Predictors of Preadolescent Children's Recreational Screen Time Duration During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Research suggests that children's screen use during the COVID-19 pandemic has doubled. There is a need to understand factors associated with increased use to more adequately inform COVID-19 pandemic recovery efforts aimed at promoting healthy device habits. The objective of this multi-informant study of children aged 9 to 11 years was to examine whether duration of screen use during the COVID-19 pandemic was predicted by sociodemographic factors (e.g., child age and sex), COVID-19 pandemic family stressors, daily routines (e.g., sleep and physical activity), and device use factors (e.g., parent management strategies and content and context of use). METHODS: Participants included 846 children (M = 9.85, SD = 0.78) and their mothers from the All Our Families cohort, Calgary, Canada. Mothers reported (May-July 2020) on child screen use and COVID-19 pandemic impacts (e.g., job/income loss and stress), and children self-reported (July-August 2020) on their screen use and daily routines (e.g., sleep, physical activity, and device-free activities). RESULTS: Screen use during the COVID-19 pandemic was highest among male and minoritized children and families reporting high levels of stress. Children had lower durations of screen time when device limits were set by mothers. Children also had lower durations of screen time when they used screens to connect with others and when they engaged in higher levels of physical activity or device-free recreational activities. CONCLUSION: This study sheds light on children's screen use during the COVID-19 pandemic and supports the current screen use guidelines for school-aged children, suggesting that parents monitor use and foster high-quality screen use (e.g., coviewing or used for connection) and device-free recreational activities when possible.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".