A new study, along with an incredible editorial, was published today in Pediatrics about the effects of watching fast-paced cartoons on the attention and working memory of 4 year-olds. It’s basically a Spongebob versus Crayola versus Caillou show-down. At least it feels that way in the media summaries today. And thus, it’s bound to hit the front pages of every parent’s windshield. First and foremost, it’s a genius study for getting the word out and attracting media attention–media love to talk about media. Especially when it comes to the effects on children; all forms of media are looking for a viable option for longevity. There is just so much competition now.
Also, the study is interesting. Plain and simple, I couldn’t wait to read it. We watch Caillou around here and my husband and I like to dissect and ridicule it (in private)–everything from the outfits to the color scheme to the lessons. As a parent, it’s kind of painful to watch–its just so utterly wholesome and slow. On the flip side because of this goodness in the the content and pace, we feel less “guilty” letting the boys watch it. The result has been a win-win: the boys looooooove it–I mean, love it–and we pat ourselves on the back for the choice. Good media is far better than bad media, we think. Fortunately, the data backs up our instinct. And this helps with our mommy-daddy-guilt. We’re a really low media viewing house, but not the lowest. We have friends whose children don’t see a screen for months at a time.
The findings are not at all surprising. If you sat down a group of parents in a room and asked which they thought was better for their child’s memory, attention, and performance on tasks: A) coloring B) watching Caillou or C) watching Spongebob, I suspect they would all come up with the results in the study. However, the beauty of the research is that it puts us one step closer in understanding why fast-paced shows may render our children less attentive, less focused, and impatient in the real world.
The study provides data, confirms instinct, and fuels efforts for me at home and in clinic. It serves up ammo for my, “Think about WHAT your kids are watching in addition to how much they are watching” advice for parents. I think you’ll find the study design fascinating, too. The details matter here. Because the results aren’t surprising (watching fast-paced cartoons hindered attention, focus, and memory), it’s more helpful to look at the methods and data and see what it means for you and your family individually.
The Study:
- Researches in Virginia took a group of 60, 4 year-olds and randomly assigned them to 1 of 3 groups. Children were then put in a room alone and asked to draw with crayons, watch Caillou (a PBS show), or watch Spongebob (a Nickelodeon show) for 9 minutes on a computer. <—–For fun, click on the two separate links I just provided. The user-experience for Calliou versus Spongebob online couldn’t be more different.
- Immediately after the 9 minute intervention, children completed a battery of tests that required focus, concentration, patience, a working memory, and manipulation. Researchers were hoping to capture a child’s “executive function.” Essentially, children were asked to rearrange blocks with certain rules, they were asked to follow complicated commands like “When I say touch your head, I want you to touch you toes, but when I say touch your toes, I want you to touch your head,” and the marshmallow test, a delay-of-gratification task. The marshmallow test is the most intoxicating to think about. Basically, the children were left in a room with a bowl of marshmallows or Goldfish crackers to decide which they liked. Then on one plate, 10 marshmallows, on the other plate are only 2. Children are told that if they wait until the experimenter returns, they got to eat all 10. If they rang a bell early, the experimenter will come back into the room right away but they will only get to eat the plate with 2. In the past, the marshmallow test has been used to predict school performance and has even been found to predict performance on the SAT some 18 years later. Watch an example of the marshmallow test. It’s a delightful test to observe.
The Results:
- Groups didn’t differ in attention skills/problems at outset based on parent reports prior to the study. Because kids were randomly assigned to each group, the groups were thought to be very alike.
- Children who watched the fast-paced TV did significantly worse on the attention and memory testing. There was no difference in performance between the educational TV (Caillou) group versus the drawing group.
- Delay of gratification (the marshmallow test) was analyzed separately and measured in the number of seconds waited before eating the marshmallow. The children who watched Spongebob did significantly worse than both the drawing and Caillou-watching group. Again the Caillou group performed equally to the drawing group.
- Researches don’t know exactly why the Spongebob watchers did so poorly. They theorize it has to do with rapid-fire motion, the only seconds-long scenes, and the fact that kids don’t have to really engage in the content. Although somewhat controversial, there have been many studies finding that fast-paced media at a young age may lead to inattention later in life. So working off of that, researchers theorize that Spongebob is super-fast moving and unlike any cogent interaction or experience in the real world. In the editorial, Dr Christakis says, “The ‘overstimulation hypothesis’ is based on the theory that the surreal pacing and sequencing of some shows might tax the brain or parts of it, leading to short-tern (or long-term) deficits….[but] it remains controversial”
The limitations?
- It’s a very small study. Only 60 children participated. Further, the kids were all white and from upper-middle and middle class families. Although this may project well on decisions in my home, it may not for my friends with different backgrounds or many of my patients. Further, the group of kids in the study had parents who had time to do this–which already puts them in a curious group!
- The children watched for only 9 minutes of the show. We don’t know what happens to their working memory, concentration level, and attention if they watch the whole 30-minute show or hours of similar shows. Further, the testing was done immediately after watching and so we don’t know what happens to their brain as time unfolds. Is the effect transient?
- Nickelodeon states that Spongebob isn’t designed for 4 year-olds even though we know young children (even younger than 4) tend to love it! Further research on older children may help us understand if the disruption in executive function happens in a critical time of development (under at 6, for example) or if fast-paced cartoon viewing is detrimental to school performance, memory and attention all the way through childhood.
Mama Doc’s To Do: Cartoons On The Brain
This really isn’t about one show over another. This isn’t about trashing one cartoon network, either. It’s about harnessing information that helps us make media-savvy decisions for our children and helps us raise media-savvy adults who know how to thrive on and offline. We weren’t reared on Spongebob and iPads, smartphones and Nintendo DS, or DVDs and the Wii. Yes, we had television but we consumed about 1/2 the hours children today consume. So our job today is to guide our children into a place of balance with media. Media (in its beauty and its beast) is here to stay. In many regards, children will need to function at a fast-paced, digital-literate pace to be successful as they grow up and transition to adults. So what we model, what we chose to expose our children to, and how much we let them sit in front of screens is relevant. Learning to find balance and compartmentalize our media is key. This isn’t a keep-away from technology blog post.
But,
We want our children to have intimate, authentic, personal friendships. We want them to know how to learn online but also offline, in the silences of the woods and a silent well-run classroom. We want them to look their friends and partners in the eyes. We want them to experience the beautiful part of an uninterrupted conversation.
My advice?
- If it were my child, I’d observe how your children behave, listen, function, and learn after watching television.
- With the data from this study, I wouldn’t let them watch fast-paced cartoons just before school or just before sitting down to dinner with your family or just before bed.
- I’d rip out excess TVs in your home. I’d never put one in a child’s bedroom. I’d limit screen time to less than 2 hours every day.
- I’d choose naturally paced shows for preschoolers like Sesame Street or a favorite in our home– Driver Dan.
You know all this already. If your kids have watched 230 hours of Spongebob? They’ll be fine. Your child won’t grow up to be an unemployed, inattentive, inconsiderate human by watching one particular cartoon. However, I believe they may be a more balanced, a more focused, and a better student and friend if you limit their exposure to this fast-paced media from here forward.
What’s your thought? You like Spongebob? Do you notice your children’s behavior change after cartoon time of any kind? You tell me.
John G says
Easy has gravitated towards Kipper, which is so slow and so sparse it drives me insane. Even the theme song is too slow for me… They call him….. kipper……kipper… the … dog….
I like spongebob, and Easy did too for like a month. then i think it had too much going on for him.
But that seems to have been a phase, he’s watching mostly Kipper, Bob the Builder, and Thomas the train. He’s also fascinated by Angelina ballerina. He is a master of netflix on the ipad, so he pretty much picks what he wants to watch from that himself. I’m really surprised how much he can figure out by tiny icons and thumbnails and touching the screen…
Melissa Arca, M.D. says
I love this very thoughtful post Dr.Swanson! I too was drawn to this study. My kids used to love Caillou and I’m still wishing we were in the Caillou phase. Admittedly, my son has gotten a taste for Spongebob and thinks it’s nothing short of hilarious! I was very averse to letting him watch this and honestly, didn’t think he’d be coming through our screen. Hard to deny that crazy cartoon makes my son laugh so hard that it’s endearing.
That being said, it’s pure brain candy and most definitely needs to be moderated. Just as anything not so nutritious for your body must be given in small doses as a treat.
I think the study is important albeit extremely limited. We should be monitoring not only how much our children watch but what they watch and as you said, this brings attention to that very important point.
BTW, I adore Curious George and luckily my kids do too! Now that’s the kind of kids programming we need more of 🙂
Barb says
I can’t stand spongebob. We notice much more positive results from most PBS shows. And thank you for not making this an anti media post
Katie says
We have never seen Sponge Bob here, but I realize the point is more the kind and pace of the show, rather than the show itself. And while Will primarily watches PBS, he also is in love with Chugginton, and that seems pretty fast-paced when I look at it (though it still has good learning content, but the scenes move very quickly). Our family sounds similar to yours in that we have less screen time than most families we know and definitely less than the two hours per day, but there is always room for improvement.
This spring, I did an interesting \N of 1\ study where I would pick random days to show Will absolutely NO television and wouldn’t tell Mike. He would get home from work, and within a half hour, he could guess (correctly, without fail) whether it had been a t.v. or no t.v. day. And to be clear, those days when he watched t.v. were still well under the two hour limit and the programming with PBS-like. It was very interesting to witness, in our own child, the effects of television on his moods – especially his patience level. So, this summer, we \banned\ t.v. except for Family Movie Night, which we do once a week, where we watch a movie together after dinner and before bath, stories, songs, etc., so there is a transition between the t.v. watching and bedtime. Even if it has no scientific foundation, I haven’t missed t.v. at all, and I don’t think he has, either. It gets more challenging, of course, in the fall and winter, as we are home and indoors more, but I still want most of our days to remain screen-free.
Clearly, there are many limits to our own study :), but when I can clearly see a difference in my own child, that is enough incentive for me to severely restrict how my screen time he gets. He is also just three, so we don’t have the other screen-temptations going yet, such as computers, hand-held games, etc.
Speaking of which. . . blog topic request. . . you said it here, our children need to learn how to live in a fast-paced world of media. When do you start teaching them how to use a computer and where do you start with preschoolers (if appropriate)? Should he have a LeapPad-type device which is a kind of gateway to computers? I know that there are many kid-friendly websites out there (PBS has one, for example), but honestly, we haven’t done anything with Will yet on the computer. We have many friends with kiddos that are computer-saavy (playing games, using the internet, even FB accounts!) at this tender age, and I wonder if we aren’t putting him behind the curve. This really hit home for me when we were touring a cutting edge preschool program and they were bragging about having iPads in their classrooms. So, what and when to do with computers, Mama Doc?
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
Well Katie, thanks for your N of 1 study results! And it’s a great blog post idea to talk about introducing computers. If only I had the answer! Will put it on my list and think about it. And will have to do a bunch of research first. We haven’t let F and O touch the computers to this point. But we’re getting to the point of enormous curiosity. And as we ready our 4 year old for Kindergarten, I suspect being slightly computer savvy will help. Thanks for the suggestion….
middleground says
Thanks for sharing this information, one of my challenges is having strong screen/media standards and having a child who’s friends rules are non-existent or at least way more permissive. This will help.
And I wanted to add a warning about Sesame Street – in the early 2000’s they changed the format – to speed it up and keep up with fast paced shows. It is no longer the Sesame Street that was watched by today’s parents when they were young. Last time I watched it with my daughter, it was very fast paced, scenes lasting only 2-4 seconds before the shot changed. We stopped watching it then, so I don’t know if they changed it back, but if not I would not include it in the category of slower paced shows.
For older kids and adults it is an interesting experiment to pick a show and watch it with a stop watch – timing the length between scene changes. It can be a great discussions starter on media, what the goal of those creating that media is, and how they accomplish it, regardless the effect on the viewers brain.
Janine says
My children are now in college and seniors in high school but I wrestled with the media issue a lot when they were little. Admittedly, I have not watched them recently so I don’t know if my information is applicable to the current situation.
I always erred on the side of PBS and in retrospect, I still feel really good about that decision. Shows there were ones we still talk about (Sesame Street, Reading Rainbow, Mr. Rogers!) It was a kind, thoughtful mix and at that time wasn’t fast-paced, and I applaud the programmers for that. It also gave us a lot of food for thought when they were little and a lot to talk about; being kind to others, good nutrition, how things are made (we still talk about the Mr. Rogers crayon episode! Well, it could be it’s just me.) My kids have such good memories about these shows.
We never had cable so I was spared other media problems until Saturday morning. Wow!!!They would get amped up on some of those shows!!!! One of the other commenters was right on–those shows are completely like candy that needs to be rationed. I thought it was important to expose them to these things as it was also part of their collective culture with their peers (i.e. Power Ranger and Pokemon school supplies, lunch boxes and backpacks). I always made sure I was in and out of the room when these shows were on and I would always pick a position on something so that we could talk about it later. I was never quite sure I liked “Squirtle” or what was Pikachu’s deal anyway? How come the animated “Brock” characters eyes were never open? They would talk and talk to me about these things. As with all things with children, I think parental interest and involvement is key.
I was not always popular on Saturday morning when I’d turn off the t.v. but I would and then we would go to a park or something so life was still interesting and fun. I didn’t always regulate their time as well as I could have (some Saturdays more shows were watched than others depending on my chore load) but my memory tells me we had better days when they watched less.
Amanda says
I don’t like Sponge-Bob so I don’t let my daughter watch it. I know she would get addicted to it because I caught her watching it at a relative’s house one time and she was glued to the TV and paid attention to NOTHING!
I never really know why I don’t like Sponge-Bob. I guess it turned out to be a good thing. LOL! Btw, before I really paid attention, I thought Sponge-Bob was a piece of cheese!
We never have Sponge-Bob in our house because we only allow our daughter to watch what has been selected for her on DVD, no channel-surfing. But the time limitation? I guess I’m guilty of that! My daughter doesn’t watch TV everyday but on the days she watches it, some times it’s more than 2 hours a day. =( It’s usually on the days that I’m occupied with something. I make myself feel better by justifying the weekly average of TV time.
I would love to have more information on “educational cartoon” for preschoolers. This is the first time I heard of Caillou. Where have I been? Well, our TV doesn’t play anything other than selected DVDs, that’s why…
Christy says
I am glad to see that others share our opinions of many of the so-called ‘Children’s programming” that is out there now. We do not allow Sponge-bob in our house either, nor any of the other annoying cartoons that are out there. We have sat down as a family one time and watched an episode of Scooby Doo, and will catch the classic holiday movies as they air, but cartoons are very rare in our house.
We stuck with the recommendations of no TV before age two, and now our 4-year old is really not interested in watching it. He would rather play with his toys, do an art project, or play outside. The TV is on much of the time at our house, but little of that time is spent sitting down and watching, it is mostly background noise. Instead of cartoons, we watch shows together. He loves Minute to Win It, Wipeout, The Amazing Race, Deadliest Catch, How It’s Made, and even likes to watch the evening news with us. We are in the Southeast, and so much time was devoted to the oil spill last summer, but he learned about it, and still asks questions about it today.
I think the biggest problem is that so many people use the TV as a babysitter and just plop the kids down in front of it so that they can get something else done, without ever seeing what they are showing their kids. My child learned to either help me do what I was doing (cleaning house, cooking, folding clothes) or he would bring in a few toys and play quietly. No TV needed.
It becomes hard when at the Doctor or Dentist office, that they always offer sticker or other prizes that have some character plastered on it. They always ask “Which is your favorite show?” and my son has no idea who most of the ones are that he has to choose from!
Jen says
Great post. we don’t allow cartoons like spongebob in out house. Our 8 year old prefers to use her very limited screen time on the weekends only to watch HGTV with us. Our 2.5 and 1 year olds get no screen time at all and when they are old enough to we will be just as picky about the kinds of shows they are allowed to watch. Kid programming today has gone way down hill. I see very few shows I like. I have watched dinosaur train, curious george and Cayou with friends kids and those seem to be good shows. spongebob just seems dumb for dumbs sake.
K says
Guilt… guilt… guilt…
That is all I can think about after reading this post. For my son’s first 22 months, he saw almost no TV… And it would have been none if my husband would have turned off the foot/basket/baseball games on the weekends. Then, #2 came along, and the TV is on so much. Sesame Street gets us through the first nursing session… Curious George and Cat in the Hat another. #1 is so active and into everything that the TV seems like a safer choice (seriously, he climbed on the dining table while I was nursing on the first day I was home by myself). So, what is the better option? How do you balance the needs of two kids, work and household responsibilities? And so the dance continues…
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
K:
No guilt, guilt, guilt. Not the point. Agreed that when #2 came around in our house, the TV went on. I simply couldn’t (or didn’t chose to) manage the screaming newborn who needed a feed and a tyrannical 2 year old who needed stimulation/play/attnetion, particularly when my husband was taking 30 hour shifts at the hospital.
Not all TV is bad. That’s really not the message here. And some may be really enjoyable for both mom and toddler (I love the old school Sesame, to be honest). It’s just finding a way to feel good about choices AND get through the day. Throw the guilt out the window with the bedroom TV. You’re off the hook in my book, K!
Julia says
My daughter is in gradeschool now so we have a tougher battle about Cartoon Network. When she was preschool she as very happy to watch PBS shows. But now that a lot of her friends watch Cartoon Network she wants to. We finally just dropped everything but basic cable so we don’t even have it. My instincts just were repelled by Spongebob and Cartoon Network type shows and this study is validating. My daughter has some friends who regularly watch cartoons and I definitely see a difference – they get bored more easily and need a lot more visual/audio stimulation to stay entertained than my daughter. I’m just honest with her and tell her “Too much screen time saps your imagination and creativity – that’s why we limit it in our house.”
Other nice preschool/kindergarten favorite at house is Kipper. Our whole family loves that show. Calliou was really annoying for the grown-ups in my house too. Too much whining from Calliou and when he threw a fit his wholesome, good Canadian parents would just shrug and then speak gently and kindly to him. The lack of discipline drove me crazy! But my daughter loved it and it was quiet and harmless for her. Another big favorite was Zaboomafoo and now the newer version, Wild Kratts.
Natasha Burgert, MD says
Dr. Swanson,
As a pediatrician, I have the utmost respect for our journal, Pediatrics. However, I have been very challenged by the release of this recent study, and I must graciously disagree with the “genius” of this research.
My summary for this study would be more simplified. In brief, 20 upper-middle class white 4-year-olds got jazzed up and couldn’t focus on a few tests after watching an incomplete Spongebob episode. Twenty other kids didn’t do that great after watching Calliou, either. And compared to these cartoon watching kids, another group of 20 kids did better on the tests if they were allowed to color for a few minutes before testing.
The limitations of this study are glaring. The sample size is very small with self-selection bias, and there is no control group. With a study so limited, it is difficult for me to find validity in the results. I remain unclear why Dr. Christakis, in his commentary, refers to the study as “robust.”
I think this study is a great demonstration that 4-year-old focus and attention can be directly affected by the activity immediately prior to a task. Could similar results also happen just as easily after 9 minutes of rough-housing with dad? What about 9 minutes of time-out?
Most unfortunately, the media attention that this paper has received has fueled the “Mommywars.” Instead of taking this information and applying it in our own homes, “PBS mommies” everywhere are touting their superiority over “Nickelodeon mommies.” While “No-TV mommies” are scoffing at both.
Is this not the last thing we need? Another thing to fight about?
Please don’t misunderstand. I am a huge cheerleader for appropriate media use. I talk about it DAILY with my families from the 2 month visit until the day they leave my office for college. I stand up and applaud your Mama Doc To Dos.
But, as for this research, I think it discredits our media education efforts to promote a relatively shallow study. Isn’t this the same tactic we often ridicule and challenge when other advocacy groups pull data from small, poorly controlled studies just to prove a point?
Watch your kids’ media. Limit the time. Monitor the quality. But, save the Journal waving until it has a little more weight.
Respectfully,
Dr. Natasha Burgert
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
Thanks, Dr Burgert. I’ll let Dr Christakis know your position and ask him to explain his rationale for calling it “robust” himself. I’ll email him after I complete this response. I really like his editorial—it makes a lot of sense to me to think about “digital natives” and “digital immigrants.” I think his point is very helpful and I’d never heard that perspective before. I like how he explains the effects of cartoons and I agree with him that media is a public health issue. Calling it “shallow” misses that point.
I appreciate what you wrote and respect your opinion. But to be clear, I didn’t say the study was “genius.” I said the design/maneuver to get attention was. And I like the study because it captured a nation of parents’ attention to think about content choices in addition to quantity choices. In an environment with a paucity of attention, and with the economy of attention what it is, I don’t know how else to get through. But I will think about what you wrote about tactics. And yes, this isn’t brain-surgery or new treatment modalities for life-threatening infection. But TV is about our daily choices. Feeling good about them and understanding the WHY behind pediatricians’ rationale for making the recommendations we do.
Social science is still science.
If I were to write a post to “journal wave” I would simply summarize the findings and repeat the headlines. I attempted to talk about method, the data, and the limitations so that as I stated, readers could ” See what it means for you and your family individually.”
I did this very intentionally in an attempt to help the public access the simplicity of the study and design (including the testing measures used) of the study, not just the branding and networks associated with it.
In regards to the mommy wars, I tried to preempt that by talking about not trashing one show or one network, not freaking if your kid loves Spongebob, etc. I wasn’t trying to be a “PBS mommy” more than another. I certainly don’t do this all “right” in my home. I certainly don’t think all pediatricians agree with me. I was talking with a pediatrician friend before writing this and she mentioned how much she LOVES Spongebob and how their family quotes it at the dinner table. This isn’t about elite-ism-TV….As I hack away at the keyboard responding to you, my kids are plugged in watching Thomas (painful!).
It is never my intent to fuel to wars. I’ll step back and think about it a bit more to improve my writing in the future.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’ll keep thinking about them. So glad you posted this, Dr Burgert!!!
John Mandrola says
WSS,
This is a fantastic synopsis. I enjoy your warm writing. And it’s cool that you are moved to write about science. Taking a stand ain’t easy.
I offer your discussion this antidote, circa 1990s.
Back in fellowship, my best friend, another EP fellow, was also a Dad to youngers. He and his physician-wife were the highly intelligent parents of four young children. I fondly remember comparing notes on parenting. We were of the ilk that TV was horrible, kids needed only human-to-human interaction, simple toys, imagination, even soy was hot in those days. All that. My friend, on the other hand, proclaimed (directly to my disbelieving and equally-educated physician-wife) that kids need videos, TV and stimulation. He had walls of DVDs, the most modern flat-screen and surround sound–all for his kids to be stimulated by action. And when his kids were insufficiently occupied, he drove them around in a conversion van equipped with a TV and stereo. Hilarious.
Twenty-years later, all four of his children attend Ivy league colleges and maintain straight As. They are the brightest of the bright. Nice too. And very athletic.
My kids are also doing well, only they didn’t get the benefit of all that fun. We had a mini-van, they a rocking conversion van!
Looking back as a middle-aged father, learner and wonderer, I don’t have the answers, heck I’m just an AF doc, but things sure look a lot different to a 48 year-old parent than they did at age 28.
Keep up the great Work.
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
John–This is AWESOME. I love this story! Thanks for reading and for the kind encouragement.
I’m standing strong against the mini-van. We’ll see…
Viki says
My take is that an \educational\ program cannot passively impart information to a young child better than a real-life, active interaction. We’re a no-TV household because there are few opportunities for viewing TV when my kids can’t be doing something better. I think squabbling and grabbing toys from each other is more instructive than watching Bob the Builder model sharing. So, in this study I disliked the comparison of Couillo and coloring as they impact performance on cognitive tests. I feel that parents will look at this and say, \whew! TV isn’t making my kid dumb. It’s just like coloring.\ Except coloring has more benefits than TV viewing long term that the study can’t capture.
When TV was habitual part of my kids’ lives, I focused my energy on making correct choices. Is there anything more ridiculous than previewing Dinosaur Train and Sid the Science Kid on Netflix and weighing their merits? I’ve come around to just focusing on the slice of the pie passive entertainment like TV gets. When the viewing is once in a while, I don’t care about the content so much, as long as it’s generally age appropriate. That means that Strawberry Shortcake was finally able to edge out Sid. My kid was no closer to understanding the scientific method but she was so grateful and excited she volunteered to clean her room. Works for me!
Dimitri Christakis says
Dr Burgert
You raise several points.
1) My calling the findings robust. Actually, that is the way the media quoted my commentary which said that or the purposes of the commentary i wish to stipulate that the findings are robust. In other words, what would be the implications if these findings represent reality
2) The lack of control group. In fact, there are two very clear control groups here– a crayon group and a slow paced TV group. That is actually a strength of this experimental design in effect explicitly controlling for other features of TV watching besides the pacing of the show. What better control group did you have in mind?
3) Self selection bias. This is only a threat to external validity of we wish to apply the findings to a group that would be so systematically different that we have a plausible reason to beleive they may not apply. yes, it was a non diverse middle class sample. If you wish to be maximally conservative you can argue it should not apply to minority or low income children. But why? Are their brains different? Are their learning styles different? I dont actually have a hypothesis that they are. DO you???
4) The mommy channel wars. here too you seem off the mark. Actually, the saliant point that i tried to make and that i think pediatricians should make is that CONTENT matters and that is not in these days tied to network. Blues clues and dora are two great shows that air with no commerical on Nick Jr. The point is not that TV is bad, but that some types of shows are
5) What about rough play or time out? These are interesting questions that might warrant further study but a) there is already both a theoretical and empirical basis to be concerned about TV and attentional problems b) TV usage is a modificable risk factor and not necessarily an integral and unavoidable part of childhood.
Natasha Burgert, MD says
Dr. Christakis,
Thank you so much for responding, and for your clarifications.
1. Robust – I am still unclear. The word “robust” was taken directly from your written commentary. I am simply trying to understand why you described the study in that way. Further, I thought your commentary was spot-on. I love the concept of digital natives/immigrants, just as Dr. Swanson mentioned. I simply think the majority of the commentary was brilliant observations reflecting the patients we all see in our clinics everyday (i.e. running 3 devices at once,) not necessarily explaining the “robust-ness” to me.
2. Lack of control – I do not claim to be an expert in experimental design, but, what about this… Were the Spongebob watchers truly “dumbed-down,” or were the self-paced kids “primed-up?” Specifically, would it not be equally as significant of a pursuit to see why the self-directed kids did so much better? It seems equally plausible that allowing self-directed play prior to executive function testing could be similar to an appetizer before a meal. Is that type of play artificially enhancing performance relative to other tasks prior to testing?
No doubt that the Spongebob viewers are not going to perform as well, however, maybe the difference was inflated. I would think a more adequate control group would be a group of kids who were also involved in a completely passive activity (staring at a 9 minute clip of clouds floating by, ie) in order to eliminate what appears to me to be a confounder.
3. No, their brains aren’t different. Their learning styles are likely the same. And, yes, the results will likely be the similar. I am concerned about the AAP using small studies with focused subjects to paint broad brushstrokes over an issue of any type. I think this is a tactical error in the fight for quality public healthcare information. This is not a statement regarding this study, specifically.
4. Maybe you are not as sensitive to “Mommywar” issues, but as a mommy who listens all day to other mommies, I think I am right on the mark. Look at the comments on this post alone. Nearly every comment includes the viewing habits in their own homes. One poor commenter leads with “guilt, guilt, guilt..” Welcome to Mommywars.
A brief glance at the comments on other media outlets demonstrates that this article has created a point of contention. The media outlets frame the coverage of the research to their “controversial” advantage. The mark that was missed is that this study is about how media content matters to young viewers. However, the arrow landed directly on a seemingly personal attack against all moms who let their kids watch a certain show.
Dr. Christakis, please don’t misunderstand. I am a media-phile and a passionate advocate about appropriate media use with my patient families, and my own. I will continue to council my families on the quantity AND quality of media viewing. I thank you for your passion and efforts on this topic that is so dynamic, evolving, and challenging; and thank you for spending time to address my comment.
I agree with Dr. Swanson that media usage and exposure is a public health issue. I am in full support of the AAP making media a priority for children’s health. I don’t want to be making a mountain out of a molehill, I just don’t believe this specific study was quite worthy of getting the attention that it has. I think the study only raises more questions, more compelling research topics, and hopefully more answers. I look forward to hearing more in the future.
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
To clarify, though I believe that media use is a public health issue—the thought came directly from Dr Christakis’s editorial. It’s more his thought than mine.
Kathy says
We are also a primarily PBS family, although dad has been known to be more liberal with the time and type of tv in our house. My kids love Caliou and Curious George and Clifford, and all the other \boring\ PBS shows.
What I find most disturbing though, is the recent study that calls for MORE video-centered educational opportunities in the classroom. Not trying to hijack your thread, but would be curious to hear your views on this sometime:
https://hereandnow.wbur.org/2011/09/12/boys-school-games
Isabelle says
This topic is eerily timed as I was just having a conversation with a friend about 1) fast paced media for kids and 2) the marshmallow study. I notice a difference in how my son behaves after he has gone to a friend’s house and watched the types of shows that we don’t allow in our home (fast paced editing and snarky ones). I also notice a difference in my son’s attention span and peers who watch all the shows we avoid, including Sponge Bob. Huge difference. My son can sit and read for over an hour, while some other boys he knows can barely focus for 15 uninterrupted minutes at a time on any task, even playing. My experience is nothing that holds up in a lab, but I was happy to learn from your piece that we may have had really good intuition about not just the amount of time but also the caliber of content. I find Caillou and some of the other shows extremely, painfully dull to watch as an adult (more Bob the Builder, anyone?) but if there is any need to watch something, those seemed at the appropriate focus and intake speed for young children. Also, unless we were sick and out of commission, we usually watch together to make sure there is discussion and interaction with the content and I think that helps too. I’m not saying my son wouldn’t watch those other shows in a heartbeat, and he sometimes asks for shows that are discussed on the playground, but I feel it’s my job as a parent to avoid the path of least resistance and try to steer him in the best direction, as long as I have influence!
Teresa says
I have a 3 year old and an 18 month old. Caillou is a staple in our home. So much so, the adults in the house know the episodes far too well due to it being on the TV ad nauseam. It may be slow-paced, but it is mezmorizing… both kids are GLUED to the TV when it comes on. I likened it to when I was a kid, and my generation and those before me watched shows like “Leave it to Beaver” or “Andy Griffith”. There was something very relaxing about those shows and that same quality is also in Caillou. Perhaps its because these shows represent an ideal whereas Sponge-Bob does not. I choose to not have Sponge-Bob on in our house. The 3 year old has requested Caillou so much since her little brother was born that at 18 months, he can now say and recognize “Caillou”. It doesn’t bother me that both kids have watched TV (Caillou, especially) well before the age of 2. What does bother me is why Caillou doesn’t have any hair. 🙂
Teresa says
Oh, By the way… Regardless of TV time, my 3 year old little girl is articulate and is learning to speak in complete sentences. My 18 month old son would prefer to be outside. Does the TV affect my son? I know he has distinct cranky times. Dad would prefer to leave the TV on all day for background noise, thus keeping SPROUT (child safe programming) on all day. I think my son is more cranky with me than with dad because I don’t always have the TV on programs that are alluring to the little ones. In that respect I wouldn’t argue that they are exposed to too much TV whether it is the Wiggles, Dora (the other favorite) or Caillou. During my son’s cranky times I sometimes put him in his bed for “quiet time” and he is completely content with his music box and his blankee for a spell or I take him outside away from the TV. Both kids look forward to walks with mom. I will say that taking the TV stimulus out completely by just taking them both on walks helps both kids become more agreeable, especially later in the day. But then there is Caillou. OH, Caillou! It IS sedating in it’s own right. I can’t compare TV very well to color crayons. My daughter loves to color with crayons… my son just loves to eat them instead!
Margaret says
My daughter has preferred Spongebob to Caillou for a few years now. She is age 5. I see this as more positive than negative – Spongebob is funnier than Caillou. As someone above suggested, it probably isn’t a good idea to have kids watch Spongebob before taking an exam. Maybe it would be a better idea to give a child a few minutes of quiet time to settle down and focus. It’s just commonsense that kids shouldn’t spend too much of their time watching t.v. But, excessive worry on the part of parents about whether or not their kids watch Spongebob or Caillou or PBS or whatever has to be more detrimental to kids than moderate t.v. viewing.