Talk:Google effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

It's not finished, by a long shot[edit]

This isn't an article about just the Betsy Sparrow study, although I'm sure others can find more information about that study and surely improve on what I did.

The phenomenon has probably been around as long as Internet search engines, and I just wasn't getting anywhere with the time I had finding the history of it. Maybe I can do more on the history later. It was hard enough just finding what Wikipedia would consider reliable sources.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:46, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Isn't this effect similar to "calculator effect" (if there is such a term)? People nowadays are bad at mental reckoning compared to say, during abacus / slide-rule eras. Berdaulat (talk) 05:40, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Einstein has been quoted as saying, "Never memorize something that you can look up." Wouldn't this indicate a prior history to the concept? JeramieHicks (talk) 17:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Lead[edit]

I changed the wording

The Google effect is a change in how people remember that has resulted from the use of Google and other search engines.

to

The Google effect is the increased use of Internet search engines such as Google as a substitute for memory.

Another editor revised this to:

"The Google effect is the tendency to forget information that can be easily found using Internet search engines such as Google as a substitute for memory.

with the comment "I believe Macrakis has misnterpreted the definition of "Google effect" to mean this is intentional...". That certainly wasn't what I intended. The main motivation for my edit was to say something substantive about the "change" (what sort of change?) which is left vague in the original wording. The main issue with the newest wording is that the phrase "as a substitute for memory" isn't attached to anything in the sentence. (In my wording, it was the "use of search engines...as a substitute for memory.") Let me try another wording.... --Macrakis (talk) 19:14, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks good now. I knew my orignal wording wasn't exactly what was desired, but I think the lead sentence now accurately describes the conclusions of the study.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)