Too Much Television? Prospective Associations Between Early Childhood Televiewing and Later Self-reports of Victimization by Sixth Grade Classmates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Using a birth cohort, this study aimed to verify whether televiewing at 29 months, a common early childhood pastime, is prospectively associated with self-reported victimization at age 12. METHODS: Participants are 991 girls and 1006 boys from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. The main predictor comprised parent-reported daily televiewing by their children at 29 months. In the sixth grade, children reported how often they experienced victimization by classmates in the past year. The authors conducted multivariate linear regression, in which child self-reports of victimization were linearly regressed on early televiewing and potential confounders. RESULTS: Every SD unit increase (0.88 hours) in daily televiewing at 29 months predicted an 11% SD unit increase in self-reported peer victimization by sixth grade classmates (unstandardized B = .031, p < .001, 95% confidence interval = 0.014-0.042). This relationship was adjusted for child characteristics (gender, preexisting externalizing behaviors, baseline cognitive abilities, and televiewing at age 12) and family characteristics (family configuration, income, and functioning, and maternal education). CONCLUSIONS: Daily televiewing time at 29 months was associated with a subsequent increased risk of victimization by classmates at the end of sixth grade, a period which represents a critical developmental transition to middle school. Youth who experience peer victimization are at an increased risk of long-term mental health issues, such as depression, underachievement, and low self-esteem. This prospective association, across a 10-year period, suggests the need for better parental awareness, acknowledgement, and compliance with existing recommendations put forth by the American Academy of Pediatrics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".