Screen Time Screeds -- Why Parents and Journalists Need to "Speak Research"

[Commentary] In recent weeks, papers worldwide have punched parents' guilt buttons yet again by hyping a study that claims screen time harms children. Editors seemingly competed to give the Iowa State University research the most extreme headline. Given the steady flow of research that says everything you've done is wrong, it's a wonder parents aren't paralyzed!

They'd be greatly helped if they, and the journalists who cover such studies, had the research literacy to weigh strengths and weaknesses. Was the sample size large or small? Was the study based on an observed behavior or someone's recollections? Did the study find "correlation" or "causation"? Did the study take content into account? Did the research weigh environmental elements like socio-economic status, parental education, parental co-viewing and overall involvement with the child? Did the study look at children's broader habits and activities? When confronted with definitive or bombastic headlines, parents should remember that research is a process and not a destination.

No single study is definitive (consider the shifting advice on red wine or chocolate) and, because people's lives are complex, it's almost impossible to attribute cause in areas like media use and development.

[David Kleeman is President of the American Center for Children and Media, an industry-led creative professional development and resource center.]