Mark Bauerlein in his “Why Gen-Y Can’t Read Nonverbal Cues (published in the Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574348493483201758.html) makes an initially compelling case that the reliance on texting and other avenues of non-face-to-face communication is creating a generation unable to read social cues successfully. The situation sounds dire, though by the column’s end, Bauerlein suggests that when a teens or young adults fails to respond to facial and other cues, we should not condemn as much as teach them how to respond.
I’ve admired many of Bauerline’s articles, finding them a refreshing corrective to certain politically correct views in academics. However, I think that this article is unduly negative. I have taught a lot of teens and young adults; generally, they aren’t much worse or better at picking up the cues that Bauerlein worries about. Even if texting is pulling their attention away from a particular interaction, with the right priming, teens and young adults can learn very quickly to focus on subtle cues. They just need to know why they should—and one way to answer the question relies on the contrast between weakness and strength.
Once you demonstrate that those who seem to focus on other people by putting aside phones, PDAs, and laptops are judged as stronger, then there is a concrete reason to develop this ability. And if there is no advantage, then why should it be developed?
I’m more worried by older generations who have become pseudo-multitaskers unable to provide strong models of how to act.
