Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39334601›Full record

ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Online Age Verification: Government Legislation, Supplier Responsibilization, and Public Perceptions.

Chelsea Jarvie, Karen Renaud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Chelsea JarvieDepartment of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XQ, UK.
Karen RenaudDepartment of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G1 1XQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7187-6531

Funding

CENSIS Scotland's Innovation Centre for sensing, imaging and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are widespread concerns about the online harms to children operating online. As such, governments have enacted laws to require online service providers to deploy age verification to prevent such harms. We investigate the following three research questions regarding this topic: (1) To what extent have different governments legislated age verification controls? (2) Do governments embrace a responsibilization strategy when it comes to online age verification? and (3) How does the UK public feel about online age verification legislation? We find that governments are applying a responsibilization strategy, which has led to widespread deployment of privacy-invasive or ineffective age verification. The former violates the privacy of underage users, with the latter undermining the overarching aims of the legislation. We have also found general disengagement and a lack of trust in the government amongst the public with regards to new online age verification laws within the UK. To conclude, despite governments globally looking to put more robust online age verification mechanisms in place, there remains a general lack of privacy preservation and affordable technological solutions. Moreover, the overarching aims of the online safety and age verification legislative changes may not be satisfied due to the general public stakeholder group's disengagement and lack of trust in their government.

Indexed as

age verificationchildrenonline harmsonline service provider responsibilization

Identifiers

PMID39334601
PMCPMC11429505

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.