New Study Challenges Common Assumptions About Screen Time For Kids (sciencedaily.com) 45
bryanandaimee shares a report from ScienceDaily: A Finnish study has found an unexpected association between screen use and cognitive performance. Children who accumulated more screen time as they grew up tended to show better cognitive processing during adolescence. One of the researchers cautions against viewing screen time as entirely harmful and says the goal should be to balance physical activity with screen use that encourages active thinking. [...] "The findings suggest that screen time can support children's and adolescents' cognitive processing. Presumably, the essential point here is what kind of things they do in their screen time. Teachers and parents should encourage children to use devices and screens in such ways that promote active thinking, problem-solving, creativity and learning," states Doctoral Researcher Petri Jalanko from the University of Jyvaskyla.
Digital activities that involve learning, creativity, problem-solving, or other forms of active mental engagement could potentially help explain the association observed in the study. "We should not regard screen time solely as harmful but seek balance between physical activity and screen time that promotes active thinking," Jalanko summarizes. The relationship between physical activity and cognition was more complicated. Among girls, greater amounts of light intensity physical activity since childhood were associated with better working memory during adolescence. Among boys, greater participation in guided physical activity from childhood through adolescence was linked to better working memory.
The researchers also found an unexpected pattern involving unsupervised exercise. Lower levels of self-reported unsupervised physical activity were associated with better cognitive processing in adolescence. By contrast, physical activity and sedentary time measured using a device that tracked heart rate and movement were not associated with cognitive processing. One possible explanation is that these sensors can measure movement and physiological activity but cannot determine exactly what a person is doing during periods of activity or inactivity. The findings have been published in the journal Pediatric Exercise Science.
Digital activities that involve learning, creativity, problem-solving, or other forms of active mental engagement could potentially help explain the association observed in the study. "We should not regard screen time solely as harmful but seek balance between physical activity and screen time that promotes active thinking," Jalanko summarizes. The relationship between physical activity and cognition was more complicated. Among girls, greater amounts of light intensity physical activity since childhood were associated with better working memory during adolescence. Among boys, greater participation in guided physical activity from childhood through adolescence was linked to better working memory.
The researchers also found an unexpected pattern involving unsupervised exercise. Lower levels of self-reported unsupervised physical activity were associated with better cognitive processing in adolescence. By contrast, physical activity and sedentary time measured using a device that tracked heart rate and movement were not associated with cognitive processing. One possible explanation is that these sensors can measure movement and physiological activity but cannot determine exactly what a person is doing during periods of activity or inactivity. The findings have been published in the journal Pediatric Exercise Science.
Paid for by the Mark Zuckerberg Election Committee (Score:2)
Re:Paid for by the Mark Zuckerberg Election Commit (Score:4, Funny)
screen time includes porn... right? right!!
Re: (Score:2)
from the article, i didnt read all of it, i assure you,
"The findings suggest that the type of screen activity may be important. Digital activities that involve learning, creativity, problem-solving, or other forms of active mental engagement could potentially help explain the association observed in the study."
Re: (Score:2)
It honestly should... but 'good porn'. It can be the worst sex ed ever, but there's no reason it can't introduce kids to what sex is like - or should be like according to whoever is curating the 'good porn' collection.
It could be teaching kids a general level of comfort with sex to avoid some of the first time awkwardness. It could be showing some proper foreplay. Maybe filter out the 'twist the woman into whatever shape gives the camera a good angle and the guy best access to hammer her anus and then g
Re: (Score:1)
someone check this guy's computer.
Everything is good in moderation (Score:2)
Pretty obvious conclusion really.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay.
https://www.frontiersin.org/jo... [frontiersin.org]
Re: Everything is good in moderation (Score:2)
Re: Everything is good in moderation (Score:2)
Should we all rush to legislate social media and phone bans, treating everyone as if they were the worst stories you've heard from the squeakiest wheels?
Re: Everything is good in moderation (Score:2)
It's conditioning during development (Score:5, Insightful)
Whatever you focus on, you will get better at. You can play piano obsessively and never be Beethoven, but you will (eventually) acquire competence unless you have a significant mental impairment.
So why would we expect anything else from obsessive focusing during childhood and adolescence? Use your screens to watch interesting, thoughtful, or informative things and you're conditioning your brain with those things. Use them to indulge your worst social instincts on social media and you're going to get 'better' at that, which unfortunately means turning yourself into a miserable person.
Doing this as a kid, when you don't have a couple of decades of other experiences under your belt to soften the impact makes it worse.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not the quantity. It's quality. (Score:2)
Common sense really. Time x Slop = your kid is f...ed. Give them something they can learn from and they'll be fine. We need better quality, and better parents who don't just give their child a tablet to shut them up when it's convenient for them. You're a parent. Behave like one.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd argue it's both. Too much of anything is bad, even if the thing is good quality.
Its eggs the of 90s (Score:2)
Screen time is killing our kids, no wait screen time is making our kids smarter than ever, maybe screen time does not really matter, omg screen time is killing our kids...
For individuals there really is only one reasonable course here. Ignore the sensational studies and news. Make sure you kids get some play with things that are not screens. Make sure not all the screen time is 'games' and at least some of it cognitive activities even if it is writing little text games in python/ruby/perl/etc that AI could
Re:Its eggs the of 90s (Score:5, Insightful)
For individuals there really is only one reasonable course here. Ignore the sensational studies and news.
Man, if you're getting your science information from news stories, the problem is you.
We live in a world where the actual study is a click away. At least read the abstract.
Re: (Score:1)
For individuals there really is only one reasonable course here. Ignore the sensational studies and news.
Man, if you're getting your science information from news stories, the problem is you.
Man we live in a world where phantomfive does not even read the sentences he is quoting. Maybe the problem is YOU and maybe it is a symptom of to much screen time.
Re: (Score:2)
nah, let me just respond to the click bait headline as was intended.
This is where culture wars SHOULD be fought (Score:2)
The culture of "put your kids in front of SOMETHING to keep them entertained" is the problem, because just watching things does not make a child or even someone older actually think. Pushing the idea of using technology to teach and in the case of phones/tablets/computers, to engage and encourage THOUGHT is something you don't see often enough. Games have also shifted from there being puzzles as a part of the game experience(even finding those secret locations in the original Tomb Raider isn't seen as a
Re: This is where culture wars SHOULD be fought (Score:2)
Being an unskilled but charismatic person has been a desire since the start of human trade. Ask the first person doing the worlds oldest profession if they'd rather have charm or technique to earn their keep. Humans have always wanted the cheap, fast fix for the ego.
Next letâ(TM)s challenge our assumptions abou (Score:2)
Finland provides far superior schools (Score:5, Insightful)
Size (Score:2)
People underestimate how much time (Score:2)
kids spend doing basically nothing. And it's not a bad thing.
Welcome to the 1980s panics (Score:3, Interesting)
Since we're in 80s mode, let's quote The Karate Kid: "concentrate on quality of what you know, not quantity". It's the nature of the screen time that's important, not necessarily the raw bulk. Are you interacting with people online, are you reading stuff? Are you watching some videos where you learn some things as well as just the latest cat videos or TikTok dance? In short, are you using the screen as a portal to the generalities of life instead of just watching brainrot all day every day?
I suspect knowing that will be key to whether the screen time is hurting or helping. And as ever, a balance is required. 100% screen and no in-person interactions is obviously harmful, provably so thanks to the pandemic providing us with data here. I'd also posit that 100% outside and in-person will be good, but not as rounded as a decent mix between the two since you gain access to different experiences online.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(Takes clipboard from Poindexter and smashes it over knee.)
I don't think
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Anecdotal, qualitative perspective: I'm not go
Re: (Score:3)
On the socialising I'm not quite so sure though - it's definitely changed the nature of it though. My 'kids' (now all adults, youngest about to enter final year of university) socialising all the time on-line. Voice chats with friends, Discord is how they org
What's on the screen? (Score:2)
"Screen time" is a pointless metric, what matters is what's on the screen.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
AFAIAC reading a book on a Kindle is no different than reading the same book as dead tree version.
Except cheaper, more convenient , and of course more friendly to the environment.
And therefore should not be counted as part of some restricted 'screen time'.
Re: (Score:2)
cheaper? idk i have sold a lot of old out of print books on ebay for 3-4 times the original cost.
Re: (Score:2)
"Screen time" is a pointless metric, what matters is what's on the screen.
The study didn't test this, they hypothesized that it could make a difference. Also the study is an association, not causal. Maybe those who have better cognitive processing want to spend more time on screens? Or they've finished all their schoolwork faster so they have more time to be on screens? Or they are from wealthier families so they don't have to work after-school jobs and have more time to spend on screens?
It's a nonsense study with a fairly small sample, and only got attention because it makes o
This is not difficult! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They have known this for decades. If you're watching Tik Tok, you're becoming an A.D.D. dopamine addict. If you're playing puzzle games and building systems in a sim game, you're getting smarter. There is no such thing as "screen time." That's like saying "going outside" is a category. Yeah, and doing what?!
In every generation before this one, "going outside" generally meant doing something that was not mentally and psychologically addictive and destructive. And generally defined the overwhelming majority of child minds between the ages of 2 and 22.
Let's not question the general caustic definition of "screen time" until the junkie audience starts to show end results that justify otherwise. GenX left the spinning wheel of Duh on the computer monitor. GenDoomScroller manifested that at the Wait, Wut? Layer 1
Published where? (Score:2)
But Finns are different. (Score:1)
translation (Score:2)
It's not the SCREEN that does the damage, it's the brain rot the screen is used to access. Also the amount of time speant with the screen. Moderation is good. This shouldn't surprise people, but since it is a nuanced understanding and not just screen bad!, it will.
Consumption vs Creation (Score:1)
Moderation in everything (Score:2)
As with anything, moderation is key. Too much will harm you, too little will harm you. All of life is a balance.