3 ms·
When the APA released their guidance on the use of social media by adolescents[0] earlier this year, they cited a study[1] that described the impacts of instruc
by csnover 3y ago
When the APA released their guidance on the use of social media by adolescents[0] earlier this year, they cited a study[1] that described the impacts of instructive[2] (a.k.a. active) versus restrictive[3] parental mediation in preventing cyber-bullying. This study found that the use of active mediation was associated with a decrease in victimisation, whereas restrictive parental mediation was not only unhelpful, it actually increased the risk of victimisation. In the discussion section, the authors reference several other studies that also suggest restrictive parental mediation is worse than doing nothing when it comes to stopping online victimisation.
The APA appear to go out of their way in the guidance to explain that what they mean by “adult monitoring” is open coaching and discussion, not spying and blocking, but this sort of distinction seems to be missed or deliberately ignored in many discussions about online safety.
As such, the source of the problem here doesn’t appear to be that the tools are inadequate at their jobs, but rather that they’re all fundamentally the wrong tools. In this case, no amount of engineering can solve it. Given this, perhaps the question should not be “What parental controls?”, but rather, “Should these kinds of restrictive parental controls even exist?”
[0] https://www.apa.org/topics/social-media-internet/health-advisory-adolescent-social-media-use https://www.apa.org/topics/social-media-internet/health-advi...
[1] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104026 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104026
[2] Definition from the study: “Instructive mediation […] explicitly involves children in the process of online monitoring. For instance, a parent adopting an instructive approach might appraise their children of the potential harms of certain online material, the appropriateness of sharing personal information online, and the latent danger of interacting with strangers on social media platforms.”
[3] Also from the study: “Restrictive mediation does not directly include children in the intervention process. Rather, it involves the curtailing of cyber-routines through blocking software or parental monitoring of children's online habits and associations. Shielding children from the dangers of the Internet is given primacy over educating them about such hazards[.]”
- eesmith 3y agoRight, but adolescents in the study are in the age range 12 to 18, and the study specifically concerns cyberhate victimization, while the issues raised mostly concern younger kids, and include things like blocking access to online stores. (The "Kids Online Safety Act" is nominally about "kids", defined as "under the age of 13", but the bill's text mostly concerns minors, defined as "under the age of 17".) We just installed MS Windows 11 and it's clearly trying to get your attention with its tabloid-like feed meant to draw you to their web site. It takes time to learn media literacy, and companies should not be allowed to use the excuse that parents simply need to monitor more, while they do everything they can to get people to use their services and to buy from them, without distinguishing between 6 year olds and 60 year olds. What is a single parent to do to provide adult monitoring for their 8 year old latchkey kid?