Objective vs. perceived maternal smartphone use and observed mother-infant interaction quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Prior research links maternal smartphone use to reduced sensitivity and responsiveness to infant cues, but emerging evidence suggests that mothers' perceptions of their smartphone use - such as feelings of empowerment or distress - may also shape the quality of mother-infant interactions. This study examined how both objective and perceived smartphone use related to mother-infant interaction quality in naturalistic settings. Method Participants were 147 mother-infant dyads from a longitudinal study of smartphone use and infant development. When infants were 2 months old, mothers completed 5 days of ecological momentary assessment (EMA), reporting time spent with their infant, perceived smartphone-related interruption (technoference), distress, and empowerment. Mothers' smartphone use was monitored continuously across the 5 day EMA period via installed mobile applications. Dyads also participated in a feeding observation; videos were later coded to assess overall interaction quality and dyadic contingency, both derived from six domain-specific subscales representing mothers' and infants' contributions to the interaction. Multivariable regression examined associations between mother-infant interaction quality and mothers' typical level of smartphone use around their infants, perceived technoference, smartphone-related distress, and smartphone-related empowerment. Results Greater smartphone-related empowerment was positively associated with greater engagement of the infant in socioemotional growth fostering experiences, greater infant clarity of cues and responsiveness to the mother, better dyadic contingency, and greater overall interaction quality. No significant associations were found for typical level of smartphone use, perceived technoference, or smartphone-related distress. Discussion How mothers feel about their smartphone use - particularly feelings of empowerment - may be more closely related to the quality of their interactions with their young infants than the amount or perceived negative impacts of their smartphone use.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".