# data[].attributes.body
Because of the increased use of technology in children, their brains are developing in different ways compared to previous generations. Technology can decrease our ability to pay attention. Studies show that reading text without any ads or links will increase your understanding of what you're reading. On the other hand, video games can increase your ability to pay attention, your reaction times, your visual-spatial capabilities, and can make you more able to find things in clutter.

Rather than making children stupid, technology more likely makes them different. Children are less capable of remembering things, but are now able to remember where to find things.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thinking. The capacity to reflect, reason, and draw conclusions based on our experiences, knowledge, and insights. It's what makes us human and has enabled us to communicate, create, build, advance, and become civilized. Thinking encompasses so many aspects of who our children are and what they do, from observing, learning, remembering, questioning, and judging to innovating, arguing, deciding, and acting.

There is also little doubt that all of the new technologies, led by the Internet, are shaping the way we think in ways obvious and subtle, deliberate and unintentional, and advantageous and detrimental The uncertain reality is that, with this new technological frontier in its infancy and developments emerging at a rapid pace, we have neither the benefit of historical hindsight nor the time to ponder or examine the value and cost of these advancements in terms of how it influences our children's ability to think.

There is, however, a growing body of research that technology can be both beneficial and harmful to different ways in which children think. Moreover, this influence isn't just affecting children on the surface of their thinking. Rather, because their brains are still developing and malleable, frequent exposure by so-called digital natives to technology is actually wiring the brain in ways very different than in previous generations. What is clear is that, as with advances throughout history, the technology that is available determines how our brains develop. For example, as the technology writer Nicholas Carr has observed, the emergence of reading encouraged our brains to be focused and imaginative. In contrast, the rise of the Internet is strengthening our ability to scan information rapidly and efficiently.

The effects of technology on children are complicated, with both benefits and costs. Whether technology helps or hurts in the development of your children's thinking depends on what specific technology is used and how and what frequency it is used. At least early in their lives, the power to dictate your children's relationship with technology and, as a result, its influence on them, from synaptic activity to conscious thought.

Over the next several weeks, I'm going to focus on the areas in which the latest thinking and research has shown technology to have the greatest influence on how children think: attention, information overload, decision making, and memory/learning. Importantly, all of these areas are ones in which you can have a counteracting influence on how technology affects your children.
Attention
You can think of attention as the gateway to thinking. Without it, other aspects of thinking, namely, perception, memory, language, learning, creativity, reasoning, problem-solving, and decision making are greatly diminished or can't occur at all. The ability of your children to learn to focus effectively and consistently lays the foundation for almost all aspects of their growth and is fundamental to their development into successful and happy people.

Attention has been found to be a highly malleable quality and most directly influenced by the environment in which it is used. This selective attention can be found in the animal kingdom in which different species develop attentional skills that help them function and survive. For example, wolves, lions, tigers, and other predators have highly tuned visual attention that enables them to spot and track their prey. In contrast, their prey, including deer and antelope, have well-developed auditory attention that allows them to hear approaching predators. In both cases, animals' attentional abilities have developed based on the environment in which they live.

The same holds true for human development. Whether infant recognition of their parents' faces or students paying attention in class, children's immediate environment determines the kind of attention that they develop. In generations past, for example, children directed considerable amounts of their time to reading, an activity that offered few distractions and required intense and sustained attention, imagination, and memory. The advent of television altered that attention by offering children visual stimuli, fragmented attention, and little need for imagination. Then the Internet was invented and children were thrust into a vastly different environment in which, because distraction is the norm, consistent attention is impossible, imagination is unnecessary, and memory is inhibited.

Technology conditions the brain to pay attention to information very differently than reading. The metaphor that Nicholas Carr uses is the difference between scuba diving and jet skiing. Book reading is like scuba diving in which the diver is submerged in a quiet, visually restricted, slow-paced setting with few distractions and, as a result, is required to focus narrowly and think deeply on the limited information that is available to them. In contrast, using the Internet is like jet skiing, in which the jet skier is skimming along the surface of the water at high speed, exposed to a broad vista, surrounded by many distractions, and only able to focus fleetingly on any one thing.

In fact, studies have shown that reading uninterrupted text results in faster completion and better understanding, recall, and learning than those who read text filled with hyperlinks and ads. Those who read a text-only version of a presentation, as compared to one that included video, found the presentation to be more engaging, informative, and entertaining, a finding contrary to conventional wisdom, to be sure. Additionally, contrary to conventional educational wisdom, students who were allowed Internet access during class didn't recall the lecture nor did they perform as well on a test of the material as those who weren't "wired" during class. Finally, reading develops reflection, critical thinking, problem-solving, and vocabulary better than visual media.

Exposure to technology isn't all bad. Research shows that, for example, video games and other screen media improve visual-spatial capabilities, increase attentional ability, reaction times, and the capacity to identify details among clutter. Also, rather than making children stupid, it may just be making them different. For example, the ubiquitous use of Internet search engines is causing children to become less adept at remembering things and more skilled at remembering where to find things. Given the ease with which information can be found these days, it only stands to reason that knowing where to look is becoming more important for children than actually knowing something. Not having to retain information in our brain may allow it to engage in more "higher-order" processing such as contemplation, critical thinking, and problem-solving.

What does all this mean for raising your children? The bottom line is that too much screen time and not enough other activities, such as reading, playing games, and good old unstructured and imaginative play, will result in your children having their brains wired in ways that may make them less, not more, prepared to thrive in this crazy new world of technology.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Technology Is Changing the Way Children Think and Focus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thinking. The capacity to reflect, reason, and draw conclusions based on our experiences, knowledge, and insights. It's what makes us human and has enabled us to communicate, create, build, advance, and become civilized. Thinking encompasses so many aspects of who our children are and what they do, from observing, learning, remembering, questioning, and judging to innovating, arguing, deciding, and acting.

# data[].attributes.body
In a recent experiment, college students remembered less information when they thought they could easily access it later

We used to have much less resources to rely on for information, so we made a greater effort to remember things. Now, since we have instant access to tremendous amounts of information, we feel that we don't have to remember as much.

According to a brain scan, people who use the internet habitually have much more activity in the prefrontal cortex than people who don't. This part of the brain is used for short term memory and quick decision making. This means that the brain classifies things you read on the internet as trivial, in a way. You read or see something, your brain reacts, and then you forget about it.

Even though we have access to so much information, our brains aren't in the proper state to actually absorb or learn anything.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
About the Video Transcript

About the Video

The average number of Google searches per day has grown from 9,800 in 1998 to over 4.7 trillion today. ¹ This may not be surprising, since we've all come to appreciate the thrill of instant information. But while it's certainly convenient to have the sum of all knowledge at our fingertips, studies show that the "Google effect" is changing the way we think.

In a 2011 experiment published in Science Magazine, college students remembered less information when they knew they could easily access it later on the computer. ² With 49% of Americans now toting around Google on their smart phones, researchers concluded that the effect is the same. We're relying on Google to store knowledge long-term, instead of our own brains. ³

Neuroimaging of frequent Internet users shows twice as much activity in the short term memory as sporadic users during online tasks. ⁴ Basically, our brain is learning to disregard information found online, and this connection becomes stronger every time we experience it. So the more we use Google, the less likely we are to retain what we see.

Our brains use information stored in the long-term memory to facilitate critical thinking. We need these unique memories to understand and interact with the world around us. If we rely on Google to store our knowledge, we may be losing an important part of our identity.

Transcript

How does the human memory work? Twenty years ago you might have found your answer in a book, or by asking a friend. But today, you'll Google it. There were 3.5 million searches in 1998, now, there are 4.7 trillion search queries everyday. ¹ When something changes our lifestyle so monumentally, you can bet it's changing us as well.

Google has become our external hard drive. In a recent experiment, college students remembered less information when they thought they could easily access it later. We used to rely on friends and family members for this method of memory outsourcing, remembering who knew what rather than the information itself. ² But now, Google is the friend with all of the expertise. If the sum of all knowledge is constantly available in our pockets, is it any wonder that we've stopped bothering to keep it in our heads?

" Neurons that fire together, wire together." And the same goes for those that fire apart. Neuroimaging of frequent Internet users shows twice as much activity in the prefrontal cortex as sporadic users. ³ This part of the brain is reserved for short-term memory and quick decision-making. Essentially, our brains recognize that most of the flood of online information is trivial, and doesn't deserve our full attention. The problem is, the brain does what we train it to do. And every time we open a browser, we prepare for skimming instead of learning. So even if we really want to remember something from Google, our brains are predisposed to forget. Everything we ever wanted to know is available to us, and we have conditioned ourselves to ignore it.

What do we actually know? If the goal is to forge a creative mind through critical thinking, our Google amnesia may be problematic. The information and experience that gets encoded into our long-term memory is the basis of our unique intelligence. ⁴ Still, we may be able to mitigate the impact to our long-term memory by adapting our response to this new reality. After all, we can't stop the sea change of the information age. In recent years, American schools have focused less on fact memorization and more on teaching students how to make innovative connections between the curriculum and real life. ⁵ This way, it's less about the knowledge you have, and more about how you use the information at hand.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How the Internet is Changing Your Brain - Academic Earth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About the Video Transcript The average number of Google searches per day has grown from 9,800 in 1998 to over 4.7 trillion today. 1 This may not be surprising, since we've all come to appreciate the thrill of instant information.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about how our brains adapt very well and how technology is both positive and negative. It mentions neuroplasticity: our brain's tendency to form habits. Although the author thinks technology isn't all bad, he says too much TV can cause ADHD.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Answer (1 of 5): Gadgets impact the morality of society What psychologists and mind researchers inform us concerning intrusions is that they have a genuinely significant impact how we think. It turns out to be considerably harder to manage consideration, to consider one thing for a drawn out str...

# data[].attributes.body
The increased use of technology, and how it affects us, is explained with an analogy.

Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a jet ski

A scuba diver moves slow and is focused on what they're doing. They are submerged in the sea of words and knowledge. A person on a jet ski, however, is just skimming by. They are distracted by the view around them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Five years ago, journalist Nicholas Carr wrote in his book The Shallows: How The Internet Is Changing Our Brains about the way technology seemed to be eroding his ability to concentrate.

"Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words," he wrote. "Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski."

In the book, which became a New York Times bestseller and Pulitzer Prize finalist, Carr explored the many ways that technology might be affecting our brains. Carr became particularly concerned about how the Internet seemed to be impairing our ability to think deeply and to focus on one subject for extended periods.

Today, social media and digital devices have an arguably greater place in our lives and hold on our attention spans than they did in 2011.

So what has changed since Carr wrote his seminal work five years ago? We chatted with the journalist and author about how our increasing interactions with mobile technology might be affecting the most important organ in our bodies.
Since you wrote this book, the Internet has only taken on a bigger role in our lives. What are some of the main changes you've observed in the way we interact with technology?
When I wrote the book, the iPhone was still very new and the iPad had just come out. Social media wasn't as big as it is today. So when I wrote the book, I was thinking about laptops and computers but not so much about smartphones. Of course, now the main way that people interact with the Internet is through mobile devices.

In the book, I argued that what we created with computers and the Internet was a system of distraction. We got the great rewards of having basically unlimited information at our fingertips, but the cost of that was we created a system that kept us in a state of perpetual distraction and constant disruption.

What psychologists and brain scientists tell us about interruptions is that they have a fairly profound effect on the way we think. It becomes much harder to sustain attention, to think about one thing for a long period of time, and to think deeply when new stimuli are pouring at you all day long. I argue that the price we pay for being constantly inundated with information is a loss of our ability to be contemplative and to engage in the kind of deep thinking that requires you to concentrate on one thing.

To me, all the things I worried about have become much worse now that we carry around this permanently connected device that we're constantly pawing at. Things are very different in a way that makes the things I worried about worse.

Research has found that millennials are even more forgetful than seniors. What do we know about how technology is impacting our memory?

Technology definitely has an effect on our memory. What happens is that to move information from your conscious mind (what's known as the working memory) into your long-term memory requires a process of memory consolidation that hinges on attentiveness. You think about the information or rehearse it in your mind in order to form a strong memory of it, and in order to connect it to other things that you remember.

If you're constantly distracted and taking in new information, you're essentially pushing information into and out of your conscious mind. You're not attending to it in a way that is necessary for the rich consolidation of memory.

Since I wrote The Shallows, there have been some very interesting studies which show that we seem to be less able to form long-term memories than we used to, thanks to technology. One study out of Columbia University showed that when people know that they'll be able to find information online easily, they're less likely to form a memory of it.
Are you also concerned about this lack of depth, or shallowness, in our social interactions?
That isn't something that I've studied much, but I think there are some indications that this kind of culture of constant distraction and interruption undermines not only the attentiveness that leads to deep thoughts, but also the attentiveness that leads to deep connections with other people.

One study I mentioned in the book seemed to show that the more distracted you are -- the more your train of thought is interrupted -- the less able you are to experience empathy. So distractions could make it more difficult for us to experience deep emotions.
In the book you talk about the "dark side" of brain plasticity. What does that mean?
Neuroscientists have discovered that the brain is plastic, meaning that it's very malleable or adaptable. Our brains are constantly adapting at a physical level to our environment. You can imagine that what's really changed our environment in the past 10 or 20 years is the Internet and social media.

A lot of people will assume that if our brains can adapt, then our brains will adapt to the flow of information and all will be well. But what you have to understand about neuroplasticity is that the process of adaptation doesn't necessarily leave you a better thinker. It may leave you a more shallow thinker.

What you have to understand about neuroplasticity is that the process of adaptation doesn't necessarily leave you a better thinker. It may leave you a more shallow thinker.

Our brains adapt, but the process of adaptation is value-neutral -- we might get smarter or we might get dumber, we're just adapting to the environment.
Are you optimistic about any of the ways we currently seem to be adapting?
No. It's the ease with which we adapt that makes me most nervous. It doesn't take long for someone to get used to glancing at their smartphone 200 times a day. We're creatures of habit mentally and physically.

When you develop that habit of distraction, it becomes harder and harder to back away and engage our minds in deeper modes of thinking.
Is there anything we can do to keep our mental faculties intact, or is it pretty much hopeless at this point?
Well, you can use the technology less and set aside your phone and spend a good part of your day trying to maintain your focus and not be interrupted. The good thing about that -- because of the plasticity of our brains -- is that if you change your habits, your brain is happy to go along with whatever you do.

What makes me more pessimistic is that we're kind of building our personalities and our entire societies around this new set of norms and expectations that says you need to be constantly connected. As long as we continue going down that path it's going to be ever harder for us to buck the status quo.
There's a ton of research being done on technology and the brain. What sort of findings are you most troubled by?
There are studies suggesting a loss of cognitive control -- not only a loss of attention, but a loss of our ability to control our mind and determine what we think about. One researcher from Stanford pointed out that the more you acclimate yourself to the technology and the constant flow of information that comes through it, it seems that you become less able to figure out what's important to focus on. Instead, your mind gets attracted just to what's new rather than what's important.

We can see signs of that in the compulsiveness with which people become attached to the streams of information that swirl by your eyes.
What do you say to people who argue that at every stage of history, we've been up in arms about new technologies that ultimately proved benign -- and that the Internet is no different?
We've never had a technology like a smartphone before -- a technology that you carry around with you all day long and are pretty much constantly interacting with. Even television was traditionally segregated into different parts of the day -- it wasn't like people carried around a TV in their pocket.

This is a very different kind of technology that we've created for ourselves that does interfere with our thoughts. We've never had a media technology that so shapes the way our mind works.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Internet May Be Changing Your Brain In Ways You've Never Imagined

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Five years ago, journalist Nicholas Carr wrote in his book The Shallows: How The Internet Is Changing Our Brains about the way technology seemed to be eroding his ability to concentrate. "Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words," he wrote.

# data[].attributes.body
"Studies suggest that people who use social media to avoid social situations report lower well being, whereas those who use it to overcome social challenges are benefited by it"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Look around: Chances are, you'll see someone on their smartphone, computer or other digital device.

Experts are divided on the impacts all this screen-time is having on our brains.

Some people claim that use of the internet, social media, and computer games is having a negative impact on social interaction, empathy, and even personal identity.

But the research doesn't totally support these views, other scientists say.

Susan Greenfield, a neurobiologist at the University of Oxford, in England who mainly studies Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, has been outspoken about the dangers of internet use and video games. But critics say Greenfield's views have no basis in the scientific literature.

"...we are concerned that Greenfield's claims are not based on a fair scientific appraisal of the evidence, often confuse correlation for causation, give undue weight to anecdote and poor quality studies, and are misleading to parents and the public at large," Vaughan Bell, a psychology professor at University College London; Dorothy Bishop, a developmental neuropsychologist at Oxford; and Andrew Przybylski, an internet researcher also at Oxford, wrote in an editorial in the British Medical Journal.

Regarding the claim that social media makes kids less social, children's use of social networking sites has actually been found to "enhance existing friendships," these researchers say, "although some individuals benefit more than others."

Studies suggest that people who use social media to avoid social situations report lower well being, whereas those who use it to overcome social challenges are benefited by it.

Greenfield has also claimed that internet-based interactions may trigger autism, which the BMJ researchers say has no scientific backing. Autism is a developmental brain disorder that can be diagnosed in preschoolers. "Her claims are misleading to the public, unhelpful to parents, and potentially stigmatizing to people with autism," they wrote.

Another claim Greenfield and others have made is that playing video games makes people impulsive and aggressive, and gives them a shorter attention span. In fact, some research suggests that playing action video games can lead to a small improvement in mental performance, though more studies are needed.

There's a lot of debate over the link between violence and video games. Some studies suggest violent games can cause a small and temporary uptick in aggressive thoughts and behavior, though others have called this research into question.

Greenfield has also made the claim that the availability of so much information online could lead to more superficial modes of thinking, instead of deep understanding. And the evidence does show that people don't remember things as well when they know they can just look it up online.

As the researchers in this recent review study point out, "In terms of information processing, we are shifting toward a shallow mode of learning characterized by quick scanning, reduced contemplation, and memory consolidation." But this is not necessarily a bad thing, they said, because it means we can free up mental resources for other tasks.

Also, outsourcing our memory to something or someone else is nothing new. We've been doing it for centuries with the written word, or when we're in groups of other people.

Although the cognitive effects of internet use and gaming may be overblown, the physical effects of all that screen time are very real. Spending so much time online is making kids more sedentary, leading to obesity and related health problems. And excessive video gaming can cut into studying time, causing problems at school. ( Internet addiction is recognized as a disorder in China, but not in the US.)

Of course, the internet also has many benefits. Families and friends can connect with one another across the world, people everywhere have access to information and educational materials they might never have otherwise, and workers in some industries can work from anywhere with an internet connection.

As Bell and her colleagues say, "we need to recognize that use of the internet and digital technology has cognitive and social benefits and to balance these against any risks."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Here's what science says about how digital technology REALLY affects our brains

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Look around: Chances are, you'll see someone on their smartphone, computer or other digital device. Experts are divided on the impacts all this screen-time is having on our brains. Some people claim that use of the internet, social media, and computer games is having a negative impact on social interaction, empathy, and even personal identity.

# data[].attributes.body
This article was not helpful in answering my question. It's just someone saying technology is bad and she offers no solution to fix it. She doesn't explain why it happens.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By SUSAN GREENFIELD

Human identity, the idea that defines each and every one of us, could be facing an unprecedented crisis.

It is a crisis that would threaten long-held notions of who we are, what we do and how we behave.

It goes right to the heart - or the head - of us all. This crisis could reshape how we interact with each other, alter what makes us happy, and modify our capacity for reaching our full potential as individuals.

And it's caused by one simple fact: the human brain, that most sensitive of organs, is under threat from the modern world.

Unless we wake up to the damage that the gadget-filled, pharmaceutically-enhanced 21st century is doing to our brains, we could be sleepwalking towards a future in which neuro-chip technology blurs the line between living and non-living machines, and between our bodies and the outside world.

It would be a world where such devices could enhance our muscle power, or our senses, beyond the norm, and where we all take a daily cocktail of drugs to control our moods and performance.

Already, an electronic chip is being developed that could allow a paralysed patient to move a robotic limb just by thinking about it. As for drug manipulated moods, they're already with us - although so far only to a medically prescribed extent.

Increasing numbers of people already take Prozac for depression, Paxil as an antidote for shyness, and give Ritalin to children to improve their concentration. But what if there were still more pills to enhance or "correct" a range of other specific mental functions?

What would such aspirations to be "perfect" or "better" do to our notions of identity, and what would it do to those who could not get their hands on the pills? Would some finally have become more equal than others, as George Orwell always feared?

Of course, there are benefits from technical progress - but there are great dangers as well, and I believe that we are seeing some of those today.

I'm a neuroscientist and my day-to-day research at Oxford University strives for an ever greater understanding - and therefore maybe, one day, a cure - for Alzheimer's disease.

But one vital fact I have learnt is that the brain is not the unchanging organ that we might imagine. It not only goes on developing, changing and, in some tragic cases, eventually deteriorating with age, it is also substantially shaped by what we do to it and by the experience of daily life. When I say "shaped", I'm not talking figuratively or metaphorically; I'm talking literally. At a microcellular level, the infinitely complex network of nerve cells that make up the constituent parts of the brain actually change in response to certain experiences and stimuli.

The brain, in other words, is malleable - not just in early childhood but right up to early adulthood, and, in certain instances, beyond. The surrounding environment has a huge impact both on the way our brains develop and how that brain is transformed into a unique human mind.

Of course, there's nothing new about that: human brains have been changing, adapting and developing in response to outside stimuli for centuries.

What prompted me to write my book is that the pace of change in the outside environment and in the development of new technologies has increased dramatically. This will affect our brains over the next 100 years in ways we might never have imagined.

Our brains are under the influence of an ever- expanding world of new technology: multichannel television, video games, MP3 players, the internet, wireless networks, Bluetooth links - the list goes on and on.

But our modern brains are also having to adapt to other 21st century intrusions, some of which, such as prescribed drugs like Ritalin and Prozac, are supposed to be of benefit, and some of which, such as widelyavailable illegal drugs like cannabis and heroin, are not.

Electronic devices and pharmaceutical drugs all have an impact on the micro- cellular structure and complex biochemistry of our brains. And that, in turn, affects our personality, our behaviour and our characteristics. In short, the modern world could well be altering our human identity.

Three hundred years ago, our notions of human identity were vastly simpler: we were defined by the family we were born into and our position within that family. Social advancement was nigh on impossible and the concept of "individuality" took a back seat.

That only arrived with the Industrial Revolution, which for the first time offered rewards for initiative, ingenuity and ambition. Suddenly, people had their own life stories - ones which could be shaped by their own thoughts and actions. For the first time, individuals had a real sense of self.

But with our brains now under such widespread attack from the modern world, there's a danger that that cherished sense of self could be diminished or even lost.

Anyone who doubts the malleability of the adult brain should consider a startling piece of research conducted at Harvard Medical School. There, a group of adult volunteers, none of whom could previously play the piano, were split into three groups.

The first group were taken into a room with a piano and given intensive piano practise for five days. The second group were taken into an identical room with an identical piano - but had nothing to do with the instrument at all.

And the third group were taken into an identical room with an identical piano and were then told that for the next five days they had to just imagine they were practising piano exercises.

The resultant brain scans were extraordinary. Not surprisingly, the brains of those who simply sat in the same room as the piano hadn't changed at all.

Equally unsurprising was the fact that those who had performed the piano exercises saw marked structural changes in the area of the brain associated with finger movement.

But what was truly astonishing was that the group who had merely imagined doing the piano exercises saw changes in brain structure that were almost as pronounced as those that had actually had lessons. "The power of imagination" is not a metaphor, it seems; it's real, and has a physical basis in your brain.

Alas, no neuroscientist can explain how the sort of changes that the Harvard experimenters reported at the micro-cellular level translate into changes in character, personality or behaviour. But we don't need to know that to realise that changes in brain structure and our higher thoughts and feelings are incontrovertibly linked.

What worries me is that if something as innocuous as imagining a piano lesson can bring about a visible physical change in brain structure, and therefore some presumably minor change in the way the aspiring player performs, what changes might long stints playing violent computer games bring about? That eternal teenage protest of 'it's only a game, Mum' certainly begins to ring alarmingly hollow.

Already, it's pretty clear that the screen-based, two dimensional world that so many teenagers - and a growing number of adults - choose to inhabit is producing changes in behaviour. Attention spans are shorter, personal communication skills are reduced and there's a marked reduction in the ability to think abstractly.

This games-driven generation interpret the world through screen-shaped eyes. It's almost as if something hasn't really happened until it's been posted on Facebook, Bebo or YouTube.

Add that to the huge amount of personal information now stored on the internet - births, marriages, telephone numbers, credit ratings, holiday pictures - and it's sometimes difficult to know where the boundaries of our individuality actually lie. Only one thing is certain: those boundaries are weakening.

And they could weaken further still if, and when, neurochip technology becomes more widely available. These tiny devices will take advantage of the discovery that nerve cells and silicon chips can happily co-exist, allowing an interface between the electronic world and the human body. One of my colleagues recently suggested that someone could be fitted with a cochlear implant (devices that convert sound waves into electronic impulses and enable the deaf to hear) and a skull-mounted micro- chip that converts brain waves into words (a prototype is under research).

Then, if both devices were connected to a wireless network, we really would have arrived at the point which science fiction writers have been getting excited about for years. Mind reading!

He was joking, but for how long the gag remains funny is far from clear.

Today's technology is already producing a marked shift in the way we think and behave, particularly among the young.

I mustn't, however, be too censorious, because what I'm talking about is pleasure. For some, pleasure means wine, women and song; for others, more recently, sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll; and for millions today, endless hours at the computer console.

But whatever your particular variety of pleasure (and energetic sport needs to be added to the list), it's long been accepted that 'pure' pleasure - that is to say, activity during which you truly "let yourself go" - was part of the diverse portfolio of normal human life. Until now, that is.

Now, coinciding with the moment when technology and pharmaceutical companies are finding ever more ways to have a direct influence on the human brain, pleasure is becoming the sole be-all and end-all of many lives, especially among the young.

We could be raising a hedonistic generation who live only in the thrill of the computer-generated moment, and are in distinct danger of detaching themselves from what the rest of us would consider the real world.

This is a trend that worries me profoundly. For as any alcoholic or drug addict will tell you, nobody can be trapped in the moment of pleasure forever. Sooner or later, you have to come down.

I'm certainly not saying all video games are addictive (as yet, there is not enough research to back that up), and I genuinely welcome the new generation of "brain-training" computer games aimed at keeping the little grey cells active for longer.

As my Alzheimer's research has shown me, when it comes to higher brain function, it's clear that there is some truth in the adage "use it or lose it".

However, playing certain games can mimic addiction, and that the heaviest users of these games might soon begin to do a pretty good impersonation of an addict.

Throw in circumstantial evidence that links a sharp rise in diagnoses of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and the associated three-fold increase in Ritalin prescriptions over the past ten years with the boom in computer games and you have an immensely worrying scenario.

But we mustn't be too pessimistic about the future. It may sound frighteningly Orwellian, but there may be some potential advantages to be gained from our growing understanding of the human brain's tremendous plasticity. What if we could create an environment that would allow the brain to develop in a way that was seen to be of universal benefit?

I'm not convinced that scientists will ever find a way of manipulating the brain to make us all much cleverer (it would probably be cheaper and far more effective to manipulate the education system). And nor do I believe that we can somehow be made much happier - not, at least, without somehow anaesthetising ourselves against the sadness and misery that is part and parcel of the human condition.

When someone I love dies, I still want to be able to cry.

But I do, paradoxically, see potential in one particular direction. I think it possible that we might one day be able to harness outside stimuli in such a way that creativity - surely the ultimate expression of individuality - is actually boosted rather than diminished.

I am optimistic and excited by what future research will reveal into the workings of the human brain, and the extraordinary process by which it is translated into a uniquely individual mind.

But I'm also concerned that we seem to be so oblivious to the dangers that are already upon us.

Well, that debate must start now. Identity, the very essence of what it is to be human, is open to change - both good and bad. Our children, and certainly our grandchildren, will not thank us if we put off discussion much longer.

* Adapted from ID: The Quest For Identity In The 21st Century by Susan Greenfield, to be published by Sceptre on May 15 at £16.99. To order a copy for £15.30 (p&p free), call 0845 606 4206.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Modern technology is changing the way our brains work, says neuroscientist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By SUSAN GREENFIELD Human identity, the idea that defines each and every one of us, could be facing an unprecedented crisis. It is a crisis that would threaten long-held notions of who we are, what we do and how we behave. It goes right to the heart - or the head - of us all.