Wednesday, August 25th, 2010
A recent article in the New York Times by Robin Marantz Hening explores the evolution of adolescence and how psychologists are struggling to describe the “unfinished” nature of twentysomething adults. According to some, like “Emerging Adulthood” author, Jeffrey Arnett, the twenties are an under-recognized stage in adult development, created by a rapid change in our economic and cultural space. In an information-based economy, Arnett sees“…the need for more education to survive in an information-based economy; fewer entry-level jobs even after all that schooling; young people feeling less rush to marry because of the general acceptance of premarital sex, cohabitation and birth control; and young women feeling less rush to have babies given their wide range of career options and their access to assisted reproductive technology if they delay pregnancy beyond their most fertile years.”
These realizations have lead to the creation of the Society for the Study of Emerging Adulthood. Others aren’t quite so sure, nothing that the period of adult rootlessness that this life-stage is not universal – many, in fact, skip it, and progress towards marriage and child-rearing right after adolescence. Development scientist Richard Lerner believes that to be a “real” life-stage (in clinical terms), it has to be universal, meaning that there need to be real measureable consequences for those who skip it.
This debate has real significance. If a new life stage exists, societies need to design support services around the needs of an emerging population, who may not be defined around a specific age range. This has a real impact on how we spend our money on things like health care and education, or how companies market their products. If it’s not universal, however, it’s going to be difficult for institutions to get these activities right.
Whether strictly applicable to the field of developmental psychology or not, we at DECODE have been noticing the impact of the life stage on everything from civic participation to employee expectations and consumer behaviour. Young independents, as we call them (those out of school, and not with children of their own) are less likely to say they’ll vote or volunteer. It’s a period that appears to me marked by a distinct lack of connection to broader community.
Hening’s article raises as many questions as it answers, particularly for those in the demographic being discussed. But kudos to her, and to the Times, for at attempting to describe the demographic in an empathetic and considered manner.
Monday, July 5th, 2010


The BBC writes about Crowdsourcing on their News front page.
According to the article, getting suggestions in from multitudes of users can be very useful. On the other hand, doing something with those ideas is more challenging.
Tom de Castella concludes with the notion that effective crowdsourcing is actually just collaboration in disguise.
Read the article: Click here.
Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009
Using the Pew Internet and the American Life’s latest data, two perspectives on online activities drive greater civic engagement, one from The Hill and one from Arts Technica. Hat Tip to Justin Stayshyn, whose Twitter feed is becoming like the radio.
Pew found (as we are also finding in Canada) that those who participate in online engagement activities are more likely to participate in “real-life” civic engagement. The study also found that 18-28 year-olds are twice as likely as the rest of the adult population to participate in online engagement activities. But, as both the Hill and Arts Technica note, socio-economic background is also a strong indicator of both people’s inclinations towards being online AND their overall level of civic participation.
Pew tried their best to get at what are the driving points behind the data, but you can see it straining under the weight of its setup: When comparing highest and lowest income earners, it found a relatively tiny gap between those who did and did not engage in online activities, but an enormous gap between those who engaged in real-world activities. But… those who are young are less likely to be affluent… but… less affluent are less likely to be online… but those young people are more likely to be online…but also less affluent?
You can see a somewhat broken mobius strip of “research speak” here. What would be most helpful is to study the larger sample of those aged 18-29. This would allow us to compare and contrast the various demographics more rigorously. As Pew itself notes, this means using research tools that reach young people on devices they use (such as cell phones or online panels). Pew admits their research was gathered using landline-only calls.
… Which leads to the convenient setup that DECODE has this data, for the U.K., the U.S., and Canada. Watch this space.
Friday, May 15th, 2009
A recent study of cell phone and landline phone polling suggests we may need a new set of standards for how we process quantitative data. This is becoming increasingly important as landline-only usage is now lower than cell phone only usage in the U.S. (similar trends are likely in Canada. A substantial portion of the population is now actually beyond the reach of random digit dialing surveys.