Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38716271›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2024

Advancing the understanding of children's digital engagement: responsive methodologies and ethical considerations in psychological research.

Natalia Kucirkova, Sonia Livingstone, Jenny Radesky

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Natalia KucirkovaUniversity of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway.
Sonia LivingstoneLondon School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Jenny RadeskyUniversity of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Children's perspectives and experiences with digital media (digital engagement for short) are becoming difficult to observe and measure in today's highly multi-faceted, personalized and dynamic media ecosystem. In response, psychologists are developing a host of innovative methods. These may be broadly divided into those which prioritize children's active participation in research and those which develop techniques for passive observation. This article presents a state-of-the-art review of emerging methodologies to highlight the ethical issues that arise, by drawing on the Belmont principles for ethical research. We identify strengths and weaknesses of both participatory and non-participatory methods and recommend ways for future research to harness the potential of child-centered, responsive, and ethical methods.

Indexed as

Belmont principleschildrenethicspsychological methodstechnology

Identifiers

PMID38716271
PMCPMC11074457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.