Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36211640›Full record

ArticleJournal of marriage and the family2022

Family Socioeconomic Status and Children's Screen Time.

Stefanie Mollborn, Aubrey Limburg, Jennifer Pace, Paula Fomby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of marriage and the family, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Family Socioeconomic Status and Children's Screen Time.Journal of marriage and the family · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stefanie MollbornDepartment of Sociology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Aubrey LimburgInstitute of Behavioral Science and Department of Sociology, University of Colorado Boulder, UCB 483, Boulder, CO 80309-0483.
Jennifer PaceMidwestern State University, Department of Sociology, 3410 Taft Blvd, Wichita Falls, TX 76308.
Paula FombyInstitute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 426 Thompson St, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.

Funding

University of Colorado Population CenterP2CHD066613 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI JANE A MENKEN · 2015 to 2026
$3.7M
The University of Colorado Population CenterR24HD066613 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI PAMPEL, FRED C · 2010 to 2014
$1.9M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD066613NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD066613
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This mixed-methods study examined whether higher-SES children's digital technology use adhered to contemporaneous pediatric guidelines, how it compared to lower-SES children, and why, as analyses showed, higher-SES children's technology use far exceeded pediatric recommendations. Background: 2013 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines recommended limited "screen time" for children. Higher socioeconomic status (SES) families tend to follow guidelines, but digital technology use-simultaneously a health behavior and a pathway for building human capital-has complex implications. Method: Quantitative analyses provide new nationally representative estimates of the relationship between social class and 9- to 13-year-old children's technology time (including television), device access, and parenting rules (2014 PSID Child Development Supplement, N=427). Qualitative analyses of 77 longitudinal higher-SES parent interviews articulated explanatory processes. Results: Higher-SES children used technology as frequently as others and in excess of recommendations. Their device access, activities, and agency in adhering to rules, however, differed from others. Qualitative analysis uncovered processes that helped explain these findings: parents' ambivalence about technology and perception that expert guidance is absent or unrealistic, and children's exercise of agency to use technology facilitated by "concerted cultivation" parenting styles, led to higher-SES individualistic parenting practices that supported children's increased non-television technology use. Conclusion: Cultures and structures related to children's technology use are in flux, and classed norms and understandings are emerging to construct relevant class-based distinctions around parenting.

Indexed as

childrenhealthinequalitiesmixed-methodologyparentingtechnology

Identifiers

PMID36211640
PMCPMC9541918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.