Infant Screen Time Studies

[skyrue]

Hi folks, I've been trying to learn more about the negative effects of screen time for babies.

If anyone has read on this subject, could you link me to the best studies on screen time for children? Even better would be studies that talk about impacts to babies under the age of 2?

I've been hearing conflicting things from the amount of time (0, 1 hour/day) to type of screen time (educational, interactive in the sense of parent following along with Ms Rachel).

John Medina's book Brain Rules for Baby helped add some context for me. He says no screen time under the age of 2, but some interactive educational programs after the age of 5 can be positive.

The AAP says- "Pediatricians should urge parents to avoid television viewing for children under the age of 2 years. Although certain television programs may be promoted to this age group, research on early brain development shows that babies and toddlers have a critical need for direct interactions with parents and other significant caregivers (e.g., child care providers) for healthy brain growth and the development of appropriate social, emotional, and cognitive skills"

Medina also wrote, "Except for some of the television work we’ll discuss in a moment, I have never seen messier research literature in my life, particularly regarding brains, behaviors, and video games. Even a cursory review of the work that’s out there reveals shoddy designs, biased agendas, lack of controls, non-randomized cohorts, too-few sample sizes, too few experiments—and lots of loud, even angry, opinions".

I did some Googling for JAMA studies on this but I don't know whether the studies I found would be considered "messy research" so I wanted to ask this sub.

I'd love to learn more about baby brain development and what happens to the baby's brain that's so harmful for the recommendation to be ZERO screen time.

I saw a comment on a study to how it's the parents' lack of presence, still face.

And my husband mentioned something about television being like schizophrenia for a developing brain with editing/cuts/sounds, etc.

Maybe it's all of the above?

Also this was asked in another thread but would zero screen time apply to non-interactive ebooks too?

This is why I'd love to read the studies so I can understand the why behind the recommendation.

I've also read that blue light can impact baby sleep so that would potentially be a strike against ebooks?

I have seen this thread that discussed this JAMA study-
https://www.reddit.com/r/ScienceBasedParenting/s/MuHBKwDwJ4

 

[danieldf]

@skyrue There are two things that have been very well established about infant screen time:

1. Up until eighteen months to two years, infants cannot learn a meaningful amount from screens. At best, time spent staring at screens is dead time.
2. There are pretty major risks of developmental delays associated with large amounts of screen usage.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9431368/

That being said, if what you're trying to figure out is whether there are negative effects of small but non-zero amounts of high quality screen time, there isn't nearly as much clear evidence. Pretty much all of the studies show a negative impact are looking at an hour or more of media per day. And, yes, most studies don't do a good job at considering the exact type of media.

So yes, there isn't very clear evidence that fifteen minutes a day of Ms. Rachel, timed away from naps and bedtime, is doing any harm. But there's also isn't very clear evidence that it isn't doing harm, and it's pretty safe to say it's not doing any good. So, as with most things with parenting, it comes down to your personal risk tolerance and what trade offs make sense for your family.

 

[skyrue]

@danieldf Thank you- I was shocked at the concept of zero screen time but I understand the nuances better now.

 

[roundson]

@danieldf a baby podcast is screenfree can achieve some of the "need a break... puleez" and is great on car rides especially if the child is used to listening.

 

[ezzeking]

@skyrue this is the AAP Media Use guide for kids under 2, they link to a lot of the actual research in the footnotes so you could click through to get to the studies.

 

[skyrue]

@ezzeking Thank you! This was very helpful.

I really liked how this resource clarifies that the guideline isn't no/zero screen time but as little screen time as possible for under 2 years old because there are absolutely no benefits and only potential problems.

 

[the_precious_one]

@skyrue My goal in this article was to get to the why behind the no-screen-time-for-under-2s recommendation (fully referenced; all studies listed at the end of the article). See if you find it helpful.

Edit: typo

 

[skyrue]

@the_precious_one Thank you!! This is a great overview.

I never thought about how 1 hour for an infant is a significant chunk of their day/wake time until I read your article.

 

[the_precious_one]

@skyrue Glad you found it useful! Yes, 1 hour can be a good portion of a baby's day. And then when the baby has a nap, the memories they made during their time awake get sorted and integrated into memory - and so if they largely watched a screen, their brain might not have much "to work with", and so the effect of screen time might sort of persist into nap in that way.

 

[lampmark123]

@skyrue https://jamanetwork.com/journals/ja...ccessKey=59506bf3-55d0-4b5d-acd9-be89dfe5c45d

Since this is the article you are referencing, I would point out the flaws in this study and why the debate in screen time vs no screen time is never going to be solved.

The issue with this study is that it is not randomized trial and with most studies on infant/toddler behavior is that a lot of "negatives" are proxy for income/wealth.

The study states that: "Mothers of children with high levels of screen time were characterized as being younger, having never given birth, and having a lower household income, lower maternal education level, and having postpartum depression."

As with anything in life, moderation is the key. Selecting good programming, limit screen time, more interaction from the environment/parents for the baby...etc...

Is zero screen time going to be plausible, maybe if you have a wealthy/high income household with maids and butlers where you get to interact with the baby all day. The typical household is juggling work, chores, childcare and limited income to buy toys, it's not plausible.

Technically, daycare is bad for children too, but we never talk about that. As with everything, give your children the best with your best.

 

[gizmorazaar]

@lampmark123 You don’t need to be rich to eliminate screen time. Zero is simply not that uncommon. You can make dinner without using videos to entertain them. (We ate dinner every single night, and since we staggered our work schedules there was only one parent home until dinner.) And obviously before screens, all parents at every economic level did zero screen time no matter how hard they had to work. The species survived.

There are two problems with the moderation approach. One is that there is no evidence for it. But the larger problem is that the universal definition of “moderation” is “whatever I do”. People who allow less are too strict and people who allow more are too lax.

If you think nobody ever talks about whether daycare is bad, you haven’t been here long.

 

[lampmark123]

@gizmorazaar Your household is privileged enough to stagger your work. Not every household can do that.

And before screens, the prevalence of stay home mom, nanny and backyards make it more possible to not have screens. Someone raising their child in a 1 bedroom condo can’t let their toddler run in the garden while they cook dinner upstairs.

There are not any robust study done on screen time that i would argue zero screen time is going to give a better outcome than moderate screen time.

 

[gizmorazaar]

@lampmark123 My point was that we normally had one parent at home at a time during meal prep. (We also used daycare for the work hours overlap.) And the parent at home handled both child care and dinner prep. Had two adults been home we could divide and conquer, so no need for screens, while with unstaggered hours and no one home there would be … no need for screens because the kids would be in daycare. So I may be missing your point about why screens are necessary. The ability to stagger work hours is a privilege I suppose, though all my siblings did this and we span a range of income levels from well off to borderline poor.

Again, I’m not saying anything about potential harms. Just that it is absurd to claim that avoiding screens is impossible when so many families do.

 

[skyrue]

@lampmark123 Thank you, appreciate it!