Cited by 142Child Development and Digital TechnologyImpact of Technology on AdolescentsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

How Much Is Too Much? Examining the Relationship Between Digital Screen Engagement and Psychosocial Functioning in a Confirmatory Cohort Study

Open access
Przybylski, Andrew K., Orben, Amy, Weinstein, Netta·2020·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have offered mixed results regarding the link between digital screen engagement and the psychosocial functioning of young people. In this study, we aimed to determine the magnitude of this relation, to inform the discussion regarding whether amount of digital screen time has a subjectively significant impact on the psychosocial functioning of children and adolescents. METHOD: We analyzed data from primary caregivers participating in the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH), an annual nationally representative survey fielded by the US Census Bureau between June 2016 and February 2017. NSCH uses an address-based sampling frame and both Web- and paper-based data collection instruments to measure psychosocial functioning and digital engagement, including a modified version of the Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire and caregiver estimates of daily television- and device-based engagement, respectively. RESULTS: The expected parabolic inverted-U-shaped relationship linking digital screen engagement to psychosocial functioning was found. These results replicated past findings suggesting that moderate levels of screen time (1-2 hours a day) were associated with slightly higher levels of psychosocial functioning compared to lower or higher levels of engagement. Furthermore, it indicated that children and adolescents would require 4 hours 40 minutes of television-based engagement and 5 hours 8 minutes of daily device-based engagement before caregivers would be able to notice subjectively significant variations in psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSION: The possible influence of digital screen engagement is likely smaller and more nuanced than we might expect. These findings do not rule out the possibility that parents might only notice very high levels of screen time when their child manifests pronounced psychosocial difficulties. Future work should be guided by transparent and confirmatory programs of research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jaac.2019.06.017

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • This aligns to the 'digital Goldilocks hypothesis' and other evidence of a curvilinear relationship between SMU and psychosocial adjustment, whereby moderate SMU is beneficial to well-being (compared to no use at all) but excessive use is associated with negative outcomes.

    “This aligns to the 'digital Goldilocks hypothesis' [24] and other evidence of a curvilinear relationship between SMU and psychosocial adjustment [23], whereby moderate SMU is beneficial to well-being (compared to no use at all) but excessive use is associated with negative outcomes.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Internet use and attitudes. Metrics Bull. 2017;2017:22.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Przybylski, A. K., Orben, A., & Weinstein, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Przybylski, Andrew K.
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
59
Issue
9
Pages
1080-1088
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2964864378
Cited by
142
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 14 · 2014: 1
FWCI
37.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
screen time, psychosocial functioning, children and adolescents, television viewing, inverted U-shaped relationship, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, National Survey of Children's Health
MeSH terms
Child Health, Psychosocial Functioning, Adolescent, Child, Humans, Parents, Television, Cohort Studies

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