We're all familiar with people who claim to hate reading, yet spend hours perusing Facebook, Twitter and Tumblr posts.
Now it's time to fess up.
In the last week, have you spent more time engaged in deep, contemplative reading or browsing the Internet?
Equally important, have you found it more difficult to absorb yourself in longer writings and easier to read short online articles?
Let's be clear: By deep, contemplative reading, I mean a complete, undisturbed commitment to a writing of several pages. That is, reading in the traditional sense.
Contrasted with this type of reading are inattentive Internet browsing, reading Facebook posts, emailing and quickly skimming Wikipedia articles — in short, the ways we read online content.
Research shows that there is a fundamental difference between these two types of reading. Scholars at University College London conducted a study observing online research habits and found that Internet readers "power browse horizontally through titles ... going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense."
So why are we avoiding reading "in the traditional sense?" Why is it more difficult for us to engage in longer writing?
In his article "Is Google Making Us Stupid?," Nicholas Carr explored such questions and found that he, along with many of his colleagues, had more difficulty reading longer writings as their Internet use increased over the years. Further, Carr argued that we tend to take on the qualities of the technology we use, and the Internet might be fundamentally changing the way we think.
In fact, it seems difficult to imagine Internet use not affecting the way we think. Much Internet use today is based on instant gratification: short, immediate bursts of information or entertainment that tend to have little lasting, beneficial impact.
As we read Facebook and Twitter posts, watch short video clips and quickly skim Wikipedia articles (forgetting its content soon after), we reinforce the neural circuitry responsible for instant gratification.
Similarly, as we use the Internet more, we tend to engage less in longer writings. This may have long-term effects on our ability to think because it weakens the neural circuitry that allows for delayed gratification. As a result, we become less likely to read longer writings to gain new insight.
According to Susan Greenfield, professor of synaptic pharmacology at Lincoln College, Oxford, social media websites pose a unique risk. Greenfield found that experiences on social media websites "are devoid of cohesive narrative and long-term significance. As a consequence, the mid-21st century mind might almost become infant-like, characterized by short attention spans, sensationalism, inability to empathize and a shaky sense of identity."
This is not to condescend or bemoan a technology that has made knowledge more widely available. The Internet's benefits are self-evident, but there is considerable emerging evidence suggesting that its unchecked use may affect the way we think.
At the end of the week, ask yourself: Have I spent more time browsing the Internet and reading Facebook statuses or reading in the traditional sense?
If the answer is the former, remember that you might be changing the way you think, and try to take steps to tip the balance in favor of the latter.
Abdul Zalikha is a biology and English junior at UF. His column appears on Wednesdays.
