Parental control on handphone access and usage among Malaysian children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Parental control for a child's handphone access is important to ensure online safety. This study was to determine parental control on handphone access and the usage amongst Malaysian children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted electronically between April 2017 and March 2018 among parents with children above 2 years of age, who owned a handphone. The 10-item questionnaire included questions about rules applied to the use of handphones, education on cybersafety, the characteristics and activities of their youngest children who had full-time access to a handphone, and parental perceptions of their children's usage of handphones. A total of 215 parents were included. RESULTS: From this, 92% controlled their children's handphones use by setting rules. The commonest rules were limiting the time of handphone usage (77%) and being aware of whom the child was communicating with (77%). The majority (94%) educated their children on cybersafety, and the commonest discussed topic was not to communicate with strangers (93%). The children's average age of first handphone ownership was 10.6 (SD: 3.6) years, and the use of the handphone averaged 17.4 (SD: 18.5) hours a week. Despite the rules and education provided, only a quarter of parents were confident of their children's capability to manage their own safety when using handphones (27%). CONCLUSION: In summary, Malaysian parents did control their children's handphone usage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".