Texting affects ability to interpret words -
Texting affects ability to interpret words
"ScienceDaily (Feb. 16, 2012) — Research designed to understand the effect of text messaging on language found that texting has a negative impact on people's linguistic ability to interpret and accept words." - Maitani from Bookmarklet
"The study, conducted by Joan Lee for her master's thesis in linguistics, revealed that those who texted more were less accepting of new words. On the other hand, those who read more traditional print media such as books, magazines, and newspapers were more accepting of the same words." - Maitani
"The study asked university students about their reading habits, including text messaging, and presented them with a range of words both real and fictitious." - Maitani
""Our assumption about text messaging is that it encourages unconstrained language. But the study found this to be a myth," says Lee. "The people who accepted more words did so because they were better able to interpret the meaning of the word, or tolerate the word, even if they didn't recognize the word. Students who reported texting more rejected more words instead of acknowledging them as possible words."" - Maitani
*cough*correlationdoesnotimplycausation*cough* - Marianne
Or, less mutteringly, it's interesting enough that those two things go together, without assuming that the first causes the second. - Marianne
Agreed in general, but in this case I can think of a few arguments in favour of a correlation between the two phenomena. Did you read Victor's post btw.? - Maitani
I did, and that's a reasonable argument (in a nifty post). But there were no falsification tests, alternative explanations, etc, even mentioned in the Science Daily blog post.... I hate reading "oh, X and Y go together and it seems reasonable that X causes Y, therefore X causes Y," no matter where it is:). Arguments in favor of probable causation should be a starting point for further research, not an answer. - Marianne
certainly :-) - Maitani
I definitely have to dumb down my texts, for the others, and not even "hard" words, ie lol: is he lol'ing at me or with me. To provide an adequate explanatory relevance requires exposition not suited to the format of 140-160 characters. And of course the 10 minutes to text, takes a 1 min phone call, except that's just stupid. Theory why: people, especially amongst the younger, are accustomed to communicating through text (social media to blame) and are intimidated by an actual phone call, far to personal. - sofarsoShawn
is it an urban myth about the person who wrote their exam paper in text language? - Halil