During my first decade in prison, I busied myself with exercising and hanging out in the big yard. I hardly grew as a person. It wasn’t until I began college in prison in my 30s that I started to realize my full potential.

Through my journey in college, I became a keen reader and writer, striving to escape prison life by expanding my mind beyond the toxic (有毒的) environments I’d been confined to. I started studying feminism and restorative justice. One concept that really hit home for me was toxic masculinity (男子气概). I come from an abusive home and a neighborhood consumed by gangs, drugs and gun violence. I wanted to understand better why I had used violence to solve my problems.

I have found, however, that strangers stand between me and many of the books I want to read.

Books, like everything an imprisoned person receives— personal mail, emails, photos, news and education materials — are evaluated by prison officials and rejected or shared with us. Corrections departments typically claim they ban books that contain sexual content, racial hatred or depictions of violence, criminal activity, anti-authority attitudes or escape. In practice, PEN America wrote in a 2019 report on prison book restriction policies, the restrictions “have been wide-ranging, from perverse to absurd to constitutionally troubling, with bans being applied in ways that are against logic.”

In Texas, books by Alice Walker, Pablo Neruda and even the former senator Bob Dole have been banned. Throughout the country, prison officials have rejected or tried to ban books about biology (too much nakedness in the anatomical drawings), the Holocaust (some of the victims were pictured naked), sketching, dragons and even the moon (it could “present risks of escape,” according to one New York prison). At one point, Colorado prison officials blocked a prisoner from reading two of President Barack Obama’s memoirs because they were “potentially harmful to national security,” although they later reversed that decision.

Claiming such bans are necessary for the safety and security of prisons seems ridiculous. If anything, many banned books could contribute to a safer environment in prisons and in the societies imprisoned individuals are released into. Practically every author I have encountered while in prison, from Don Miguel Ruiz to Angela Y. Davis, has played a role in my efforts to grow and become a better person— someone who can live in society by adding to it, as opposed to taking from it.

Without college and without access to books and materials that expanded my mind beyond the razor wire (钢丝网) and towering concrete walls, I might still be wasting my time on the yard. My worldview would still be dictated by toxic masculinity and the violence and harm that surround it. That’s not who I want to be when I leave this prison. It’s not who I want to see sent back into society.

I had to say something after reading The Anxious Generation. It is going to sell well , because Jonathan Haidt is telling a scary story about children’s development many parents are led to believe. However, the book’s repeated suggestion that digital technologies are rewiring our children’s brains and causing the epidemic (流行病) of mental illness is unsupported by science. Worse , the rude proposal that social media is to blame might distract (分心) us from effectively responding to the real causes of the current mental-health crisis in young people.

Researchers have searched for the effects suggested by Haidt. Our efforts have produced a mix of no, small and mixed associations. Most data are correlative. When associations over time are found, they suggest not that social-media use predicts or causes depression, but that young people who already have mental-health problems use such platforms more often or in different ways from their healthy peers.

We are not alone here. Several analyses and systematic reviews centralize on the same message. An analysis done in 72 countries shows no consistent or measurable associations between well-being and social media globally. Moreover, studies from some authorities finds no evidence of intense changes associated with digital-technology use.

As a psychologist studying children’s and adolescents’   mental health, I appreciate parents’ frustration (沮丧) and desire for simple answers. As a parent of adolescents, I would also like to identify a simple source for the pain this generation is reporting. There are, however, no simple answers. The beginning and development of mental disorders are driven by a complex set of genetic and environmental factors.

More young people are talking openly about their mental-health struggles than ever before. But insufficient services are available to address their needs. In the United States, there is, on average, one school psychologist for every 1,119 students. We have a generation in crisis and in desperate need of the best of what science and evidence-based solutions can offer. Unfortunately, our time is being spent telling stories that are unsupported by research and that do little to support young people who need, and deserve, more.

This might not sound so extraordinary, but I didn’t just read a book in print, on an e-reader or even on a mobile phone. Instead, I read a book on dozens of devices(设备). I was not trying to set a Guinness world record. I wanted to answer a question I often hear: which e-reader or tablet（平板）is the best for reading books? So I set out to try them all, reading a chapter on each: the Amazon Kindle, the first and second generation Apple iPads and mobile phones. To be fair, I also read a chapter in that old-fashioned form — an old print paperback.

The book I chose was The Alienist. For the first chapter, I turned to an Amazon Kindle. Shopping on Amazon for the Kindle is simple; you go to Amazon’s Web site and buy the book, which is then sent to any devices with Kindle software installed(安装). Reading on the Amazon Kindle is a joy in many aspects. The Kindle is light．Its six-inch screen is the perfect size for reading, and reading on its black and white E Ink display doesn’t harm your eyes. Battery life is outstanding; on average you charge the device only once a month. My only complaint with the Kindle design is the placement of the keyboard at the bottom of the device. Amazon’s CEO has noted during past product announcements that the keyboard is there to help people take notes or search. But to me，it seems like a waste of space.

Despite the small screen on a mobile phone, I find reading on one to be simple and satisfactory. All of the mobile phones on which I read chapters felt somewhat similar; although screen brightness and the size of the phone’s screen did vary.

If I had wanted to, I could have bought my book through dozens of e-book apps (应用程序) in the Apple App Store. Most are free and offer access to thousands of free e-books or paid versions. But the big downside for many is that you can read them only on Apple devices. Both iPads 1＆2 offer an immersive（沉浸式）reading experience. I found myself jumping back and forth between my book and the Web, looking up old facts and pictures of New York City. I also found myself being sucked into the wormhole of the Internet and a few games of Angry Birds rather than reading my book. For the last chapters of the book, I read the paperback, which is still my favourite choice.

Since we are comparing devices so I guess I need to choose one. In the end it might come down to Kindle. But if money is tight, go for print. My used paperback cost only＄4 from Amazon.

A．

B．

C．

D．