Cited by 375Child Development and Digital TechnologyImpact of Technology on AdolescentsMedia and Digital Communication

Media use, face-to-face communication, media multitasking, and social well-being among 8-to 12-year-old girls

Pea, Roy, Nass, Clifford, Meheula, Lyn, Rance, Marcus, Kumar, Aman, Bamford, Holden, Nass, Matthew, Simha, Aneesh +3 more·2012·Developmental Psychology

Abstract

An online survey of 3,461 North American girls ages 8-12 conducted in the summer of 2010 through Discovery Girls magazine examined the relationships between social well-being and young girls' media use--including video, video games, music listening, reading/homework, e-mailing/posting on social media sites, texting/instant messaging, and talking on phones/video chatting--and face-to-face communication. This study introduced both a more granular measure of media multitasking and a new comparative measure of media use versus time spent in face-to-face communication. Regression analyses indicated that negative social well-being was positively associated with levels of uses of media that are centrally about interpersonal interaction (e.g., phone, online communication) as well as uses of media that are not (e.g., video, music, and reading). Video use was particularly strongly associated with negative social well-being indicators. Media multitasking was also associated with negative social indicators. Conversely, face-to-face communication was strongly associated with positive social well-being. Cell phone ownership and having a television or computer in one's room had little direct association with children's socioemotional well-being. We hypothesize possible causes for these relationships, call for research designs to address causality, and outline possible implications of such findings for the social well-being of younger adolescents.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0027030

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

2 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pea, R., Nass, C., Meheula, L., Rance, M., Kumar, A., Bamford, H., Nass, M., Simha, A., Stillerman, B., Yang, S., & Zhou, M.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Venue
Developmental Psychology
Published
2012
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
327-336
ISSN
  • 0012-1649 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0599
OpenAlex
W2118360093
Cited by
375
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 5
FWCI
136.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Developmental Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (NSF-0835854, NSF-0841556)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
Keywords
media use, face-to-face communication, media multitasking, social well-being, social and emotional wellbeing, young girls, children, video use, video games, instant messaging, mobile phone ownership, social media, homework, reading, interpersonal communication
MeSH terms
Child, Child Behavior, Communication, Emotions, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Predictive Value of Tests, Regression Analysis, Sex Factors, Sleep, Video Recording, Electronic Mail, Social Media

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