MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388410338 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1287396

Meeting preschool screen time recommendations: which parental strategies matter?

2023· article· en· W4388410338 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Caroline Fitzpatrick, Emma Cristini, Jonathan Y. Bernard, Gabrielle Garon‐Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsResearch Nova ScotiaAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsScreen timeTemperamentMediationPsychologyNegative affectivityDevelopmental psychologyToddlerLogistic regressionOddsClinical psychologyPersonalityMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High levels of screen use by preschoolers may contribute to adverse health and developmental outcomes. Little is known about which parental strategies may be protective against intensive screen use by children. Our aim is to estimate whether parent strategies for mediating child screen time including restrictive and instructive mediation and social coviewing, predict preschooler adherence to the screen time recommendation of ≤1 h/day during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also examine if parent restrictive mediation interacts with child temperament characteristics. Methods: Our sample is composed of 315 Canadian parents of preschoolers surveyed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Parents provided measures of child adherence to screen time guidelines at ages 3.5 (baseline) and 4.5 years. Parents also reported how often they used restrictive and instructional mediation, and social coviewing to manage their child's screen use. Control variables include child sex and temperament (effortful control, negative affectivity, extraversion), educational attainment, and parenting stress at age 3.5. Results: A logistic regression revealed that parental restrictiveness was associated with a 4 time increase in the odds of adherence to screen time guidelines, OR = 4.07 (95% CI [1.70-13.03]). Parental social coviewing decreased the chances of adherence by 80% (OR = 0.20, 95% CI [0.09-0.48]). Furthermore, children not meeting recommendation at 3.5 were 98% less likely to respect the recommendation 1 year later (OR = 0.02, 95% CI [0.01-0.07]). Results were adjusted for child sex, temperament, baseline screen time, and parent education and stress The interaction between the restriction mediation and child temperament on later screen time was not significant. Conclusion: Our results indicate that some parental strategies may be more effective than others for managing preschooler screen time. Parent use of restrictive mediation was most likely to forecast child adherence to later screen time recommendations. The present results may contribute to the development of targeted family-based interventions designed to promote healthy development from a young age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207