According to the San Francisco Chronicle, when it comes to wireless hotspots per capita, access to broadband and the number of online shoppers and e-mail users, San Francisco is way ahead of the curve, making it one of the tech-savviest cities in the country.

But is there a cost to all this technology?  In an earlier article, the intrusion of social media into everyday life was discussed.  But bedtime, mealtime, and intimate time may not be the only places social media is intruding.

On Monday, the Nielsen Co. discussed the findings of it’s latest Three Screen Report, which tracks consumption across TV, Internet, and mobile phones.  The latest findings are that the typical American continues to increase his or her media time: each week watching almost 35 hours of TV, 2 hours of time-shifted TV, 22 minutes of online video and 4 minutes of mobile video, while also spending 4 hours on the Internet.

Of particular interest were findings related to the increased time spent multitasking.  Americans now spend 35% more time using the Internet and TV simultaneously than they did a year ago.  Commenting on this phenomenon in the company blog, Matt O’Grady (Nielsen Company media product leader) states, “The initial fear was that Internet and mobile video and entertainment would slowly cannibalize traditional TV viewing, but the steady trend of increased TV viewership alongside expanded simultaneous usage argues something quite different…It seems that, for the foreseeable future at least, America’s love affair with the TV will continue unabashed.  We seem to have an almost insatiable appetite for media, with online and mobile programming only adding to it.”

The latest reports don’t suggest that Americans have stopped eating, sleeping, having sex, or watching TV, only that we are now using social media (texting, social networking sites, etc) during those other activities.  The question, then, is not if these activities are being replaced, only if our experience of them is diminished.

Samantha Smithstein, Psy.D.

Earlier this week, Retrevo Blog released their latest Gadgetology study in which they asked social media users when, where, and how much time they spend on sites like Facebook and Twitter.

Not surprisingly, there was a difference between the over 25 crowd and the under 25 crowd. Nevertheless, the numbers were striking all around. For example, overall almost half of the respondents check on social media while in bed, during the night, or as soon as they wake up in the morning.

The most notable numbers were related to the concept of interruption, and how people felt about the possibility of an electronic message intrusion. Half of those under 25 said they didn’t mind receiving a text message during a meal (32% from both age groups), and a quarter of the younger set said they wouldn’t mind being interrupted while on the toilet or during a meeting. Most significantly, a full 11% of those under 25 and 6% of those over 25 said they would even check a text message during sex.

Retrevo concludes their article by questioning if we are facing a social media crisis or something akin to an addiction when we feel compelled to check in with our gadgets while in bed, sharing a meal, and having sex. These numbers certainly prompt that question. Eventually we may have to face the question of our essential orientation as electronic media becomes more and more a part of daily life: is electronic media interrupting life, or is life the interruption? Earlier this month, the newborn baby of a South Korean couple starved to death as they cared for their virtual daughter online. While this seems like an extreme case, it does seem crucial we eventually get the balance right.

Samantha Smithstein, Psy.D.

Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Edwards, Elin Nordegren, and now Sandra Bullock… what do they all have in common?  Their partners made headlines engaging in sexual behaviors that seemed risky, out of control, and outside of their committed relationships.

Those of us not intimately connected with these couples cannot possibly diagnose any of the partners with a “sex addiction” or any other diagnosis.  However, what is true about all of these women is that their partner’s sexual behavior has left them with an aftermath of pain, confusion, anger, grief, and shame.

Disclosure/discovery of compulsive sexual behavior to/by the partner is a key element of recovery for the sex addict and the right thing for a relationship.  But this process is usually incredibly painful for the partner, and takes a great deal of time and effort to heal from.  In spite of this, many partners are reluctant to get the help they need.  “Many partners and ex-partners of sex addicts are particularly resistant to getting treatment for themselves,” says Mavis Humes Baird of NYTimes.com.  “They have the highest dropout rates of any major 12-step program.”

It is not clear why partners of sex addicts have such a particularly difficult time getting treatment.  Perhaps it is related to the level of anger and betrayal they feel, or the shame and way this particular behavior can cut down a partner’s self esteem.  But regardless of the difficulty, this help is essential.  Studies indicate that most couples ultimately stay together, but that neither the initial disclosure nor threats to leave prevents relapse of the sexual behavior.  Instead, both the individuals and the couple require support and help acquiring new tools for recovery and moving forward in their lives and relationship in a new way.

Samantha Smithstein, Psy.D.

Much was made of the writings of S.L.A. Marshall when he published his conclusions that most soldiers during World War II did not fire their weapons during combat. When the military discovered this aversion to killing among soldiers it prompted a change in its training to overcome it.

Recently, the New York Times reported about a study published in The Journal of Traumatic Stress regarding soldiers who have killed in combat or gave orders that lead to killing. Shira Maguen, a psychologist at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the principal investigator of the study found that these soldiers were more likely to report symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, alcohol abuse, anger and relationship problems. The study suggests that helping veterans work through their trauma does not just entail encouraging them to talk about the fear and stress they were under while in combat, but also the shame and guilt they may feel over killing. Not talking about it caused their symptoms to be worse.

The horrors of war and effects on young soldiers aside, there is something important in this study about communication. In another recent study, it was found that parents who talked with their dying children about death had no regrets and found it to be positive, whereas those who had been afraid to talk about it regretted it after it was too late. In a different study, researchers found that when partners did not communicate to each other about sex, it was much more likely to lead to a negative sexual experience for one or both. In a yet another study, teens who received a comprehensive sex education were less likely to get pregnant than those who did not.

Death, sex, killing, conception. These are only a few of the many topics that people are afraid to speak about. In an attempt to protect themselves or others from painful or scary feelings, people avoid communicating and sharing. But study after study shows that the effect of not talking is far worse than whatever feelings may come up during the communication. Ultimately, we must learn to speak to each other (friends, therapists, partners, children, parents) about difficult things, or suffer the often grave consequences of our silence.

Samantha Smithstein, Psy.D.