The Case For Unlimited Tablet Time For Toddlers
While I don't like children sitting in front of the TV, these limits are based on their knee-jerk reactions (kids today and their screens!) rather than anything that's meaningful to kids' development.
Research on screen time focuses mostly on children who watch TV in comparison to those who don't. As Emily Oster explains at Fivethirtyeight the effects of TV watching are usually negligible when you look at demographic differences such as income education, race and gender.
Television may not be a problem for kids, and other tablet activities like video games shouldn't be lumped in with watching TV in any way. I surveyed the research on this when I wrote about tablet time for Lifehacker. To summarize the key differences:
Television is passive. Things happens, and you get to watch. The stuff that happens isn't customized to you as well: your grandma's may be on TV but it's not your grandma.
One of the pediatricians who wrote the AAP's guidelines wrote in JAMA Pediatrics (careful to note that the author was speaking for himself, not the AAP) that playing with an iPad is much more similar to playing with blocks or reading the book with a parent as opposed to watching TV in a passive manner. Mega Blog
The evidence-based guidelines stress the importance of finding suitable content, not placing time limits. However, their evidence for the importance of "appropriate content" is not always clear. Mega Blog
Maybe it's better to say that kids should be playing educational video games with their dads instead of flinging birds at asteroids repeatedly again. However, I'm not sure about that. My toddler has no problem with his numbers and letters after having discovered them through a combination of real life and, okay, maybe TV. But he knows more about orbital mechanics from Angry Birds Space than I ever did in high school physics class.
(When I mentioned Angry Birds in my Lifehacker piece, I got commenters insisting that I was wrong and that my toddler could not be doing anything more than swiping aimlessly. Here's news: if you don't think a one-year-old can master levels on Angry Birds, then you haven't had much time with one-year-olds lately.)
My kids each have an iPad (a Nook HD+, bought on an extremely good deal, and rooted to run cyanogenmod's version of Android), and they determine their own age-appropriate use for it. The five-year-old uses it to create elaborate creations in Minecraft (a kind of Lego-like world) and also to study whatever is on his mind ("OK Google, show me images of narwhal skeletons.") The two-year-old explores the physics behind Angry Birds. Both children enjoy problem-solving games such as Cut the Rope or Bad Piggies which can go on for hours. And, to be fair, they also watch a lot of Youtube.
Imagine, for the moment, you wanted to have a child spend hours on a tablet. What are the problems you can anticipate? They'd be bored. They'd find other uses for it than what you suggested. They'd keep it in the bottom of their toybox for days if some newer more interesting toy appeared in their lives. Guess what? This is exactly what happens when you give your users unlimited screen time and the novelty fades away.
I don't think a ban on forbidden fruit is the best option. If my kids only got an hour of screen time each day, I can assure you they would only use it to watch cartoons. Sometimes, they send me messages to their grandparents or dads. Sometimes they gather with me to play an adventure game. Or the older boy will show their younger brother how to install and use a brand new device.
Today, Google and touchscreens and online communication are a part of the background of everyday life. My children know how to avoid advertisements on videos and how navigate websites even if they don't understand the words. They can find out the information accessible on a smartphone and will ask Daddy for help or Google or type something into the GPS. Keeping kids away from screens is as absurd as if parents in the past kept their children away from the radio or the telephone or even pencils and paper.
For the Lifehacker piece I asked Clare Smith, a language research scientist who has written about screen time, whether she is in agreement with my views on this. Here's her answer:
We now live in a world in which this technology opens up opportunities for extended social involvement as well as learning, work and leisure. It is becoming the norm and our children will be expected be proficient in this field. It's just another media format that can be utilized in any way desired. Making the decision to use apps and devices is the same as selecting books or toys and each one must be based according to its own merits. My children are avid gamers and gaming, and we are trying to help them navigate the potential risks and rewards. Just as a conscientious parent teaches their child road safety, stranger danger, eating a balanced, healthy diet, and an organized approach to learning, this may extend to learning about modern technology and the world of online.
Screen time isn't something we should be concerned about for children; it's an everyday thing. Let's stop pretending it's some kind of tragedy to hand the toddler an iPad.
