I frequently get requests for information about how to pursue interests in the field of media psychology.  I am always honored to represent the field and share my views and advice.  The following is typical of several letters I have received recently.

I am currently completing my last year as an undergraduate in psychology. I discovered Media Psychology last year in a Popular Culture course but I have found it very difficult to find ANY postgraduate training in Media Psychology.  I was wondering if you could point me in the right direction, as I feel that Media Psychology is the next step to my career, but am finding it difficult to get started.  I would appreciate any advice.

I appreciate the enthusiasm for media psychology.  Media psychology is a new field. There are few “official” programs, there are no clearly defined career paths, and there are no easy answers.

What is media psychology?  Media psychology is the applied study of what happens when people interact with media as producers, distributors, and consumers.

It is simpler to say what media psychology is not–maybe easier than to define what it is.  It is not a clinical degree and will not prepare you for the psychological treatment of patients in a mental health field.  Media psychology is not just being a psychologist in the media or promoting psychology in the media.

Beyond that, media psychology is very broad.  Consequently, the applications are also broad,  not well defined, and the potential is limitless.  Any place that an understanding of human behavior can be applied to media technologies is a relevant application.

It is important to study both psychology AND technology.  If you want to “practice” media psychology, you need to know how media technologies work–how they are developed, produced, and consumed–in order to apply psychological theory to issues of usability, effectiveness, and impact.

Media psychology is also considerably more complex than focusing on media as a reflection of culture because it encompasses the integration of media technologies into life in a myriad of ways.  People are now interact with media in multiple ways across multiple platforms as producers, consumers, and distributors of information of all kinds: visual images, sound, video, text, and color both synchronously and asynchronously.  If you are searching for a profession with a clear career path, predictable income estimations, and logical next steps, this is not a field for you.

I am currently teaching, as you may know from the website bio, at Fielding Graduate University.  This is the very first university with PhD in media psychology.  Fielding also has a master’s degree program, Media Psychology and Social Change, that is entirely online.  My advice to recent psych grads, however, is to get some media technology experience so that you can apply psychology to that knowledge base.  If you don’t understand the technology, it doesn’t matter how well you know the psychology.  Depending upon your interests, this could mean anything from virtual environments (gaming, virtual reality, etc.) or business and marketing communications, to translating educational materials for technology.  This can be done by working in the field in an area that interests you, or finding a program in a university that has courses in both psychology and media communications and production (and not just mass media.)  Areas in psychology that I think are particularly important to media psychology are cognitive psychology (how we process information, make mental models, attention, perception), developmental psychology (different stages of emotional, cognitive, and cultural development), cultural psychology (an appreciation of how different people and cultures have different standards and goals and how that is part of the cognitive process), and positive psychology (what makes people function better both behaviorally and emotionally).

If your interest is working with people in a clinical capacity, then the logical next step is a clinical psychology program even if you want to use media technologies within that practice. Working with clients as a mental health professional requires specific training, supervised practice, an internship, and has licensing requirements.  In the US, these requirements vary depending on the type of work/title/training (e.g. a counselor, therapist, psychologist, or psychiatrist).  Each title has very specific requirements defined by the governing body where you want to practice and the type of practice it entails (such as psychological testing, type of therapy, prescription privileges, etc.).  The rules differ from place to place, even state to state in the US, so it’s important to check for the specifics in the place you want to work.

Research is somewhat different and depends mostly upon what you’re researching.  The licensing requirements do not apply to research, however most lead researchers do have graduate degrees at the masters or doctoral level.  There are also are ethical requirements when you are dealing with human subjects, so research proposals should be reviewed by an Internal Review Board to review the research design.

Media psychology is very exciting and has tremendous potential.  This is the beginning of the field so the early entrants have the excitement and burden of defining the path.  This is part of what I love about media psychology.  There are no easy answers.  It is not an “ivory tower” field.  It requires a good knowledge base and draws across multiple disciplines because media technologies are not isolated or compartmentalized.   It also requires the ability to think critically and have a certain amount of cognitive flexibility since the technologies (and thus the field) change constantly.

Media is a system, not a thing; it is inseparable from society and they are mutually influential.   To me, media psychology is about understanding the interaction of people and media technologies.  Perhaps more importantly, it is also about taking responsibility for our part in the cycle.  It is the only way we can develop better technologies and use them well.

Previously published in Psychology Today “Positively Media.”

Facebook’s recent privacy control changes have triggered a big response of concern, indignation, and pages of analysis. One thing you have to love about social media, when people are ticked off, you find out pretty fast. Facebook is doing some rhetorical back-pedaling but when people are angry, they demand solutions—often in haste and not often rationally. This has added fuel to the political fire to regulate social networking sites like Facebook. It’s time to take a deep breath and realize that we need a longer view to achieve a solution that is both effective and sustainable. That solution is education, not legislation. We need to redefine media literacy to include understanding how media technologies work and how they are used, not focus on content. We need to elevate media literacy to media citizenship.

Facebook violated a social contract with its users. People are rightfully frustrated when they sign up for something and the rules change. But for Facebook users, this is more than that. The changes to privacy controls violate cultural expectations and cross a psychological boundary, not just the fine print. The sense of betrayal is heightened because of the personal investment, not to mention exposure, people have in an online identity, experience, friends, and community. There is a danger, though, that these emotions will cloud people’s vision about the longer-term and the more fundamental principles at stake. Short-term fixes won’t address longer-term issues.

Whatever the core issues are—and not everyone agrees—the problems are not unique to Facebook. We are all grappling with the implications of a digitally connected world and what this means for a myriad of issues. The solution, however, is not in lawsuits or regulation. Both are a waste of resources and neither will achieve a positive objective: making people safe and effective navigators of the continually evolving digital landscape. The solution is in education.

It’s time we admitted that we are a technology-rich society and redefined media literacy to include understanding how media technologies work, not just what’s in them. We need to elevate media literacy to media citizenship.

As a society fond of taking action, education may not seem like a proactive, eye-for-an-eye response. But it is ultimately more powerful, because it can create a cultural shift toward technological competence and responsibility. Media technologies impact every part of our lives. This is not, in and of itself, a bad or good thing. It is a fact of life. The travesty is to expect people to navigate a new terrain without training and guidance. Media literacy needs to be just that and it needs to be included as a core item in our educational line-up not an after-school after-thought. It may not be easy to measure media literacy like reading and math, but media literacy will be the backbone of how traditional literacy skills are applied in the years ahead.

Social media technologies are creating a participatory culture and that’s a good thing. We want people to have a voice, believe their actions matter, have access to information and education, and be active participants in their lives, their communities, and their country. But most of this will involve technology. If the politicians can’t pass up a photo op and feel they must get involved, then getting on the education bandwagon and promoting media citizenship through media literacy is a better place to do it.

I absolutely agree with concerns over privacy online. This is a whole new world and it’s not all Disney. Digital media and a fully networked society have fundamentally changed the game. But if we showed up someplace to play baseball and the game was basketball, we wouldn’t try to change the rules of basketball to match those of baseball. We’d learn the new rules, get a different ball and get in the game. As a society, we need to make sure everyone learns the new rules so they can effectively (and safely) get in the game.

The privacy issues encircling Facebook are, like most important things, complex. As technologies are changing, so is our sense of privacy. The benefits of social networking sites are not without trade-offs, and we are grappling with where those boundaries lie for ourselves and for others, who might not read the fine print or be able to understand the ramifications. This is not only children and teens. Many people lack a fundamental understanding of how the Internet and social media work; much less an understanding of privacy features and policies in a single networking site.

While the issues of privacy and disclosure currently on the block are not unique to Facebook, the sheer dominance (currently) of the site has people are rightfully concerned and in true social media style, they are letting their voices be heard. Facebook should pay close attention to this. People don’t go on Facebook to see Facebook, they go on Facebook to connect with others. If people are unhappy or distrustful, customer loyalty will be nonexistent when other effective tools come along.

Privacy advocates have filed complaints with the FCC this week. Lawmakers can smell blood and are largely unwilling to address the broader philosophical questions, some of which Psychology Today Blogger Samantha Smithstein raised in her post about online privacy and responsibility. But wherever you fall on the regulate/don’t regulate spectrum, the unassailable problem with it regulation that even if you believed that government employees actually understood the technology, regulation is always done using a rearview mirror. We need to accept that the issues with Facebook are some of the many that we will face as technologies change, most of which we can’t even anticipate. The government has better ways to spend it’s time and our money than regulating social media sites into a negotiated consensus compliance in retrospect instead of providing people with the tools they need to look forward.

It makes much more sense to EDUCATE people—especially kids—because we want them to be able to evaluate not just Facebook but the next new thing, and the next. Media literacy needs to be defined and taught in a way that equips kids and adults to navigate a digital world that is networked, permanent, searchable, and public. Not only is this important for their psychological and physical safety, it is critical for their future success. There will be few careers in the future that do not involve understanding how to use technology—but using the technology won’t be the job, it will be how other jobs are done.

The problem we face isn’t just about privacy and Facebook. It is a by-product of advances in communications technology. Before you bash technology with abandon, remember that it is responsible for much of our economic wealth. So if we believe some people can’t engage with technology safely by themselves, let’s put our efforts into teaching them how. Let’s embrace the responsibility–which is, after all, the whole point in having the freedom to do so—and put more energy and resources into equipping not only our kids, but all our citizens—to have the knowledge and critical thinking skills that will allow them to be responsible, ask the right questions, and understand and appreciate how to use technology well.

Previously published in Psychology Today “Positively Media.”

When you see the headlines about social media addiction, take a deep breath. Exhale. I know this sounds radical, but don’t go by the news articles. Find the actual study and read it. Don’t just read the results; see how the researchers define what they are measuring. This is important because 1) sometimes studies just don’t make sense, 2) sometimes things that are only correlated get reported as being a ’cause’, and, 3) the people writing the articles don’t always read the actual studies before they write—even whey they are real journalists.

Psychologists, parents, educators and politicians frequently talk about how important it is to teach kids media literacy so they can critically use, produce and evaluate media. Evidence suggests that this is not a skill that should be reserved for the young.

There has been a little flurry of news articles and blogs recently about social media addiction. First of all, it concerns me that, as a society, we are very cavalier tossing around the concept of ‘addiction.’ Addiction is a serious psychological diagnosis based on specific and seriously life-impairing criteria. (PT Blogger Allen Frances has a good discussion of behavioral addictions as compulsively driven behavior with negative consequences and the problems of getting too loose with clinical diagnoses.) Identifying an addiction of any kind is important.  To my knowledge, however, a college student saying “I’m addicted to Facebook” is not adequate diagnostic criteria for addiction any more than someone saying they are addicted to chocolate or American Idol.

Of course, as a writer, if you can get the word ‘addiction’ in a headline it will draw eyeballs to your copy because it targets people’s fears. (Did it get you to read this?) Since we are all biologically wired to notice danger, especially where kids are concerned, this is a sure-fire way to get someone to read your stuff. I know journalists are all freaking out about the competition from new media. I get the conflict. But this isn’t the time to compromise journalistic standards, it’s the time to shore them up to prove your point about training and objectivity.

One of the recent studies discussed in the reports about social media addiction was an interesting outgrowth of a class assignment in a journalism course, not an empirically designed research project. The web-published results were a thoughtful qualitative analysis by a team headed by University of Maryland professor Dr. Susan Moeller. (An acknowledged limitation is that this is a population of college students particularly interested in and engaged with media.) The homework assignment was to go without media for 24 hours and then write about it.

The results of the analysis of student submissions (along with some notes on methodology) were published online. They included quotes from students that were illustrative of their experience. That is how qualitative studies are done. A quote is not meant to be a common denominator and it is not accompanied by a frequency distribution; it is local color. The report on the website describes how students experienced a new appreciation for how they used media. Some students even used the word ‘addiction’ in their submissions. However, most comments, judging from the data published on the report’s site, were reflective of different types of new media use, the shift in the students’ reliance on new media relative to traditional forms, and the students’ desire to stay connected to friends, family and world events.

The conclusion had nothing to do with addiction, but made important points about the way social media technologies have been integrated into students’ lives, their expectations about frequency of contact, and how that impacts how they relate to the world.  From the site:

The major conclusion of this study is that the portability of all that media stuff has changed students’ relationship not just to news and information, but to family and friends — it has, in other words, caused them to make different and distinctive social, and arguably moral, decisions.  (ICMPA, 2010, ¶3)

The headlines in several news articles reporting on the study focused entirely on social media addiction, extrapolated from student comments not the analysis, and did not mention the profound, albeit conceptual, shifts in behavior and expectations. Thus when various reporters/writers polled experts for their articles, they were asked about the topic of social media addiction, not the other implications of the study. One article had a particularly good quote came from fellow PT blogger and media psychologist Stuart Fischoff, who reasonably and articulately pointed out that,

“All these technologies have potential for terrific use and for terrific abuse…Everyone is a potential addict – they’re just waiting for their drug of choice to come along, whether heroin, running, junk food or social media. All those substances can be streetcars of desire…”

His remarks, evoking some cool imagery and media references, basically said there is potential for addiction for with many behaviors. Exactly.

Fischoff’s great quote got picked up by WiredPRNews.com when they decided to cover the story about the Maryland study, only now the headline said “Study shows social media withdrawal can occur” and starts out, “A recent study suggests individuals may go through withdrawal symptoms from abstaining from social media for long periods.” The writer then cites the Maryland study as the source for Fischoff’s quote. (At least he still got credit for saying it, even if he hadn’t been in the study.) Does this remind anyone of the old “telephone” or “whisper” game?

Another recently quoted report was published online by Retrevo Gadgetology, entitled “Is Social Media a New Addiction?” This is a marketing report by a consumer electronics marketplace. As an academic piece, it has some serious methodological issues, such as in how the questions are structured, particularly if you are drawing conclusions about addiction. (None of the criteria for diagnosing addiction were included in the survey.)

That wasn’t Retrevo’s intention and, to their credit, if you read the actual report you see they responsibly qualify their remarks, are conversational and speculative about their conclusion, and do not declare outright an epidemic of social media addiction as the headline might imply:

We’re not qualified to declare a societal, social media crisis but when almost half of social media users say they check FaceBook or Twitter sometime during the night or when they first wake up, you have to wonder if these people aren’t suffering from some sort of addiction to social media. From this study, it also appears that social media may have begun to replace more conventional sources for news with many social media users saying tweets trump TVs for that morning cup of news. (Retrevo, 2010, ¶7)

For marketers, the take-away here is the shift from TVs to social media for late-breaking news. However, by the time the study got to Media Post, it is labeled “Social Addiction” and reports that the study concludes that social media can be habit forming. Not very useful to marketers nor helpful to society at large.

We live in a world where information abounds.  Information is no longer the purview of the privileged few, but neither is having an opinion.  This is a tremendous freedom and opportunity.  With it comes responsibility.  There is no way to maintain freedom and have someone else vet all the material you read.  You have to do it yourself.  Think of it like defensive driving.  This is a big onus, but in my mind a price worth paying.

However, we can’t be lazy or blinded by what we  believe instead of engaging our gray matter.  If we blithely forward ‘facts’ based on our innate biases and “it seems right to me” conclusions, pull the most sensational quotes to use as headlines, and, as consumers, believe what we see rather than thinking critically and reading original sources, then we will not be able to identify the real issues we need to tackle nor will we be able to see our way to the positive potential these tools can bring.

As Fischoff said in his quote, there is no shortage of things to be addicted to.  Social media is just one of many.  But just because something is new and having a profound impact on how people behave doesn’t by definition mean that it is bad or harmful.  Believe it or not, there is actual research that talks about the postive side of social media, too, but they don’t make very good headlines.

—

ICMPA (2010). A Day Without Media. Research Project, University of Maryland, Phillip Merrill College of Journalism. Retrieved May 20, 2010 http://withoutmedia.wordpress.com/

Retrevo (2010). Is Social Media a New Addiction? Retrevo Studies. Retrieved May 20, 2010 http://www.retrevo.com/content/blog/2010/03/social-media-new-addiction%3F

A version of this  article ran on PsychologyToday.com in my blog “Positively Media.”

A recent survey by the Career College Association reported that 9 out of 10 Americans think college is important for career opportunities and 67% believe that education is the key to competitiveness in the global economy. Turns out education can also be the key to keeping your job in an economic downturn. Recent employment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that not only do people with more education earn more, but in tough times like these, education provides a buffer against unemployment. The unemployment rate for people with a bachelor’s degree or higher as of October 2009 was 4.6%. However, compare that to the percent of people out of work with less than a high school diploma– 14%. When it comes to unemployment, 10% is a lot. The desire for more employment options is also fueling a spike in enrollment of adults returning to school.

The good news is that technology can help. First, it allows you to build a persuasive argument to inspire your kids.  You can find employment and earning potential numbers at the click of a mouse (including charts) at the Bureau of Labor Statistics website so you can show your kids at the dinner table why it’s so important to get an education. (Make sure you translate the numbers into a currency your kids will understand, like clothes or cars.)

More importantly, however, communications technologies make education available to people–both young and old–for whom it was previously out of reach. Traditional higher education programs can be prohibitive for a number of reasons: cost, geography, admission requirements, or home and family demands. Also, according to a report by Howell, Williams, and Lindsay Thirty-two Trends Affecting Distance Education: An Informed Foundation for Strategic Planning , the current higher education infrastructure isn’t equipped to handle the number of college-bound students coming down the pipeline, not to mention the swelling number of nontraditional students looking to further their education and career options. In 2001, 42% of all students were over age 25.  Adult learners are the fastest growing segment of the higher education population.

Brick and mortar institutions can’t offer the flexibility to facilitate the needs of many, particularly adult learners, so it’s exciting to see different solutions using distance learning models springing up. For example, the Big Bend Community College has established satellite “Community Knowledge Centers” to provide broadband access to their programs.  The military is instituting a virtual school program to help the kids in military families stay on track through frequent relocations. The Conterra Telecom Services is connecting eight high schools in the Navajo Nation to the Northeast Arizona Technological Institute of Vocational Education.  Where the average distance between high schools is 101 miles and 78% of student have to travel over unpaved roads to school, providing high speed Internet access can make a huge difference.

With the technology we have today, there is no reason why quality education cannot be available to anyone who wants it. In a perfect world, everyone would have a chance to stroll leisurely past ivy-covered halls carrying a swell book bag on their way to a lecture by a Nobel laureate. But it’s not. Only about 25% of the population is able to attend a four-year college. Distance education is a powerful way to help expand access and options to the rest.

Contrary to widely-held beliefs, distance-learning is not a sorry second best.  It is possible to have very meaningful relationships and learning experiences in asynchronous environments. I know. I’ve been on both sides of the equaiton. Just like in face-to-face courses, much of the success of an online course is due to the energy the teacher and students invest. But it is the convenience and flexibility in scheduling of the distance learning format that allows most students to continue their education. While there are potential downsides, of course, the disadvantages are vastly outweighed by the alternative–no education.

The U.S. could learn from places like India’s Indira Ghandhi National Open University. It provides educational opportunities through distance and open education targeting disadvantaged populations. There are kids working as busboys working in Kuwait studying to be engineers, thanks to this system. We should take notice of both the opportunity and the motivation and energy of so many who are working to take advantage of it.

The world is becoming a smaller place, thanks to technology. This means that competition for jobs, not just goods, is in a global market. The disparity in unemployment across education levels is an example of this trend. If you haven’t seen the viral video “Did You Know” on YouTube, watch it to get an idea of the magnitude of this global shift.

Unemployment numbers underscore the importance of an education in slow economic times.  But in the global economy, we not only need to get an education, we need to keep learning.

Wondering what courses make up a media psychology curriculum is common particularly among people thinking about the next steps in their education.   Recently a young woman from Athlone High School for Girls in South Africa posed this  question, so I am sharing my response here.  It is exciting to hear that people all around the world are becoming aware of the importance of psychology in addressing media and technology in our daily lives.

Media psychology, while based in psychology, is transdisciplinary.  You will want a working understanding of several areas of psychology, sociology, and (surprise!) design.  You will also want good communication skills and actual (not theoretical) experience with media applications.  Each person develops their own interests that will involve more targeted learning.

Start with a broad view of psychology, including developmental, cognitive, and social. When you are thinking about how people use, develop or are impacted by media, developmental psychology helps you to understand how people develop, change, and mature and the differences that makes in how they perceive the world. Cognitive psychology looks at how people think–including the physical nature of processing information of all kinds (words, images, sounds) through the senses, how that gets our attention, and influences how we learn, are persuaded, and become engaged. It also looks at the qualitative side–how individuals interpret or make meaning out of all that information based on our individual experiences and culture.

Social psychology and sociology examine different aspects of the behavior of individuals as they connect with groups, group behaviors, networks and network behaviors, and the sense of self and place that are part of our social and personal identities. It also looks at broader social implications of society as groups, institutions, and nations. 

From there, two areas that I find particularly relevant are Narrative Psychology and Positive Psychology.  I find Narrative Psychology very useful because stories are how we connect the dots when we try to understand things.   Positive Psychology contributes to understanding how strengths, self-efficacy, hope, and resilience can be important factors in the development of prosocial media.

Good communication skills are very important so that you know how to get your message across. The best understanding of psychology and media in the world won’t help if you can’t communicate your thoughts.

As technology changes, we must be more innovative, intuitive, and creative. Design brings together disparate elements in new and exciting ways.

And finally, learning how media is produced, how technology tools work, and how the technology influences content and our interaction with it and each other is very important. The tools change often, but the fundamental issues of people and message construction will continue to apply.  Media psychology is an applied field, promoting the understanding of media technologies, their impact, and their potential.  Philosophically, the media psychologists I know are actively engaged in the positive development and use of media technologies for everything from education to social change.