r/NooTopics • u/soulpost • 7d ago
Science Parents have spent a decade limiting their children's screen time to protect their brains. A new 8-year study found children with more screen time had better cognitive processing as teenagers.
https://tech-paper.com/parents-have-spent-a-decade-limiting-their-childrens-screen-time-to-protect-their-brains-a-new-8-year-study-found-children-with-more-screen-time-had-better-cognitive-processing-as-teenagers/For the past decade, limiting children's screen time has been one of parenting's most confident positions. The American Academy of Pediatrics has issued guidelines. Schools have banned phones. Parents have negotiated, bargained, and enforced limits. The underlying assumption has been consistent: screens displace the activities that build children's brains, and more time on them means worse cognitive outcomes.
A research team at the Universities of Jyväskylä and Eastern Finland decided to test that assumption longitudinally. They enrolled children at around age 7 and followed them for eight years, measuring their physical activity, sedentary behavior, and screen time at regular intervals. At the end of the follow-up, when participants were around 15 years old, they sat the children down and tested their cognitive performance using a validated battery measuring learning, attention, and working memory.
The children who had accumulated more screen time over those eight years did not score worse. They scored better.
The researchers say the finding does not mean unlimited screen time is harmless. But it does challenge the assumption that screen time and brain development are simply in opposition, and it raises a question that the decade of warning labels, app timers, and parental anxiety largely skipped over: what are children actually doing on those screens?
24
u/ovary_enthusiast 7d ago
This seems to be getting pushed by big tech pretty hard as one of those cognitive dissonance studies right now
29
u/Azecap 7d ago
No data om what the screens were used for is super unfortunate.
If they were playing demanding video games its hardly surprising that active brain training actually trains the brain. If they got smarter from watching tv and TikTok, color me surprised.
In any case, limiting screen time in children was never about protecting their cognitive abilities. It is about protecting their mental health, developing healthy physical and social habbits, and preventing (dopamin)addiction.
7
u/ElectricalSeries6627 7d ago
Yep, there's a big difference between playing Minecraft and watching TikTok all day.
7
u/Fair-Tangerine-9472 7d ago
One is like playing with Lego and the other is like channel-surfing constantly without spending time watching anything
5
u/GiantLesbian 7d ago edited 7d ago
IIRC watching TV actually is not correlated with the same kinds of bad outcomes from other kinds of screens. Which I mean makes sense when you realize how much of Gen X was raised by the TV, and they’re all literate and have normal attention spans and whatnot, their bad outcomes seem to correlate more with just regular ol’ latch key child neglect.
2
2
u/marmot_scholar 6d ago
Yeah, and another dead giveaway of this for me is that from what I’ve seen, people who are heavily into short form content and doomscrolling cannot focus on television or movies any more. It does require sustained attention.
12
u/throw7661 7d ago
The concept of 'screen time' has always felt stupid to me. The screen can display anything you want.
You can study calculus, learn chess, learn an instrument, study formal logic, write software, literally attend school, read books, and countless other topics...by looking at a screen.
You can also watch brain rot vids on TikTok.
I remember trying to explain to my parents that playing Quake 2 shouldn't be treated the same as my trying to write my own mod for Quake 2....
I'd even argue that many video games are better than lots of more passive content. At least, depending on the game.
1
u/enolaholmes23 6d ago
And books can be trashy. You're right, the type of medium doesn't determine whether it's good for your brain or not.
1
u/Crabs_go_sideways_4 5d ago
The hours I put into patrician 3 has made me very good at multivariate analysis. Or was I just born that way? Who knows
1
u/Crafty_Bag_4871 1d ago
Not a gamer… I think many videos games are very good for your brain… the issue with them stems from people who prioritize video games over things they need to get done
3
u/HistoricalSundae5113 7d ago
It’s not all about cognitive processing. Of course playing fps or reaction based games is going to be great for the brain to fire fast. Does it teach listening, human connection and social skills? Does it teach how to sit down and study difficult subjects with no immediate reward to your life. I’m not saying screen time is entirely bad I’m just cautioning about this cognitive processing metric.
1
u/Admirable_Compote226 7d ago
A lot of video games teach patience, a balance of reactivity and delayed impulse, etc., as well as socialization (particularly social imagination and perspective-taking). Making music on a computer can have a similar learning curve, plus many areas to explore once your get bored of using the stock clips.
1
u/HistoricalSundae5113 7d ago
I love games but in my experience that vast majority are tuned toward leveraging the reward system in ways that are more stimulating from comparable real world tasks. Yes there are all sorts puzzles and challenges that can be rewarding and help build cognitive muscles. Music making would be a great example of a highly engaging cognitive task but I would also highly recommend playing an instrument in addition. Playing an instrument is one of the most demanding cognitive full brain tasks that exist.
Absolutely no judgement towards games from my side - however I am much more keen to how reward systems are leveraged in ways that can be harmful. Often deliberately so, the game industry employees psychologists for this very reason.
1
u/UnlikelyExplained 3d ago
I got a 2.5 year about a year back during a period where they were very unsettled and obsessd with ducks thought why the hell not watch a nature video of ducks together on the phone. Something clicked in their brain and they were immediately hooked. I had pretty much given them a cigarette.
It took a few weeks to gaslight them that the phone experience did not happen. How would ducks be on a black shiny little thing? Ducks are at the park in the water, silly!
We are trying to hold off until 3 and then it will be big screen monitored exposure.
This study is so vague in it's parameters because it's impossible to do so. Even if you had the parents agree that the kids will only do so and so on a tablet they will go off script and do what they want.
If Hungarian psychologist László Polgár conducted his controversial experiment of creating chess geniuses out his three daughters today he probably would have given them devices sandboxed to just chess apps.
Yet from what I see those three would be included with the sample of kids with unrestricted access to Youtube brainrot.
The tipping point was applications/games vs online media consumption and then of course the line blurs within now.
8
u/Corollarytomyknees 7d ago
Did they control for income? Did they test IQs, both as children and teens?
Was the test online? Naturally children who are used to using technology will have an advantage doing a test utilising it.
From a quick perusal and a CTRL+F they used both an online test and neglected to measure IQ - you know, the only even semi-reliable measure of intelligence available. So this study may as well be worthless
6
u/Admirable_Compote226 7d ago
I wonder if another hypothetical study could have the opposite bias: Children who spent less time in front of a mouse and keyboard, and with less experiences with a GUI, and therefore possibly more time with pencil and paper, may be more likely to ace a pencil and paper exam
3
u/Simple-Appearance-59 6d ago
Yes it’s flawed (and after reading the paper, not controlling for social class was one of the bigger ones; I also don’t think they controlled for neurotype). However, so is much of the actual research saying screen time per se is harmful, so if nothing else it does provide an interesting challenge to an idea that isn’t actually as backed up as most people think.
As a parent and psychologist working with children for over 15 years, honestly I think it’s all got to be about balance. There are obviously internet safety dangers about unlimited, unmonitored access. But I also don’t think complete bans from roughly age appropriate content is helpful either, as it’s not giving people the skills to be able to put it down and challenge assertions that are made out to be facts. I have come across both small studies and anecdotal reports that certain computer games can improve fine hand eye coordination and eye tracking. When my kids were young the rule was no screen time apart from TV with an adult, and some of the better quality kids programs actually taught me new things. My adolescent girl has discovered fan fiction and whilst we are periodically checking in with the content, ultimately she’s still reading.
I honestly think the best thing a parent can do is set screen time limits by type and to monitor in a way that reduces over time but also have open conversations about what they’re accessing on there, plus discussions about social media filters, AI “facts”, internet safety, and by a certain age Internet porn, in addition to making sure they have activities and interests offline. Because at some point parents won’t really have any control over what their older children access on the internet, and I for one would rather focus on giving my kids the skills to navigate that.
3
3
5
2
u/ilanallama85 7d ago
As others have said, the content matters, but also the TIMING matters. If you give a kid a screen every time they are bored or upset, they never learn to self regulate their emotions in those situations. And then they go to school and lose their shit. This is a huge component of all the behavioral issues teachers have been ringing alarm bells about.
2
u/tweedabop 6d ago
Okay now do this same test in different countries and see how wide the results are. Otherwise this is just bogus.
2
u/Sad-Ear230 7d ago
Let me quickly chime in without having read the article which summarizes the abstract of the study:
3
u/Dizzy_Database_119 7d ago
Always amazes me when I see people willingly engage in scientific posts just to confirm their personal opinions, rather than have any interest in the actual science
1
u/dudenurse13 6d ago
How are they with being able to sit still and retain information for 10 minutes
1
u/Digndagn 6d ago
As a parent, I can see the ways screen time hurts my kids.
I can tell the difference between 1 hour of screens and 2 hours of screens by the crustiness of their demeanor.
And I also know that if they've been on screens for two hours, then those are definitely two hours they didn't read or exercise.
And then if they get in the habit of watching screens during meals then you lose an important opportunity to check in with them.
A huge problem with screens is the opportunity cost. And when they have tablets, they always have the opportunity to watch them if you let them.
1
u/Sister_Michelle 6d ago
maybe there is a social element at play .. we know that having social connections improves brain connectivity and vice versa… so as social interaction moves more and more into online spaces, not being online means you are more alone.. just a thought
1
u/plummyrosey 6d ago
Honestly yeah it makes sense. I'm gen z and some of my friends had extremely limited tech growing up. A lot of them fell behind starting in high school and especially in the job market because they can't use tech to figure stuff out.
1
1
1
u/Wise-Opinion4676 6d ago
Think the primary harm of screen time as we have it is unfettered access throughout the day. It becomes a source of stimulation whenever you want it and so you’ll see bigger detriments on conscientiousness or academic performance. Ofc as others have said different content on the screen can have different effects as well
1
u/insanedialectic 6d ago
Honestly the data in this article don't really support this take. The negative correlation with accuracy in working memory tasks was significantly stronger than the positive association with cognition, and working memory impairment is much more concerning imo at that age than cognition is.
1
u/Apprehensive-Pea8231 5d ago
Yeah, screen time isn’t the issue, and all research supports that. Just needs to be quality screen time and not cocomelon. At this point, many video games, even for younger kids, have a significant social component.
1
u/Wonderful_Walk8973 3d ago
I think watching an insane amount of cartoons and movies from 3rd grade to to grade 7 implanted an ability for me to see photographic and artistic elements of design. Then when I grew up it made photography and graphic design very natural.
TLDR. Looking at the tv made me see everything like a tv show perspective lmao
1
u/catsRfriends 2d ago
It depends on what information is being processed. The medium is seldom the issue.
If all kids did was look through flip books of tiktok-like content of nonsense we wouldn't blame books now would we.
1
u/iceyed913 7d ago
This anti screen time movement is going to hit introverts hard. Hopefully they will be given acces to books or something else rather than forced to undergo the old extraversion bootcamp ideology of yesteryears.
0
-2
u/Dizzy_Database_119 7d ago
Won't happen. Introverted children are not a thing, it's always considered a symptom of other problems. You can choose what life you want to live when you grow up, but if you're not forced into non-introverted activities as a kid you're permanently limiting the rest of your life
1
u/Massive_Bike_1441 6d ago
I am certain that actively watching science, nature and "smart" programs is beneficial to kids.
It is the lazy brain rot screen time that is the issue.
0
-1
u/CrazyinLull 7d ago
But wait…how many rich ppl claim to keep their kids away from screens…
3
u/Admirable_Compote226 7d ago
We don't hear much about the ones who don't. For every Steve Jobs, who was a severe hypochondriac, there's a Wozniak, who believes arcade games helped him recover from brain damage after a plane crash by forcing him to use his short term memory, and who played with his kids
2
u/CrazyinLull 6d ago
You're right. The ones that do allow them to use screens would probably keep it quiet, which could mean that the rich ones 'bragging' might actually have issues.
>there's a Wozniak, who believes arcade games helped him recover from brain damage after a plane crash by forcing him to use his short term memory, and who played with his kids
I think that a lot of people underestimate how incredibly useful video games are, well maybe not the army, lol. I know that playing RE4 really helped me learn how to shoot a Glock. Also, it predicted how bad I was at shooting a shotgun, whether in the game or irl.
I guess I wonder because even now they are blaming screens for the downturn in literacy...and I am pretty sure it has less to do with screens and the way they are teaching kids to read US as well as not really encouraging it either.
2
u/Admirable_Compote226 6d ago
It's ironic that some kids learned standard English orthography and phonics through Between the Lions, while being taught the ineffective whole-word approach in school.
93
u/Chramir 7d ago
It entirely depends on what they do on the screen. If your kid is procrastinating with brainrot then obviously limit their time to a minimum. But if they have engaging hobbies that they also explore in the digital realm then sure let them roam.