2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106762
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tantrums, toddlers and technology: Temperament, media emotion regulation, and problematic media use in early childhood

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
68
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
68
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another possibility which merits further exploration in future research, is that high screen use disrupts sleep quality (Cheung et al, 2017 ; Janssen et al, 2020 ), which is important to cognitive development and regulation (Bernier et al, 2013 ). A further potential explanation of the association between screen use and regulation is that infants who are frequently exposed to screens as a soothing technique when they are distressed, bored or over‐aroused may not develop their own coping mechanisms (Coyne et al, 2021 ). However, notwithstanding lockdowns’ utility as an imperfect proxy for randomization noted above, again the observational nature of our data does limit our ability to make causal conclusions about the association between screen use and EFs, and relations are likely to be transactional to some extent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another possibility which merits further exploration in future research, is that high screen use disrupts sleep quality (Cheung et al, 2017 ; Janssen et al, 2020 ), which is important to cognitive development and regulation (Bernier et al, 2013 ). A further potential explanation of the association between screen use and regulation is that infants who are frequently exposed to screens as a soothing technique when they are distressed, bored or over‐aroused may not develop their own coping mechanisms (Coyne et al, 2021 ). However, notwithstanding lockdowns’ utility as an imperfect proxy for randomization noted above, again the observational nature of our data does limit our ability to make causal conclusions about the association between screen use and EFs, and relations are likely to be transactional to some extent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firstly, McHarg et al (2020a , 2020b) have primarily focused on passive forms of screen engagement (i.e., viewing content on TVs and touchscreens), whereas the current study focused on passive, active, and social forms of touchscreen engagement. The issue of background screen exposure, namely having the TV or attention-grabbing device playing in the background, may be more detrimental for EF development as this is likely to disrupt infants’ attentional processes ( Ribner et al, 2017 ) and their opportunity to practice regulation ( Coyne et al, 2021 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another limitation was that the purpose of screen use (e.g., education, pacifying, seeing loved ones) and parental co-viewing was not assessed. While video chatting may facilitate more positive social engagement due to higher parental involvement ( McClure et al, 2015 ), using screens to “manage” emotional outbursts may hinder EF ( Coyne et al, 2021 ). However, the cross-sectional nature of our analyses prevents us from establishing the direction of causality, thus it is unclear whether bi-directional relationships are in play.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Research has found that families facing higher levels of adversity and who have less personal, social, and financial resources, are likely to expose children to more screen time ( Hartshorne et al, 2021 ). Indeed, parents are likely to use more screens with children that are less-well regulated ( Thompson et al, 2013 ; Coyne et al, 2021 ; Parrish et al, 2022 ). In addition, children with a low level of effortful control may have greater difficulty regulating emotional and physiological responses to media as well as disengaging from media ( Clifford et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%