Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research
17.5K views | +0 today
Follow
 
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
onto Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research
Scoop.it!

Autism and Screen Time: Special Brains, Special Risks // Dr. Victoria Dunckley

Autism and Screen Time: Special Brains, Special Risks // Dr. Victoria Dunckley | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

By Dr. Victoria Dunckley

"Children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are uniquely vulnerable to various brain-related impacts of screen time. These electronic “side effects” include hyperarousal and dysregulation—what I call Electronic Screen Syndrome—as well as technology addiction, to video games, internet, smartphones, social media, and so on.

 

Why? Because a brain with autism has inherent characteristics that screen time exacerbates. In truth, these impacts in occur in all of us, but children with autism will be both more prone to experiencing negative effects and less able to recover from them; their brains are more sensitive and less resilient.

 

As a framework for understanding these vulnerabilities, it’s helpful to know that screen time—particularly the interactive kind—acts like a stimulant, not unlike caffeine, amphetamines, or cocaine. Also know that children with autism are often sensitive to stimulants of all kinds, whether pharmaceutical or electronic. For example, children with autism and attention issues often can’t tolerate prescribed stimulants, a standard treatment for ADD/ADHD. Stimulants tend to make children with autism irritable, weepy, over-focused, more obsessive-compulsive, and unable to sleep. Stimulants can also exacerbate tics, self-injurious behaviors, aggression, and sensory issues.

 

Meanwhile, in families dealing with autism, there exist additional social and emotional factors that contribute to technology overuse. First, families are often dealing with highly disruptive behaviors that are quieted—at least in the short term—by handing the child a device. Second, parents are told that “playing video games is ‘normal.’ It’s something your son can do with other kids.” Third, parents are encouraged to introduce technology early and often—especially if “he’s good at computers.” Fourth, in-home and school behavior therapists often use video games or other apps as reinforcers: “It’s the only thing that works with her!” And lastly, parents and clinicians are routinely encouraged to try unproven screen-based software claiming to reduce autistic behaviors or to improve social, communication or reading skills.

 

Needless to say, education in this arena is sorely needed.

_______

11 reasons children with autism are extra vulnerable to screen time effects and tech addiction

1. Children with autism tend to have low melatonin and sleep disturbances, [1] and screen time suppresses melatonin and disrupts sleep.[2]  Aside from regulating sleep and the body clock, melatonin also helps modulate hormones and brain chemistry, balances the immune system, and keeps inflammation at bay.

 

2. Children with autism are prone to arousal regulation issues, manifesting in an exaggerated stress response, emotional dysregulation, or a tendency to be over or under-stimulated[3]; screen time increases acute and chronic stress, induces hyperarousal, causes emotional dysregulation, and produces overstimulation.[4]

 

3. Autism is associated with inflammation of the nervous system,[5] and screen time may increase inflammation by a variety of mechanisms including increased stress hormones, suppressed melatonin, and non-restorative sleep.[6] Light-at-night from screens also suppresses REM sleep, a phase during which the brain “cleans house.”[7]

4. The autistic brain tends to be underconnected—less integrated and more compartmentalized [8]—and screen time hinders whole-brain integration and healthy development of the frontal lobe.[9] In fact, in tech addiction brain scan studies reveal reduced connectivity (via reduced white matter) and atrophy of gray matter in the frontal lobe.[10]

 

5. Children with autism have social and communication deficits, such as impaired eye contact, difficulty reading facial expressions and body language, low empathy, and impaired communication[11]; screen time hinders development of these exact same skills—even in children and teens who don’t have autism.[12] Screen time appears to directly compete with social rewards, including eye contact—a factor essential for brain development.[13] Lastly, screen viewing and even background TV has been shown to delay language acquisition.[14]

 

6. Children with autism are prone to anxiety[15]—including obsessive-compulsive traits, social anxiety—and screen time is associated with increased risk for OCD and social anxiety,[16] while contributing to high arousal and poor coping skills.[17] Additionally, anxiety in autism has been linked to abnormalities in serotonin synthesis and amygdala activity,[18] and both serotonin regulation and amygdala changes have been implicated in screen time.[19]

 

7. Children with autism frequently have sensory and motor integrationissues[20] as well as tics; screen time has been linked to sensori-motor delays and worsening of  sensory processing[21], and can precipitate or worsen vocal and motor tics due to dopamine release.

 

8. Individuals with autism are typically highly attracted to screen-based technology and are not only at increased risk for developing video game and other technology addictions, but are more likely to exhibit symptoms with smaller amounts of exposure.[22] Male teens and young adults with ASD are also at high risk for porn addiction, due to a combination of social deficits, isolation, and excessive computer time, and may develop romantic delusions or obsessions fueled by being accustomed to immediate gratification and a lack of practicing in the real world. At the same time, dopamine released by screen interaction reinforces these obsessive “loops.”

 

9. Children with autism tend to have a fragile attention system, poor executive functioning, and “reduced bandwidth” when processing information [23]; screen time likewise fractures attention, depletes mental reserves, and impairs executive functioning.[24]

 

10. Children with autism may be more sensitive to EMFs(electromagnetic fields) emitted from wireless communications (e.g. WiFi and cell phone frequencies) as well as from the electronic devices themselves.[25] At the cellular, molecular, and atomic level, the pathology seen in autism mirrors the effects demonstrated in research on the biological impacts of EMFs. Heightened sensitivity to EMFs may be due to (and may worsen) immune abnormalities and problems with barrier integrity in the gut and/or the brain.

 

11. Children with autism are at higher risk for psychiatric disorders of all kinds, including mood and anxiety disorders, ADHD, tics and psychosis.[26] Likewise, higher amounts of total screen time are associated with higher levels of psychiatric disturbances, including mood and anxiety disorders, ADHD, tics and psychosis.[27] Regarding psychosis, young people with ASD who engage in daily screen time may experience hallucinations, paranoia, dissociation, and loss of reality-testing. More often than not, however, these scary symptoms resolve or greatly diminish once devices are removed and don’t require antipsychotic medication.

 

In addition to the above, screen time replaces the very things we know to be critical to brain development: bonding, movement, eye contact, face-to-face verbal interactions, loving touch, exercise, free play, and exposure to nature and the outdoors. Reduced exposure to these factors negatively impact brain integration, IQ, and resilience in all children."

 

For full post, see: 

https://sabineduflofr.wordpress.com/2017/01/04/autism-and-screen-time-special-brains-special-risks/ 

 

No comment yet.
Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research
For additional resources and related updates in education, please visit http://eduresearcher.com. [Links to external site]
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD from Educational Psychology & Technology
Scoop.it!

American Academy of Pediatrics Issues New Recommendations On #ScreenTime and Exposure to Cell Phones // EduResearcher

American Academy of Pediatrics Issues New Recommendations On #ScreenTime and Exposure to Cell Phones // EduResearcher | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

"The American Academy of Pediatrics has recently issued two new sets of recommendations on media use for children.  At first glance, popular news headlines suggest elimination of the previous “no screens before age two” recommendations (see NPR’s American Academy of Pediatrics Lifts ‘No Screens Under 2’ Rule and KQED’s American Academy of Pediatrics Says Some Screen Time is Okay for Kids Under Two). However, close examination of the new guidelines reveal nuanced suggestions that maintain a primary focus on limiting tech usage. What appear to be obscured in public discussions are the same AAP organization’s recommendations issued just months earlier, specifically encouraging parents to reduce children’s exposures to cell phone radiation.

For ease of access, both sets of recommendations are provided in this post.
 

“Healthy Digital Media Use Habits for Babies, Toddlers & Preschoolers
Media in all forms, including TV, computers, and smartphones can affect how children feel, learn, think, and behave. However, parents (you) are still the most important influence.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) encourages you to help your children develop healthy media use habits early on. Read on to learn more.”…


“What About Apps and Digital Books?

Most apps advertised as “educational” aren’t proven to be effective and they don’t encourage co-viewing or co-play that help young children learn. Also, most educational apps target rote skills, such as ABCs and shapes. These skills are only one part of school readiness. The skills young children need to learn for success in school (and life) such as impulse control, managing emotions, and creative, flexible thinking, are best learned through unstructured and social play with family and friends in the real world.

Digital books (“eBooks”) that have lots of sound and visual effects can sometimes distract children, who then “miss the story” and don’t learn as well as they would from a print book.

If you plan to read e-books to your children:

  • Choose e-books that don’t have too many “bells and whistles.”
  • Read e-books with your children (parent-child interaction around books is one of the most important factors to a child’s success at reading and literacy).

Why Limit Media Use?
Overuse of digital media may place your child at risk of:

  • Not enough sleep. Young children with more media exposure or who have a TV,computer, or mobile device in their bedrooms sleep less and fall asleep later at night. Even babies can be overstimulated by screens and miss the sleep they need to grow.
  • Delays in learning and social skills. Children who watch too much TV in infancy and preschool years can show delays in attention, thinking, language, and social skills. One of the reasons for the delays could be because they interact less with parents and family. Parents who keep the TV on or focus on their own digital media miss precious opportunities to interact with their children and help them learn. See Parents of Young Children: Put Down Your Smartphones.
  • Obesity. Heavy media use during preschool years is linked to weight gain and risk of childhood obesity. Food advertising and snacking while watching TV can promote obesity. Also, children who overuse media are less apt to be active with healthy, physical play.
  • Behavior problems. Violent content on TV and screens can contribute to behavior problems in children, either because they are scared and confused by what they see, or they try to mimic on-screen characters.

Other Tips for Parents, Families, and Caregivers

  • Do not feel pressured to introduce technology early. Media interfaces are intuitive and children can learn quickly.
  • Monitor children’s media. For example, know what apps are used or downloaded.Test apps before your child uses them, play together, and ask your child what he or she thinks about the app.
  • Turn off TVs and other devices when not in use. Background media can distract from parent-child interaction and child play, which are both very important in child language and social-emotional development.
  • Keep bedrooms, mealtimes, and parent-child playtimes screen free and unplugged for children and parents. Turn off phones or set to “do not disturb”during these times.
  • Avoid exposure to devices or screens 1 hour before bedtime. Remove devices from bedrooms before bed.
  • Avoid using media as the only way to calm your children. Although media maybe used to soothe children, such as during a medical procedure or airplane flight,using media as a strategy to calm could lead to problems with a child’s own ability with limit setting and managing emotions. Ask your child’s doctor for help if needed.
  • Develop a Family Media Use plan for you and your family.
  • Remember that your opinion counts. TV, video-game, and other media producers, and sponsors pay attention to the views of the public. Let a TV station know if you like a program, or contact video game companies if the content is too violent. For more information, visit the Federal Communications Commission(FCC) website.
  • Encourage your school and community to advocate for better media programs and for healthier habits. For example, organize a “Screen-Free Week” in your town with other parents, teachers, and neighbors.

Additional Information from HealthyChildren.org (American Academy of Pediatrics)

The related recommendations below on cell phone use were issued by the same American Academy of Pediatrics, yet appear to be receiving much less media attention.  American Academy of Pediatrics Issues New Recommendations to “Reduce Exposure to Cell Phones”: Nation’s largest group of children’s doctors responds to new government study linking cell phone radiation to cancer.

“In response to the U.S. National Toxicology Program study results finding exposure to wireless radiation significantly increased the prevalence of highly malignant heart and brain cancers in rodents, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has issued specific recommendations to reduce wireless cell phone exposure and updated their online resources for parents concerning cell phones and wireless devices.

“They’re not toys. They have radiation that is emitted from them and the more we can keep it off the body and use (the phone) in other ways, it will be safer,” said Jennifer A. Lowry, M.D., FAACT, FAAP, chair of the AAP Council on Environmental Health Executive Committee in the AAPs press release on the NTP Study Results.

“The findings of brain tumors (gliomas) and malignant schwann cell tumors of the heart in the NTP study, as well as DNA damage in brain cells, present a major public health concern because these occurred in the same types of cells that have been reported to develop into tumors in epidemiological studies of adult cell phone users,” stated Ronald L. Melnick, PhD, the National Institutes of Health toxicologist who lead the NTP study design and senior advisor to the Environmental Health Trust. “For children the cancer risks may be greater than that for adults because of greater penetration and absorption of cell phone radiation in the brains of children and because the developing nervous system of children is more susceptible to tissue-damaging agents. Based on this new information, regulatory agencies need to make strong recommendations for consumers to take precautionary measures and avoid close contact with their cell phones, and especially limit or avoid use of cell phones by children.”

The AAP has updated their Healthy Children Webpage on Cell Phones entitled Cell Phone Radiation & Children’s Health: What Parents Need to Know. The webpage reiterated children’s unique vulnerability to cell phone radiation stating, “Another problem is that the cell phone radiation test used by the FCC is based on the devices’ possible effect on large adults—not children. Children’s skulls are thinner and can absorb more radiation.”

The AAP issued the following cell phone safety tips specifically to reduce exposure to wireless radiation:

  • “Use text messaging when possible, and use cell phones in speaker mode or with the use of hands-free kits.
  • When talking on the cell phone, try holding it an inch or more away from your head.
  • Make only short or essential calls on cell phones.
  • Avoid carrying your phone against the body like in a pocket, sock, or bra. Cell phone manufacturers can’t guarantee that the amount of radiation you’re absorbing will be at a safe level.
  • Do not talk on the phone or text while driving. This increases the risk of automobile crashes.
  • Exercise caution when using a phone or texting while walking or performing other activities. “Distracted walking” injuries are also on the rise.
  • If you plan to watch a movie on your device, download it first, then switch to airplane mode while you watch in order to avoid unnecessary radiation exposure.
  • Keep an eye on your signal strength (i.e. how many bars you have). The weaker your cell signal, the harder your phone has to work and the more radiation it gives off. It’s better to wait until you have a stronger signal before using your device.
  • Avoid making calls in cars, elevators, trains, and buses. The cell phone works harder to get a signal through metal, so the power level increases.
  • Remember that cell phones are not toys or teething items.

Even though the cell phone manual contains specific instructions that say do not carry the phone next to the body, the US government does not publicize this information nor mandate companies inform the public, leaving most people unaware of potential hazards, unwittingly allowing their young children to play with them like toys,” stated Devra Davis MPH, PhD, president of the Environmental Health Trust pointing to the Berkeley Cell Phone Right To Know Ordinance being challenged in court this month.

In 2012, the AAP published Pediatric Environmental Health, 3rd Edition recommending, “exposures can be reduced by encouraging children to use text messaging when possible, make only short and essential calls on cellular phones, use hands free kits and wired headsets and maintain the cellular phone an inch or more away from the head.”

Since 2012, the AAP has supported the Federal Cell Phone Right to Know Legislation and has written letters to the FCC calling on the federal government to review and strengthen radiation standards for wireless devices in an effort to protect children’s health.

Links
AAP Healthy Children.org Cell Phone Radiation & Children’s Health: What Parents Need to Know

AAP responds to study showing link between cell phone radiation, tumors in rats May 27, 2016

2012 AAP Letter in Support of the Cell Phone Right to Know Act

2013 AAP Letter to the FCC calling for a review of RF guidelines

From: http://www.releasewire.com/press-releases/american-academy-of-pediatrics-issues-new-recommendations-to-reduce-exposure-to-cell-phones-726805.htm 

_____________________

##

 

For main post on EduResearcher, see: https://eduresearcher.com/2016/10/25/media/ 

For readers interested in additional updates and research on screen time, development, learning, and health, see here.

 

 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Health and Safety Research Gaps in Policies and Practices Integrating Emerging Technologies for Young Children 

To download slides, click on title or arrow above. 


Links are as follows in order of the slides: 

http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/action/tell-fisher-price-no-ipad-bouncy-seats-infants 

 

The Silicon Valley Billionaires Remaking America's Schools 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/technology/tech-billionaires-education-zuckerberg-facebook-hastings.html 

 

Dr. Catherine Steiner-Adair
Clinical Psychologist and Research Associate at Harvard Medical School https://childmind.org/bio/catherine-steiner-adair/ 

 

Video link may be viewed at: https://youtu.be/pjnFPo_mk6s 

 

Carter B, Rees P, Hale L, Bhattacharjee D, Paradkar MS. Association Between Portable Screen-Based Media Device Access or Use and Sleep Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA Pediatr. 2016 Oct 31. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.2341. [Epub ahead of print] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27802500?dopt=Abstract 

 

Screen Time Hurts More Than Kids' Eyes

http://www.healthline.com/health-news/screen-time-hurts-more-than-kids-eyes-101215 

 

New Media Consortium / Consortium for School Networking Horizon Report
http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2016-nmc-cosn-horizon-report-k12-EN.pdf 

 

"American Revolution 2.0: How Education Innovation is Going to Revitalize America and Transform the U.S. Economy"  http://sco.lt/5JnF7B 

 

"Preschool is Good For Children But It's Expensive So Utah Is Offering It Online" https://www.washingtonpost.co m/local/education/preschool-is- good-for-poor-kids-but-its- expensive-so-utah-is-offering-it- online/2015/10/09/27665e52- 5e1d-11e5-b38e- 06883aacba64_story.html  

 

Philanthropy Roundtable's: "Blended Learning: Wise Givers Guide to Supporting Tech-Assisted Learning"

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/file_uploads/Blended_Learning_Guidebook.pdf (Formerly chaired by B. DeVos)  

 

CyberCharters Have Overwhelming Negative Impact 

 

Ma, J., van den Heuvel, M., Maguire, J., Parkin, P., Birken, C. (2017). Is handheld screen time use associated with language delay in infants? Presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting, San Francisco, CA. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170504083141.htm  

 

Jonathan Rochelle’s GSV/ASU PRIMETIME Keynote Speech pitching Google Cardboard for children in schools as proxy for actual field trips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNqYMI89umE 

 

Scientists Urge Google to Stop Untested Microwave Radiation of Children's Eyes and Brains with Virtual Reality Devices in Schools  http://sco.lt/8ZY5Zp // https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B12B4w0bwyQ_bzRTSUtfb2lORXM/view  Asus product manual

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/ZenFone/ZE550ML/e10509_ze550ml_ze551ml_em_0601.pdf 

 

Telecom Industry Liability and Insurance Information 

http://sco.lt/6MrkcT 

 

National Association for Children and Safe Technology - iPad Information 

 

For infant/pregnancy related safety precautions, please visit http://BabySafeProject.org 

 

194 Signatories (physicians, scientists, educators) on Joint Statement on Pregnancy and Wireless Radiation http://sco.lt/7C2N3B 

 

Article screenshot from France: "Portables. L'embrouille des ondes electromagnetiques  

http://sco.lt/68rtCb

 

Wireless Phone Radiation Risks and Public Policy

http://bit.ly/wirelessradiationUCLA102215 

 

"Show The Fine Print" 
http://ShowTheFinePrint.org 

 

Scientist petition calls for greater protective measures for children and pregnant women, cites need for precautionary health warnings, stronger regulation of electromagnetic fields, creation of EMF free zones, and media disclosures of experts’ financial relationships with industry when citing their opinions regarding the safety of EMF-emitting technologies. Published in European Journal of Oncology http://sco.lt/8SDDd3 

 

International Agency for Research on Cancer Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans (2011)

 

For more on source of funding research, see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1797826/ and http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.2008.21.6366 

 

Maryland State Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council // Public Testimony https://youtu.be/8sCV1l7IfDY?t=7m15s

 

"Until now, radiation from cell towers has not been considered a risk to children, but a recent study raises new questions about possible long-term, harmful effects."  http://sco.lt/5tm5dx 

 

For further reading, please see Captured Agency report published by Harvard’s Center for Ethics http://sco.lt/4qwS2r  or https://ethics.harvard.edu/files/center-for-ethics/files/capturedagency_alster.pdf 

 

Updates/posts/safety information on Virtual Reality:

http://www.scoop.it/t/emf-wireless-radiation?q=virtual 

 

Environmental Health Trust Virtual Reality Radiation Absorption Slides 

https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Virtual-reality-Slides-1.pdf 

 

Healthy Kids in a Digital World:

http://commercialfreechildhood.org/healthykidsdigitalworld 

 

National Association for Children and Safe Technology http://nacst.org 

 

Doctors’ Letters on Wifi in Schools// 154 page compilation

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8Oub2Nx5eSLNEthQmNlb3ZGcTQ/view 

 

Insurance and Liability Disclaimers/Information from Telecom Companies https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Telecom-10-K-Liability-and-Insurance-Companies-Slides-EHT-6-2016.pdf 

  

Most of the documents and articles embedded within the presentation above are searchable/accessible on the following page: http://bit.ly/screen_time
_______________________________

Document above is a pdf with live links. They are provided above for easier access. To download the original file, please click on title or arrow above. It is a large file so may take several minutes.  

 

 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Social Media Use and Mental Health: A Review

Social Media Use and Mental Health: A Review

 

An ongoing open-source  literature review posted and curated by Jonathan Haidt (NYU-Stern) and Jean Twenge (San Diego State U). You can cite this document as:

 

Haidt, J., & Twenge, J. (2019). Social media use and mental health: A review. Unpublished manuscript, New York University.

 

The review contains comments added by other researchers: Chris Ferguson (Stetson U), Sarah Rose Cavanagh (Assumption College), Tom Hollenstein (Queens U., Canada), Kai Lukoff (U. Washington), Ian Goddard, Ray Aldred (??), Sonia Livingstone (??). You can find this doc linked from www.thecoddling.com/better-mental-health, or from tinyurl.com/MediaMentalHealth

 

Also see our companion review: Is there an increase in adolescent mood disorders, self-harm, and suicide since 2010 in the USA and UK? A review

 

See also additional Google docs laying out evidence for trends in mental health and social media use in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.

 

First posted: Feb 7, 2019. Last updated: August 22, 2019.

 

This Google doc is a working document that contains the citations and abstracts of the published articles we have found that shed light on a question that is currently being debated in the USA and UK: Does social media use contribute to the recent rise of adolescent  mood disorders (depression and anxiety) and related behaviors (especially self-harm and suicide)?  [See companion review for studies documenting this recent rise.]

 

This Google Doc is a work in progress. We (Haidt & Twenge) have not done an exhaustive search of citation databases. A Google Scholar search for [“social media” depression] yields 72,000 hits. We begin instead with articles published in or after 2014 that are being cited by scholars on either side of the debate. (We pick 2014 because the increase in adolescent depression and anxiety is not clearly visible until around 2013, and it takes a while for papers to be published.) We invite fellow scholars to point us to studies we have missed, or to note ways in which we are misinterpreting the studies we cite below.

 

We are not unbiased. Haidt came to the tentative conclusion that there is a causal link, and said so in his book (The Coddling of the American Mind, with Greg Lukianoff.) Twenge said the same thing in her book (iGen). Haidt’s own research (presented in The Righteous Mind) says that we likely to be motivated to find evidence to support the positions we took publicly. Like all people, we suffer from confirmation bias. But we take J.S. Mill seriously, and we know that we need help from critics to improve our thinking and get closer to the truth. If you are a researcher and would like to notify us about other studies, or add comments or counterpoints to this document, please request access to the Google Doc, or contact Haidt directly, and he will set your permissions to add comments to the Google doc. This document is evolving based on feedback. A copy of the original document, as posted on Feb 7, is here. 

 

====================================================

 

 

Clickable Table of Contents:

 

INTRODUCTION        3

CAUTIONS AND CAVEATS        4

QUESTION 1: IS THERE AN ASSOCIATION BETWEEN SOCIAL MEDIA USE AND BAD MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES?        6

1.1 STUDIES INDICATING AN ASSOCIATION        6

1.2: STUDIES INDICATING LITTLE OR NO ASSOCIATION        22

QUESTION 2: DOES SOCIAL MEDIA USE AT TIME 1 PREDICT ANYTHING ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES AT TIME 2?        27

2.1: STUDIES INDICATING EFFECTS AT T2        27

2.2: STUDIES INDICATING LITTLE OR NO EFFECT AT T2        32

QUESTION 3: DO EXPERIMENTS USING RANDOM ASSIGNMENT SHOW A CAUSAL EFFECT OF SOCIAL MEDIA USE ON MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES?        35

3.1: STUDIES INDICATING A CAUSAL EFFECT ON MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES        36

3.2: STUDIES INDICATING NO CAUSAL EFFECT        41

4.0: MAJOR REVIEW ARTICLES AND DATABASES        41

5. STUDIES SUGGESTED BY COMMENTERS THAT ARE RELEVANT BUT NOT FOCUSED ON THE CENTRAL QUESTION OF SOCIAL MEDIA AND TEENAGERS [e.g., those that focus on screen time and young children]        43

6. DISCUSSION        44

 

 INTRODUCTION 

Two studies published in January 2019 suggest that there is little or no association between social media use and harmful mental health outcomes: Orben & Przybylski (2019) and Heffer, Good, et al. (2019). A third study published in January suggested that there is a more substantial link: Kelly, Zilanawala, Booker, & Sacker (2019). These three studies, all published in reputable journals in the same month, are now getting attention from journalists, leaving many parents and policymakers confused about what to believe. We therefore thought it would be useful to gather together in one place the abstracts of the studies that are often referred to in these debates.

 

We divide the studies into three categories, based on which method they use: 1) cross-sectional correlational studies, 2) time lag or longitudinal studies, and 3) true experiments. Each method answers a different question. Finding answers to the three questions will allow us to address the question everyone cares about: is social media contributing to the recent rise in anxiety, depression, self-harm, and suicide among American and British teenagers? The answers may be too tentative to form the basis of legislation in 2019, but not to form the basis for advice to parents, millions of whom are asking questions like: Should I let my 11-year old child have an Instagram or Snapchat account? If not now, then when? If yes, then should I impose any time limits? These questions are important and in the forefront of many parents’ minds. We’ll offer some suggestions for parents at the end of the document.

 

We structure this list of abstracts around three questions, each one addressed by a different kind of study. Within each question we present the studies that DO find a relationship in subsection 1, and the studies that DON’T find a relationship in subsection 2. For each study we offer a link to the original publication and we reprint the full abstract with no edits, other than bold-facing some parts. We offer brief comments and show figures from some of the studies."...

 

For full document, please visit:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w-HOfseF2wF9YIpXwUUtP65-olnkPyWcgF5BiAtBEy0/mobilebasic#h.xi8mrj7rpf37

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Colleges are turning students’ phones into surveillance machines, tracking the locations of hundreds of thousands // Washington Post

Colleges are turning students’ phones into surveillance machines, tracking the locations of hundreds of thousands // Washington Post | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

By Drew Harwell

When Syracuse University freshmen walk into professor Jeff Rubin’s Introduction to Information Technologies class, seven small Bluetooth beacons hidden around the Grant Auditorium lecture hall connect with an app on their smartphones and boost their “attendance points.”

And when they skip class? The SpotterEDU app sees that, too, logging their absence into a campus database that tracks them over time and can sink their grade. It also alerts Rubin, who later contacts students to ask where they’ve been. His 340-person lecture has never been so full.

“They want those points,” he said. “They know I’m watching and acting on it. So, behaviorally, they change.”

 

Short-range phone sensors and campuswide WiFi networks are empowering colleges across the United States to track hundreds of thousands of students more precisely than ever before. Dozens of schools now use such technology to monitor students’ academic performance, analyze their conduct or assess their mental health.

 

But some professors and education advocates argue that the systems represent a new low in intrusive technology, breaching students’ privacy on a massive scale. The tracking systems, they worry, will infantilize students in the very place where they’re expected to grow into adults, further training them to see surveillance as a normal part of living, whether they like it or not.

“We’re adults. Do we really need to be tracked?” said Robby Pfeifer, a sophomore at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, which recently began logging the attendance of students connected to the campus’ WiFi network. “Why is this necessary? How does this benefit us? … And is it just going to keep progressing until we’re micromanaged every second of the day?"

 

This style of surveillance has become just another fact of life for many Americans. A flood of cameras, sensors and microphones, wired to an online backbone, now can measure people’s activity and whereabouts with striking precision, reducing the mess of everyday living into trend lines that companies promise to help optimize.Americans say in surveys they accept the technology’s encroachment because it often feels like something else: a trade-off of future worries for the immediacy of convenience, comfort and ease. If a tracking system can make students be better, one college adviser said, isn’t that a good thing?

 

But the perils of increasingly intimate supervision — and the subtle way it can mold how people act — have also led some to worry whether anyone will truly know when all this surveillance has gone too far. “Graduates will be well prepared … to embrace 24/7 government tracking and social credit systems,” one commenter on the Slashdot message board said. “Building technology was a lot more fun before it went all 1984.”

 

Instead of GPS coordinates, the schools rely on networks of Bluetooth transmitters and wireless access points to piece together students’ movements from dorm to desk. One company that uses school WiFi networks to monitor movements says it gathers 6,000 location data points per student every day.

School and company officials call location monitoring a powerful booster for student success: If they know more about where students are going, they argue, they can intervene before problems arise. But some schools go even further, using systems that calculate personalized “risk scores” based on factors such as whether the student is going to the library enough."...

 

For full post, please visit: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/24/colleges-are-turning-students-phones-into-surveillance-machines-tracking-locations-hundreds-thousands/

No comment yet.
Rescooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD from Educational Psychology & Technology
Scoop.it!

Health Research Gaps in the Marketing and Promotion of Emerging Educational Technologies // (Marachi, 2018) Presented at the Digital Media and Developing Minds Conference, New York 

To download poster, click on title above. For resource collections related to the research and including many of the references cited, see: http://bit.ly/screen_time

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Oregon Wireless Safety Bill (SB 283) Passed Both Houses of Legislature and Awaits Governor's Signature // June 19th, 2019

Oregon Wireless Safety Bill (SB 283) Passed Both Houses of Legislature and Awaits Governor's Signature // June 19th, 2019 | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it
 
06/19/2019 11:50 AM PDT

Relating to exposure to radiation in schools in this state; and declaring an emergency.
 
Directs Oregon Health Authority to review peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies of health effects of exposure to microwave radiation, particularly exposure that results from use of wireless network technologies in schools and to report results of review to interim committee of Legislative Assembly related to education not later than January 2, 2021.
 
Specifies requirements for review. Directs Department of Education to develop recommendations to schools in this state for practices and alternative technologies that reduce students' exposure to microwave radiation that Oregon Health Authority report identifies as harmful. Declares emergency, effective on passage. 
 
 
BACKGROUND:
Oregon public schools serve approximately 581,000 students in 197 school districts. Oregon law directs school districts to provide opportunities for students to use technology. Oregon law also requires school districts to develop and adopt a Healthy and Safe Schools Plan. The plan must address environmental conditions at the facilities owned or leased by the district or school where students or staff are present on a regular basis. Senate Bill 283 directs ODE to inform schools about potential health hazards of using wireless network technology in schools and to provide recommendations for minimizing exposure to possible harmful effects.

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureAnalysisDocument/51824
No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Silicon Valley parents are raising their kids tech-free — and it should be a red flag // Business Insider

Silicon Valley parents are raising their kids tech-free — and it should be a red flag // Business Insider | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-parents-raising-their-kids-tech-free-red-flag-2018-2/ 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Is 5G Technology Safe? The Debate Intensifies // WHEC.com

Is 5G Technology Safe? The Debate Intensifies // WHEC.com | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

By

NEW YORK (WHEC) -- The major cell phone companies promise 5G networks will bring faster internet speeds, better reception and the ability to connect more devices simultaneously but as they ramp up for the rollout, many are wondering whether the technology is safe.

 

What makes 5G different? 2G brought the ability to text message, 3G laid the groundwork for smartphones and 4G allowed video streaming. 5G is expected to download data 20 times faster and could pave the way for self-driving vehicles but a big question many have is whether the radio frequency waves it takes to do all of that are dangerous to your body and overall health.  

 

"There are good parts of 5G, I guess, but it has effects, side effects, so I think people should research it really," says Judi Flanders of Penfield.

Flanders currently lives within a mile of a cell phone tower and has long been concerned about how much radiation she's being exposed to but recently that concern grew when she learned Verizon is in talks with the town to upgrade its network to 5G.  

 

Currently, 3G and 4G service come from regular cell phone towers like the one near Flanders home but 5G works differently. Smaller base stations or antennas are installed all over the community and then networked together with the tower.  

Wireless companies expect to install about 300,000 antennas nationwide which is about equal to the number of cell towers built in the U.S. over the last 30 years. That's why carriers are knocking on the doors of our local leaders.

"We've been approached by a couple of different groups to at least start the conversation," says Penfield Town Supervisor Tony LaFountian.  

 

LaFountain says he's heard from residents that are worried about whether 5G radiation can cause cancer.

 

"You get information from the carriers to say it's safe, these are all of our studies and then of course there's an equal amount of information on the other side to say there are health concerns and health risks associated with this," he says.

Dr. David Carpenter is the director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany.

 

"It's too new for there to be any studies of human health and this is a big issue. Why are we rolling out this new form of electromagnetic radiation without any attention to the question of whether it's safe or not…with regard to 3G and 4G, we have absolutely definitive evidence that excessive use of cell phones, held to your ear, increases the rate of brain cancer," he tells News10NBC. 

 

But that's excessive, long-term use with the phone to your head. What about proximity to towers and antennas? Most public health experts seem to agree that 5G will increase the levels of RF radiation in the vicinity of the antennas.

 

"It means that you're not going to be able to walk down the sidewalk without being continuously irradiated," Dr. Carpenter says.  

 

But the wireless companies installing 5G say the radiation will be low and well within the federal government's allowable standards.

 

Verizon is interested in upgrading its network here in the Rochester area, so News10NBC reached out to them to ask about this issues.

 

In a statement, spokesman David Weissmann says, "All equipment used for 5G must comply with federal safety standards. Those standards have wide safety margins and are designed to protect everyone, including children. Everyday exposure to the radio frequency energy from 5G small cells will be well within those safety limits, and is comparable to exposure from products such as baby monitors, Wi-Fi routers, and Bluetooth devices."

 

The FDA and the FCC say based on the current information available, they believe the safety limits are acceptable for protecting public health. Some governments in other parts of the world disagree though. In Brussels, Belgium, the expansion to 5G has been halted until more research is done. Dr. Carpenter says he'd like the U.S. to slow down the process too.

 

"There are a lot of factors that go into that [determining what causes cancer] and you can never say that one person's cancer was because of this particular exposure. What we can say with great confidence is that any exposure to radio frequency radiation is going to increase your risk of developing cancer," he says.

So, what happens if you're not comfortable with 5G and don't want an antenna near your house?

 

You don't have many options to fight it.

The FCC has restricted the ability of cities and towns to regulate 5G infrastructure. Under new rules, local governments have tight deadlines to approve or reject installation of cellular equipment. The rules also limit how much municipalities can charge wireless carriers who to put hardware in public rights of way. The FCC also prohibits cities and towns from rejected an application solely for health concerns."... 

 

For full post, see:

https://www.whec.com/news/is-5g-technology-safe-tbe-debate-intensifies/5338867/

 

 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Presentation Slides from Dr. Joel Moskowitz Keynote, Feb. 27th, 2019, Director of Center for Family and Community Health // School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley 

To download, click on title or arrow above. Slides are also available at: http://bit.ly/UCB2-27-19jmm

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

What are small cell facilities, and why are they in the public rights-of-way? // Bradley Law

What are small cell facilities, and why are they in the public rights-of-way? // Bradley Law | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

By Vince Rotty

On September 27, 2018, the FCC released a declaratory ruling and report and order (available here). This post has been updated to reflect the FCC’s new regulations.

 

I.       WHAT ARE SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES?

A small wireless facility (sometimes referred to as a small cell facility) is a cellular network facility capable of delivering high transmission speeds but at lower ranges. Although they are called “small,” this is in reference to their small coverage area, not their physical size. These facilities, due to their heightened transmission speeds and capacities, are critical to the wireless industry’s deployment of 5G services. However, because a small wireless facility, when compared to a traditional macrocell tower, is only able to transmit data at low ranges and is not capable of transmitting through buildings and other structures, many more small wireless facilities are needed to cover the same geographic area that a single, traditional macrocell tower would cover. It is estimated that each wireless provider will need at least ten times as many small wireless facilities as macrocell towers to provide the same network coverage.[1]

 

II.     WHY ARE SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY?

Wireless service providers and wireless infrastructure providers will seek to collocate small wireless facilities and construct wireless support structures in a municipality’s rights-of-ways for a number of reasons, but one of the primary reasons is that small wireless facilities require two resources: (1) data via fiber optic cable and (2) power, and both of these resources are often found in a municipality’s rights-of-way.

Additionally, many states have enacted statutes that, among other things, limit rights-of-way and permit application fees that a municipality can collect from a wireless service provider or wireless infrastructure provider and create statutory review periods for small wireless facility permit applications.[2] Often, utility poles and wireless support structures owned by private entities are exempt from these state statutes, further prompting wireless providers and wireless infrastructure providers to prefer to collocate small wireless facilities to existing municipal assets in the municipality’s rights-of-way.[3]

III.  WHICH TYPES OF ENTITIES ARE COLLOCATING SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES OR CONSTRUCTING WIRELESS SUPPORT STRUCTURES?

In addition to traditional wireless providers, neutral host and other infrastructure providers are also expected to play a critical role in the deployment of small wireless facilities. Neutral host and other infrastructure providers will often lease their wireless assets to traditional wireless providers. As a result, your municipality might not receive any permit requests of applications for collocating small wireless facilities or constructing wireless support structures from traditional wireless providers such as AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint. Instead, your municipality may be receiving permit requests and applications from neutral host providers such as ExteNet and Mobilitie.

IV. WHY SHOULD MY MUNICIPALITY BE CONCERNED?

Not all small wireless facilities are created equal. While wireless providers and wireless infrastructure providers may initially propose to construct facilities that are integrated into light poles, monopoles, traffic signals, and other existing rights-of-way structures or assets, the reality is that your municipality should expect that very few small wireless facilities will be constructed in this manner. For example, a light pole with a pole-top antenna and integrated equipment cabinet is shown below. As can be seen in the below image, there are almost no exposed elements or cables, and there is only a minimal intrusion into the rights-of-way. The rights-of-way in the below image appears to be largely undisturbed by the small wireless facility integrated into the light pole.

 

Source: https://twitter.com/stealthsite/status/851882939633762304

However, in reality, many small wireless facilities are likely to be collocated on existing wooden utility poles. Because these existing utility poles are almost universally incapable of integrating equipment cabinets within the pole’s base, as is in the above image, wireless service providers and wireless infrastructure providers will instead install equipment cabinets at ground level or mount the cabinets to utility poles in the rights-of-way. These facilities can create safety, aesthetic, and noise issues, including violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“the ADA”).

An example of a non-integrated small wireless facility is shown below. As can be seen in the below image, the small wireless facility extends beyond the wooden utility pole, the cabling is loose, and there are equipment cabinets mounted at the top of the pole.

 

Source: https://www.cleveland.com/middleburg-heights/index.ssf/2018/05/middleburg_will_closely_regula.html

These rights-of-way impacts and concerns are compounded by the increased number of small wireless facilities necessary to operate a small cell network. Regulating how and when small wireless facilities can be collocated in your municipality’s rights-of-way is key to addressing a municipality’s concerns such as safety, noise, aesthetic, and undergrounding of ground-level facilities.

V.    HOW SHOULD MY MUNICIPALITY RESPOND TO REQUESTS TO COLLOCATE SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES OR CONSTRUCT WIRELESS SUPPORT STRUCTURES IN ITS PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY?

When a municipality receives a permit request or application to collocate a small wireless facility or construct a wireless support structure, there are three sources of law that must be followed: (1) federal law, (2) state law, and (3) local law.

A.     Federal Law

In 2018, the FCC issued a declaratory ruling and report and order addressing how municipalities must process small wireless facility applications.[4] A small wireless facility application is an application for a permit or other authorization that seeks to either: (1) collocate a small wireless facility on an existing structure or (2) collocate a small wireless facility on a new structure (i.e., construction of a new structure to collocate a small wireless facility).[5] The primary difference between these two types of small wireless facility applications is the number of days that a municipality is allowed to process the application (shown below).

Type of Permit Request Review Period Remedy Collocation on an existing structure 60 days Judicial Cause of Action Collocation on a new structure 90 days Judicial Cause of Action

If a municipality fails to grant or deny an application within either of these review periods, the applicant may appeal the municipality’s failure to act to an applicable court.[6] Unlike Section 6409(a) applications, there is no deemed granted remedy for small wireless facility applications.[7] A deemed granted remedy means that an application is automatically granted if a municipality fails to act on the application.

For more information on the details and impacts of federal law, please consult your legal counsel or the attorneys at Bradley Berkland Hagen & Herbst LLC.

B.      State Law

After determining how to process a permit application or request under federal law, a municipality should next examine their state law. Often, state small wireless facility statutes will reduce review periods, limit the criteria by which a permit can be denied, and limit fees that municipalities can charge. A list of states that have passed small wireless facility laws can be found here. In short, state small wireless facility statutes are rarely, if ever, helpful for local governments. Instead, these statutes almost invariably limit municipal authority. For example, Oklahoma’s small wireless facility statute reduces the 90-day review period in federal law to 75-days and limits fees to $40 per small wireless facility collocated on a municipally-owned utility pole in the rights-of-way.[8] If your state has enacted a small wireless facility statute, it will be important to understand the restrictions and limitations placed on your municipality by state law in addition to federal law.

If your municipality is in a state that hasn’t passed small wireless facility-specific legislation, your municipality should nevertheless look for any processes or requirements that apply generally to wireless towers. These statutes were likely enacted with macrocell towers in mind but are often applicable to small wireless facilities.

C.      Local Law

Finally, your municipality should examine its local law to determine how to process an application. Many municipalities have passed ordinances governing the municipality’s rights-of-way or wireless towers, but some municipalities have passed small wireless facility ordinances as well. While no small wireless facility ordinance “may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service” (i.e., a prohibition on the collocation of small wireless facilities within a municipality), these ordinances do allow a municipality to enact aesthetic and design standards, undergrounding requirements, and other zoning restrictions.[9]

If your municipality has not already enacted a small wireless facility ordinance, please speak with an attorney at Bradley Berkland Hagen & Herbst to discuss how your community’s unique needs and interests can be addressed through an ordinance or other legal mechanisms."

 

For original post, please see:

https://www.bradleylawmn.com/telecommunications/what-are-small-cell-facilities-and-why-are-they-in-the-public-rights-of-way/ 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

The Ethics of Virtual Reality Technology: Social Hazards and Public Policy Recommendations // Spiegel, 2018; Science and Engineering Ethics

The Ethics of Virtual Reality Technology: Social Hazards and Public Policy Recommendations // Spiegel, 2018; Science and Engineering Ethics | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

Abstract
This article explores four major areas of moral concern regarding virtual reality (VR) technologies. First, VR poses potential mental health risks, including Depersonalization/Derealization Disorder. Second, VR technology raises serious concerns related to personal neglect of users’ own actual bodies and real physical environments. Third, VR technologies may be used to record personal data which could be deployed in ways that threaten personal privacy and present a danger related to manipulation of users’ beliefs, emotions, and behaviors. Finally, there are other moral and social risks associated with the way VR blurs the distinction between the real and illusory. These concerns regarding VR naturally raise questions about public policy. The article makes several recommendations for legal regulations of VR that together address each of the above concerns. It is argued that these regulations would not seriously threaten personal liberty but rather would protect and enhance the autonomy of VR consumers."

 

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11948-017-9979-y 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Is 5G Worth the Risks?

Is 5G Worth the Risks? | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

By IIshana Artra

"In recent months there’s been a lot of talk about 5G – the next generation of wireless technology. 5G is being touted as a necessary step to the ‘internet of things’ – a world in which our refrigerators alert us when we’re low on milk, our baby’s diapers tell us when they need to be changed, and Netflix is available everywhere, all the time. But what we’re not hearing is that evidence-based studies worldwide have clearly established the harmful effects of human exposure to pulsed radiofrequency radiation from cell towers, cell phones and other devices – and that 5G will make the problem exponentially worse.


Most people believe that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) carefully assesses the health risks of these technologies before approving them. But in testimony taken by Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut, the FCC admitted it has not conducted any safety studies on 5G.


Telecom lobbyists assure us that guidelines already in place are adequate to protect the public. Those safety guidelines, however, are based on a 1996 study of how much a cell phone heated the head of an adult-sized plastic mannequin. This is problematic, for at least three reasons:

+ living organisms consist of highly complex and interdependent cells and tissue, not plastic.


+ those being exposed to radiofrequency radiation include fetuses, children, plants, and wildlife – not just adult male humans.


+
the frequencies used in the mannequin study were far lower than the exposures associated with 5G.

 

5G radiofrequency (RF) radiation uses a ‘cocktail’ of three types of radiation, ranging from relatively low-energy radio waves, microwave radiation with far more energy, and millimeter waves with vastly more energy (see below). The extremely high frequencies in 5G are where the biggest danger lies. While 4G frequencies go as high as 6 GHz, 5G exposes biological life to pulsed signals in the 30 GHz to 100 GHz range. The general public has never before been exposed to such high frequencies for long periods of time."...

 

For full post, visit here.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/05/03/is-5g-worth-the-risks/ 

 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Chinese Facial Recognition Company Left Database of People's Locations Exposed // CNET

Chinese Facial Recognition Company Left Database of People's Locations Exposed // CNET | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

"A Chinese facial recognition company left its database exposed online, revealing information about millions of people, a security researcher discovered.

SenseNets, a company based in Shenzhen, China, offers facial recognition technology and crowd analysis, which the company boasted in a promotional video could track people across cities and pick them out in large groups.

 

But the company failed to protect that database with a password, Victor Gevers, a Dutch security researcher with the GDI Foundation, discovered Wednesday. The database contained more than 2.5 million records on people, including their ID card number, their address, birthday, and locations where SenseNets' facial recognition has spotted them.

 

From the last 24 hours alone, there were more than 6.8 million locations logged, Gevers said. Anyone would be able to look at these records and track a person's movements based on SenseNets' real-time facial recognition."...

 

For full post, see:

https://www.cnet.com/news/chinese-facial-recognition-company-left-database-of-peoples-location-exposed/  

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Association Between Screen Time and Children’s Performance on a Developmental Screening Test (2019) // Journal of the American Medical Association 

Association Between Screen Time and Children’s Performance on a Developmental Screening Test (2019) // Journal of the American Medical Association  | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

Abstract
"Importance
  Excessive screen time is associated with delays in development; however, it is unclear if greater screen time predicts lower performance scores on developmental screening tests or if children with poor developmental performance receive added screen time as a way to modulate challenging behavior.

Objective  To assess the directional association between screen time and child development in a population of mothers and children.
Design, Setting, and Participants
  This longitudinal cohort study used a 3-wave, cross-lagged panel model in 2441 mothers and children in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, drawn from the All Our Families study. Data were available when children were aged 24, 36, and 60 months. Data were collected between October 20, 2011, and October 6, 2016. Statistical analyses were conducted from July 31 to November 15, 2018.

Exposures  Media.
Main Outcomes and Measures
  At age 24, 36, and 60 months, children’s screen-time behavior (total hours per week) and developmental outcomes (Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition) were assessed via maternal report.

Results  Of the 2441 children included in the analysis, 1169 (47.9%) were boys. A random-intercepts, cross-lagged panel model revealed that higher levels of screen time at 24 and 36 months were significantly associated with poorer performance on developmental screening tests at 36 months (β, −0.08; 95% CI, −0.13 to −0.02) and 60 months (β, −0.06; 95% CI, −0.13 to −0.02), respectively. These within-person (time-varying) associations statistically controlled for between-person (stable) differences.

Conclusions and Relevance  The results of this study support the directional association between screen time and child development. Recommendations include encouraging family media plans, as well as managing screen time, to offset the potential consequences of excess use."...

 

For full research study, please see:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2722666 

 
No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Associations Between Screen-Based Media Use and Brain White Matter Integrity in Preschool-Aged Children // Hutton, Dudley, & Horowitz-Kraus (2019) // Neurology, JAMA Pediatrics

Associations Between Screen-Based Media Use and Brain White Matter Integrity in Preschool-Aged Children // Hutton, Dudley, & Horowitz-Kraus (2019) // Neurology, JAMA Pediatrics | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it
Abstract

Importance The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends limits on screen-based media use, citing its cognitive-behavioral risks. Screen use by young children is prevalent and increasing, although its implications for brain development are unknown.

Objective  To explore the associations between screen-based media use and integrity of brain white matter tracts supporting language and literacy skills in preschool-aged children.


Design, Setting, and Participants
  This cross-sectional study of healthy children aged 3 to 5 years (n = 47) was conducted from August 2017 to November 2018. Participants were recruited at a US children’s hospital and community primary care clinics.


Exposures
  Children completed cognitive testing followed by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), and their parent completed a ScreenQ survey.


Main Outcomes and Measures
  ScreenQ is a 15-item measure of screen-based media use reflecting the domains in the AAP recommendations: access to screens, frequency of use, content viewed, and coviewing. Higher scores reflect greater use. ScreenQ scores were applied as the independent variable in 3 multiple linear regression models, with scores in 3 standardized assessments as the dependent variable, controlling for child age and household income: Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, Second Edition (CTOPP-2; Rapid Object Naming subtest); Expressive Vocabulary Test, Second Edition (EVT-2; expressive language); and Get Ready to Read! (GRTR; emergent literacy skills). The DTI measures included fractional anisotropy (FA) and radial diffusivity (RD), which estimated microstructural organization and myelination of white matter tracts. ScreenQ was applied as a factor associated with FA and RD in whole-brain regression analyses, which were then narrowed to 3 left-sided tracts supporting language and emergent literacy abilities.

Results  Of the 69 children recruited, 47 (among whom 27 [57%] were girls, and the mean [SD] age was 54.3 [7.5] months) completed DTI. Mean (SD; range) ScreenQ score was 8.6 (4.8; 1-19) points. Mean (SD; range) CTOPP-2 score was 9.4 (3.3; 2-15) points, EVT-2 score was 113.1 (16.6; 88-144) points, and GRTR score was 19.0 (5.9; 5-25) points. ScreenQ scores were negatively correlated with EVT-2 (F2,43 = 5.14; R2 = 0.19; P < .01), CTOPP-2 (F2,35 = 6.64; R2 = 0.28; P < .01), and GRTR (F2,44 = 17.08; R2 = 0.44; P < .01) scores, controlling for child age. Higher ScreenQ scores were correlated with lower FA and higher RD in tracts involved with language, executive function, and emergent literacy abilities (P < .05, familywise error–corrected), controlling for child age and household income.

Conclusions and Relevance  This study found an association between increased screen-based media use, compared with the AAP guidelines, and lower microstructural integrity of brain white matter tracts supporting language and emergent literacy skills in prekindergarten children. The findings suggest further study is needed, particularly during the rapid early stages of brain development.

 

For access to full text, please visit:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2754101

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Long-Term Symptoms of Mobile Phone Use on Mobile Phone Addiction and Depression Among Korean Adolescents // Int'l Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 

Long-Term Symptoms of Mobile Phone Use on Mobile Phone Addiction and Depression Among Korean Adolescents // Int'l Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health  | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

"Abstract

This study aimed to compare the mean scores of mobile phone use, mobile phone addiction, and depressive symptoms at three-time points among Korean adolescents according to gender and to examine the differences in the long-term relationships among the three above mentioned variables between Korean boys and girls in a four-year period. Data for 1794 adolescents (897 boys and 897 girls) were obtained from three waves of the second panel of the Korean Children and Youth Panel Survey. Multi group structural equation modeling was used for data analyses.

The study findings showed that at each of the three-time points, Korean girls tended to use their mobile phones more frequently and were at a higher risk of mobile phone addiction and depressive symptoms than Korean boys. Significant changes were observed in the longitudinal relationships among phone use, mobile phone addiction, and depressive symptoms in Korean adolescents across time periods, but no gender differences were found in the strengths of these relationships. These findings contribute to expanding the knowledge base of mobile phone addiction and depressive symptoms among Korean adolescents."

KEYWORDS:

Korean adolescents; depression; mobile phone addiction; mobile phone use

 

For original research study, please visit:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31557844

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Technoference: Longitudinal Associations Between Parent Technology Use, Parenting Stress, and Child Behavior Problems // McDaniel & Radesky, Pediatric Research 2018

"Abstract
Background and objectives
Heavy parent digital technology use has been associated with suboptimal parent–child interactions and internalizing/externalizing child behavior, but directionality of associations is unclear. This study aims to investigate longitudinal bidirectional associations between parent technology use and child behavior, and understand whether this is mediated by parenting stress.


Methods

Participants included 183 couples with a young child (age 0–5 years, mean = 3.0 years) who completed surveys at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Cross-lagged structural equation models of parent technology interference during parent–child activities, parenting stress, and child externalizing and internalizing behavior were tested.


Results

Controlling for potential confounders, we found that across all time points (1) greater child externalizing behavior predicted greater technology interference, via greater parenting stress; and (2) technology interference often predicted greater externalizing behavior. Although associations between child internalizing behavior and technology interference were relatively weaker, bidirectional associations were more consistent for child withdrawal behaviors.


Conclusions

Our results suggest bidirectional dynamics in which (a) parents, stressed by their child’s difficult behavior, may then withdraw from parent–child interactions with technology and (b) this higher technology use during parent–child interactions may influence externalizing and withdrawal behaviors over time."

 

For access to original research, please visit:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41390-018-0052-6

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Advertisers Abandon YouTube Over Concerns That Pedophiles Lurk In Comments Section // NPR National Public Radio 

Advertisers Abandon YouTube Over Concerns That Pedophiles Lurk In Comments Section // NPR National Public Radio  | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

 

"Editor's note: This story contains content that may be upsetting to some readers.

 

Big brands are pulling their ads off YouTube over concerns that potential sexual predators are gathering in the comment sections of videos featuring children. In response, YouTube has deleted more than 400 channels and suspended comments on tens of millions of videos as it tries to purge the system of pedophiles.

 

The controversy emerged after a former YouTube content creator described what he called a "soft-core pedophile ring" on the site. Pedophiles are communicating with each other in the comments and trading links to illegal pornography, Matt Watson said in a video posted this week that has been viewed millions of times.

 

"They're providing links to actual child porn in YouTube comments," he said. "They're trading unlisted videos in secret. And YouTube's algorithm, through some kind of glitch or error in its programming, is actually facilitating their ability to do this."

 

Earlier this week, Disney, Nestle and Epic Games — which makes Fortnite — pulled their ads from YouTube, which is owned by Google. AT&T and Hasbro followed suit.

 

"Until Google can protect our brand from offensive content of any kind, we are removing all advertising from YouTube," AT&T said in a statement, according to AdAge.

 

The controversy highlights the difficulty that major Internet content companies often have patrolling user-generated content, which can stream in at an incredible pace. A YouTube spokesman told TechCrunch that around 400 hours of video are uploaded each minute. The company has around 10,000 human reviewers who analyze content that's been flagged as inappropriate.

 

YouTube executives are scrambling to reassure companies that YouTube is doing everything it can to protect children. "Child safety has been and remains our #1 priority at YouTube," YouTube said in a memo sent to major brands, AdWeek reported. YouTube this week suspended comments on millions of videos that "are likely innocent but could be subject to predatory comments," the memo said.

 

Some of the children in the videos look to be as young as 5 years old, according to a Wired magazine report.

 

In his video critique, Watson describes how he says the pedophile ring works: YouTube visitors gather on videos of young girls doing innocuous things, such as putting on their makeup, demonstrating gymnastics moves or playing Twister. In the comment section, people would then post timestamps that link to frames in the video that appear to sexualize the children.

 

YouTube's algorithms would then recommend other videos also frequented by pedophiles. "Once you enter into this wormhole, now there is no other content available," Watson said.

 

"And of course, there is advertising on some of these videos," he said, showing examples of ads. His video was titled: "Youtube is Facilitating the Sexual Exploitation of Children, and it's Being Monetized."... 

 

For full post, see: 

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/22/696949013/advertisers-abandon-youtube-over-concerns-that-pedophiles-lurk-in-comments-secti 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Lawsuit Filed Against Apple, Samsung After Chicago Tribune Tests Cellphones for Radiofrequency Radiation // Chicago Tribune 

Lawsuit Filed Against Apple, Samsung After Chicago Tribune Tests Cellphones for Radiofrequency Radiation // Chicago Tribune  | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

By Joe Mahr

"A group of lawyers has filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Apple and Samsung, citing a Tribune investigation that tested popular cellphones for radiofrequency radiation and found some results over the federal exposure limit.

The lawsuit — filed Friday in California, Illinois and Iowa — alleges that the phone makers “intentionally misrepresented" the safety of their devices, assuring users that the phones had been adequately tested and “were safe to use on and in close proximity to their bodies.”

The complaint, which alleges “negligence, breach of warranty, consumer fraud and unjust enrichment,” seeks an unspecified amount of money and medical monitoring for anyone who bought an iPhone 7, iPhone 8, iPhone X, Galaxy S8, Galaxy S9 or Galaxy J3.

The Tribune commissioned tests of 11 models of cellphones made by four companies, including the six models mentioned in the suit. The newspaper stated that the intention was not to rank phone models for safety and noted it was not possible to say whether any of the devices tested could cause harm.

 

But the tests, conducted according to federal guidelines at an accredited lab, found that radiofrequency radiation from some models operating at full power measured over the exposure limit set by the Federal Communications Commission. The FCC said it would pursue its own testing after the agency reviewed the Tribune’s lab reports.

Before any phone model can be brought to market, a sample must be tested for compliance with the exposure limit for radiofrequency radiation. In one phase of Tribune’s testing, the phones were positioned at the same distance from a simulated human body as the manufacturers chose for their premarket tests — between 5 and 15 millimeters, depending on the model.

 

In this phase, all three Samsung phones tested measured under the safety limit. Results varied for Apple phones, but several iPhone 7s were tested and all results exceeded the limit.

 

The Tribune also tested all the phone models at a consistent and closer distance of 2 millimeters, to estimate the potential exposure for an owner using the phone in a pants or shirt pocket.

 

In that phase of testing, most of the models tested yielded results that were over the exposure limit, sometimes far exceeding it. At 2 millimeters, the results from the three Samsungs and several iPhone models — again, operating at full power — were higher than the standard.

 

Two days after the Tribune published its investigation, the lawsuit was filed in U.S. district court in San Jose, California, alleging that Apple and Samsung “market and sell some of the most popular smartphones in the world ... as emitting less RF radiation” than the legal limit.

 

 

The suit was filed by three firms with lawyers experienced with class-action lawsuits, including Chicago law firm Fegan Scott. One of its lawyers, Elizabeth Fegan, represents alleged victims of disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein and has worked on cases alleging that the NCAA mishandled student-athlete concussions and that the city of Chicago’s work on water pipes has increased the risks of lead poisoning.

 

Representatives with Apple and Samsung did not return emails seeking comment.

 

Apple previously has disputed the Tribune’s results, saying the lab used by the newspaper did not test the phones the same way it does. Apple and Samsung both have told the Tribune their phones comply with federal standards.

 

The lawsuit argues that recent research has shown radiofrequency radiation exposure "affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines.”

 

“Thus," the suit claims, “defendants’ design, manufacture, and sale of smartphones that far exceed federal guidelines exacerbates the health risks to Plaintiffs and the Classes.”

 

High levels of radiofrequency radiation can heat biological tissue and cause harm. Less understood is whether people, especially children, are at risk for health effects from exposure to low levels over many years of cellphone use."...

 

For full story, please visit

https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-radiation-lawsuit-apple-samsung-met-20190829-ye5h7fw6yvauxpo367vqeg7pju-story.html 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

The Challenges of Defining and Studying “Digital Addiction” in Children // Journal of the American Medical Association 

The Challenges of Defining and Studying “Digital Addiction” in Children // Journal of the American Medical Association  | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

"In the 2013 edition, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) (DSM-5) identified “internet gaming disorder” as “a condition in need of further study.”1 The World Health Organization recognized “gaming disorder” as a diagnosable condition in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11).2 The appellation—gaming disorder—is a misnomer because it does not include social media or nongaming applications. Still the emerging phenomenon of “digital addiction” represents a real and potential widespread problem that defies easy solutions or prevention strategies.

Scientific consensus suggests that addictions arise from a combination of a genetic predisposition and repeated exposure to a specific substrate.3 

 

In the case of digital addiction, the exposure is ubiquitous, unavoidable, and in some cases the use of digital devices is mandated. Some preschools use iPads in classrooms; many schools require children to use computers for their work; most employers not only rely on internet use during the day but also expect employees to have ready access to digital media outside of work hours. In a recent report of a nationally representative study of sedentary behavior, the estimated prevalence of computer use outside of school or work for more than 1 hour per day or more among children aged 5 through 11 years increased from 43% to 56% from 2001 to 2016, and among adolescents aged 12 through 19 years increased from 53% to 57% from 2003 to 2016.4

 

For those trying to study the effects of media on child development, this poses vexing challenges. Avoiding digital media is impractical and undesirable. It stands to reason that there is appropriate and beneficial usage, but what might constitute too much of a good thing?


The relationship between biological exposures and outcomes can follow one of many functional forms. Most straightforward is a monotonically linear relationship in which outcomes are directly and proportionately related to exposure, such as with a high-fat diet and weight gain.5 Often, there is a dose-response relationship in which no discernable effect is observed until some critical threshold is crossed, after which there is a clear relationship over a dosage range and when no additional benefits are derived and at even higher doses harm may result. This is usually the case for pharmaceuticals.

Less common, and perhaps most challenging to discern, is the “inverted U” relationship in which both low and high exposure are associated with less desirable outcomes, but for some middle level, outcomes are improved. Such is the relationship between alcohol consumption and health in which those who consume no or very little alcohol appear to have poorer health outcomes than those who consume 7 to 14 units of alcohol per week.6 The nature of this relationship took many years to establish in part because of the odd functional form (U shape). Such is likely the relationship between media exposure and health. A recent meta-analysis7 found that adolescents with heavy and no social media usage have diminished mental health compared with those with moderate usage. Specifically, compared with nonusers, children with 1 hour per day of media use had a 12% reduced risk of depression. With 3 hours they had a 19% increased risk, and at 5 hours it was increased by 80%.7 But the relationship is in many ways infinitely more complex than the one between alcohol and health.

Except for the potentially unique effects of some polyphenols found in red wine, alcohol researchers can distill their exposure of interest—alcohol—into discrete units so that drinkers can easily be categorized without regard to their libation of choice. An analogous approach is being used in most media studies in which usage is defined solely in terms of time spent on various devices (eg, smartphones, computers) or in certain activities (eg, social media or games). Media usage as a predictor variable belies the reality that content drives any observed effects.

It is not as simple as time spent on a device or activity but rather how that time is spent that matters. Therein lies the challenge. Disentangling the complicated effects of media usage to establish guidelines that can inform public policy and industry regulations requires a fine level of granularity. Even drawing distinctions between social media vs passive viewing or gaming is inadequate. For example, 1 hour of social media usage could be spent in an online support group. For an LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) teen, such a community can be an invaluable and otherwise unavailable supportive resource, but for a teen with an eating disorder that social media exposure may normalize and even encourage the behavior.

 

Traditionally, media researchers have relied on retrospective self-report or contemporaneous diaries to assess exposure. These tools are antiquated and do not capture the many and varied uses of media today particularly given the frequency of multitasking. How can parents of a middle schooler possibly reliably recount their child’s use of recreational screen time given that many children and adolescents carry a device in their pocket at all times and use it to communicate, play games, and do homework? How could teenagers estimate their screen time given the hundreds of times they check their phone during the day even for a few seconds, never mind informing scientists of what precisely they looked at? Coupled with individual characteristics, these data are crucial to further understanding of the true relationship between nature and substrate that define healthy media usage.

 

While researchers have struggled to find methods to reliably collect these data, industry has been capturing them, using them, and even monetizing them. Facebook has information on what children see, how long they look at it, and even how they feel about it. Apple indicates it does not have data on where children spend their time on its devices (Fred Sainz, director of corporate communications, Apple, email communication, May 21, 2019). Although its “screen time app” collects data on how children spend their time on the device and shares those data with parents, it does not currently facilitate exporting or sharing data with researchers. In fact, Apple has taken the additional step of blocking the third-party screen-time trackers many researchers use since those trackers compete with theirs.8

 

As media conglomerates face increasing scrutiny by politicians and regulators for their harvesting of data and their dissemination of misinformation, they should consider collaborating with impartial scientists so that they can begin to understand how to mediate media in the best interest of children. If these companies are willing to share data with advertisers, they also should be willing to share them with academic scientists. Without their cooperation, child advocates may never get the answers they need to understand digital media use by children and develop effective measures to prevent and counteract “digital addiction” in children."

 
For original post, please visit:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2734210

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

The Terrifying Potential of the 5G Network // The New Yorker

The Terrifying Potential of the 5G Network // The New Yorker | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

'The future of wireless technology holds the promise of total connectivity. But it will also be especially susceptible to cyberattacks and surveillance. '

 

By Sue Alpern

"In January, 2018, Robert Spalding, the senior director for strategic planning at the National Security Council, was in his office at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, across the street from the White House, when he saw a breaking-news alert on the Axios Web site. “Scoop,” the headline read, “Trump Team Considers Nationalizing 5G Network.” At the time, Spalding, a brigadier general in the Air Force who previously served as a defense attaché in Beijing, had been in the military for nearly three decades. At the N.S.C., he was studying ways to insure that the next generation of Internet connectivity, what is commonly referred to as 5G, can be made secure from cyberattacks. “I wasn’t looking at this from a policy perspective,” he said. “It was about the physics, about what was possible.” To Spalding’s surprise, the Axios story was based on a leaked early draft of a report he’d been working on for the better part of a year.

 

Two words explain the difference between our current wireless networks and 5G: speed and latency. 5G—if you believe the hype—is expected to be up to a hundred times faster. (A two-hour movie could be downloaded in less than four seconds.) That speed will reduce, and possibly eliminate, the delay—the latency—between instructing a computer to perform a command and its execution. This, again, if you believe the hype, will lead to a whole new Internet of Things, where everything from toasters to dog collars to dialysis pumps to running shoes will be connected.

 

Remote robotic surgery will be routine, the military will develop hypersonic weapons, and autonomous vehicles will cruise safely along smart highways. The claims are extravagant, and the stakes are high. One estimate projects that 5G will pump twelve trillion dollars into the global economy by 2035, and add twenty-two million new jobs in the United States alone. This 5G world, we are told, will usher in a fourth industrial revolution.

 

A totally connected world will also be especially susceptible to cyberattacks. Even before the introduction of 5G networks, hackers have breached the control center of a municipal dam system, stopped an Internet-connected car as it travelled down an interstate, and sabotaged home appliances. Ransomware, malware, crypto-jacking, identity theft, and data breaches have become so common that more Americans are afraid of cybercrime than they are of becoming a victim of violent crime. Adding more devices to the online universe is destined to create more opportunities for disruption. “5G is not just for refrigerators,” Spalding said. “It’s farm implements, it’s airplanes, it’s all kinds of different things that can actually kill people or that allow someone to reach into the network and direct those things to do what they want them to do. It’s a completely different threat that we’ve never experienced before.”...

 

For full post, see:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/the-terrifying-potential-of-the-5g-network

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D, UC Berkeley Center for Family and Community Health Keynote on Cell Phones, Cell Towers, and Wireless Safety // UC Berkeley School of Public Health

"On February 27, 2019, Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., delivered the keynote presentation, "Cell Phones, Cell Towers and Wireless Safety" for the "Balancing Technology" series offered by University Health Services (UHS) at the University of California, Berkeley. The event was co-sponsored by the UC Berkeley School of Public Health.
 
Dr. Moskowitz, director of the UC Berkeley Center for Family and Community Health, has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views by visitors from over 200 countries since 2013.
 
The presentation was filmed by UHS and by CNBC. The video, slides, and safety tips can be viewed at the following links:

View Video:  http://bit.ly/UCBvideo2-27-19 (72 minute YouTube video)
View Slides: http://bit.ly/UCB2-27-19jmm (Supplemental slides can be found at end of presentation.)


Safety Tips
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety:           http://bit.ly/EMRsafetytips3
California Department of Public Health:  http://bit.ly/CDPHguidance"
No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Toddlers on Touchscreens: Immediate effects of gaming and physical activity on cognitive flexibility of 2.5-year-olds in the US // Antrilli & Wang, 2018, Journal of Children and Media, Vol. 12, No. 4

Toddlers on Touchscreens: Immediate effects of gaming and physical activity on cognitive flexibility of 2.5-year-olds in the US // Antrilli & Wang, 2018, Journal of Children and Media, Vol. 12, No. 4 | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

Abstract
Interactive technologies have become a common play medium for young children; it is not unusual for toddlers to play games on a touchscreen device in lieu of games in the yard. Here, we compared the immediate effects of physical and touchscreen play on 2.5-year-olds’ cognitive flexibility, a key aspect of executive function. For nine minutes, toddlers engaged in touchscreen play or physical play; a third group drew and colored (control group). Next, a sorting task measured cognitive flexibility. The physical-play group outperformed the other two groups. Compared to the control group, toddlers’ cognitive flexibility benefited from physical play, whereas touchscreen play yielded no significant effect. Interestingly, toddlers who played the touchscreen game in a socially interactive way outperformed those who treated gaming as solitary play. Together, the results bear practical implications on whether and how to introduce young children to interactive technologies for play."

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17482798.2018.1486332 

No comment yet.
Rescooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD from Educational Psychology & Technology
Scoop.it!

Educator Toolkit for Teacher and Student Privacy // Parent Coalition for Student Privacy 

Educator Toolkit for Teacher and Student Privacy // Parent Coalition for Student Privacy  | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

To download, click on title above or here: 

https://www.studentprivacymatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/PCSP_BATS-Educator-Toolkit.pdf 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Stop and Frisk Online: Theorizing Everyday Racism in Digital Policing in the Use of Social Media for Identification of Criminal Conduct and Associations

Stop and Frisk Online: Theorizing Everyday Racism in Digital Policing in the Use of Social Media for Identification of Criminal Conduct and Associations | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it

"Abstract
Police are increasingly monitoring social media to build evidence for criminal indictments. In 2014, 103 alleged gang members residing in public housing in Harlem, New York, were arrested in what has been called “the largest gang bust in history.” The arrests came after the New York Police Department (NYPD) spent 4 years monitoring the social media communication of these suspected gang members. In this article, we explore the implications of using social media for the identification of criminal activity. We describe everyday racism in digital policing as a burgeoning conceptual framework for understanding racialized social media surveillance by law enforcement. We discuss implications for law enforcement agencies utilizing social media data for intelligence and evidence in criminal cases."

 

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2056305117733344 

 

No comment yet.
Scooped by Roxana Marachi, PhD
Scoop.it!

Expert Forum on Children's Exposure to Wireless Radiation in Schools 

Expert Forum on Wireless Radiation in Schools
Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
March 25, 2019
 
Presenters:
Cece Doucette, MTPW, Wireless Education
David O. Carpenter, MD, School of Public Health, University at Albany
Martha Herbert, MD, PhD, Harvard Medical School; Massachusetts General Hospital
Ronald Melnick, PhD; retired senior toxicologist, National Toxicology Program
Frank Clegg, former head of Microsoft Canada; Citizens for Safe Technology
Theodora Scarato, MSW, Environmental Health Trust
No comment yet.