A Case Study on Reducing Children’s Screen Time: The Project of Screen Free Week
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aims to direct children to alternative activities within a week period by applying the project ofscreen free week to voluntary families. The ultimate aim of the study is to reduce children’s screen time. Theinstrumental case study method; one of the qualitative research methods, was employed. Five children attending thepreschool class of an elementary school in the Kartal district of İstanbul and their families voluntarily participating inthe project of screen free week constituted the study group in the current research. Documents and structuredinterview form were used to collect data. The document used to collect data is the weekly chart in which the familiesnoted the activities they performed during the week spent without screen. The structured interview form wasdeveloped by the researcher by reviewing the related literature. Content analysis was conducted on the data collectedin the current research. As a result of the families’ participation in the project of screen free week, they recognizedthe importance of family-child interaction, that their children are happier when they spend time with them, that theycan decide on programs to be watched and games to be played together with their children and that this decisionshould not be taken as a rule rather as a routine of the family. At the end of the project of screen free week, it wasseen that a great majority of the families set a limit to the time spent in front of the screen suitable for the age anddevelopmental level of their children. In light of the findings of the current study, it can be suggested that the projectof screen free week should be made more widespread and more families and children should be reached. In additionto this, training programs can be organized for families to learn how to select quality programs/applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".