Texting too much can make you shallow and have low self-esteem issues …

  • Students who texted the most displayed evidence of racism

  • Compulsive texters more likely to have shallow and rapid thoughts

  • Author of the study believes the effect of constant texting and tweeting needs further investigation

By
James Daniel

03:54 GMT, 13 April 2013


|

04:04 GMT, 13 April 2013

Teenagers who text more than 100 times a day tend to be shallow, image-obsessed and driven by wealth - not to mention pretty bad at spelling.

The study from the University of Winnipeg suggests that a lot can be learned about a person’s personality simply from the number of texts they send.

The most incessant texters often turn out to be a slightly more racist than others.

Scroll down for video...

Not getting the message: Research suggests frequent texters tend to be shallow

Not getting the message: Research suggests frequent texters tend to be shallow

Personality: Psychologists say those who text more than 100 times a day are more interested in wealth and image

Personality: Psychologists say those who text more than 100 times a day are more interested in wealth and image

The data was gathered over a period of three years from 2,300 psychology students at the University of Winnipeg.

The theory the university study tried to test was that constant use of twitter and texting for communication results in a world where people have quick and shallow thoughts.

People with superficial opinions with little substance beneath.

The results indicate that students who text frequently place less importance on moral, aesthetic and spiritual goals and greater importance on wealth and image.

Long term: The study conducted over a period of three years amongst 2,300 students at the University of Winnipeg

Long term: The study conducted over a period of three years amongst 2,300 students at the University of Winnipeg

Superficial thinking: Texting and using Twitter for extreme periods of time can change your thought process

Superficial thinking: Texting and using Twitter for extreme periods of time can change your thought process

Strikingly, the study states those who text more than 100 times a day were 30 per cent less likely to feel strongly that leading an ethical, principled life was important, in comparison to those who texted 50 times or less a day.

The students texted, some spoke on cellphones, and some did neither. The students rated their feelings towards different social groups.

Those who had been texting the most, rated ethnic-minority groups more negatively.

In the most extreme cases, 30 per cent of the survey-takers texted more than 200 times a day and that 12 per cent texted at least 300 times a day.

Priorities: Heavy teen texters place less importance on moral, aesthetic, and spiritual goals, and greater importance on wealth and image

Priorities: Heavy teen texters place less importance on moral, aesthetic, and spiritual goals, and greater importance on wealth and image

The study was inspired by the 'shallowing hypothesis' first described by Nicholas Carr in his 2010 book The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains.

It does not suggest that shallow mindedness is at all new, merely the growth of texting and twitter has resulted in new avenues for expression that has made such thoughts more acceptable.

The theory states 'ultra brief social media like texting and Twitter encourages rapid, relatively shallow thought and consequently very frequent daily use of such media should be associated with cognitive and moral shallowness.'

'The values and traits most closely associated with texting frequency are surprisingly consistent with Carr’s conjecture that new information and social media technologies may be displacing and discouraging reflective thought,' Dr. Paul Trapnell, associate professor of psychology at The University of Winnipeg, said in a statement. 'We still don’t know the exact cause of these modest but consistent associations, but we think they warrant further study.'

Open bundled references in tabs:

Leave a Reply