The Case For Unlimited Tablet Time For Toddlers
While I don't like children watching television, these limits are determined by their knee-jerk reactions (kids these day and their screens!) Much more on what is important for children's development over anything else.
Research on screen time focuses mainly on children who watch TV as compared to those who do not. As Emily Oster explains at Fivethirtyeight, the effects of TV viewing are often negligible when you take into account differences in demographics like income and race, education level and gender.
Television probably isn't inherently bad for children, and other tablet activities , like video games, should not be grouped together with watching TV in any way. I surveyed the evidence on this when I wrote about tablet time for Lifehacker. These are the main differences:
Television is passive: you are watching the things happen. The stuff that happens doesn't matter to you. Your grandma might be watching television but not your grandma.
One of the pediatricians from the AAP wrote in JAMA Pediatrics (be aware that the doctor was speaking on behalf of himself and not the AAP). He said that iPad play is more like playing with blocks or reading a book with a caregiver rather than watching TV passively.
Nonprofit Zero to Three's evidence-based guidelines emphasize the importance of finding suitable content, not placing time limits. However, their evidence for the importance "appropriate content" is weak at times.
It might be easier to say that kids should play educational video games with their Dad rather than throwing birds at asteroids. I'm not aware of anything about this. My toddler is fine with his numbers and letters and has figured them out through some combination of real life and perhaps, TV. However, he is more aware of orbital mechanics from Angry Birds Space than I ever did from high school physics class.
(When I wrote about Angry Birds in my Lifehacker piece, I got commenters insisting that I was wrong and that my toddler shouldn't be doing anything more than swiping aimlessly. The good thing is that if you think a one year old can play Angry Birds, you haven’t spent much time with children of one year olds recently.
My children each have tablets (a Nook HD+, bought on a very good sale, and modified to run cyanogenmod's version of Android) and they determine their own age-appropriate use for it. The five-year-old uses it to build elaborate things in Minecraft (a kind of lego-block world) and to research whatever is on his mind ("OK Google, show me pictures of narwhal bones.") The two-year-old explores the physics of Angry Birds and Monument Valley. Both children enjoy problem-solving games like Cut the Rope or Bad Piggies that can go on for hours. To be fair, they also stream many videos on Youtube.
Imagine for an instant that you wanted your child to spend hours on a tablet. What problems can you observe? They would get bored. They'd discover new and unique things to do with it than whatever you proposed. If they could find something better they'd keep it for days. Guess what? This is exactly what happens when you allow unlimited screen-time and the novelty wears off.
I don't think a forbidden fruit policy is the best. Just another wordpress site If my kids had an hour of screen time per day, I guarantee they'd use it to watch cartoons. Sometimes they send me texts to their parents or grandparents. Sometimes they gather with me to play an adventure game. Or , the older child will teach their younger brother how to set up and use a new gadget.
Today, Google and touchscreens and online communication are part of the background of everyday life. My kids know how to get rid of ads on videos and how to navigate a website even if they aren't able to read the content. They are able to find out the information available on a mobile phone and will ask Daddy for help or Google or enter something into the GPS. The idea of keeping kids away from screens is as absurd as if parents from the past kept their kids away from the radio, or the phone or even pencils and paper.
Clare Smith, a researcher in the field of language development, and who has written extensively about screen time, was contacted by me to discuss my thoughts for the Lifehacker piece. Here's what she said:
We now live in a world where technology provides opportunities for extended social involvement, learning, work and leisure. In fact, it is becoming the norm, and our children will be expected to be proficient in this field. It is just another form of media that can and should be utilized however one decides to use it. It's the same as choosing toys and books when it comes to selecting apps and devices. Each choice must be evaluated on its merits. My children are taking to gaming and social networking, and we are doing to help them understand the associated risks and advantages. As a parent who diligent, they teach their children about safety on the road and stranger danger, healthy eating habits, and disciplined learning, it may also extend to technology and the internet.
Screen time isn't something that children should be shielded from. It's a part of our lives. Let's not pretend it's a tragedy to give an iPad to an infant.
