Have Smart Phones Destroyed Generation Analysis
The article, “Have Smart Phones Destroyed a Generation?” by Twenge explores the impact of smartphones on teens. In the article, the author starts with a capturing paragraph by narrating her phone interview with Athena. However, the argument that follows immediately appear to lack correlation with the topic. Instead, the author has argued her position in the middle and towards the end of the article. Besides, the author’s major argument seems to focus on the lack of children independence as the major cause of smartphone destruction in today’s generation, a statement that lacks strong correlation with the question under exploration. Despite a few shortcomings in the Twenge’s article, this analysis finds that the article has sufficient argument to answer the question under research. Smartphones have had adverse effects, including teens using them to compensate for their lack of independence, becoming addictive and causing depression. In exploring the lack of independence among teens, the author has sufficiently compared the current generation to different past generations to depict how the current generation has been affected by smartphones. The support to this argument is typical because the author compares the current generation to the 1970’s adolescent boomers (paragraph 12) and the Generation X teens who were able to explore the world by their own unlike today’s teens (Twenge, 2017). Besides, the author uses several studies and surveys to prove her claim. The argument on the lack of independence among teens is accurate because the author has based it on the research she has been conducting for the past 25 years (Twenge, 2017). The author has used relevant information that supports the claim that smartphones have affected the iGeneration life to compensate for the freedom that they have been denied by their parents.
Twenge claims that smartphones are addictive to today’s teens. Sufficiently, the author uses different observations and surveys to prove how teens are addicted to smartphones. The typical aspect on this claim can be found in paragraph 7, where the author’s surveys with teens, born between 1995 and 2012 indicate that the current generation is shaped by smartphones (Twenge, 2017). The accuracy of this claim is depicted by portraying Generation X as an aggressive generation that used any available opportunity to seek the adventure and earn compared to the current generation that is always glued on its smartphones. The support to the claim appears very accurate based on paragraphs 38, 39 and 47 that are based on 2014 reports giving explanations on how smartphones can be addictive to the today’s teens. The relevance of the addiction claim is found in the research, studies and surveys and observations used by the author (paragraph 38, 39 and 47).Finally, the author claims that smartphones cause depression among the teens. The author has used sufficient information to argue out her point because she uses surveys and reports to support her position. For example, a survey of 8th graders depicts that social media increased their depression by 27 percent (paragraph 30). The argument that smartphones cause depression among the teens is typical because the author uses a variety of case situations such as surveys, reports and author’s information to explain this claim. In supporting the argument that smartphone cause depression, the author has used accurate information because it was obtained from 2011 to 2015. For example, in paragraph 27 and 31, the author says that based on the 2011 to 2015 study, spending more time on smartphones causes depression and may influence teens to commit suicide. The author’s argument is relevant since she has used 2011 report and her surveys she has been conducting in the past 25 years to show that much consumption of electronic devices causes suicide among the teens. The 2011 reports showed teen suicide was tremendously increasing among the teens who spend more time on electronic devices.