they combine information from a variety of different sources, analyze the material instantly, and act on the insights derived from those data. With massive improvements in storage systems, processing speeds, and analytic techniques, they are capable of tremendous sophistication in analysis and decisionmaking.

Artificial intelligence is already altering the world and raising important questions for society, the economy, and governance.

Intelligence

AI generally is undertaken in conjunction with machine learning and data analytics. 5 Machine learning takes data and looks for underlying trends. If it spots something that is relevant for a practical problem, software designers can take that knowledge and use it to analyze specific issues. All that is required are data that are sufficiently robust that algorithms can discern useful patterns. Data can come in the form of digital information, satellite imagery, visual information, text, or unstructured data.

Adaptability

AI systems have the ability to learn and adapt as they make decisions. In the transportation area, for example, semi-autonomous vehicles have tools that let drivers and vehicles know about upcoming congestion, potholes, highway construction, or other possible traffic impediments. Vehicles can take advantage of the experience of other vehicles on the road, without human involvement, and the entire corpus of their achieved “experience” is immediately and fully transferable to other similarly configured vehicles. Their advanced algorithms, sensors, and cameras incorporate experience in current operations, and use dashboards and visual displays to present information in real time so human drivers are able to make sense of ongoing traffic and vehicular conditions. And in the case of fully autonomous vehicles, advanced systems can completely control the car or truck, and make all the navigational decisions.

Related Content

Jack Karsten, Darrell M. West

October 26, 2015

Makada Henry-Nickie

November 16, 2017

Sunil Johal, Daniel Araya

February 28, 2017

Applications in diverse sectors

AI is not a futuristic vision, but rather something that is here today and being integrated with and deployed into a variety of sectors. This includes fields such as finance, national security, health care, criminal justice, transportation, and smart cities. There are numerous examples where AI already is making an impact on the world and augmenting human capabilities in significant ways. 6

One of the reasons for the growing role of AI is the tremendous opportunities for economic development that it presents. A project undertaken by PriceWaterhouseCoopers estimated that “artificial intelligence technologies could increase global GDP by $15.7 trillion, a full 14%, by 2030.” 7 That includes advances of $7 trillion in China, $3.7 trillion in North America, $1.8 trillion in Northern Europe, $1.2 trillion for Africa and Oceania, $0.9 trillion in the rest of Asia outside of China, $0.7 trillion in Southern Europe, and $0.5 trillion in Latin America. China is making rapid strides because it has set a national goal of investing $150 billion in AI and becoming the global leader in this area by 2030.

Meanwhile, a McKinsey Global Institute study of China found that “AI-led automation can give the Chinese economy a productivity injection that would add 0.8 to 1.4 percentage points to GDP growth annually, depending on the speed of adoption.” 8 Although its authors found that China currently lags the United States and the United Kingdom in AI deployment, the sheer size of its AI market gives that country tremendous opportunities for pilot testing and future development.

Investments in financial AI in the United States tripled between 2013 and 2014 to a total of $12.2 billion. 9 According to observers in that sector, “Decisions about loans are now being made by software that can take into account a variety of finely parsed data about a borrower, rather than just a credit score and a background check.” 10 In addition, there are so-called robo-advisers that “create personalized investment portfolios, obviating the need for stockbrokers and financial advisers.” 11 These advances are designed to take the emotion out of investing and undertake decisions based on analytical considerations, and make these choices in a matter of minutes.

A prominent example of this is taking place in stock exchanges, where high-frequency trading by machines has replaced much of human decisionmaking. People submit buy and sell orders, and computers match them in the blink of an eye without human intervention. Machines can spot trading inefficiencies or market differentials on a very small scale and execute trades that make money according to investor instructions. 12 Powered in some places by advanced computing, these tools have much greater capacities for storing information because of their emphasis not on a zero or a one, but on “quantum bits” that can store multiple values in each location. 13 That dramatically increases storage capacity and decreases processing times.

Fraud detection represents another way AI is helpful in financial systems. It sometimes is difficult to discern fraudulent activities in large organizations, but AI can identify abnormalities, outliers, or deviant cases requiring additional investigation. That helps managers find problems early in the cycle, before they reach dangerous levels. 14

National security

AI plays a substantial role in national defense. Through its Project Maven, the American military is deploying AI “to sift through the massive troves of data and video captured by surveillance and then alert human analysts of patterns or when there is abnormal or suspicious activity.” 15 According to Deputy Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan, the goal of emerging technologies in this area is “to meet our warfighters’ needs and to increase [the] speed and agility [of] technology development and procurement.” 16

Artificial intelligence will accelerate the traditional process of warfare so rapidly that a new term has been coined: hyperwar.

The big data analytics associated with AI will profoundly affect intelligence analysis, as massive amounts of data are sifted in near real time—if not eventually in real time—thereby providing commanders and their staffs a level of intelligence analysis and productivity heretofore unseen. Command and control will similarly be affected as human commanders delegate certain routine, and in special circumstances, key decisions to AI platforms, reducing dramatically the time associated with the decision and subsequent action. In the end, warfare is a time competitive process, where the side able to decide the fastest and move most quickly to execution will generally prevail. Indeed, artificially intelligent intelligence systems, tied to AI-assisted command and control systems, can move decision support and decisionmaking to a speed vastly superior to the speeds of the traditional means of waging war. So fast will be this process, especially if coupled to automatic decisions to launch artificially intelligent autonomous weapons systems capable of lethal outcomes, that a new term has been coined specifically to embrace the speed at which war will be waged: hyperwar.

While the ethical and legal debate is raging over whether America will ever wage war with artificially intelligent autonomous lethal systems, the Chinese and Russians are not nearly so mired in this debate, and we should anticipate our need to defend against these systems operating at hyperwar speeds. The challenge in the West of where to position “humans in the loop” in a hyperwar scenario will ultimately dictate the West’s capacity to be competitive in this new form of conflict. 17

Just as AI will profoundly affect the speed of warfare, the proliferation of zero day or zero second cyber threats as well as polymorphic malware will challenge even the most sophisticated signature-based cyber protection. This forces significant improvement to existing cyber defenses. Increasingly, vulnerable systems are migrating, and will need to shift to a layered approach to cybersecurity with cloud-based, cognitive AI platforms. This approach moves the community toward a “thinking” defensive capability that can defend networks through constant training on known threats. This capability includes DNA-level analysis of heretofore unknown code, with the possibility of recognizing and stopping inbound malicious code by recognizing a string component of the file. This is how certain key U.S.-based systems stopped the debilitating “WannaCry” and “Petya” viruses.

Preparing for hyperwar and defending critical cyber networks must become a high priority because China, Russia, North Korea, and other countries are putting substantial resources into AI. In 2017, China’s State Council issued a plan for the country to “build a domestic industry worth almost $150 billion” by 2030. 18 As an example of the possibilities, the Chinese search firm Baidu has pioneered a facial recognition application that finds missing people. In addition, cities such as Shenzhen are providing up to $1 million to support AI labs. That country hopes AI will provide security, combat terrorism, and improve speech recognition programs. 19 The dual-use nature of many AI algorithms will mean AI research focused on one sector of society can be rapidly modified for use in the security sector as well. 20

Health care

AI tools are helping designers improve computational sophistication in health care. For example, Merantix is a German company that applies deep learning to medical issues. It has an application in medical imaging that “detects lymph nodes in the human body in Computer Tomography (CT) images.” 21 According to its developers, the key is labeling the nodes and identifying small lesions or growths that could be problematic. Humans can do this, but radiologists charge $100 per hour and may be able to carefully read only four images an hour. If there were 10,000 images, the cost of this process would be $250,000, which is prohibitively expensive if done by humans.

What deep learning can do in this situation is train computers on data sets to learn what a normal-looking versus an irregular-appearing lymph node is. After doing that through imaging exercises and honing the accuracy of the labeling, radiological imaging specialists can apply this knowledge to actual patients and determine the extent to which someone is at risk of cancerous lymph nodes. Since only a few are likely to test positive, it is a matter of identifying the unhealthy versus healthy node.

AI has been applied to congestive heart failure as well, an illness that afflicts 10 percent of senior citizens and costs $35 billion each year in the United States. AI tools are helpful because they “predict in advance potential challenges ahead and allocate resources to patient education, sensing, and proactive interventions that keep patients out of the hospital.” 22

Criminal justice

AI is being deployed in the criminal justice area. The city of Chicago has developed an AI-driven “Strategic Subject List” that analyzes people who have been arrested for their risk of becoming future perpetrators. It ranks 400,000 people on a scale of 0 to 500, using items such as age, criminal activity, victimization, drug arrest records, and gang affiliation. In looking at the data, analysts found that youth is a strong predictor of violence, being a shooting victim is associated with becoming a future perpetrator, gang affiliation has little predictive value, and drug arrests are not significantly associated with future criminal activity. 23

Judicial experts claim AI programs reduce human bias in law enforcement and leads to a fairer sentencing system. R Street Institute Associate Caleb Watney writes:

Empirically grounded questions of predictive risk analysis play to the strengths of machine learning, automated reasoning and other forms of AI. One machine-learning policy simulation concluded that such programs could be used to cut crime up to 24.8 percent with no change in jailing rates, or reduce jail populations by up to 42 percent with no increase in crime rates. 24

However, critics worry that AI algorithms represent “a secret system to punish citizens for crimes they haven’t yet committed. The risk scores have been used numerous times to guide large-scale roundups.” 25 The fear is that such tools target people of color unfairly and have not helped Chicago reduce the murder wave that has plagued it in recent years.

Despite these concerns, other countries are moving ahead with rapid deployment in this area. In China, for example, companies already have “considerable resources and access to voices, faces and other biometric data in vast quantities, which would help them develop their technologies.” 26 New technologies make it possible to match images and voices with other types of information, and to use AI on these combined data sets to improve law enforcement and national security. Through its “Sharp Eyes” program, Chinese law enforcement is matching video images, social media activity, online purchases, travel records, and personal identity into a “police cloud.” This integrated database enables authorities to keep track of criminals, potential law-breakers, and terrorists. 27 Put differently, China has become the world’s leading AI-powered surveillance state.

Transportation

Transportation represents an area where AI and machine learning are producing major innovations. Research by Cameron Kerry and Jack Karsten of the Brookings Institution has found that over $80 billion was invested in autonomous vehicle technology between August 2014 and June 2017. Those investments include applications both for autonomous driving and the core technologies vital to that sector. 28

Autonomous vehicles—cars, trucks, buses, and drone delivery systems—use advanced technological capabilities. Those features include automated vehicle guidance and braking, lane-changing systems, the use of cameras and sensors for collision avoidance, the use of AI to analyze information in real time, and the use of high-performance computing and deep learning systems to adapt to new circumstances through detailed maps. 29

Light detection and ranging systems (LIDARs) and AI are key to navigation and collision avoidance. LIDAR systems combine light and radar instruments. They are mounted on the top of vehicles that use imaging in a 360-degree environment from a radar and light beams to measure the speed and distance of surrounding objects. Along with sensors placed on the front, sides, and back of the vehicle, these instruments provide information that keeps fast-moving cars and trucks in their own lane, helps them avoid other vehicles, applies brakes and steering when needed, and does so instantly so as to avoid accidents.

Advanced software enables cars to learn from the experiences of other vehicles on the road and adjust their guidance systems as weather, driving, or road conditions change. This means that software is the key—not the physical car or truck itself.

Since these cameras and sensors compile a huge amount of information and need to process it instantly to avoid the car in the next lane, autonomous vehicles require high-performance computing, advanced algorithms, and deep learning systems to adapt to new scenarios. This means that software is the key, not the physical car or truck itself. 30 Advanced software enables cars to learn from the experiences of other vehicles on the road and adjust their guidance systems as weather, driving, or road conditions change. 31

Ride-sharing companies are very interested in autonomous vehicles. They see advantages in terms of customer service and labor productivity. All of the major ride-sharing companies are exploring driverless cars. The surge of car-sharing and taxi services—such as Uber and Lyft in the United States, Daimler’s Mytaxi and Hailo service in Great Britain, and Didi Chuxing in China—demonstrate the opportunities of this transportation option. Uber recently signed an agreement to purchase 24,000 autonomous cars from Volvo for its ride-sharing service. 32

However, the ride-sharing firm suffered a setback in March 2018 when one of its autonomous vehicles in Arizona hit and killed a pedestrian. Uber and several auto manufacturers immediately suspended testing and launched investigations into what went wrong and how the fatality could have occurred. 33 Both industry and consumers want reassurance that the technology is safe and able to deliver on its stated promises. Unless there are persuasive answers, this accident could slow AI advancements in the transportation sector.

Smart cities

Metropolitan governments are using AI to improve urban service delivery. For example, according to Kevin Desouza, Rashmi Krishnamurthy, and Gregory Dawson:

The Cincinnati Fire Department is using data analytics to optimize medical emergency responses. The new analytics system recommends to the dispatcher an appropriate response to a medical emergency call—whether a patient can be treated on-site or needs to be taken to the hospital—by taking into account several factors, such as the type of call, location, weather, and similar calls. 34

Since it fields 80,000 requests each year, Cincinnati officials are deploying this technology to prioritize responses and determine the best ways to handle emergencies. They see AI as a way to deal with large volumes of data and figure out efficient ways of responding to public requests. Rather than address service issues in an ad hoc manner, authorities are trying to be proactive in how they provide urban services.

Cincinnati is not alone. A number of metropolitan areas are adopting smart city applications that use AI to improve service delivery, environmental planning, resource management, energy utilization, and crime prevention, among other things. For its smart cities index, the magazine Fast Company ranked American locales and found Seattle, Boston, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and New York City as the top adopters. Seattle, for example, has embraced sustainability and is using AI to manage energy usage and resource management. Boston has launched a “City Hall To Go” that makes sure underserved communities receive needed public services. It also has deployed “cameras and inductive loops to manage traffic and acoustic sensors to identify gun shots.” San Francisco has certified 203 buildings as meeting LEED sustainability standards. 35

Through these and other means, metropolitan areas are leading the country in the deployment of AI solutions. Indeed, according to a National League of Cities report, 66 percent of American cities are investing in smart city technology. Among the top applications noted in the report are “smart meters for utilities, intelligent traffic signals, e-governance applications, Wi-Fi kiosks, and radio frequency identification sensors in pavement.” 36

Policy, regulatory, and ethical issues

These examples from a variety of sectors demonstrate how AI is transforming many walks of human existence. The increasing penetration of AI and autonomous devices into many aspects of life is altering basic operations and decisionmaking within organizations, and improving efficiency and response times.

At the same time, though, these developments raise important policy, regulatory, and ethical issues. For example, how should we promote data access? How do we guard against biased or unfair data used in algorithms? What types of ethical principles are introduced through software programming, and how transparent should designers be about their choices? What about questions of legal liability in cases where algorithms cause harm? 37

The increasing penetration of AI into many aspects of life is altering decisionmaking within organizations and improving efficiency. At the same time, though, these developments raise important policy, regulatory, and ethical issues.

Data access problems

The key to getting the most out of AI is having a “data-friendly ecosystem with unified standards and cross-platform sharing.” AI depends on data that can be analyzed in real time and brought to bear on concrete problems. Having data that are “accessible for exploration” in the research community is a prerequisite for successful AI development. 38

According to a McKinsey Global Institute study, nations that promote open data sources and data sharing are the ones most likely to see AI advances. In this regard, the United States has a substantial advantage over China. Global ratings on data openness show that U.S. ranks eighth overall in the world, compared to 93 for China. 39

But right now, the United States does not have a coherent national data strategy. There are few protocols for promoting research access or platforms that make it possible to gain new insights from proprietary data. It is not always clear who owns data or how much belongs in the public sphere. These uncertainties limit the innovation economy and act as a drag on academic research. In the following section, we outline ways to improve data access for researchers.

Biases in data and algorithms

In some instances, certain AI systems are thought to have enabled discriminatory or biased practices. 40 For example, Airbnb has been accused of having homeowners on its platform who discriminate against racial minorities. A research project undertaken by the Harvard Business School found that “Airbnb users with distinctly African American names were roughly 16 percent less likely to be accepted as guests than those with distinctly white names.” 41

Racial issues also come up with facial recognition software. Most such systems operate by comparing a person’s face to a range of faces in a large database. As pointed out by Joy Buolamwini of the Algorithmic Justice League, “If your facial recognition data contains mostly Caucasian faces, that’s what your program will learn to recognize.” 42 Unless the databases have access to diverse data, these programs perform poorly when attempting to recognize African-American or Asian-American features.

Many historical data sets reflect traditional values, which may or may not represent the preferences wanted in a current system. As Buolamwini notes, such an approach risks repeating inequities of the past:

The rise of automation and the increased reliance on algorithms for high-stakes decisions such as whether someone get insurance or not, your likelihood to default on a loan or somebody’s risk of recidivism means this is something that needs to be addressed. Even admissions decisions are increasingly automated—what school our children go to and what opportunities they have. We don’t have to bring the structural inequalities of the past into the future we create. 43

AI ethics and transparency

Algorithms embed ethical considerations and value choices into program decisions. As such, these systems raise questions concerning the criteria used in automated decisionmaking. Some people want to have a better understanding of how algorithms function and what choices are being made. 44

In the United States, many urban schools use algorithms for enrollment decisions based on a variety of considerations, such as parent preferences, neighborhood qualities, income level, and demographic background. According to Brookings researcher Jon Valant, the New Orleans–based Bricolage Academy “gives priority to economically disadvantaged applicants for up to 33 percent of available seats. In practice, though, most cities have opted for categories that prioritize siblings of current students, children of school employees, and families that live in school’s broad geographic area.” 45 Enrollment choices can be expected to be very different when considerations of this sort come into play.

Depending on how AI systems are set up, they can facilitate the redlining of mortgage applications, help people discriminate against individuals they don’t like, or help screen or build rosters of individuals based on unfair criteria. The types of considerations that go into programming decisions matter a lot in terms of how the systems operate and how they affect customers. 46

For these reasons, the EU is implementing the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in May 2018. The rules specify that people have “the right to opt out of personally tailored ads” and “can contest ‘legal or similarly significant’ decisions made by algorithms and appeal for human intervention” in the form of an explanation of how the algorithm generated a particular outcome. Each guideline is designed to ensure the protection of personal data and provide individuals with information on how the “black box” operates. 47

Legal liability

There are questions concerning the legal liability of AI systems. If there are harms or infractions (or fatalities in the case of driverless cars), the operators of the algorithm likely will fall under product liability rules. A body of case law has shown that the situation’s facts and circumstances determine liability and influence the kind of penalties that are imposed. Those can range from civil fines to imprisonment for major harms. 48 The Uber-related fatality in Arizona will be an important test case for legal liability. The state actively recruited Uber to test its autonomous vehicles and gave the company considerable latitude in terms of road testing. It remains to be seen if there will be lawsuits in this case and who is sued: the human backup driver, the state of Arizona, the Phoenix suburb where the accident took place, Uber, software developers, or the auto manufacturer. Given the multiple people and organizations involved in the road testing, there are many legal questions to be resolved.

In non-transportation areas, digital platforms often have limited liability for what happens on their sites. For example, in the case of Airbnb, the firm “requires that people agree to waive their right to sue, or to join in any class-action lawsuit or class-action arbitration, to use the service.” By demanding that its users sacrifice basic rights, the company limits consumer protections and therefore curtails the ability of people to fight discrimination arising from unfair algorithms. 49 But whether the principle of neutral networks holds up in many sectors is yet to be determined on a widespread basis.

Recommendations

In order to balance innovation with basic human values, we propose a number of recommendations for moving forward with AI. This includes improving data access, increasing government investment in AI, promoting AI workforce development, creating a federal advisory committee, engaging with state and local officials to ensure they enact effective policies, regulating broad objectives as opposed to specific algorithms, taking bias seriously as an AI issue, maintaining mechanisms for human control and oversight, and penalizing malicious behavior and promoting cybersecurity.

Improving data access

The United States should develop a data strategy that promotes innovation and consumer protection. Right now, there are no uniform standards in terms of data access, data sharing, or data protection. Almost all the data are proprietary in nature and not shared very broadly with the research community, and this limits innovation and system design. AI requires data to test and improve its learning capacity. 50 Without structured and unstructured data sets, it will be nearly impossible to gain the full benefits of artificial intelligence.

In general, the research community needs better access to government and business data, although with appropriate safeguards to make sure researchers do not misuse data in the way Cambridge Analytica did with Facebook information. There is a variety of ways researchers could gain data access. One is through voluntary agreements with companies holding proprietary data. Facebook, for example, recently announced a partnership with Stanford economist Raj Chetty to use its social media data to explore inequality. 51 As part of the arrangement, researchers were required to undergo background checks and could only access data from secured sites in order to protect user privacy and security.

In the U.S., there are no uniform standards in terms of data access, data sharing, or data protection. Almost all the data are proprietary in nature and not shared very broadly with the research community, and this limits innovation and system design.

Google long has made available search results in aggregated form for researchers and the general public. Through its “Trends” site, scholars can analyze topics such as interest in Trump, views about democracy, and perspectives on the overall economy. 52 That helps people track movements in public interest and identify topics that galvanize the general public.

Twitter makes much of its tweets available to researchers through application programming interfaces, commonly referred to as APIs. These tools help people outside the company build application software and make use of data from its social media platform. They can study patterns of social media communications and see how people are commenting on or reacting to current events.

In some sectors where there is a discernible public benefit, governments can facilitate collaboration by building infrastructure that shares data. For example, the National Cancer Institute has pioneered a data-sharing protocol where certified researchers can query health data it has using de-identified information drawn from clinical data, claims information, and drug therapies. That enables researchers to evaluate efficacy and effectiveness, and make recommendations regarding the best medical approaches, without compromising the privacy of individual patients.

There could be public-private data partnerships that combine government and business data sets to improve system performance. For example, cities could integrate information from ride-sharing services with its own material on social service locations, bus lines, mass transit, and highway congestion to improve transportation. That would help metropolitan areas deal with traffic tie-ups and assist in highway and mass transit planning.

Some combination of these approaches would improve data access for researchers, the government, and the business community, without impinging on personal privacy. As noted by Ian Buck, the vice president of NVIDIA, “Data is the fuel that drives the AI engine. The federal government has access to vast sources of information. Opening access to that data will help us get insights that will transform the U.S. economy.” 53 Through its Data.gov portal, the federal government already has put over 230,000 data sets into the public domain, and this has propelled innovation and aided improvements in AI and data analytic technologies. 54 The private sector also needs to facilitate research data access so that society can achieve the full benefits of artificial intelligence.

Increase government investment in AI

According to Greg Brockman, the co-founder of OpenAI, the U.S. federal government invests only $1.1 billion in non-classified AI technology. 55 That is far lower than the amount being spent by China or other leading nations in this area of research. That shortfall is noteworthy because the economic payoffs of AI are substantial. In order to boost economic development and social innovation, federal officials need to increase investment in artificial intelligence and data analytics. Higher investment is likely to pay for itself many times over in economic and social benefits. 56

Promote digital education and workforce development

As AI applications accelerate across many sectors, it is vital that we reimagine our educational institutions for a world where AI will be ubiquitous and students need a different kind of training than they currently receive. Right now, many students do not receive instruction in the kinds of skills that will be needed in an AI-dominated landscape. For example, there currently are shortages of data scientists, computer scientists, engineers, coders, and platform developers. These are skills that are in short supply; unless our educational system generates more people with these capabilities, it will limit AI development.

For these reasons, both state and federal governments have been investing in AI human capital. For example, in 2017, the National Science Foundation funded over 6,500 graduate students in computer-related fields and has launched several new initiatives designed to encourage data and computer science at all levels from pre-K to higher and continuing education. 57 The goal is to build a larger pipeline of AI and data analytic personnel so that the United States can reap the full advantages of the knowledge revolution.

But there also needs to be substantial changes in the process of learning itself. It is not just technical skills that are needed in an AI world but skills of critical reasoning, collaboration, design, visual display of information, and independent thinking, among others. AI will reconfigure how society and the economy operate, and there needs to be “big picture” thinking on what this will mean for ethics, governance, and societal impact. People will need the ability to think broadly about many questions and integrate knowledge from a number of different areas.

One example of new ways to prepare students for a digital future is IBM’s Teacher Advisor program, utilizing Watson’s free online tools to help teachers bring the latest knowledge into the classroom. They enable instructors to develop new lesson plans in STEM and non-STEM fields, find relevant instructional videos, and help students get the most out of the classroom. 58 As such, they are precursors of new educational environments that need to be created.

Create a federal AI advisory committee

Federal officials need to think about how they deal with artificial intelligence. As noted previously, there are many issues ranging from the need for improved data access to addressing issues of bias and discrimination. It is vital that these and other concerns be considered so we gain the full benefits of this emerging technology.

In order to move forward in this area, several members of Congress have introduced the “Future of Artificial Intelligence Act,” a bill designed to establish broad policy and legal principles for AI. It proposes the secretary of commerce create a federal advisory committee on the development and implementation of artificial intelligence. The legislation provides a mechanism for the federal government to get advice on ways to promote a “climate of investment and innovation to ensure the global competitiveness of the United States,” “optimize the development of artificial intelligence to address the potential growth, restructuring, or other changes in the United States workforce,” “support the unbiased development and application of artificial intelligence,” and “protect the privacy rights of individuals.” 59

Among the specific questions the committee is asked to address include the following: competitiveness, workforce impact, education, ethics training, data sharing, international cooperation, accountability, machine learning bias, rural impact, government efficiency, investment climate, job impact, bias, and consumer impact. The committee is directed to submit a report to Congress and the administration 540 days after enactment regarding any legislative or administrative action needed on AI.

This legislation is a step in the right direction, although the field is moving so rapidly that we would recommend shortening the reporting timeline from 540 days to 180 days. Waiting nearly two years for a committee report will certainly result in missed opportunities and a lack of action on important issues. Given rapid advances in the field, having a much quicker turnaround time on the committee analysis would be quite beneficial.

Engage with state and local officials

States and localities also are taking action on AI. For example, the New York City Council unanimously passed a bill that directed the mayor to form a taskforce that would “monitor the fairness and validity of algorithms used by municipal agencies.” 60 The city employs algorithms to “determine if a lower bail will be assigned to an indigent defendant, where firehouses are established, student placement for public schools, assessing teacher performance, identifying Medicaid fraud and determine where crime will happen next.” 61

According to the legislation’s developers, city officials want to know how these algorithms work and make sure there is sufficient AI transparency and accountability. In addition, there is concern regarding the fairness and biases of AI algorithms, so the taskforce has been directed to analyze these issues and make recommendations regarding future usage. It is scheduled to report back to the mayor on a range of AI policy, legal, and regulatory issues by late 2019.

Some observers already are worrying that the taskforce won’t go far enough in holding algorithms accountable. For example, Julia Powles of Cornell Tech and New York University argues that the bill originally required companies to make the AI source code available to the public for inspection, and that there be simulations of its decisionmaking using actual data. After criticism of those provisions, however, former Councilman James Vacca dropped the requirements in favor of a task force studying these issues. He and other city officials were concerned that publication of proprietary information on algorithms would slow innovation and make it difficult to find AI vendors who would work with the city. 62 It remains to be seen how this local task force will balance issues of innovation, privacy, and transparency.

Regulate broad objectives more than specific algorithms

The European Union has taken a restrictive stance on these issues of data collection and analysis. 63 It has rules limiting the ability of companies from collecting data on road conditions and mapping street views. Because many of these countries worry that people’s personal information in unencrypted Wi-Fi networks are swept up in overall data collection, the EU has fined technology firms, demanded copies of data, and placed limits on the material collected. 64 This has made it more difficult for technology companies operating there to develop the high-definition maps required for autonomous vehicles.

The GDPR being implemented in Europe place severe restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning. According to published guidelines, “Regulations prohibit any automated decision that ‘significantly affects’ EU citizens. This includes techniques that evaluates a person’s ‘performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements.’” 65 In addition, these new rules give citizens the right to review how digital services made specific algorithmic choices affecting people.

By taking a restrictive stance on issues of data collection and analysis, the European Union is putting its manufacturers and software designers at a significant disadvantage to the rest of the world.

If interpreted stringently, these rules will make it difficult for European software designers (and American designers who work with European counterparts) to incorporate artificial intelligence and high-definition mapping in autonomous vehicles. Central to navigation in these cars and trucks is tracking location and movements. Without high-definition maps containing geo-coded data and the deep learning that makes use of this information, fully autonomous driving will stagnate in Europe. Through this and other data protection actions, the European Union is putting its manufacturers and software designers at a significant disadvantage to the rest of the world.

It makes more sense to think about the broad objectives desired in AI and enact policies that advance them, as opposed to governments trying to crack open the “black boxes” and see exactly how specific algorithms operate. Regulating individual algorithms will limit innovation and make it difficult for companies to make use of artificial intelligence.

Take biases seriously

Bias and discrimination are serious issues for AI. There already have been a number of cases of unfair treatment linked to historic data, and steps need to be undertaken to make sure that does not become prevalent in artificial intelligence. Existing statutes governing discrimination in the physical economy need to be extended to digital platforms. That will help protect consumers and build confidence in these systems as a whole.

For these advances to be widely adopted, more transparency is needed in how AI systems operate. Andrew Burt of Immuta argues, “The key problem confronting predictive analytics is really transparency. We’re in a world where data science operations are taking on increasingly important tasks, and the only thing holding them back is going to be how well the data scientists who train the models can explain what it is their models are doing.” 66

Maintaining mechanisms for human oversight and control

Some individuals have argued that there needs to be avenues for humans to exercise oversight and control of AI systems. For example, Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence CEO Oren Etzioni argues there should be rules for regulating these systems. First, he says, AI must be governed by all the laws that already have been developed for human behavior, including regulations concerning “cyberbullying, stock manipulation or terrorist threats,” as well as “entrap[ping] people into committing crimes.” Second, he believes that these systems should disclose they are automated systems and not human beings. Third, he states, “An A.I. system cannot retain or disclose confidential information without explicit approval from the source of that information.” 67 His rationale is that these tools store so much data that people have to be cognizant of the privacy risks posed by AI.

In the same vein, the IEEE Global Initiative has ethical guidelines for AI and autonomous systems. Its experts suggest that these models be programmed with consideration for widely accepted human norms and rules for behavior. AI algorithms need to take into effect the importance of these norms, how norm conflict can be resolved, and ways these systems can be transparent about norm resolution. Software designs should be programmed for “nondeception” and “honesty,” according to ethics experts. When failures occur, there must be mitigation mechanisms to deal with the consequences. In particular, AI must be sensitive to problems such as bias, discrimination, and fairness. 68

A group of machine learning experts claim it is possible to automate ethical decisionmaking. Using the trolley problem as a moral dilemma, they ask the following question: If an autonomous car goes out of control, should it be programmed to kill its own passengers or the pedestrians who are crossing the street? They devised a “voting-based system” that asked 1.3 million people to assess alternative scenarios, summarized the overall choices, and applied the overall perspective of these individuals to a range of vehicular possibilities. That allowed them to automate ethical decisionmaking in AI algorithms, taking public preferences into account. 69 This procedure, of course, does not reduce the tragedy involved in any kind of fatality, such as seen in the Uber case, but it provides a mechanism to help AI developers incorporate ethical considerations in their planning.

Penalize malicious behavior and promote cybersecurity

As with any emerging technology, it is important to discourage malicious treatment designed to trick software or use it for undesirable ends. 70 This is especially important given the dual-use aspects of AI, where the same tool can be used for beneficial or malicious purposes. The malevolent use of AI exposes individuals and organizations to unnecessary risks and undermines the virtues of the emerging technology. This includes behaviors such as hacking, manipulating algorithms, compromising privacy and confidentiality, or stealing identities. Efforts to hijack AI in order to solicit confidential information should be seriously penalized as a way to deter such actions. 71

In a rapidly changing world with many entities having advanced computing capabilities, there needs to be serious attention devoted to cybersecurity. Countries have to be careful to safeguard their own systems and keep other nations from damaging their security. 72 According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, a major American bank receives around 11 million calls a week at its service center. In order to protect its telephony from denial of service attacks, it uses a “machine learning-based policy engine [that] blocks more than 120,000 calls per month based on voice firewall policies including harassing callers, robocalls and potential fraudulent calls.” 73 This represents a way in which machine learning can help defend technology systems from malevolent attacks.

To summarize, the world is on the cusp of revolutionizing many sectors through artificial intelligence and data analytics. There already are significant deployments in finance, national security, health care, criminal justice, transportation, and smart cities that have altered decisionmaking, business models, risk mitigation, and system performance. These developments are generating substantial economic and social benefits.

The world is on the cusp of revolutionizing many sectors through artificial intelligence, but the way AI systems are developed need to be better understood due to the major implications these technologies will have for society as a whole.

Yet the manner in which AI systems unfold has major implications for society as a whole. It matters how policy issues are addressed, ethical conflicts are reconciled, legal realities are resolved, and how much transparency is required in AI and data analytic solutions. 74 Human choices about software development affect the way in which decisions are made and the manner in which they are integrated into organizational routines. Exactly how these processes are executed need to be better understood because they will have substantial impact on the general public soon, and for the foreseeable future. AI may well be a revolution in human affairs, and become the single most influential human innovation in history.

Note: We appreciate the research assistance of Grace Gilberg, Jack Karsten, Hillary Schaub, and Kristjan Tomasson on this project.

The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and policy solutions. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its management, or its other scholars.

Support for this publication was generously provided by Amazon. Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its absolute commitment to quality, independence, and impact. Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment. 

John R. Allen is a member of the Board of Advisors of Amida Technology and on the Board of Directors of Spark Cognition. Both companies work in fields discussed in this piece.

• Thomas Davenport, Jeff Loucks, and David Schatsky, “Bullish on the Business Value of Cognitive” (Deloitte, 2017), p. 3 (www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/deloitte-analytics/articles/cognitive-technology-adoption-survey.html).
• Luke Dormehl, Thinking Machines: The Quest for Artificial Intelligence—and Where It’s Taking Us Next (New York: Penguin–TarcherPerigee, 2017).
• Shubhendu and Vijay, “Applicability of Artificial Intelligence in Different Fields of Life.”
• Andrew McAfee and Erik Brynjolfsson, Machine Platform Crowd: Harnessing Our Digital Future (New York: Norton, 2017).
• Portions of this paper draw on Darrell M. West, The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation , Brookings Institution Press, 2018.
• PriceWaterhouseCoopers, “Sizing the Prize: What’s the Real Value of AI for Your Business and How Can You Capitalise?” 2017.
• Dominic Barton, Jonathan Woetzel, Jeongmin Seong, and Qinzheng Tian, “Artificial Intelligence: Implications for China” (New York: McKinsey Global Institute, April 2017), p. 1.
• Nathaniel Popper, “Stocks and Bots,” New York Times Magazine , February 28, 2016.
• Michael Lewis, Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt (New York: Norton, 2015).
• Cade Metz, “In Quantum Computing Race, Yale Professors Battle Tech Giants,” New York Times , November 14, 2017, p. B3.
• Executive Office of the President, “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy,” December 2016, pp. 27-28.
• Christian Davenport, “Future Wars May Depend as Much on Algorithms as on Ammunition, Report Says,” Washington Post , December 3, 2017.
• John R. Allen and Amir Husain, “On Hyperwar,” Naval Institute Proceedings , July 17, 2017, pp. 30-36.
• Paul Mozur, “China Sets Goal to Lead in Artificial Intelligence,” New York Times , July 21, 2017, p. B1.
• Paul Mozur and John Markoff, “Is China Outsmarting American Artificial Intelligence?” New York Times , May 28, 2017.
• Economist , “America v China: The Battle for Digital Supremacy,” March 15, 2018.
• Rasmus Rothe, “Applying Deep Learning to Real-World Problems,” Medium , May 23, 2017.
• Eric Horvitz, “Reflections on the Status and Future of Artificial Intelligence,” Testimony before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, November 30, 2016, p. 5.
• Jeff Asher and Rob Arthur, “Inside the Algorithm That Tries to Predict Gun Violence in Chicago,” New York Times Upshot , June 13, 2017.
• Caleb Watney, “It’s Time for our Justice System to Embrace Artificial Intelligence,” TechTank (blog), Brookings Institution, July 20, 2017.
• Asher and Arthur, “Inside the Algorithm That Tries to Predict Gun Violence in Chicago.”
• Paul Mozur and Keith Bradsher, “China’s A.I. Advances Help Its Tech Industry, and State Security,” New York Times , December 3, 2017.
• Simon Denyer, “China’s Watchful Eye,” Washington Post , January 7, 2018.
• Cameron Kerry and Jack Karsten, “Gauging Investment in Self-Driving Cars,” Brookings Institution, October 16, 2017.
• Portions of this section are drawn from Darrell M. West, “Driverless Cars in China, Europe, Japan, Korea, and the United States,” Brookings Institution, September 2016.
• Yuming Ge, Xiaoman Liu, Libo Tang, and Darrell M. West, “Smart Transportation in China and the United States,” Center for Technology Innovation, Brookings Institution, December 2017.
• Peter Holley, “Uber Signs Deal to Buy 24,000 Autonomous Vehicles from Volvo,” Washington Post , November 20, 2017.
• Daisuke Wakabayashi, “Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Pedestrian in Arizona, Where Robots Roam,” New York Times , March 19, 2018.
• Kevin Desouza, Rashmi Krishnamurthy, and Gregory Dawson, “Learning from Public Sector Experimentation with Artificial Intelligence,” TechTank (blog), Brookings Institution, June 23, 2017.
• Boyd Cohen, “The 10 Smartest Cities in North America,” Fast Company , November 14, 2013.
• Teena Maddox, “66% of US Cities Are Investing in Smart City Technology,” TechRepublic , November 6, 2017.
• Osonde Osoba and William Welser IV, “The Risks of Artificial Intelligence to Security and the Future of Work” (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corp., December 2017) (www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE237.html).
• Ibid., p. 7.
• Dominic Barton, Jonathan Woetzel, Jeongmin Seong, and Qinzheng Tian, “Artificial Intelligence: Implications for China” (New York: McKinsey Global Institute, April 2017), p. 7.
• Executive Office of the President, “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence,” October 2016, pp. 30-31.
• Elaine Glusac, “As Airbnb Grows, So Do Claims of Discrimination,” New York Times , June 21, 2016.
• “Joy Buolamwini,” Bloomberg Businessweek , July 3, 2017, p. 80.
• Mark Purdy and Paul Daugherty, “Why Artificial Intelligence is the Future of Growth,” Accenture, 2016.
• Jon Valant, “Integrating Charter Schools and Choice-Based Education Systems,” Brown Center Chalkboard blog, Brookings Institution, June 23, 2017.
• Tucker, “‘A White Mask Worked Better.’”
• Cliff Kuang, “Can A.I. Be Taught to Explain Itself?” New York Times Magazine , November 21, 2017.
• Yale Law School Information Society Project, “Governing Machine Learning,” September 2017.
• Katie Benner, “Airbnb Vows to Fight Racism, But Its Users Can’t Sue to Prompt Fairness,” New York Times , June 19, 2016.
• Executive Office of the President, “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy” and “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence.”
• Nancy Scolar, “Facebook’s Next Project: American Inequality,” Politico , February 19, 2018.
• Darrell M. West, “What Internet Search Data Reveals about Donald Trump’s First Year in Office,” Brookings Institution policy report, January 17, 2018.
• Ian Buck, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” February 14, 2018.
• Keith Nakasone, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” March 7, 2018.
• Greg Brockman, “The Dawn of Artificial Intelligence,” Testimony before U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, November 30, 2016.
• Amir Khosrowshahi, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” February 14, 2018.
• James Kurose, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” March 7, 2018.
• Stephen Noonoo, “Teachers Can Now Use IBM’s Watson to Search for Free Lesson Plans,” EdSurge , September 13, 2017.
• Congress.gov, “H.R. 4625 FUTURE of Artificial Intelligence Act of 2017,” December 12, 2017.
• Elizabeth Zima, “Could New York City’s AI Transparency Bill Be a Model for the Country?” Government Technology , January 4, 2018.
• Julia Powles, “New York City’s Bold, Flawed Attempt to Make Algorithms Accountable,” New Yorker , December 20, 2017.
• Sheera Frenkel, “Tech Giants Brace for Europe’s New Data Privacy Rules,” New York Times , January 28, 2018.
• Claire Miller and Kevin O’Brien, “Germany’s Complicated Relationship with Google Street View,” New York Times , April 23, 2013.
• Cade Metz, “Artificial Intelligence is Setting Up the Internet for a Huge Clash with Europe,” Wired , July 11, 2016.
• Eric Siegel, “Predictive Analytics Interview Series: Andrew Burt,” Predictive Analytics Times , June 14, 2017.
• Oren Etzioni, “How to Regulate Artificial Intelligence,” New York Times , September 1, 2017.
• “Ethical Considerations in Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems,” unpublished paper. IEEE Global Initiative, 2018.
• Ritesh Noothigattu, Snehalkumar Gaikwad, Edmond Awad, Sohan Dsouza, Iyad Rahwan, Pradeep Ravikumar, and Ariel Procaccia, “A Voting-Based System for Ethical Decision Making,” Computers and Society , September 20, 2017 (www.media.mit.edu/publications/a-voting-based-system-for-ethical-decision-making/).
• Miles Brundage, et al., “The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence,” University of Oxford unpublished paper, February 2018.
• John Markoff, “As Artificial Intelligence Evolves, So Does Its Criminal Potential,” New York Times, October 24, 2016, p. B3.
• Economist , “The Challenger: Technopolitics,” March 17, 2018.
• Douglas Maughan, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” March 7, 2018.
• Levi Tillemann and Colin McCormick, “Roadmapping a U.S.-German Agenda for Artificial Intelligence Policy,” New American Foundation, March 2017.

Artificial Intelligence

Governance Studies

Center for Technology Innovation

Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technology Initiative

Jacob Taylor

May 20, 2024

Mark Schoeman

May 16, 2024

Charles Asiegbu, Chinasa T. Okolo

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Childhood Digital World essay

This essay seeks to examine the term digital technologies and the benefits and limitations of digital technologies on children and evaluating the quality of competencies and autonomy of children using digital technologies. Children learn and obtain new experiences and gain knowledge every day. The growing presence of digital technology in their lives presents new challenges and opportunities. Unavoidable exposure to digital technologies in a child’s daily life means need to embrace the huge potential of digital technologies to enhance learning and teaching methods and ultimately benefit a child’s comprehensive development using appropriate methods that don’t play a role in harming children understanding. I will also provide my view of solution towards concerns about children over exposure to digital technology.

Related Papers

Lydia Plowman , Joanna McPake

"Based on a series of research projects, this book explores the role of technology in the lives of three- and four-year-old children. We analyse children’s experiences at home and in preschool settings and include the perspectives of parents, practitioners and children. We frame the discussion of young children using technology in the context of public debate, then describe perspectives on children's learning in the preschool years in relation to curriculum and pedagogy in preschool settings and in relation to children's learning within the family. See www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415468923/ Or 'look inside' on Amazon.

Journal of Early Childhood Literacy

Charles Mifsud

Debra Harwood

The 21st Century has been described as the digital age. The digital age is marked by a variety of media choices and technological devices that can be connected, devices that ‘talk to one another’. Today’s technology can do so much more than the stationary lone desktop. For example, a child’s drawing can be animated when an embedded QR code (quick response code) is scanned. A tablet and an application (app) like colAR Mix can lift the child’s drawing off the page (Figure 1). These same drawings can be shared across platforms with opportunities for other children to add content. These additional modes invite new ways for children to explore ideas and express their knowledge. A mode can be simply thought of as an avenue or outlet for children to explore an idea or express what they know. In this sense, a crayon, lump of clay, pen, or a child’s own body can be thought of as modes. In the 21st Century, the digital world represents a new kind of mode, in that multiple avenues of expression and knowing are inherent within any one digital device that children interact with. Within children’s play and learning opportunities we can see an increasing reliance upon these multiple modes...

Acta Educationis Generalis

Žaneta Guzikova

Introduction: This research aims to examine pedagogically significant applications of digital technologies and attempt to identify certain principles of educational influence in pre-primary education. A qualitative methodology was used for this purpose. Methods: The research is focused on in-depth interpretive analysis and identification of the meanings of the use of digital technologies for didactic purposes from a pedagogical point of view. The research was conducted in a kindergarten in Šaľa, Slovakia; the research group consisted of 12 children aged 5-6 years and 10 parents of children of preschool age from 3 to 6 years. Results: The results have shown that through the constant comparative strategy and the sampling of extreme and similar cases we were able to analyse particular occurrences and mutual connections between them as interpreted by children and parents. Discussion: We know that there are disagreements and conflicts between parents and children in the area of using dig...

Ioanna Palaiologou

Jillian Fox

The pervasiveness of technology in the 21st Century has meant that adults and children live in a society where digital devices are integral to their everyday lives and participation in society. How we communicate, learn, work, entertain ourselves, and even shop is influenced by technology. Therefore, before children begin school they are potentially exposed to a range of learning opportunities mediated by digital devices. These devices include microwaves, mobile phones, computers, and console games such as Playstations® and iPods®. In Queensland preparatory classrooms and in the homes of these children, teachers and parents support and scaffold young children’s experiences, providing them with access to a range of tools that promote learning and provide entertainment. This paper examines teachers’ and parents’ perspectives and considers whether they are techno-optimists who advocate for and promote the inclusion of digital technology, or whether they are they techno-pessimists, who ...

Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education

neriman aral

Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy

Greta Björk Gudmundsdottir

This is a full text of my thesis, submitted in 2006. The thesis begins by arguing that the mid 1990s witnessed a proliferation of popular, political and academic discourses of childhood and technology, which characterised children as ‘digital natives’ and which presented children’s seemingly natural facility with digital technology use as heralding the potential for new relationships between children and adults. In order to understand the implications of these representations, the thesis: 1. Conducts a review of the literature of childhood studies, and of childhood in the context of new formations characterised as the ‘information society’; 2. Examines the relationship between language and society, exploring specifically the concepts of ‘hegemony, articulation, recontextualisation, and appropriation/colonisation’ drawn from Gramsci, Laclau and Mouffe, Bernstein and Hall’s analyses of the role of discourse in political and social change; and 3. Develops a metholodology based upon Critical Discourse Analysis, in order to provide an account of the relationship between discursive representations of childhood and the social practices and institutions in which these representations are enacted or resisted. The data analysed in the thesis comprise: 1. New Labour political speeches between 1996 and 2001, focusing specifically upon Tony Blair’s speeches and upon the chain of texts linking Blair’s 1996 conference speech, the Stevenson Report and the National Grid for Learning 2. 997 newspaper articles from the years 1997 and 2001, analysed through both a corpus analysis and detailed textual analysis of selected articles 3. 5 Interviews with 6 families in the home conducted between 1998 and 2000 On the basis of this analysis, the thesis contends that, while children were repesented as having significant agency and ‘natural affinity’ with digital technologies in this period (representations which did challenge traditional adult-child relations of the ‘dominant framework’) this new form of agency was colonised within wider educational policy to act as a warrant for a ‘personalisation’ of educational provision and a de-articulation of childhood from the institutions of home and school. This process of colonisation serves to obscure the differences in resources available to different children in achieving agency in the context of the ‘information age’, and serves to create equivalences between different social groupings acting with very different political and social agendas.

RELATED PAPERS

Stasis: groupe d'enquête sur le contemporain

Philippe Blouin

Safaa Ramadan

Abdellah Ammar

2015 5th Australian Control Conference (AUCC)

Azam Asanjarani

Revista Catedral de León, Año IV, nº 7

Dolores Herrero Ferrio

F1000Research

bikal shrestha

debora Modena

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Marcos Vinícius Vidor

Revista de Enfermagem UFPE on line

Maria Adelane Monteiro Silva

Brian Gomez

The Astronomical Journal

Egyptian journal of microbiology

Prof. Omar Abdulwahid

International journal of case studies in business, IT, and education

Sreeramana Aithal

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior &amp; Research

Andrew Henley

KLYTAIMNISTRA KATSARA , George Fanourakis

Lam Dung Đỗ

Filipa Oliveira

Journal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment,

Lifescience Global Canada

African Journal of Laboratory Medicine

Constance Schultsz

DergiPark (Istanbul University)

Abdullah Mesut ŞAHİN

Muferet Erguven

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

In the tech world and beyond, new 5G applications are being discovered every day. From driverless cars to smarter cities, farms, and even shopping experiences, the latest standard in wireless networks is poised to transform the way we interact with information, devices and each other. What better time to take a closer look at how humans are putting 5G to use to transform their world.

What is 5G?

5G (fifth-generation mobile technology  is the newest standard for cellular networks. Like its predecessors, 3G, 4G and 4G LTE, 5G technology uses radio waves for data transmission. However, due to significant improvements in latency, throughput and bandwidth, 5G is capable of faster download and upload speeds than previous networks.

Since its release in 2019, 5G broadband technology has been hailed as a breakthrough technology with significant implications for both consumers and businesses. Primarily, this is due to its ability to handle large volumes of data that is generated by complex devices that use its networks.

As mobile technology has expanded over the years, the number of data users generate every day has increased exponentially. Currently, other transformational technologies like  artificial intelligence (AI),  the  Internet of Things (IoT ) and  machine learning (ML)  require faster speeds to function than 3G and 4G networks offer. Enter 5G, with its lightning-fast data transfer capabilities that allow newer technologies to function in the way they were designed to.

Here are some of the biggest differences between 5G and previous wireless networks.

• Physical footprint : The transmitters that are used in 5G technology are smaller than in predecessors’ networks, allowing for discrete placement in out-of-the-way places. Furthermore, “cells”—geographical areas that all wireless networks require for connectivity—in 5G networks are smaller and require less power to run than in previous generations.
• Error rates : 5G’s adaptive Modulation and Coding Scheme (MCS), a schematic that wifi devices use to transmit data, is more powerful than ones in 3G and 4G networks. This makes 5G’s Block Error Rate (BER)—a metric of error frequency—much lower. 
• Bandwidth : By using a broader spectrum of radio frequencies than previous wireless networks, 5G networks can transmit on a wider range of bandwidths. This increases the number of devices that they can support at any given time.
• Lower latency : 5G’s low  latency , a measurement of the time it takes data to travel from one location to another, is a significant upgrade over previous generations. This means that routine activities like downloading a file or working in the cloud is going to be faster with a 5G connection than a connection on a different network.

Like all wireless networks, 5G networks are separated into geographical areas that are known as cells. Within each cell, wireless devices—such as smartphones, PCs, and IoT devices—connect to the internet via radio waves that are transmitted between an antenna and a base station. The technology that underpins 5G is essentially the same as in 3G and 4G networks. But due to its lower latency, 5G networks are capable of delivering faster download speeds—in some cases as high as 10 gigabits per second (Gbps).

As more and more devices are built for 5G speeds, demand for 5G connectivity is growing. Today, many popular Internet Service Providers (ISPs), such as Verizon, Google and AT&T, offer 5G networks to homes and businesses. According to Statista,  more than 200 million homes  and businesses have already purchased it with that number expected to at least double by 2028 (link resides outside ibm.com).

Let’s take a look at three areas of technological improvement that have made 5G so unique.

New telecom specifications

The 5G NR (New Radio) standard for cellular networks defines a new radio access technology (RAT) specification for all 5G mobile networks. The 5G rollout began in 2018 with a global initiative known as the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3FPP). The initiative defined a new set of standards to steer the design of devices and applications for use on 5G networks.

The initiative was a success, and 5G networks grew swiftly in the ensuing years. Today, 45% of networks worldwide are 5G compatible, with that number forecasted to rise to 85% by the end of the decade according to  a recent report by Ericsson  (link resides outside ibm.com).

Independent virtual networks (network slicing)

On 5G networks, network operators can offer multiple independent virtual networks (in addition to public ones) on the same infrastructure. Unlike previous wireless networks, this new capability allows users to do more things remotely with greater security than ever before. For example, on a 5G network, enterprises can create use cases or business models and assign them their own independent virtual network. This dramatically improves the user experience for their employees by adding greater customizability and security.

Private networks

In addition to network slicing, creating a 5G private network can also enhance personalization and security features over those available on previous generations of wireless networks. Global businesses seeking more control and mobility for their employees increasingly turn to private 5G network architectures rather than public networks they’ve used in the past.

Now that we better understand how 5G technology works, let’s take a closer look at some of the exciting applications it’s enabling.

Autonomous vehicles

From taxi cabs to drones and beyond, 5G technology underpins most of the next-generation capabilities in autonomous vehicles. Until the 5G cellular standard came along, fully autonomous vehicles were a bit of a pipe dream due to the data transmission limitations of 3G and 4G technology. Now, 5G’s lightning-fast connection speeds have made transport systems for cars, trains and more, faster than previous generations, transforming the way systems and devices connect, communicate and collaborate.

Smart factories

5G, along with AI and ML, is poised to help factories become not only smarter but more automated, efficient, and resilient. Today, many mundane but necessary tasks that are associated with equipment repair and optimization are being turned over to machines thanks to 5G connectivity paired with AI and ML capabilities. This is one area where 5G is expected to be highly disruptive, impacting everything from fuel economy to the design of equipment lifecycles and how goods arrive at our homes.

For example, on a busy factory floor, drones and cameras that are connected to smart devices that use the IoT can help locate and transport something more efficiently than in the past and prevent theft. Not only is this better for the environment and consumers, but it also frees up employees to dedicate their time and energy to tasks that are more suited to their skill sets.

Smart cities

The idea of a hyper-connected urban environment that uses 5G network speeds to spur innovation in areas like law enforcement, waste disposal and disaster mitigation is fast becoming a reality. Some cities already use 5G-enabled sensors to track traffic patterns in real time and adjust signals, helping guide the flow of traffic, minimize congestion, and improve air quality.

In another example, 5G power grids monitor supply and demand across heavily populated areas and deploy AI and ML applications to “learn” what times energy is in high or low demand. This process has been shown to significantly impact energy conservation and waste, potentially reducing carbon emissions and helping cities reach sustainability goals.

Smart healthcare

Hospitals, doctors, and the healthcare industry as a whole already benefit from the speed and reliability of 5G networks every day. One example is the area of remote surgery that uses robotics and a high-definition live stream that is connected to the internet via a 5G network. Another is the field of mobile health, where 5G gives medical workers in the field quick access to patient data and medical history. This enables them to make smarter decisions, faster, and potentially save lives.

Lastly, as we saw during the pandemic, contact tracing and the mapping of outbreaks are critical to keeping populations safe. 5G’s ability to deliver of volumes of data swiftly and securely allows experts to make more informed decisions that have ramifications for everyone.

5G paired with new technological capabilities won’t just result in the automation of employee tasks, it will dramatically improve them and the overall  employee experience . Take virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), for example. VR (digital environments that shut out the real world) and AR (digital content that augments the real world) are already used by stockroom employees, transportation drivers and many others. These employees rely on wearables that are connected to a 5G network capable of high-speed data transfer rates that improve several key capabilities, including the following:

• Live views : 5G connectivity provides live, real-time views of equipment, events, and even people. One way in which this feature is being used in professional sports is to allow broadcasters to remotely call a sporting event from outside the stadium where the event is taking place.
• Digital overlays : IoT applications in a warehouse or industrial setting allow workers that are equipped with smart glasses (or even just a smartphone) to obtain real-time insights from an application. This includes repair instructions or the name and location of a spare part.
• Drone inspections : Right now, one of the leading causes of employee injury is inspection of equipment or project sites in remote and potentially dangerous areas. Drones, which are connected via 5G networks, can safely monitor equipment and project sites and even take readings from hard-to-reach gauges.

Edge computing , a computing framework that allows computations to be done closer to data sources, is fast becoming the standard for enterprises. According to  this Gartner white paper  (link resides outside ibm.com), by 2025, 75% of enterprise data will be processed at the edge (compared to only 10% today). This shift saves businesses time and money and enables better control over large volumes of data. It would be impossible without the new speed standards that are generated by 5G technology. 

Ultra-reliable edge computing and 5G enable the enterprise to achieve faster transmission speeds, increased control and greater security over massive volumes of data. Together, these twin technologies will help reduce latency while increasing speed, reliability and bandwidth, resulting in faster, more comprehensive data analysis and insights for businesses everywhere.

5G solutions with IBM Cloud Satellite  

5G presents significant opportunities for the enterprise, but first, you need a platform that can handle its speed. IBM Cloud Satellite® lets you deploy and run apps consistently across on-premises, edge computing and public cloud environments on a 5G network. And it’s all enabled by secure and auditable communications within the IBM Cloud®.

Get the latest tech insights and expert thought leadership in your inbox.

Get our newsletters and topic updates that deliver the latest thought leadership and insights on emerging trends.

Innovations in Teamwork for Health Care

Don’t leave teaming up to chance. Create better teamwork through science.

In this course, experts from Harvard Business School and the T.H. Chan School of Public Health teach learners to implement a strategy for organizational teamwork in health care.

What You'll Learn

Health care is a team effort. From the front desk administrators to the nurses, doctors, insurers, and even the patients and their families, there are many people involved in an individual’s care. To deliver quality care in today’s fast-paced environment, practitioners and caregivers must go beyond medical problem-solving and rely on effective collaboration and communication skills.

While other businesses may organize around a functional area or project, allowing team members to learn each other's working styles and strengths over time, health care workers often find themselves in ad hoc scenarios, coordinating with near-strangers on life and death situations. As a leader, how do you encourage trust and meet shared goals when teams are formed quickly? How do you strengthen flexibility and collaboration even as team membership and structures fluctuate across departments? 

In Innovations in Teamwork for Health Care, leaders in the field of organizational behavior and teamwork, Amy Edmondson, Professor at Harvard Business School, and Michaela Kerrissey, Assistant Professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, share their latest research and present their concept of "teaming" as it relates to the health care and life science industries.

In this course, you will explore the complexities of collaboration in dynamic cross-functional teams and its impact on quality of care. You will examine the theory of teaming – where individuals join together to lend their expertise – to appreciate what enables effective teamwork and why teamwork fails; articulate the importance of psychological safety and a joint problem-solving orientation; understand the particular needs of time-limited teams; and rethink the role of hierarchy and leadership in the context of teaming.

You’ll hear firsthand from experts with experience inside and outside the health care industry, from CEO and President of the Cleveland Clinic, Tomislav Mihaljevic, to Andres Sougarret, the engineer who led the miraculous rescue of 33 Chilean miners in 2011. 

Ultimately, this course provides you with the tools needed to implement effective teaming strategies for patient-centered care and provides your organization with a framework to empower robust communication, improve efficiency, and elevate patient safety.

The course will be delivered via  HBS Online’s course platform  and immerse learners in real-world examples from experts at industry-leading organizations. By the end of the course, participants will be able to:

• Explore the science of teamwork, focusing on the psychological and sociological aspects of teaming, collaboration, and defining effective outcomes.
• Understand the complexity of building trust in ad hoc teams, including how to define purpose, build trust, and navigate interpersonal risks to reach common goals.
• Apply communication strategies that encourage psychological safety and create a safe space for all to contribute.
• Understand the value in adopting a model of joint problem-solving for patient care.
• Identify the distinct needs of time-limited project teams and how to incorporate effective and transparent feedback loops.
• Ensure accountability and identify leaders, breaking down hierarchy and encouraging the right person to step up at the right time.
• Implement a PDSA (Plan, Do, Study, and Act) framework for your organization.

Continuing Education Credits

In support of improving patient care, Harvard Medical School is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education.

The Harvard Medical School designates this enduring material for a maximum of 20 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Harvard Medical School is accredited as a provider of nursing continuing professional development by the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation.

This activity is approved for 20.00 contact hours. Contact hours are awarded commensurate with participation and completion of the online evaluation and attendance attestation. We suggest claiming your hours within 30 days of the activity date, after this time, the attendance attestation will still be required to claim your hours. 

Groups of 10 or more receive Amy Edmondson's latest book!

A free, hard copy of right kind of wrong: the science of failing well for each participant. .

Your Instructors

Amy C. Edmondson  is the Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at Harvard Business School, a chair established to support the study of human interactions that lead to the creation of successful enterprises that contribute to the betterment of society. She has pioneered the concept of psychological safety for over 20 years and was recognized in 2021 as #1 on the Thinkers50 global ranking of management thinkers. 

She is the author of Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy (2012), The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth (2018), and Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well (2023).

Michaela Kerrissey  is an Assistant Professor of Management at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. She conducts research on how teams and organizations innovate, integrate, and perform, with a focus on health care.   Dr. Kerrissey has authored over 30 publications on these topics and has won numerous best-paper awards, such as from the Academy of Management. She designed the Management Science for a New Era course at Harvard’s School of Public Health. In 2023, she was listed on Thinkers50 Radar, a global listing of top management thinkers.

Real World Case Studies

Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only.

Tomislav Mihaljevic, MD

Learn from the President and CEO of the Cleveland Clinic about how to implement joint problem solving in complex care organizations.

Maya Rupert

Hear from a top political strategist and campaign manager about how she leads within a teaming structure.

Trishan Panch, MD, MPH

Learn from Harvard faculty and founder of Wellframe about the importance of team learning.

Available Discounts and Benefits for Groups and Individuals

Experience Harvard Online by utilizing our wide variety of discount programs for individuals and groups. 

Past participant discounts.

Learners who have enrolled in at least one qualifying Harvard Online program hosted on the HBS Online platform are eligible to receive a 30% discount on this course, regardless of completion or certificate status in the first purchased program. Past Participant Discounts are automatically applied to the Program Fee upon time of payment.  Learn more here .

Learners who have earned a verified certificate for a HarvardX course hosted on the  edX platform  are eligible to receive a 30% discount on this course using a discount code. Discounts are not available after you've submitted payment, so if you think you are eligible for a discount on a registration, please check your email for a code or contact us .

Nonprofit, Government, Military, and Education Discounts

For this course we offer a 30% discount for learners who work in the nonprofit, government, military, or education fields. 

Eligibility is determined by a prospective learner’s email address, ending in .org, .gov, .mil, or .edu. Interested learners can apply below for the discount and, if eligible, will receive a promo code to enter when completing payment information to enroll in a Harvard Online program. Click here to apply for these discounts.

Gather your team to experience Innovations in Teamwork for Health Care and other Harvard Online courses to enjoy the benefits of learning together: 

• Single invoicing for groups of 10 or more
• Tiered discounts and pricing available with up to 50% off
• Growth reports on your team's progress
• Flexible course and partnership plans 

Learn more and enroll your team ! 

Course Syllabus

Learning requirements: There are no prerequisites required to enroll in this course. In order to earn a Certificate of Completion from Harvard Online and Harvard Business School Online, participants must thoughtfully complete all 5 modules, including satisfactory completion of the associated assignments, by stated deadlines.

Download Full Syllabus

• Study the Mining Accident Rescue and Cleveland Clinic cases.
• Understand the concept of teaming and how it can be applied to the health care industry.
• Brainstorm how to organize with a team to rescue 33 trapped miners.
• Analyze the problems solved and new challenges created by organizational structures that were implemented to facilitate teamwork at the Cleveland Clinic.
• Outline and analyze an individualized teaming breakdown for your organization. 
• Study the NASA and Google cases on psychological safety.
• Collaborate with team members and leadership to create a space of psychological safety. 
• Identify the indicators of psychological safety in a group. Analyze data from Project Aristotle’s study of teams at Google.
• Consider how past experiences can affect current feelings of psychological safety.
• Study the Cleveland Clinic ,  Boehringer Ingelheim , and  Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center cases.
• Implement a joint problem-solving orientation in which team members view problems as shared and solutions as requiring collaboration.
• Match different types of diversity in the workplace with the interpersonal boundaries that they imply.
• Articulate what you bring to a team and what you might need from others.
• Walk down the ladder of inference to get to the root of a problem.
• Study the  Virginia Mason Medical Center and  Institute for Healthcare Improvement cases.
• Cultivate an organization where team learning is valued and mobilized for improved performance.  
• Identify different kinds of work on the process knowledge spectrum.
• Brainstorm how a nursing team could learn from an accidental morphine overdose.
• Study the cases of Julio Castro's Presidential Campaign and Wellframe . 
• Practice leadership skills that include coaching, enabling, and ensuring that the right voices are present or represented within the team structure. 
• Build a leadership workshop for your team using the concepts addressed in this course.
• Practice asking meaningful questions as a way to encourage input and express authentic humility.
• Learn the difference between confirmatory and exploratory responses.

Earn Your Certificate

Enroll today in this course.

Still Have Questions?

What are the learning requirements? How do I list my certificate on my resume? Learn the answers to these and more in our FAQs.

Related Courses

Health care economics.

Taught by Harvard Medical School faculty, this course provides insights into the interactions between industries in the US health care sector and teaches what economic forces are shaping health care.

Digital Health

Digital technologies and big data offer tremendous opportunities to improve health care.

Reducing Racial Disparities in Health Care

In partnership with the Disparities Solutions Center at MGH, this course will help you deliver high-quality health care to all through organizational change.