What do heroin and potatoes have to do with screen time?
Issue #32
Every parent knows it: that creeping anxiety when you read the latest headline on screen time. It's ruining kids' brains. It's causing depression. Some experts even seem to suggest that it's worse than heroin. But then, every so often, you see a headline telling you the opposite. Maybe screen time isn't all that bad—maybe it can even improve school performance. Some experts say it's as harmless as a potato.
Heroin or potatoes. Is this really what the screen time science has come to? It's almost like there is no practical advice to be found anywhere. The culture of anxiety and shame around screen time is deeply rooted in extreme narratives. In one corner, we have researchers sounding the alarm, including Dr. Jean Twenge. She's known for arguing that smartphone use among teens leads to depression and anxiety—and for seeming to suggest that social might be worse than heroin for girls.
In the other corner, we have researchers telling us not to worry, including Dr. Amy Orben and Dr. Andrew K. Przybylski. These two often question the scientific merit of Dr. Twenge's arguments and are known for suggesting that screen time use is as harmless as a potato.
But when you dig into these claims, you start to realize that they're often inflated. A few weeks ago, my team had the chance to talk to parenting coach Anita Cleare, and we asked her about the science. Here's what she had to say about the current state of screen time research: "There is very little consensus among experts about screen time and how much is suitable for children. The problem is that the pace of technological change has been so rapid that research can't really keep up. There are a lot of disputes, and there is a lot of over-interpretation of small-scale studies that then have big headlines about how social media is like crack cocaine for teenagers. It's very easy to over-dramatize some of those things. The worry that technology is somehow bad for children's brains is one that parents often fall prey to."
These headlines have real consequences for parents and kids. If all parents buy into the idea that screen time is worse than heroin, the logical conclusion is to lock up the screens and throw away the key. Doing that would deprive kids of technology that can help them connect, create and learn—and something that will be a huge part of their personal and professional lives later on. This kind of anti-screen sentiment also fuels discord in the family. Most kids love technology and want to use it more.
But the tide appears to be turning a little bit, which is good news. Jon Haidt and Jean Twenge recently published an article in the New York Times titled "This Is Our Chance to Pull Teenagers Out of the Smartphone Trap," and it received so much pushback that they published an open Google Doc online to respond to the criticism. One critic pointed out that the pair seemed to be flipping back and forth between making claims about screen time in general and social media in particular. In essence, the pair identifies a correlation between social media use and depressive symptoms. But the headline and argument throughout seem to argue that devices, in general, are the problem.
Haidt and Twenge acknowledge this in the Google Doc: "The point here is that when you look at individual-level correlations with poor mental health, they are usually quite low for "screen time," especially if they include TV watching. Standardized betas are often below .05, as Orben and Przybylski point out in numerous papers. If this is true, then telling an individual kid to reduce his or her "screen time" is unlikely to lead to much improvement in his or her mental health." It's a step in the right direction that they acknowledge that not all screen time is created equal—I'd just love to see them bring that nuance to the articles they publish in major news outlets.
So, what can parents do to parse through all the rhetoric? Anita Cleare had some advice there as well: "It’s always worth looking at how many people were involved in this study. They can take a critical eye to the questions that were being asked in a study—but also just sense check some of the claims: technology isn't the same as crack cocaine—of course, it isn't, you know that."
I believe we need to shift the conversation. I think every academic and expert has a responsibility to be reasonable—not sensational—when they present their research. That information, at least, is supposed to be peer-reviewed, unbiased and reliable. I know I'm used to taking news headlines with a grain of salt, but I think it's incredibly dangerous when we need to start questioning the researchers themselves. So, I implore the experts: please stop feeding us extremes. Stop overselling (or underselling) the dangers to promote papers. Technology is here and it will be a major part of our kids' lives. We parents need real, reasonable and actionable suggestions for incorporating screen time as safely as possible.
A deeper dive
Here are a few helpful resources in case you want to really dig into today's topic:
Couching your scientific article in salacious language isn't just confusing for parents—it also has a way of spiraling out of control in academic circles. An off-the-cuff comment about heroin can end up cited in other places. This article from Psychology Today referenced Dr. Twenge's paper, and the author's tweet about it stated, "[f]or girls, social media use is substantially more harmful than heroin use.” This is a mischaracterization, of course, and Dr. Twenge's co-author even said so on Twitter in a reply to the psychologist who wrote the article.
If you're interested in Haidt and Twenge's response to the criticism, their open Google Doc can be found here. It might help put your mind at ease to see them back off the hard-line they've been known for.
TL;DR
Too long; didn't read. It shouldn't be a full-time job to keep up on industry news, so here is a mercifully quick summary of some other notable developments:
TikTok challenges often involve fun and silly dances, but sometimes, they're more dangerous (like the tide pod challenge, which inexplicably encouraged users to ingest laundry detergent). The latest danger is the milk crate challenge, where users stack milk crates and attempt to climb over them. It's already resulted in sprains, broken bones and even spinal injuries—so it's definitely one to watch out for.
You might remember Yik Yak from the first time the app was popular circa 2014. It was the anonymous social media app popular on college campuses and it was known for a culture of bullying and hate speech. And, it's back. The new owners say they're working on combatting cyberbullying, but that kind of thing is especially tricky to control on an anonymous platform.
And lastly
Here are a few more pieces of original writing from me and my team—just in case you're keen for more:
Anyone looking to cut through the fads and trends in parenting advice should check out the full interview with Anita Cleare. She's the founder of the Positive Parenting Project and she doles out down-to-earth, evidence-based advice.
And, if you have questions about whether or not Yik Yak is safe for kids, my team put together a handy parents' guide that outlines everything you need to know!
Okay, that's it from me until next time. If you enjoyed this newsletter, and know of another parent who would as well, please feel free to forward it along.