Tuning into the real effect of smartphone use on parenting: a multiverse analysis.


Journal

Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines
ISSN: 1469-7610
Titre abrégé: J Child Psychol Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0375361

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2020
Historique:
accepted: 12 05 2020
pubmed: 9 7 2020
medline: 22 9 2021
entrez: 9 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Concerns have been raised regarding the potential negative impacts of parents' smartphone use on the parent-child relationship. A scoping literature review indicated inconsistent effects, arguably attributable to different conceptualizations of parent phone use and conflation of phone use with technological interference. Based on a sample of n = 3, 659 parents collected in partnership with a national public broadcaster, we conducted a multiverse analysis. We explored 84 different analytic choices to address whether associations were weak versus robust, and provide clearer direction for measurement, theory, and practice. Effects were assessed in relation to p values, effect sizes, and AIC; we further conducted a meta-analytic sensitivity check. Direct associations between smartphone use and parenting were relatively weak and mixed. Instead, the relation between use and parenting depended on level of technological interference. This pattern was particularly robust for family displacement. At low levels of displacing time with family using technology, more smartphone use was associated with better (not worse) parenting. Our results indicate fragility in findings of risks for parental smartphone use on parenting; there were few concerns in this regard. Rather, at low levels of technological interference, more phone use was associated with higher parenting quality. Scholars should avoid generalized narratives of family risk and seek to uncover real effects of smartphone use on family outcomes across diverse households and contexts.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Concerns have been raised regarding the potential negative impacts of parents' smartphone use on the parent-child relationship. A scoping literature review indicated inconsistent effects, arguably attributable to different conceptualizations of parent phone use and conflation of phone use with technological interference.
METHODS
Based on a sample of n = 3, 659 parents collected in partnership with a national public broadcaster, we conducted a multiverse analysis. We explored 84 different analytic choices to address whether associations were weak versus robust, and provide clearer direction for measurement, theory, and practice. Effects were assessed in relation to p values, effect sizes, and AIC; we further conducted a meta-analytic sensitivity check.
RESULTS
Direct associations between smartphone use and parenting were relatively weak and mixed. Instead, the relation between use and parenting depended on level of technological interference. This pattern was particularly robust for family displacement. At low levels of displacing time with family using technology, more smartphone use was associated with better (not worse) parenting.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results indicate fragility in findings of risks for parental smartphone use on parenting; there were few concerns in this regard. Rather, at low levels of technological interference, more phone use was associated with higher parenting quality. Scholars should avoid generalized narratives of family risk and seek to uncover real effects of smartphone use on family outcomes across diverse households and contexts.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32638400
doi: 10.1111/jcpp.13282
pmc: PMC7496662
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

855-865

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health.

Références

Future Child. 2000 Fall-Winter;10(2):31-43
pubmed: 11255707
Nature. 2018 Feb 22;554(7693):432-434
pubmed: 29469108
Nat Hum Behav. 2019 Feb;3(2):173-182
pubmed: 30944443
J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2016 Nov/Dec;37(9):694-701
pubmed: 27802256
J Adolesc Health. 2014 Nov;55(5):602-11
pubmed: 25168105
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016 Sep;11(5):702-712
pubmed: 27694465

Auteurs

Kathryn L Modecki (KL)

School of Applied Psychology, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD, Australia.
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Samantha Low-Choy (S)

Arts, Education, Law Group, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD, Australia.
Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD, Australia.

Bep N Uink (BN)

Kulbardi Aboriginal Centre, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA, Australia.

Lynette Vernon (L)

School of Education, Edith Cowan University, Mount Lawley, WA, Australia.
National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University, Bentley, WA, Australia.

Helen Correia (H)

School of Psychology & Exercise Science, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA, Australia.

Kylie Andrews (K)

Science Unit, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH