1. Parrott 1
Andrew Parrott
English 101
Professor Bolton
4/9/2012
Technology: Family’s Friend or Foe?
Is technology the cause of deterioration in traditional families today? Many people
would be distraught at the very thought! However, the Federal Interagency Forum on Child and
Family Statistics reported through its publication entitled, “America’s Children: Key National
Indicators of Well-Being,” that sixty-six percent of children in America between the ages of 0
and 17 years lived in a traditional family in 2010. This percentage of traditional families
represented a decrease from seventy-seven percent that was reported in 1980. Clearly,
something is happening to traditional families, and I feel technology is a primary underlying
cause. The presence of technology in our families has its downsides, and it is extremely
important that we comprehend this truth. Each family member experiences the pleasure of their
favorite technologies, but have they ever pondered the possibilities of negative consequences?
The fact is that the majority of life at home is spent isolated within a world that our personal
technology creates and, thereby, deprives us of the very activities that are known to build healthy
families. The increasing presence of technology is to blame for weakened family camaraderie,
natural communication, and personal connection.
Some would argue that technology brings families together through more efficient
communication and available free-time for quality interaction. Furthermore, some explain that
information technologies are vital to empowering families in many areas, even healthcare. For
instance, D’Alessandro and Dosa reported that “informational technology facilitates information
sharing, and thereby empowers children and families” (1134). While technology can provide

2. Parrott 2
better communication and bonding opportunities, people do not understand how this is only
possible if that is a main priority when using technology. To address this lack of understanding,
researchers have begun to examine the social and psychological impact of technologies, such as
the Internet, and the results have been telling. For instance, the research of Kraut et. al suggested
that “greater use of the Interest was associated with statistically significant declines in social
involvement” (1029). Additionally, although technology allows families to keep in close touch
with one another during times of absence, popular computer networking sites, such as Facebook,
continuously distract families from participating together in family activities. During the extra
time technology may provide for people, it is more than likely that they fail to use the available
time to participate in family fun. Additionally, though today’s newest gadgets are able to
connect people with hardly any limits at all, the interactions tend to be mechanical or distant in
nature.
While the family unit serves many functions, one of the most important is nurturing the
ability to interact skillfully with others. Indeed, from the dawn of time, human beings have
relied on social interaction to develop psychological well being, which is necessary for an
individual to be able to function successfully in society. Social interaction, also known as
camaraderie, represents the medium through which some of the most important life lessons are
practiced and learned. Therefore, anything that causes an erosion of social interaction should be
carefully monitored, as was done by Kraut et al. In this research, it was determined that
prolonged use of technology, such as the Internet, directly corresponds to a decline in size of
one’s circle of friends when compared to those who do not spend as much time on the Internet.
Additionally, Engelberg and Sjoberg reported “a very large difference in loneliness between
high- and low- frequency users of the Internet” (45). Their research shows the effects of

3. Parrott 3
prolonged use of the Internet in relation to the user’s loneliness. Those who spend the majority
of their time isolated with technology tend to experience more intense feelings of depression;
however, they fail to fix the problem. Furthermore, the Internet also provides another means for
bullying which is a major cause of unhealthy distress, so why do people continue to remain
absorbed by this falsely glorified form of technology? I shudder at the fact that so many
important relationships are being ruined by today’s seemingly flawless applied sciences. I think
technology is nothing more than a manmade inhibitor of interaction that subconsciously breaks
families apart and erodes their opportunities to build camaraderie. Because technologies draw
family members’ time and attention to individual pursuits, the quality time needed to foster true
family camaraderie dwindles away. Another enemy of camaraderie is text messaging. Indeed,
texting is one of the most common forms of interaction between family members; however,
texting cannot capture the emotional aspects of conversations and, therefore, generally turns nice
chats into brief transmissions of information. Furthermore, because the emotional aspects of
conversations can be uncomfortable at times, texting has also provided a means of escape from
difficult conversations, and this avoidance has become a major deterrent to the formation of
healthy communication skills. For example, many teenagers today turn to texting when
uncomfortable situations arise, such as breakups in relationships. Also, internet dating sites
portray only the good characteristics of people which exclude the necessary skills of processing
and applying negative feedback. Further, internet dating sites present a particular problem for
individuals who already have psychosocial difficulties when they begin using them.
Specifically, Caplan reported in his research that “over time people who prefer online social
interaction may engage in compulsive and excessive use of some synchronous computer-
mediated applications to the point that they suffer negative outcomes at home and work, further

4. Parrott 4
exacerbating existing psychosocial problems” (638). Today’s most popular social networking
sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, severely hinder one’s social skills while eliminating almost
all opportunities to develop them. In addition, these sites are accessible at nearly all times which
render a decrease in social interaction among their users; therefore, I fear tomorrow’s children,
growing up in such a technology reliant world, stand no chance of establishing valuable social
skills. As these applicable examples illustrate, another ill-effect of technology is its negative
impact on communication skills.
In general, communication is considered to be the imparting or exchange of information,
ideas, or feelings. However, not all acts of communication are equal, and this fact distinguishes
mechanical communication from natural communication. Some would argue that if all that is
needed is the transfer of facts, technology clearly fosters communication. However, as Hart and
Risley reported in their book entitled Meaningful Differences, “children’s experiences with
language cannot be separated from their experiences with interaction because parent-child talk is
saturated with affect” (101). In general, the investigations of these authors revealed that
mechanical communication, such as educational television, cannot equal natural, reciprocal
conversations with parents in fostering communication abilities. Likewise, Krcmar, Grela, and
Lin studied the development of vocabulary in young children and their results “support the idea
that prelinguistic or newly verbal children are more likely to learn vocabulary from an adult
rather than television” (60). Additionally, another thing technology will never be able to mimic
is nonverbal communication, and experts report that approximately 60 percent of communication
is nonverbal in nature. Not only does technology fail to provide this key element of
communication, it poses a substantial distraction to the perception of everyday nonverbal signals.
Indeed, technology entices people to such an extent that, although they may be in each other’s

5. Parrott 5
presence, they remain unaware of communication cues. It is the lack of mindfulness that is
caused by the typical mechanical interactions created by technology that inhibits true personal
connection with others.
Connection between people forms over time as healthy relationships with strong
camaraderie, natural communication, and personal connection are continuously exercised.
Technology creates a very real barrier that impedes this process and, thereby, has set a new norm
in what we perceive as possible regarding the depth of connection among family members. The
first stages of connection often begin in early childhood with games. These include games
between brothers and sisters as well as games between children and parents. The new
technology-based games have supplanted the typical board games of the distance past. Today’s
video games have never been more popular or individually absorbing, and these video games are
marketed to kids as young as five years of age. Therefore, during this crucial time in which
connection should be thriving, technology is already eating away at any chance a family has at
forming it. For instance, traditional games require people to be hands-on with one another while
today’s gaming sources, such as the Xbox, allow kids to play with each other without having to
leave their individual rooms. The new-age games encourage people of all ages to enjoy their fun
but hide their true goal of addicting society to their unnaturally isolated form of entertainment for
their own personal profit. Of course, it can be assumed that parents are the ones responsible for
ensuring that this does not happen to children. However, parents are not always available for
monitoring. For instance, as reported by Chesley, technological advances have enabled
persistent communication between work and home, and increases in negative work-family
spillover associated with persistent communication use are linked to increased distress and
decreased family satisfaction. Additionally, this spillover is a major source of distraction to

6. Parrott 6
parents, often causing them to be unaware of their lack of connection with their children. As
more technology becomes available, the few chances of establishing true personal connections
fade into the past, especially within modern families. This slow transition appears to be creating
a warped society that no longer cherishes connections with others. Indeed, time saving
technology such as the microwave oven, washing machine, dishwasher, and dryer now seem to
merely provide more opportunities for isolation. Families of the past didn’t have today’s
technology to help them gather food, prepare it, or wash clothes; rather, family members worked
together constantly to create and maintain their desired living conditions. Before these so called
time saving technologies came about, everyday chores required teamwork, which required
multiple family members to spend time interacting in order to complete the task. On the other
hand, today, we have numerous technologies to help meet our basic needs efficiently. However,
this increase in available time does not correspond to an increase in family-oriented activities.
Families today unnecessarily struggle with weak relationships and are finding that
children who are growing up in this technological era have less communicational and social
awareness. The topic of a family’s strength in camaraderie, natural communication, and personal
connection is very rarely brought to attention; therefore, technology is subconsciously causing a
total shift in the idea of family. I am not concerned whether society will come to this tragic
realization for I feel certain it will. However, I am very concerned about when this realization
will develop and what may happen in the meantime. If society’s lack of awareness continues
without efforts to change, we will find ourselves trapped in a hole for which technological
dependence is solely to blame. I am relieved to report that I am not alone when I ask if
technology is the cause of the deterioration in traditional families today. Indeed, the voices of
those who dare to point out the elephant in the room will begin to create dialogue and debate on

7. Parrott 7
this pressing matter. These debates will serve as a catalyst for critical analysis of the field to our
technological innovators. I have faith in the ingenuity of our leaders and the fortitude of the
American family. It is not too late!

8. Parrott 8
Works Cited
Chaplan, Scott E., “Preference for Online Social Interaction: A Theory of Problematic Internet
Use and Psychosocial Well-Being.” Communication Research 30.6. (2003): 625-648.
Google Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012.
Chesley, Noelle. “Blurring Boundaries? Linking Technology Use, Spillover, Individual Distress,
and Family Satisfaction.” Journal of Marriage and Family 67. (2005): 1237-1248.
Google Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012.
“Communication." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, 2011. Google Scholar. Web. 2
April 2012.
D’Alessandro, Donna M., and Dosa, Nienke P. “Empowering Children and Families With
Information Technology.” Pediatric Adolescence Medicine 155. (2001): 1131-1136.
Google Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012.
Engelberg, Elisabeth, and Sjoberg, Lennart. “Internet use, Social Skills, and Adjustment.” Cyber
Psychology and Behavior 7.1. (2004): 41-47. Google Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012.
Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics. America’s Children: Key National
Indicators of Well-Being. 2011. Google Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Hart, Betty, and Risley, Todd R. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young
American Children. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Inc., 2011.
Print.
Kraut, Robert, Patterson, Michael, Lundmark, Vicki, Kiesler, Sara, and Mukophadhyay, Tridas,
Scherlis, William. “Internet Paradox: A Social Technology that Reduces Social
Involvement and Psychological Well-Being?” American Psychologist 53.9. (1998):

9. Parrott 9
1017-1031. Google Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012.
Krcmar, Marina, Bernard, Grela, and Lin, Kirsten. “Can Toddlers Learn Vocabulary from
Television? An Experimental Approach.” Media Psychology 10. (2007). 41-63. Google
Scholar. Web. 2 April, 2012.