Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 453

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Abstract

Anderson, Daniel R, Huston, Aletha C, Schmitt, Kelly L, Linebarger, Deborah L, Wright, John C·2003·Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development

Abstract

In this Monograph, we report the follow-up of 570 adolescents who had been studied as preschoolers in one of two separate investigations of television use. The primary goal of the study was to determine the long-term relations between preschool television viewing and adolescent achievement, behavior, and attitudes. Using a telephone interview and high school transcripts, we assessed adolescent media use; grades in English, science, and math; leisure reading; creativity; aggression; participation in extracurricular activities; use of alcohol and cigarettes; and self-image. In each domain, we tested theories emphasizing the causal role of television content (e.g., social learning, information processing) as contrasted with those theories positing effects of television as a medium, irrespective of content (e.g., time displacement, pacing, interference with language). The results provided much stronger support for content-based hypotheses than for theories emphasizing television as a medium; moreover, the patterns differed for boys and girls. Viewing educational programs as preschoolers was associated with higher grades, reading more books, placing more value on achievement, greater creativity, and less aggression. These associations were more consistent for boys than for girls. By contrast, the girls who were more frequent preschool viewers of violent programs had lower grades than those who were infrequent viewers. These associations held true after taking into account family background, other categories of preschool viewing, and adolescent media use. One hypothesis accounting for the sex differences is that early experiences, such as television viewing, have greater effects when they counteract normative developmental trends and predominant sex-typed socialization influences than when they reinforce them. Adolescents in the study used both television and print media to support ongoing interests. Television content (e.g., entertainment, sports, or world events) predicted extracurricular activities, role models, and body image. The only evidence for possible effects of television as a medium was the positive relation of total viewing to obesity for girls. The medium of television is not homogeneous or monolithic, and content viewed is more important than raw amount. The medium is not the message: The message is.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/1540-5834.00120

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 453

Metadata

Authors
Anderson, D. R., Huston, A. C., Schmitt, K. L., Linebarger, D. L., & Wright, J. C.
Venue
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development
Published
2001-02
Volume
66
Issue
1
Pages
vii-viii
ISSN
  • 0037-976X (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5834
OpenAlex
W1912875212
Cited by
453
References
7
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Abstract. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1540-5834.00120
The paper
Anderson, D. R., Huston, A. C., Schmitt, K. L., Linebarger, D. L., & Wright, J. C. (2003). Abstract. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5834.00120

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.