4 ms·
Screen time can damage under-twos' development, landmark study suggests
- aaron695 4mo ago[dead]
- rahimnathwani 4mo agoThe article title claims causality. The article body says the researchers didn't claim causality: The review, conducted by researchers from four UK universities known as the Action on Digital Device Immersive Conditions Team, did not establish causal links between screen use and specific developmental conditions.
- pmarreck 4mo agoThat's a problem because "using a screen as a babysitter" likely correlates with overworked poorer parents and thus a whole host of other developmental problems
- thatfrenchguy 4mo agoEven for upper middle class parents, "using a screen as a babysitter" just means you're more stressed and have less hands around. My kiddo has not seen a screen at the age of 2, but that's just because he has two parents at home at 5pm everyday.
- pmarreck 4mo agoI made the error of wasting my time (ahem... it was fun while it lasted, at least) not having a kid until I turned 49... which meant our parents were too elderly (or dead) to help (my mom had me at 35) in any significant capacity, and the rest of my relatives (as it just so happened) already had plans to move away to FL before he was conceived. This has resulted in so much stress (especially in the 3's and 4's, because he still doesn't sleep through the night in his own goddamn bed) that I arguably lost a job from it... 50+ year old bodies are simply not well-capable of handling toddlers for the more-than-fulltime-weekly hours that they require I'm sure there are fringe benefits though but damn
- dempedempe 4mo agoI don't think child rearing is supposed to be as difficult as modern society makes it. As you pointed out, you don't have a lot of help in raising your kid. You're expected to do it mostly with your partner (or god forbid alone). They've done some studies of hunter gather tribes to determine who handled babies the most. Turns out the kids' actual parents only handled the kids for about half the time (I think even a little less)! The term for it is "alloparenting". Evolution did not prime us for this level of child care. Good luck to you!
- rationalist 4mo agoEven without going that far back, I imagine it was easier when parents kicked the kids out of the house and told them not to come back until dinner time.
- graemep 4mo ago> Even without going that far back, I imagine it was easier when parents kicked the kids out of the house and told them not to come back until dinner time. Did people ever do that with under-twos? Or under-fives? The big difference in more recent times was community and extended family help, and at least one parent having more time at home.
- amanaplanacanal 4mo agoEvidently there was quite a bit of handwringing in the 1950s that the "nuclear family" was bad for children and would lead to more divorce, since there were no longer grandparents and aunts and uncles around to help with childrearing.
- andai 4mo agoAnd banning screens for the first several decades of your child's life correlates with being a billionaire.
- SilverElfin 4mo agoThis happens a lot in mainstream science and journalism. Another famous example is the often misquoted study (from McKinsey?) about DEI improving company results. The authors didn’t claim causality, since the most likely explanation is just that already large companies were more likely to adopt policies that discriminate based on race or gender, simply to keep up with trends. But virtually all news articles and company policies mistakenly referenced the study as if it had established causality.
- sfn42 4mo agoThe ADDICT, nice
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 4mo agoI don't like the screen time generalization either. What about watching a tv show with a parent explaining? What about trying a videogame with a controller on an actual game console, experiencing remote controlling something in a screen (Spoiler alert: amazing results, I have a video with my daughter shocked at age 2). Smartphones used as a babysitter with a f2p game is probably garbage time
- y0eswddl 4mo agothe guidance in TFA addresses this
- SiempreViernes 4mo ago> The article title claims causality. Maybe they edited the title since you saw it, but currently there's no claims of causation unless you think "can" and "will" are synonyms.
- lesam 4mo ago'can damage' means 'sometimes causal'. If there's no causal link, they should say 'associated with' or 'correlated with'.
- Hizonner 4mo ago"Landmark" review by an advocacy group. Not a good review, either.
- rendx 4mo ago"The babies' stress reactions during smartphone use were comparable to those in the 'still-face' situation—that is, intentional ignoring." https://www.pmu.ac.at/aktuelles/detail/wenn-das-smartphone-dazwischenkommt-unsere-aktuelle-studie-smartbaby-zeigt-was-bei-mama-und-baby-passiert https://www.pmu.ac.at/aktuelles/detail/wenn-das-smartphone-d...
- andrewstuart 4mo agoThere’s no reason for kids under 6 to ever look at a screen.
- amanaplanacanal 4mo agoI don't have kids myself, but I understand there is good educational programming on television for small children.
- graemep 4mo agoNot in my opinion. Certainly nothing like as good as adult attention or play.
- aweb 4mo agoYeah it seems crazy to me that this is news. Here in France the government officially recommends to avoid screens at all costs for under 3 years omds and as much as possible under 6. There are tons of studies showing it hinders their development.
- x3n0ph3n3 4mo agoFacetime calls with family. I've had to do a lot of travelling, and it's been amazing being able to see, talk to, and sing with my kid while I'm gone. He's also really close to his extended family and loves seeing them on video calls.
- AndrewDucker 4mo agoI know one kid, now 5, who taught himself to read watching Alphablocks. My own kids haven't done anything that impressive, but they've certainly enjoyed watching a lot of videos and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm. Doesn't get in the way of doing non-screen things either.
- geophph 4mo agoI have no regrets watching the World Cup games with my 3 year old and having him narrate me through everything he’s seeing
- 4mo ago
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- greatgib 4mo agoWhen you see the following sentence: "She said parents should not be blamed for a problem they did not create." associated with the deceptive title, you can know for sure that this article has a hidden objective, and that there is a big lobby behind it. Something like "internet, digital, ... is bad, there should be regulation for that". Because, let's be serious, if the causality was there (it is not the case), the obvious conclusion is that the parents are not doing their job or at most not well educated enough on how to raise a kid. It would not be the fault of anyone else.
- marcuschong 4mo agoI don't think my 18-month-old had any problems from watching a little Miss Rachel and Baby Einstein here and there. However, the few times my mother showed her cute animal videos on Instagram, it was a completely different story. She became obsessed with the phone and would fuss and scream whenever my mother put it away. It was pretty incredible. We banned it pretty quickly.