Researchers Warn Parents About Multi-Screen Viewing

August 3, 2011 -

The new study showed that children enjoy looking at more than one screen at a time, or as researchers called it, "multiple screen viewing." The rise of "multiple screens" viewing among children on devices including portable game systems and televisions may have an effect on how active children are, researchers say.

The data is based on a survey of around 63 10- and 11-year-olds who were asked about their screen time. Most said they enjoyed looking at more than one screen at a time. The survey was conducted by researchers at Bristol and Loughborough universities in the UK, who published the results Wednesday.

"Health campaigns recommend reducing the amount of time children spend watching TV," said Russ Jago, of Bristol University's centre for exercise, nutrition and health sciences. "However, the children in this study often had access to at least five different devices at any one time, and many of these devices were portable."

In the study the children would move the equipment between their bedrooms and family rooms, depending on whether they wanted privacy or not.

"This suggests that we need to work with families to develop strategies to limit the overall time spent multiscreen viewing wherever it occurs within the home."

The children would also use a second device to fill in breaks during their entertainment, often talking or texting their friends during commercials or while waiting for a computer game to load. The television was also used to provide "background entertainment" while they were doing something else, according to researchers.

"There is a shortage of information about the nature of contemporary screen viewing amongst children, especially given the rapid advances in screen viewing equipment technology and their widespread availability," Jago said. "For example, TV programmes are watched on computers, games consoles can be used to surf the internet, smartphones, tablet computers and hand-held games play music, video games provide internet access, and laptop computers can do all of the above."

The research paper is called "I'm on it 24/7 at the moment: A qualitative examination of multiscreen viewing behaviours among UK 10-11 year olds," and has been published in the International Journal of Behavioural Nutrition and Physical Activity.

Source: The Guardian


Comments

Re: Researchers Warn Parents About Multi-Screen Viewing

logically, the same "warnings" apply while driving, seeing as you have to keep your eyes on the road and the dashboard at the same time lest you risk getting a speeding ticket or running out of fuel

岩「…I can see why Hasselbeck's worried about fake guns killing fake people. afterall, she's a fake journalist on a fake news channel」

Re: Researchers Warn Parents About Multi-Screen Viewing

So.... children able to access content and interactions that they enjoy are competing with things they do not enjoy?  Ah.. ha....

Meh, I still maintain that until we start reintroducing unstructured, unsupervised outside areas for children to interact, the outdoors will not be able to compete with virtual connections where they can actually be kids.   Sadly, in both urban and suburban areas, this type of space just doesn't exist anymore (or at least too few examples exist).

Re: Researchers Warn Parents About Multi-Screen Viewing

And if it does, it's too poorly maintained to be of any fun anymore. And if it's on school grounds, you get reported for trespassing if you use it.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
james_fudgeCharity starts at home ;)07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
james_fudgeSo mandatory charity? That sounds shitty to me07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
E. Zachary KnightGoth, if Union dues are automatically withdrawn, then there is no such thing as a non-union employee.07/07/2015 - 2:38pm
Goth_Skunka mutually agreed upon charity instead.07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_Skunkyou enjoy the benefits of working in a union environment. If working in a union is against your religious beliefs or just something you wholeheartedly object to, dues will still be deducted from your pay, but you can instruct that they be directed towards07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_SkunkBasically, if you are employed in a business where employees are represented by a union for the purposes of collective bargaining, whether or not you are a union member, you will have union dues deducted from your pay, since regardless of membership,07/07/2015 - 2:32pm
Goth_SkunkIt's something that has existed in Canada since 1946. You can read more on it here: http://ow.ly/PiHWR07/07/2015 - 2:27pm
Goth_SkunkSee, we have something similar in Canada, called a "Rand Employee." This is an employee who benefits from the collective bargaining efforts of a union, despite not wanting to be a part of it for whatever reason.07/07/2015 - 2:22pm
Matthew Wilson@info depends on the sector. for example, have you looked at how powerful unions are in the public sector? I will make the argument they have too much power in that sector.07/07/2015 - 12:39pm
InfophileIt's easy to worry about unions having too much power and causing harm. The odd thing is, why do people seem to worry about that more than the fact that business-owners can have too much power and do harm, particularly at a time when unions have no power?07/07/2015 - 12:31pm
Matthew Wilsonthe thing is unions earned their bad reputation in the US. the way unions oparate the better at your job you are, the likely you want to be in a union.07/07/2015 - 11:33am
InfophilePut that way, "right to work" seems to have BLEEP-all to do with gay rights. Thing is, union-negotiated contracts used to be one of the key ways to prevent employers from firing at will. Without union protection, nothing stops at-will firing.07/07/2015 - 11:06am
Infophilehas an incentive to pay dues if they're represented either way, so the union is starved for funds and dies, unless things are bad enough that people will pay dues anyway.07/07/2015 - 11:02am
InfophileFor those who don't know, "right to work" laws mean that it can't be a condition of an employment contract that you pay union dues. That is, the right to work without having to pay dues. Catch is, unions have to represent non-members as well, so no one...07/07/2015 - 11:01am
MechaCrashUnexpected? Seriously?07/07/2015 - 10:55am
Mattsworknamejob they wanted without the unions getting involved. The problem is, it has some unexpected side effects, like the ones Info mentioned07/07/2015 - 8:49am
MattsworknameThe problem being, right to work states exsist specificly as a counter to Unions, as the last 20 or so years have shown, the unions have been doing this countries economoy NO favors. The right to work states came into being to allow people to work any07/07/2015 - 8:49am
Infophile(cont'd) discriminatory. This can only be done for protected classes which are outlined in law (race, sex, religion, ethnicity everywhere, sexual orientation in some states). So, a gay person could be fired because they're gay and have no recourse there.07/07/2015 - 7:27am
Infophile@Goth: See here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/firedforbeinggay.asp for a good discussion on it. Basically, the problem is that in the US, most states allow at will firing, and it's the burden of the fired person to prove the firing was ...07/07/2015 - 7:25am
Goth_SkunkAssuming that's true, then that is a fight worth fighting for.07/07/2015 - 6:58am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician