The Prospective Association Between Electronic Device Use Before Bedtime and Academic Attainment in Adolescents

Raising the Child-Do Screen Media Help or Hinder? The Quality over Quantity Hypothesis

Screen media are ubiquitous in human life across all age, cultural and socioeconomic groups. The ceaseless and dynamic growth of technological possibilities has given rise to questions regarding their effect on the well-being of children. Research in this area largely consists of cross-sectional studies; experimental and randomized studies are rare, which makes drawing causative conclusions difficult. However, the prevailing approach towards the use of screen media by children has focused on time limitations. The emerging evidence supports a more nuanced perspective. It appears that the older the child, the more important how the screen media are used becomes. Concentrating on the quality of the screen, time has become increasingly relevant in the recent COVID-19 pandemic, which necessitated a transfer of educational and social functioning from real-life to the digital world. With this review, we aimed at gathering current knowledge on the correlations of different screen media use and development outcomes, as well as providing an overview of potential benefits that new technologies may provide to the pediatric population. To summarize, if one cannot evade screen time in children, how can we use it for children's maximum advantage?

Recommendations on screen time, sleep and physical activity: associations with academic achievement in Swiss adolescents

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate how meeting international recommendations for screen time (<2 h/day), moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA; at least 60 min/day) and sleep (8-10 h/night), as well as media multitasking (MMI) as a form of screen time, impact academic achievement in early adolescence.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective design was used, where self-report measures were collected during the spring semester and academic achievement at the end of the school year.

METHODS

A total of 1208 grade 3 middle school students (M_age = 13.55 years, SD_age = 0.60) in 37 Swiss schools filled out a paper-and-pencil questionnaire including measures of screen time (covering watching television, playing video games, Internet use, smartphone use and social media use), MMI, sleep time and time for MVPA. To evaluate academic achievement, end-term grades were provided by the collaborating education administration for Italian, Maths, Science, History, Geography, Music and Visual arts.

RESULTS

After adjustment for covariates, such as gender, socio-economic status, body mass index and stressful life events, multivariate linear mixed-effect models, nesting participants in schools, showed that meeting recommendations for screen time (B = 0.12, β = 0.105, P < 0.001) and MVPA (B = 0.09, β = 0.09, P = 0.001), but not sleep (B = 0.05, P = 0.087), were associated with higher academic achievement. Considering the number of recommendations met, meeting all three recommendations improved academic achievement the most (B = 0.24, β = 0.21, P < 0.001), followed by meeting the guidelines for screen time + MVPA (B = 0.20, β = 0.15, P < 0.001) and for screen time + sleep (B = 0.21, β = 0.13, P < 0.001). In the fully adjusted model, multitasking with two or more media was related to a worse academic achievement.

CONCLUSIONS

Screen time (including MMI), sleep and MVPA impact academic achievement in adolescence; hence, governmental organisations and schools should raise awareness about the positive and negative effects of following or not recommendations for MVPA, sleep and screen time among adolescents and their parents. In addition, support should be provided to promote sufficient sleep and MVPA while limiting overall screen time and parallel device use.

A systematic review of screen-time literature to inform educational policy and practice during COVID-19

There is an urgent need for consensus around the matter of screen time (ST) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some governments announced restrictions for online schooling time per day to protect students from perceived risks of prolonged screen-use, but critics and an emerging body of research question such regulations. Our review of 52 empirical studies found (a) an overwhelming majority of literature shows effect sizes too small to be of practical or clinical significance, and (b) findings more specifically on educational ST are inconclusive and critically underrepresented. These facts, along with the undeniable benefits of online learning in the absence of brick-and-mortar schooling and the ominous forecasts of learning loss caused by prolonged school closure, inform our recommendations for a more moderate policy and practical stance on restrictions - one that is focused on responsibly leveraging the educational and social benefits of ST in a world still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Psychological impacts of "screen time" and "green time" for children and adolescents: A systematic scoping review

Technological developments in recent decades have increased young people's engagement with screen-based technologies (screen time), and a reduction in young people's contact with nature (green time) has been observed concurrently. This combination of high screen time and low green time may affect mental health and well-being. The aim of this systematic scoping review was to collate evidence assessing associations between screen time, green time, and psychological outcomes (including mental health, cognitive functioning, and academic achievement) for young children (<5 years), schoolchildren (5-11 years), early adolescents (12-14 years), and older adolescents (15-18 years). Original quantitative studies were identified in four databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, Scopus, Embase), resulting in 186 eligible studies. A third of included studies were undertaken in Europe and almost as many in the United States. The majority of studies were cross-sectional (62%). In general, high levels of screen time appeared to be associated with unfavourable psychological outcomes while green time appeared to be associated with favourable psychological outcomes. The ways screen time and green time were conceptualised and measured were highly heterogeneous, limiting the ability to synthesise the literature. The preponderance of cross-sectional studies with broadly similar findings, despite heterogeneous exposure measures, suggested results were not artefacts. However, additional high-quality longitudinal studies and randomised controlled trials are needed to make a compelling case for causal relationships. Different developmental stages appeared to shape which exposures and outcomes were salient. Young people from low socioeconomic backgrounds may be disproportionately affected by high screen time and low green time. Future research should distinguish between passive and interactive screen activities, and incidental versus purposive exposure to nature. Few studies considered screen time and green time together, and possible reciprocal psychological effects. However, there is preliminary evidence that green time could buffer consequences of high screen time, therefore nature may be an under-utilised public health resource for youth psychological well-being in a high-tech era.