Cited by 617Child Development and Digital TechnologyChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Technoference: Parent distraction with technology and associations with child behavior problems

Open access
McDaniel, Brandon T, Radesky, Jenny S·2018·Child Development

Abstract

Heavy parent digital technology use has been associated with suboptimal parent–child interactions, but no studies examine associations with child behavior. This study investigates whether parental problematic technology use is associated with technology-based interruptions in parent–child interactions, termed “technoference,” and whether technoference is associated with child behavior problems. Parent reports from 170 U.S. families (child Mage = 3.04 years) and actor–partner interdependence modeling showed that maternal and paternal problematic digital technology use predicted greater technoference in mother–child and father–child interactions; then, maternal technoference predicted both mothers’ and fathers’ reports of child externalizing and internalizing behaviors. Results suggest that technological interruptions are associated with child problem behaviors, but directionality and transactional processes should be examined in future longitudinal studies. The title for this special section is Contemporary Mobile Technology and Child and Adolescent Development, edited by Zheng Yan and Lennart Hardell

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/cdev.12822

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Children's caregivers are the relational cornerstone in which children explore, learn, and play.

    “Children’s caregivers (eg, parents) are the relational cornerstone in which children explore, learn, and play.28-31”

    From Digital Ecosystems, Children, and Adolescents: Technical Report (2026) · cites this paper as [28]

    The paper discusses parent–child play, interaction, and caregivers’ responsiveness to children (section labeled Abstract; page unavailable). That supports the importance of caregiver relationships to play, but our copy does not state that caregivers are the relational foundation for children’s exploration and learning. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Teen externalizing behaviors increase with caregiver digital media use.

    “Teen externalizing behaviors increase with caregiver digital media use.28”

    From Digital Ecosystems, Children, and Adolescents: Technical Report (2026) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Results report that greater mobile-technoference in mother–child interactions was associated with greater child externalizing behavior. But the Method (Participants & Procedure; page unavailable) gives an index-child age range of 1 to 5.5 years, not teens. The Discussion also cautions that this cross-sectional analysis cannot establish whether caregiver technology use causes behavior to increase. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. Katz JE 2002 Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McDaniel, B. T., & Radesky, J. S.
Affiliations
  • Illinois State University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
McDaniel, Brandon T
Venue
Child Development
Published
2018-01-01
Volume
89
Issue
1
Pages
100-109
ISSN
  • 0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8624
OpenAlex
W2613481590
Cited by
617
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 117 · 2025: 102 · 2024: 81 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 92 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
137.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Child Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA017629)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (F31HD084118)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
technoference, parent-child interaction, child behavior problems, externalizing problems, internalizing problems, early childhood
MeSH terms
Problem Behavior, Smartphone, Adult, Child Behavior Disorders, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Middle Aged, Parent-Child Relations, United States, Young Adult

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