Cited by 29Impact of Technology on AdolescentsChild Development and Digital TechnologyPhysical Activity and Health

Exploring contemporary screen time in Australian adolescents: A qualitative study

Open access
Thomas, George, Bennie, Jason A., De Cocker, Katrien, Biddle, Stuart J.H.·2021·Health Promotion Journal of Australia

Abstract

Issue addressed: Screen time, a highly prevalent behaviour, can be detrimental to adolescent health. To better understand this health‐related behaviour, this study explores the nature of adolescents’ contemporary screen engagement, adding to the currently limited body of qualitative research in this area. Methods: Sixteen adolescents (9 girls and 7 boys) aged 13‐17 years from a secondary school in Queensland, Australia participated in semi‐structured one‐on‐one interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim, anonymised and thematically analysed using an inductive approach. Results: Smartphone use was ubiquitous, occurring mostly at home, after school, and typically used for social, entertainment and functional activities. Binge‐watching and multi‐screening emerged as common sedentary patterns of contemporary screen engagement, often performed solitary. Screen time appeared to be an important aspect of adolescents’ social lives, while there were also some psychological, physical and behavioural concerns. Family and friends were thought to influence adolescents’ screen time either directly (co‐participation) or indirectly (modelling), while social smartphone notifications were said to prompt habitual, frequent and prolonged screen engagement. Conclusion: This study provided several new insights into the nature, functions, patterns, and benefits and concerns of adolescents’ contemporary screen engagement. On the whole, adolescents engaged in a wide variety of screen‐viewing practices, including newer digital media, mostly as a function to connect with friends and family. So what?: It might be desirable for screen time reduction interventions and policies to take into account the underlying social and psychological factors, and habitual nature of contemporary screen engagement among adolescents.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hpja.440

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thomas, G., Bennie, J. A., De Cocker, K., & Biddle, S. J. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern Queensland (AU)
  • Physically Active Lifestyles Research Group (USQ‐PALs) Centre for Health Research University of Southern Queensland Springfield Central Qld Australia
Corresponding author
Thomas, George
Venue
Health Promotion Journal of Australia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-11-27
Volume
32
Issue
S2
Pages
238-247
ISSN
  • 1036-1073 (ISSN-L)
  • 2201-1617
OpenAlex
W3105035412
Cited by
29
References
46
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2
FWCI
6.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Promotion Journal of Australia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland) (acceptedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Collections
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
screen time, adolescents, smartphone use, binge-watching, sedentary behavior, social media, family influence, peer influence, social connectedness, adolescent health
MeSH terms
Screen Time, Adolescent, Australia, Female, Humans, Male, Health Behavior, Internet, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review