This study had like 45 participants... how does one control for other variables with such a small population? Keep in mind ScreenQ is just a fancy name for a s

This study had like 45 participants... how does one control for other variables with such a small population? Keep in mind ScreenQ is just a fancy name for a survey geared towards screen usage. It’s hard to think that income has something to do with this. I grew up in a household where my sister and I were beneficiaries of a high earning father. My mother stayed home with us and never let us watch TV. Then my brother came along and when he was 3 and I was 7, my father lost his business. Almost overnight, our lives changed, and I recall walking home from school (this was surprisingly common in Queens in 1995) and immediately plopping down in front of the TV with my brother while both my parents worked. It wasn’t until I had a child of my own when my mother told us how she painfully remembers having to make this choice: “we had no money, and we couldn’t afford a caretaker. On the one hand, we could have lived in worse conditions, and I would have bored you to death. On the other hand, there was 0% chance of vacations and showing you all various cultures- but with cable TV, you all had a better chance of acquiring culture.” Conclusion: I didn’t get much screen time until about 7. My brother got a lot of it from 3. Let’s just say the data (n=3) shows that there is a positive correlation in cognitive development for the 1 of us who watched excessive TV around pre-school age vs. the others. I will never let my kids watch as much TV as my brother did when I was 3, but this is purely a function of money- I’m very fortunate to make good money and able to throw $60k a year on daycare + activities + nanny to provide entertainment away from the TV. By extension, Money is the causal factor.