Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children’s screen time is connected with factors at intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and other levels. Parental screen time in the family environment with children’s presence is likely to have relationship with children’s screen time. To advance the understanding of the relationship between parental and children’s screen time at home, a qualitative study was conducted to explore what parents’ screen time experiences were at home and how they experienced their screen time while their children were present at home, employing a phenomenological approach. Eight participants, who were parents of children in the first year of schooling, were recruited for interviews to share their experiences. The qualitative data analysis tool, NVivo, was used to analyze the data by coding and thematizing the significant statements identified in the data. Textural and structural analyses of individual participants’ screen time were reported in this study, so that the realities of parental screen time were revealed in detail. A discussion of parental and children’s time at home and their screen time at home were reported to explore what influenced parental screen time at home and what influences parental screen time had in the family environment while their children in the first year of schooling were at home. Discussions of the reasons for screen time and measures to control screen time were also included in this study intending to explore the ways to keep screen time for the purpose of entertainment at low level. It is pointed out that parental screen time for entertainment is one factor for children’s screen time for entertainment, and limited parental attention for their children is another factor in the family environment to influence whether parents give their children screen time for entertainment.
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 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".