Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by autoexec 220 days ago
> Those 4.5 million survey responses were gathered over a decade

I'd feel more confident about the results of this research if it didn't entirely depend on self-reported data from a survey. At least in this case it was a phone survey and not just an internet questionnaire posted to social media sites. I'd put more faith in a much smaller sample of young people being professionally evaluated for memory problems.

The survey asks the question: "Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, do you have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions?"

It doesn't ask what physical/mental/emotional condition they have, or even if they were diagnosed with it by a professional (although it does at one point ask if a doctor has told them they have a depressive disorder).

Some years the survey included optional questions (which people may or may not have been asked) that asked if they were taking medicine or receiving treatment from a doctor or other health professional for any type of mental health condition or emotional problem, but again, didn't ask what that condition was.

If you told me that there has been a surge in young people over the last ~10 years who self-identify as having a mental or emotional problem that they themselves suspect has caused difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions I wouldn't be at all surprised.

I'd be more curious to know if there were a surging number of young people who were being diagnosed and treated for serious memory disorders recently.

4 comments

With rising ADHD awareness and corresponding academic waivers and medications used to enhance academic performance, I'm surprised the results are not much higher among students. I'm disappointed the paper failed to address the limitations of the study.

Note that the effect was stronger with wealth, as expected for performance- and excuse-seeking behaviors in high-achieving households.

I'm starting to think ADHD is isn't a disorder at all. It's like obesity, if something afflicts 2% of the population, it's an individual disorder or issue. If it afflicts 20%+ of the population, it's either a systems/societal issue, or even more likely, a common personality trait that just happens to be very undesirable at this particular moment in time.
ADHD is in part an adaptation to being bombarded with information in the Internet era.

I'm sure it's a legitimate disorder in the most severe cases as well, but like most psych quackery, there are way too many doctors and patients (80%+) too eager to self-diagnose and put people on a prescription and call it a day.

Doctors get money from pharma and people get to use their "disorder" as a convenient excuse for everything. That's what we call incentive alignment in economics.

How is it an adaptation? My understanding is that the internet era disrupts ADHD people the most.
> diagnosed with it by a professional

Honestly, I wouldn't be sure how to answer some of the questions.

In a 15 minute doctor's appointment I was "diagnosed" and medicated for bipolar. In another 15 minute appointment with a psychiatrist, we added OCD and general anxiety as well.

We stopped medications shortly after and it has been 20 years.

There has been a lot of discussion about self diagnosis, but I have the opposite problem. How can you decide a diagnosis with 10 questions and some pills?

Modern medicine has no incentive to diagnose you. Their incentives are to get you in and out as quickly as possible, get you on a recurring prescription, and schedule the next followup visit. And to do this for as many people as possible. As long as they don't accidentally kill you, they profit.
> internet questionnaire posted to social media sites

This has got to have a strong selection effect.

I think so, but that hasn't stopped it from being a popular way to gather data, or from often being the only source of data used in a paper. I get that internet surveys are dirt cheap and it's easy to get large number of responses, but you have to take the results with a such a massive boulder of salt that it seems more like a convenient way to churn out papers (or even an easy way to get a desired result) than a way to conduct actual worthwhile research.
> an easy way to get a desired result

Reminds me of that bit from yes prime minister https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GSKwf4AIlI

Well a good surveyor would take into account order effects, i.e. the order in which questions were asked for example using Latin square designs.
An uncontrolled selection bias that has changed over time as the social media landscape has changed.
Yes, which is why the parent points out that it wasn't this.
The survey data can be measured against itself.