The association between parent–child technology interference and cognitive and social–emotional development in preschool‐aged children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increased adoption and dependence of electronic devices have potential implications on parent-child relationships, including parental responsiveness. Few studies have examined the association between parent-child technology interference and developmental outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine the associations between parent-child technology interference and cognitive and social-emotional development in preschool-aged children (3-5 years). METHODS: Participants were 100 parents and their preschool-aged child from Edmonton, Canada. Parent-child technology interference across six different devices (i.e., cell phone/smartphone, tablet, iPod, television, computer and video game console) was parental reported using an adapted version of the Technology Device Interference Scale, and a total score was calculated. Cognitive development was objectively measured using three iPad-based tasks from the Early Years Toolbox to capture executive functions (i.e., working memory and response inhibition) and language development (i.e., expressive vocabulary). Social-emotional development was parental reported using the Child Self-Regulation and Social Behaviour Questionnaire, and seven subscales (i.e., sociability, externalizing, internalizing, prosocial and behavioural, cognitive, and emotional self-regulation) were calculated. Multiple linear regression models that adjusted for several potential confounders were conducted. RESULTS: The mean total parent-child technology interference score was 4.2 units, which equates to approximately 12-16 interruptions per day due to an electronic device. Approximately 60% of the score was due to interference by a cell phone/smartphone. After removing influential cases based on Cook's distance values, higher parent-child technology interference was significantly associated with lower response inhibition (B = -0.015, 95% CI: -0.028, -0.002) and emotional self-regulation (B = -0.095, 95% CI: -0.163, -0.028) scores and higher log externalizing (B = 0.033, 95% CI: 0.002, 0.063) and log internalizing (B = 0.034, 95% CI: 0.013, 0.056) scores. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic devices, in particular the cell phone/smartphone, appear to interrupt parents' conversations and activities with their preschool-aged child multiple times per day. Higher parent-child technology interference may be adversely associated with several subdomains of early childhood development. Future longitudinal and experimental research is needed to confirm these findings.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".