One of the brain-damaging activities students regularly engage in-binge drinking, smoking, gambling, communicating via technology and pulling all-nighters-does not seem to belong in the same category as the rest.
Yet according to a recent study conducted at King's College in London, communicating with e-mail, text and instant messages may have a detrimental impact on IQ that exceeds the decline in intelligence associated with the other activities. IQ damage aside, dependence on communication through cell phones and the Internet desecrates the English language, decreases cognitive capacity and inhibits person-to-person relationships.
Punctuation vigilantes can easily identify the massive assault that communication technology has unleashed on the English language, but this \seventh sense"" for grammar eludes many college students. In the words of Lynne Truss, author of the grammar book, ""Eats, Shoots & Leaves,"" ""We are like the little boy in 'The Sixth Sense' who can see dead people, except that we can see dead punctuation.""
While grammar elitists hear and see grammar errors with innate sensitivity, many rely on Microsoft Word or animated paperclips to expose grammar mistakes. The availability of right-clicking and the condensed words used in text messages endanger a comprehensive understanding of grammar, spelling and prose.
The 10-point reduction in IQ associated with using communication technology is more than double the impact of smoking cannabis and equal to that of losing one night's sleep. The study might indicate that e-mailing, text or instant messaging during lectures also impairs learning since it divides attention. This practice may have the unfortunate result of damaging the cognitive ability of fellow classmates. To the students who refuse to turn off their cell phones during lecture: Silence them-we would like to keep our IQs intact.
The fact that some students refuse to silence their phones during lecture corresponds with the study that found one in five participants described themselves as ""happy"" to interrupt business or social gatherings to reply to an e-mail or a text-message. If a plummeting IQ does not give students the incentive to silence their phones or quit communicating on the Internet, the social implications might serve this purpose.
Eighty-nine percent of the study's participants described those who interrupt gatherings to answer phone calls as ""rude."" In a lecture attended by hundreds of students, each individual should consider the high social cost of keeping his or her phone on in comparison to the miniscule possibility he or she might appear ""cool"" for receiving a call at 8:50 a.m.
In the list of activities that harm intelligence, communication through recent technology holds a place of equal importance as other activities that, at first glance, seem to pose a greater threat to mental function. The rise of text and instant messaging and e-mailing has undoubtedly equipped students with the ability to maintain relationships with distant friends or family and facilitates efficient communication. Still, students should think critically about the multiple negative side effects associated with dependence on recent communication technology.
In the words of Glenn Wilson, the University of London psychologist who performed the study, ""People need to use [technology] responsibly. We know technology makes us more effective, but we also know that misuse of technology can be counterproductive."" For the sake of the IQ, English competence, intellective capacity and personal relationships of every student, infomaniacs should answer Wilson's advice and not the calls, texts or e-mails they receive during lecture.
Jill Klosterman is a freshman planning on majoring in journalism.
