In Context

Book
Machine-made men
The Cybermen are some of Dr Whos most fearsome
adversaries. Intent upon upgrading their victims, they
strip away the fragile human body, implant the brain in a
metallic exoskeleton and over ride the psyche with their
own shared consciousness. Such measures ensure total
adherence to the races assimilative purpose, untroubled by
inconvenient notions of self or conscience. The antagonism
may seem the pulpy staple of genre entertainment, but the
frightening idea behind it is closer to home. After all, how
often have you neglected the emotional needs of friends
and family in order to feed the hive minds of Facebook
and Twitter? Computers, tablets and smartphones are
inevitably here to stay, but are they really capable of it
reprogramming the way we think?
This question is explored by Susan Greeneld in her book
Mind Change, where the noted neuroscientist argues digital
technology is increasingly robbing us of the characteristics
which make us most human. Due to the multiple
contributing factors, Greeneld aptly compares our
changing faculties to climate change. In doing so, Mind
Change becomes a useful umbrella concept, capable
of combining threads from apparent societal trends and
expert professional views, as well as a wide range of direct
and indirect scientic ndings from dierent disciplines.
Such an approach naturally leaves the book open to
criticism as it is backed by little more than anecdotal evidence.
After all, clinically establishing societys descent to Hell in a
wi- enabled handcart would be hard for anyone to prove.
However, as Greeneld herself asserts absence of evidence is
not evidence of absence, and a spate of recent behaviour by
the technically literate makes the existence of Mind Change
hard to contest. As social taboos are increasingly breached,
with covert lming of theatre productions, and clandestine
photos of private funerals posted to Facebook, the author
has evidently tapped into something potent.
Greenelds research indicates social media may be largely
to blame for these behaviours, given its eects on the users
identity and self esteem. Constantly bombarded with images
of wealth and success among their friendship groups, she
highlights an increasing trend towards narcissism, as more
and more people construct a socially desirable self to which
individuals aspire but have not yet been able to achieve. This
narcissism, as Greeneld writes, has repercussions not only for
the individual, but also for their day-to-day interactions, with
large groups of online friends viewed more as a personal
audience than a source of mutually reciprocal exchanges.
Among frequent internet users, these ideas could
undoubtedly leave the author open to ridicule and trolling.
The printed word however aords Greeneld an intimacy
too often lacking online. Here, she has space to explore her

theories without the pressures of instantaneous feedback.

As a result, the book has an accessible tone, and in spite of
the seemingly broad and negative conclusions it reaches, it
is hard not to be drawn in by Greenelds genuine concern.
Consequently, Mind Change is not just a book, but an open
invitation to discuss a seemingly benign phenomenon with
the potential to alter society incomprehensibly.
Such discussion is made all the more necessary by a
potential neurological threat most of us use daily without
considerationthe search engine. According to Greeneld,
internet searches are dangerous because they change
the way we evaluate and store information in our brains.
Before the internet, we had to actively search through vast
quantities of archived knowledge for useful information,
evaluating each fact as we went. While seemingly tedious,
doing so created a neurological trail of breadcrumbs, with
one fact following another, leading to a more profound
understanding of the subject. Search engines, Greeneld
supposes, prevent such links from forming due to the
sheer volume of information available to us. This search for
information ultimately results in an arguably questionpoor world where our brains are saturation-bombed with
answers, preventing us from seeing one thing in terms of
another and thereby understanding each component as part
of a whole.
How do we tackle such cognitive laziness? Greeneld
herself is a rm believer in the use it or lose it principal,
citing a 2000 study of London taxi drivers whose brain
scans showed a particular area of the brain related to
working memory (the hippocampus) was actually bigger
in the drivers than in non-taxi drivers. A reasonable
person could suggest the acquisition and retention of
such in-depth knowledge would be impractical all the
time. However, it would be nevertheless interesting to see
the eect of limiting search engine use in favour of more
traditional sources, particularly as some of the studies
Greeneld cites indicate comprehension and information
retention can be higher when reading the printed word.
Ultimately, Mind Change presents an argument that like
our physical bodies we need to be careful about what we
allow our minds to consume. The danger, Greeneld argues,
is not that we will be forcibly assimilated, but that we
will voluntarily upgrade ourselves to emotionless drones
through a process akin to osmosis. With this in mind, the
words of science ction author Arthur C Clarke take on a
chilling potency: Whether we are based on carbon or on
silicon makes no fundamental dierence; we should each
be treated with appropriate respect.

Lancet Neurol 2015

Published Online
October 12, 2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
S1474-4422(15)00291-4
Mind Change: How digital
technologies are leaving their
mark on our brains
Susan Greeneld
Rider Books, 2015.
Pp384. 9.99
ISBN 978-184-604-431-1
For the 2000 study of London
taxi drivers see
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000
97: 43984403 DOI:10.1073/
pnas.070039597

Andrew Bianchi

www.thelancet.com/neurology Published online October 12, 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00291-4