This article was downloaded by: [Barr, Rachel] On: 7 December 2010 Access details: Access Details: [subscription

number 925988800] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Early Years Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713425018

Amount, content and context of infant media exposure: a parental questionnaire and diary analysis
Rachel Barra; Catherine Danzigera; Marisa E. Hilliarda; Carolyn Andolinaa; Jenifer Ruskisa a Department of Psychology, Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA Online publication date: 18 August 2010

To cite this Article Barr, Rachel , Danziger, Catherine , Hilliard, Marisa E. , Andolina, Carolyn and Ruskis, Jenifer(2010)

'Amount, content and context of infant media exposure: a parental questionnaire and diary analysis', International Journal of Early Years Education, 18: 2, 107 122 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/09669760.2010.494431 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2010.494431

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

International Journal of Early Years Education Vol. 18, No. 2, June 2010, 107122

Amount, content and context of infant media exposure: a parental questionnaire and diary analysis
Rachel Barr*, Catherine Danziger, Marisa E. Hilliard, Carolyn Andolina and Jenifer Ruskis
Department of Psychology, Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA (Received 8 May 2009; final version received 19 April 2010)
CIEY_A_494431.sgm Taylor and Francis [email protected] RachelBarr 0 200000June Journal 18 Taylor 2010 & Francis Original Article 0966-9760 (print)/1469-8463 Years Education International2010 of Early (online) 10.1080/09669760.2010.494431

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

Recent research has indicated that there are long-term consequences of early media exposure. This study examined the amount, content and context of television exposure across the infancy period in the USA. Parents of 308 infants aged 618 months completed questionnaires detailing parental attitudes regarding their childrens television use and 24-hour television diaries to provide an accurate measurement of household television usage. Television exposure during infancy varied as a function of infant age, sibling status, socio-economic status and parental attitudes toward television. Regression analyses indicated that parental attitudes were not associated with the amount of television exposure, but were associated with the content of television exposure. These findings indicate that television exposure changes rapidly across infancy and is associated with parental attitudes. Keywords: infant; parent restrictions; television exposure; content

Parents in the USA provide a variety of reasons for allowing their young children to watch television television has value as a babysitter, enabling parents to get chores done; it quietens their children down; and it has educational value (Rideout and Hamel 2006; Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella 2003; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007a) 29% of parents report that the most-important reason for their child watching television was the belief that television is educational or good for the childs brain. Four of every five parents surveyed in one study are comfortable or very comfortable with their infants watching television, and are satisfied with the educational videos their infants watch (Weber and Singer 2004). Specifically, parents list vocabulary expansion (particularly in a foreign language), exposure to a variety of different experiences and exposure to diversity as positive benefits of television exposure (Rideout and Hamel 2006). That is, parents typically perceive viewing time with child-directed programming as having educational value. Moreover, a growing number of infantdirected programmes are being developed and targeted specifically at young infants (e.g., Baby Einstein, Brainy Baby), with sales of Baby Einstein videos alone being estimated at $200 million in 2005 (Bronson and Merryman 2006; Garrison and Christakis 2005). These products are accompanied by a number of implicit and explicit educational claims (Garrison and Christakis 2005). Although studies have shown that television shows produced with childrens development in mind can have positive effects
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
ISSN 0966-9760 print/ISSN 1469-8463 online 2010 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/09669760.2010.494431 http://www.informaworld.com

108

R. Barr et al.

for the cognitive and prosocial development of preschoolers (Anderson et al. 2000), the American Academy of Pediatrics (1999) recommends that children under two years old should not watch any television. Owing to the rapidly changing media climate, cultural differences and to wording of survey questions, however, it has been difficult to quantify both the content and amount of infant television exposure (Anderson et al. 1985; Certain and Kahn 2002; Christakis et al. 2004; Mendelsohn et al. 2008; Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella 2003; Stanger 1997; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007a). For example, higher rates of television exposure have been reported in the USA (Mendelsohn et al. 2008; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff, 2007a) than in Denmark (Obel et al. 2004), but usage patterns are similar to the USA in Australia (Skouteris and McHardy 2009). Much of the research examining television usage during early childhood has been conducted in the USA. Researchers have also reported that early viewing has risen dramatically. Using data collected during the early 1990s, Certain and Kahn reported that 17% of 01-year-olds and 48% of 12-year-olds watch television. More recently, researchers have reported that by three months, 40% of infants regularly watch television and DVDs and by 24 months the number rises to 90% (Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007a). Those 624-month-olds exposed to television, regularly spend 12 hours per day watching TV (Mendelsohn et al. 2008; Rideout and Hamel 2006) which accounts for 1015% of infant awake time. Thompson and Christakis (2005) found that higher levels of television exposure among infants and toddlers was associated with an increased risk of having an irregular sleep schedule. Anderson and Pempek (2005) argue that the increase in parental reports of young children television viewing coincided with the availability of programming directed at infants. Anderson and Pempek (2005) caution that, in the past, parents may have misinterpreted questions such as How much time would you say your child spends watching television on a typical weekday? (Certain and Kahn 2002), regarding what it meant for infants to watch television. In particular, parents may have failed to report exposure to adult-directed television (i.e., television that is not directed towards children). Not including exposure to adult-directed television may have resulted in under-reported exposure and age of earliest exposure to television. Mendelsohn et al. (2008) therefore decided to use exposure to television, defined as when the baby was in the room and awake, as their primary measure of television exposure. They found that parents reported that infants were actively watching the programmes for approximately half the time that infants were awake and in the room and the television was on. Negative associations with heavy television exposure during infancy Children in the first two years of life may be particularly vulnerable in terms of the harmful effects of television exposure for a number of reasons. They have little input regarding their own media exposure. They choose neither the amount nor the content of exposure on a daily basis. Rather, parents and older siblings make these choices. If parents choose to view adult-directed programmes, such as a sitcom, while their infants are in the room, infants will be exposed to this content regardless of whether they attend to this programme or not. Such adult-directed television exposure may reduce the quantity and quality of parental interactions and infant play behaviour. Schmidt et al. (2008) examined looking time and infant play behaviour during an adult-directed game show. Infants quality and quantity of play with toys was

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

International Journal of Early Years Education

109

significantly worse when adult-directed television was on compared with a period in which the television was off. Children only attended to the game show 5% of the time, but solitary play episodes were shorter, less complex and included less-focused attention when the television was on than when it was not on. Furthermore, adult-directed television also reduces the quality and quantity of parentchild interactions, with parents responding passively rather than actively to their 13-year-olds requests when an adult-directed television programme was being played when compared with no television programme being played (Kirkorian et al. 2009). These findings are significant because parentchild interaction and play is critical for subsequent social and cognitive development (see Singer and Singer 2001). This argument is supported by Tomopoulos and colleagues (in press) who reported that higher exposure to adultdirected television at six months was associated with poorer language outcomes at 14 months for children living in low-income minority families. Furthermore, exposure to high levels of television may be associated with poorer executive functioning. Researchers have associated heavy exposure to television during early childhood with poor school performance, increased bullying, attention problems and sleep problems during childhood and adolescence (Christakis et al. 2004; Lanhuis et al. 2007; Thakkar, Garrison, and Christakis 2006; Thompson and Christakis 2005; Zimmerman and Christakis 2005, 2007; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007b; Zimmerman et al. 2005). Negative associations endure even when demographic factors including socio-economic status, ethnicity, maternal risk factors and prematurity are controlled in the statistical models. By contrast, infants television exposure was not associated with behaviour problems during the preschool years in a sample of Danish children who were exposed to lower overall levels of television (Obel et al. 2004; but see Miller et al. 2007). Most recently, researchers compared infant exposure to child- and adult-directed programming and reported that exposure to adult-directed or violent programming during infancy was associated with parental reports of poorer executive functioning, but exposure to similar levels of child-directed programming was not (Barr et al. 2010; Zimmerman and Christakis 2007). Other research indicates that content is also crucial in terms of associations with language development. In a longitudinal study of 630-month-olds, Linebarger and Walker (2005) found that certain television shows (Blues Clues and Dora the Explorer) were associated with greater language production, whereas others (Barney and the Teletubbies) were negatively related to vocabulary acquisition. Furthermore, smaller receptive vocabulary was associated with viewing more than one hour per day of infant-directed videos, such as the Baby Einstein or Brainy Baby series (Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007b). The long-term effects of exposure to infant-directed programming remain unknown. Restrictions on television use Parents of preschoolers and school-aged children tend to enforce rules regarding television use (Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella 2003; Stanger 1997; Vandewater et al. 2005). Two-thirds of parents with children aged 017 years implemented rules regarding television use, aiming to restrict both the content and amount of television exposure (Stanger 1997; Vandewater et al. 2005). Parents who reported that they strongly enforced time rules regarding television use also reported lower levels of television viewing for children aged 06 years (Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

110

R. Barr et al.

2003; Vandewater et al. 2005). Parents with programme content rules reported more positive attitudes towards television and higher levels of co-viewing (Vandewater et al. 2005). Although rules are not enforceable for parents with infants, early attitudes about television may influence the amount and the content of television exposure for infants. The present study Early exposure to television is complex and involves both deliberate viewing of childdirected programming and indirect exposure to adult-directed television. Even though infants do not actively view adult-directed television, they are merely exposed to it, there is growing body of evidence that such mere exposure may be detrimental (Barr et al. 2010; Schmidt et al. 2008; Tomopoulos et al., in press). Parent questionnaires are unable to accurately determine adult-directed exposure because of the possible misinterpretation of the wording of questions such as, how much television is your baby watching? A 24-hour household television usage diary was collected in order to obtain more accurate reports of infant television exposure and to separate out overall household television usage from infant exposure (see also Anderson et al. 1985; Mendelsohn et al. 2008). Previous studies (Christakis et al. 2004; Vandewater et al. 2005; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007a, 2007b) have only examined either content or the amount of television viewed by children via survey report, whereas this study combines parent questionnaires and 24-hour viewing diaries (see also Mendelsohn et al. 2008). Considering the increased availability of infant-directed programming and the potentially long-lasting effects of early television use, this study investigated how early parental restrictions concerning television are associated with the amount, content type and context of infant television exposure. Method Participants Participants were recruited using a commercial mailing list or word-of-mouth from the Washington DC metropolitan area. They were recruited as part of an ongoing study examining learning and memory during infancy. This sample consisted of 308 parents with infants aged 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 months, who completed a 24-hour television diary and answered a questionnaire on television viewing behaviours. A stratified sample was obtained whereby infants were divided by age into 6-, 9-, 12-, 15- and 18month-olds, to assess the rapid developmental changes in viewing behaviour for children under two years of age. The stratified sample of infants consisted of 57 sixmonth-olds with an average age of 198.9 days (SD = 13.8), 51 nine-month-olds with an average age of 292.0 days (SD = 60.2), 83 12-month-olds with an average age of 382.4 days (SD = 15.5), 48 15-month-olds with an average age of 459.4 days (SD = 56.4), and 69 18-month-olds with an average age of 566.9 days (SD = 9.77). The sample included 167 male and 141 female infants. Parental educational attainment ranged from 12 to 18 years (M =17.24, SD = 1.19) and, as reported by 94.16% of the sample, their ranks of socio-economic status (Nakao and Treas 1992) ranged from 26.39 to 97.16 (M = 79.46, SD =12.85). Educational attainment, occupational status and annual income are the major components of socioeconomic status. The socio-economic index (SEI) ranks 503 occupations listed in the 1980 US census on a scale of 1 to 100, with higher status occupations (e.g., physician)

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

International Journal of Early Years Education

111

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

being accorded higher rank. Where data were available for only one adult (e.g., only one parent/guardian was working), the code for the employed individual was used. In families in which data were available for more than one parent/guardian, their socioeconomic status scores were averaged. Missing values for socio-economic status were computed using sample mean replacement. Families were Caucasian (n = 220; 71.4%), Asian (n = 13; 4.2%), African-American (n = 15; 4.9%), Latino (n = 16; 5.1%), Native American (n = 2; 0.65%) and of mixed ethnicity (n = 26; 8.4%); 16 families did not report their ethnic background. Of those included in the study, 123 of the target infants had one or more siblings and 185 were only children. The presence of siblings in the household was relatively consistent across ages; the numbers of children aged 618 months with siblings are as follows: 24 (six months), 28 (nine months), 29 (12 months), 15 (15 months) and 27 (18 months). Additional data were collected but not analysed, as only paired data (questionnaire and diary) were evaluated; those parents who did not complete both sets of data sufficiently were not included in the final analysis. The attrition rate for this study was 18.5%. Materials To maximise the reliability and validity of the diary data, parents were asked to record all of the programmes and videos that were viewed in their households over the 24-hour period in a series of columns, labelled on the diary (see also, Anderson et al. 1985; Dale et al. 1989; Mervis et al. 1992). This information included the time viewing took place, the programme and channel that was viewed, the duration of each programme, the individuals present in the room and other comments on the infants behaviour during viewing (e.g., he really liked the music or she spent most of the time playing with toys). After completing the diary, a structured interview constructed around a 10-item questionnaire was administered. Regarding amount of television exposure, questionnaire/interview items included the age at which the infant was first exposed to television, the estimated amount of time the television was on in the household in a typical day and the number of infant pre-recorded childrens programmes (DVDs or videos) owned. Regarding content, parents were asked which television shows they viewed as high-quality programmes for the infants age group. Parents were also asked whether the infant was exposed more frequently to television or pre-recorded programming. To find out parental attitudes regarding regulating television use for infants, parents were asked to describe any restrictions concerning the infants use of television and videos. Regarding co-viewing behaviour, parents were asked: how often they were in the room while the infant was viewing television, how often they talked with the infant during viewing and how often the infant sat and watched programmes with siblings; these questions were based on a four-point Likert scale ranging from never to almost always. Procedure The study was described to the primary caregiver and informed consent was obtained. Demographic information including occupation, ethnicity, educational achievement and languages spoken in the home was also obtained. The rationale for the study was explained and detailed instructions on reporting household television viewing were

112

R. Barr et al.

provided on the diary. Parents were told that the purpose of the study was to assess infants exposure to television. Parents were familiarised with the procedures they were to use and were informed that an experimenter would be available to answer questions during the 24-hour period. Parents completed the television diary. One day later, the experimenter collected the television diary either in person or via email and conducted the interview either in person or over the phone. Data were collected continuously across seasons and across days of the week from January 2002 to January 2005. Coding All diaries and questionnaires were double coded and verified to ensure that data entry was reliable. Parental restrictions Parental restrictions regarding time were coded as the frequency of parents who reported any restriction on time of television use and those who specifically reported having a no-TV policy for their child. Parental restrictions concerning content were coded as frequency of parents who specified restriction of viewing to only childdirected programming and frequency of parents specifying no violent programming. Owing to the young age of children in this study, parents of children particularly under the age of one frequently responded no restrictions yet, so we decided to analyse this response as a separate category. In the data set, a zero indicated no restriction, a one indicated that parents did not have any restrictions yet for their infants, a two indicated that parents had a restriction. N is not consistent across analyses because some answers were not codeable. Per cent reliability for coding restrictions was 92%. Calculation of ratios The child content ratio was calculated as the ratio of child-directed programming viewed by the child divided by infants total exposure to television. The co-viewing ratio is the total number of hours that parents, siblings and others spend co-viewing with the child divided by the infants total exposure to television (with a maximum set at 100%). These ratios exclude parent reports of no television during the 24-hour diary period (n = 62).

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

Results Descriptive statistics Amount of exposure Table 1 shows mean amount of television exposure by infants as a function of age in a 24-hour period (as determined from the diary), and compares these amounts with parent estimates of the amount of household television on any given day. Viewing amount is relatively constant across age groups. According to diary reports, 62 infants (20.10%) were not exposed to any television on the day of diary collection. Because there was only one day of data collection it is not clear whether this was a typical day or whether this was due to specific parental restrictions on television use.

International Journal of Early Years Education

113

Table 1. Mean (SD) for the amount of television infants (n = 308) are exposed to, as a function of age (in months), measure and content. Infant exposure is dened as the infant being in the same room when the television was on. Questionnaire Diary (hours in a 24-hour period)

Infant exposure Infant exposure Recorded Estimated to childrens Infant total to adult household TV household TV programmes exposure programmes Age (months) usage (hours) usage (hours) 6 9 12 15 18 Total
Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

3.75 (2.88) 3.15 (2.48) 3.96 (2.61) 3.20 (2.05) 3.91 (2.35) 3.66 (2.51)

1.67 (1.33) 2.63 (2.31) 2.21 (2.16) 1.86 (1.44) 2.20 (2.06) 2.12 (1.95)

0.76 (0.86) 0.80 (1.51) 0.72 (1.3) 0.23 (0.41) 0.47 (1.16) 0.61 (1.15)

0.26 (0.53) 0.54 (0.79) 0.47 (0.68) 0.68 (0.68) 0.95 (0.98) 0.58 (0.79)

1.01 (1.04) 1.34 (1.85) 1.19 (1.43) 0.91 (0.86) 1.44 (1.68) 1.19 (1.44)

We also compared exposure as a function of day of the week and season of the year. We conducted a 7 (day) 4 (season) analysis of variance (ANOVA) on infant hours of television exposure. Consistent with prior time use research, we found a main effect of season, F(3, 280) = 4.56, p < .01, but no other main effects or interactions. Post-hoc StudentNewmanKeuls t-tests (p < .05) indicated that exposure was higher during winter (M = 1 hour 42 minutes, SE = 11 minutes), than during autumn or summer (M = 54 minutes, SE = 15 minutes, M = 42 minutes, SE = 15 minutes, respectively) and exposure during spring was intermediate (M = 1 hour 6 minutes, SE = 10 minutes). The lack of weekday/weekend difference may be due to the age of the infants under investigation (see also Skouteris and McHardy 2009 for a similar result). Content Nearly one-third (30.84%) of parents reported that their children were exposed to television more frequently than to videos, 16.56% of parents reported that their children were exposed to the same amount of both types of media, and almost half of parents surveyed (46.43%) reported that their children were exposed to videos more frequently than television. Families owned on average 5.55 videos (SE = 0.46), increasing from an average of 4.26 (SE= 0.85) when infants were six months to 7.16 (SE = 0.96) when infants were 18 months. Parents were asked to list high-quality age-appropriate programming for their infants. The top-ranked programmes and the frequency with which they were watched on a daily basis were calculated. Table 2 lists the percentage of parents who ranked the following top-ranked programmes (> 5%) as high quality: Baby Einstein, Sesame Street, Clifford, Teletubbies, Barney, Wiggles or Blues Clues. Several other programmes were mentioned by between 1.5 and 3.5% of parents (Between the Lions, Bear in the Big Blue House, Caillou, Dragontales, Arthur, Rolie Polie Olie, Mr. Rogers and Dora the Explorer; see Table 2). The programmes listed in Table 2 are hereafter referred to as child-directed programming. The Baby Einstein series (35.06%) and Sesame Street (31.49%) were the programmes ranked highest as high quality and age appropriate. Table 2 also lists the diary data of the percentage of children who viewed one of the seven programmes during the 24-hour diary data

114

R. Barr et al.

Table 2. Percentage of parents from the sample (n = 308) who listed the following shows as high quality and age-appropriate for their infants and percentage of infants who viewed the program in the diary records. Parent rated high quality age- % Parents who rated appropriate programmes programme as high quality Baby Einstein Sesame Street Teletubbies Wiggles Barney Clifford Blues Clues Caillou Mr Rogers Between the Lions Bear in the Big Blue House Rolie Polie Olie Dragontales Arthur Dora the Explorer 35.06 31.49 12.01 10.40 6.80 5.52 5.52 3.25 2.92 2.60 2.27 2.27 1.95 1.62 1.62 Frequency viewed (%) 16.56 5.52 6.17 8.40 4.90 5.84 1.60 3.57 0.65 0.97 0.97 0.97 4.85 2.60 1.30

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

collection period. Again, Baby Einstein was the most frequently viewed programme, with 16.56% of children viewing a Baby Einstein video or DVD at least once during the day. There is a high correspondence between reported high-quality programmes and programmes that infants are being exposed to on a daily basis. Not surprisingly, there were also age-related increases in the number of reported high-quality programmes ranging from 0.72 (SE = 0.11) quality programmes at six months to 2.00 (SE = 0.07) quality programmes at 18 months of age. Parent-reported restrictions about appropriate amount and content of television exposure Table 3 shows the frequency of restrictions on the amount and specific content as reported by the 231 parents; 75% of parents had some restriction on infant viewing. More than half of the parents in our sample (56.28%) reported having restrictions on time use, but only 8.66% of parents specifically reported having a no-TV policy for
Table 3. Percentage and number (n) of parents with and without time and content restrictions, and no television policy for their infants (total n = 231). Time restriction Time % (n) No Not yet Yes 34.20 (79) 9.52 (22) 56.28 (130) No-TV policy % (n) 81.82 (189) 9.52 (22) 8.66 (20) Content restriction No violent content % (n) 70.13 (162) 9.52 (22) 20.35 (47) Child-directed programming % (n) 69.7 (161) 9.52 (22) 20.78 (48)

International Journal of Early Years Education

115

their child. Parents also reported content-related restrictions restricting their children to child-directed content only (20.35%) or restricting content to no violent programming (20.78%). Co-viewing practices. Co-viewing was defined as being in the room with the infant at the same time that the television was on. This is a passive measure of co-viewing. Parents co-viewed with infants for 1 hour 1 minute (SD = 1 hour 23 minutes), siblings co-viewed together for 16 minutes (SD = 37) and others (family members, nannies, etc.) co-viewed for 6 minutes (SD = 19). On average, 95.6% of the time infants were in the room with others when the television was on, and they were unlikely to be left on their own. Those with siblings co-viewed 66% of the time with another sibling, 77% of the time with parents and 9% of the time with others, whereas those without siblings co-viewed 85% of the time with parents and 11% with others. The numbers do not add to 100% because infants could co-view with multiple people at once. Parents also reported that they were likely to sit and talk with their infants once in a while or almost always 70.6% of the time. Associations between demographic factors, restrictions and amount and content of exposure Previously, SEI, sibling status, gender and age have been associated with television exposure and these variables are also included in our analyses (Certain and Kahn 2002; Christakis et al. 2004; Linebarger and Walker 2005; Rideout and Hamel 2006; Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella 2003; Thompson and Christakis 2005; Vandewater et al. 2005; Weber and Singer 2004; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007a). Ethnicity has also been associated with television usage patterns but unfortunately the homogeneity in our sample did not allow us to examine factors associated with ethnicity. Table 4 displays the zero-order correlations between these variables as well as parental restrictions. Collinearity diagnostics indicated that all variance inflation factors (VIFs) were < 2. Two regression analyses were conducted to answer questions specifically about amount and content. Associations with amount of television exposure. We first looked at how demographic variables and parental restrictions on television use were associated with infant television exposure by conducting a linear regression, simultaneously entering the variables of age, socio-economic index, gender, number of siblings, time use restrictions and content restrictions (child content and no violence). The overall model was not significant, F(6, 245) < 1, R = .12, R2 = .02. Although 75% of the sample reported having restrictions on either time use and/or content regarding infant exposure to television, neither time nor content restrictions were associated with absolute amounts of infant television exposure. To specifically address whether a no-TV policy influenced infant television exposure, we conducted a one-way ANOVA across parents who reported a no-TV policy (n = 22) compared with those parents who either reported no such policy (n = 201) or had not decided yet (n = 28). We found no association between the amount of television use for those who did (M = 1 hour, 1 minutes) and did not (M = 1 hour 11 minutes) have a no-TV use policy, F(2, 248) = 1.4, ns. Those who had not decided yet about a no-use policy exposed their infants to non-significantly higher amounts of television (M = 1 hour 40 minutes). Half of the parents who reported a no-TV policy had exposed their child to television the day

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

116

R. Barr et al.

Table 4. Siblings .01 .01 .06 .02 .17 .58* .14* .01 .52* .52** .08 .02 .04 .11 .09 .66* .06 .02 .01 .03 .08 .02 .02 .07 .11 .02 Time restriction SEI Child content restriction Violent content restriction Co-view

Correlation table for variables of interest. Ratio co-view Ratio content

Age .09 .14* .05 .07 .00 .05 .18** .06 .04 .03 .06 .19* .06

Female

Female Siblings Time restriction Child content restriction Violent content restriction SEI Co-view Ratio co-view Ratio child content Infant total hours

.04 .07 .11 .19** .15** .05 .18** .12 .42* .05

.06 .07 .07

.02 .11

.16*

Note: The categorical variable of gender was dummy coded and age was entered as an ordinal variable. Spearman rank correlations were reported if one of the variables was not continuous. *Signicant to the .05 level; **signicant to the .01 level.

International Journal of Early Years Education

117

Table 5. Results of a simultaneous linear regression on the content ratio (time spent viewing child-directed programming/total time exposed to television). Unstandardised coefficients B Age (months) Gender Sibling status Child-directed content restriction Violent content restriction SEI 0.04 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.01 SE 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.01 Standardised coefficients Beta 0.42 0.10 0.14 0.22 0.07 0.18 ** * ** **

Notes: *Signicant to the .05 level; **signicant to the .01 level.

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

before. That is, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation is not being followed even by those parents who have adopted it. It is possible that parents are not considering adult-directed television exposure. Associations with content of television exposure. Second, to assess how demographic variables and parental restrictions were associated with the content of television exposure, we conducted a linear regression simultaneously entering the variables of socio-economic index, gender, number of siblings, time use restrictions and content restrictions (child content and no violence) on the ratio of the total amount of childdirected programming viewed by the participant relative to the overall amount of television viewed by the child (child content ratio). Table 5 presents the results of the regression analysis on ratio content. The overall model for the content ratio was significant, F(6, 195) = 12.50, p < .001, R = .53, R2 = .28 indicating that having restrictions concerning child content was significantly associated with viewing a higher proportion of child-directed programming. Also, having siblings was associated with a greater likelihood of exposure to child-directed programming (M = 41.4 min, SD = 4.2) than not having siblings (M = 30.6 min, SD = 3.6). Higher socioeconomic status is also related to more exposure to child-directed programming. Finally, older infants viewed a higher proportion of child-oriented television than younger infants (see Figure 1). In fact, 6-, 9- and 12-month-olds were exposed on average to 45 minutes of adult-directed television (45, 47 and 43 minutes, respectively) while 15- and 18-month-olds were exposed to 14 and 28 minutes, respectively.
Figure 1. The proportion of exposure to child-directed and adult-directed programming as a function of age (months).

Discussion This study was an initial investigation into the relations between age, demographic factors, parental restrictions and the amount, content and context of television exposure during infancy. The findings from this study with regard to the amount of time that infants in the sample were exposed to television is consistent with recent data collected from parent surveys (Rideout and Hamel 2006; Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella 2003; Stanger 1997; Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007a, 2007b; but see Mendelsohn et al. 2008). Consistent with the findings from Rideout, Vandewater, and Wartella (2003), few parents reported having a no-television policy for

118

R. Barr et al.

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

Figure 1. The proportion of exposure to child-directed and adult-directed programming as a function of age (months).

their infant (8.66% of sample), but 20.10% were not exposed to television on the day the diary was collected, suggesting that not all infants were being exposed to television on a daily basis. Those who had a no-television policy did not necessarily restrict television exposure. Although the amount of time was consistent with past studies, the content of exposure appears to be associated with a number of factors. Results indicate that parental restrictions on programmatic content, age and demographic factors (including presence of siblings and socio-economic status) are associated with exposure to higher proportions of child-directed programming relative to overall television exposure. Younger infants were exposed to higher levels of adult-directed television than older infants. This finding has not previously been reported, perhaps because previously parents were asked how much infants watch television. In this study, we deliberately focused on household television exposure across a 24-hour period to examine infant television exposure, regardless of whether the content was intended for them. During adult-directed programming infants typically attend only 5% of the time (Anderson and Pempek 2005) and parents may not consider that infants are watching television. These findings are particularly relevant to early childhood development, as the amount of adult-directed television, particularly for young infants, may be detrimental to play, language development and executive functioning (Anderson and Pempek 2005; Barr et al. 2010; Kirkorian et al. 2009; Schmidt et al. 2008; Singer and Singer 2001; Tomopoulos et al., in press). Recently, Mendelsohn et al. (2008) similarly reported that their 69-month-old infants from low-income Latino families were exposed to 50% child-directed and 50% adult-directed programmes, but their average television exposure was twice as high. They also reported that parents were most

International Journal of Early Years Education

119

likely to interact with their 69-month-old children during educational programmes and least frequently during adult-directed television. Our findings indicate that younger infants may be the most vulnerable to exposure to adult-directed television and exposure levels decrease by the second year of life when parents perceive higher quality programming to be available. That is, parents may perceive that their children attend to infant- and child-directed programming, but not to adult-directed programming and ascribe different values to each of these experiences. Nearly half of the parents reported a preference for videos/DVDs over regular commercial programming. This suggests that there is some characteristic inherent in videos which make that medium more appealing to parents than television whether it is the absence of commercials or the ability to control more carefully the content of what children are watching is unknown. It is also possible that there would be advantages of DVD exposure over typical television exposure due to the importance repetition of the televised content for learning early in development (Barr et al. 2007; Linebarger and Vaala 2010; Skouteris and McHardy 2009). How parents are judging quality programming is not clear. Sesame Street, Blues Clues and Barney have all benefited from careful design and have been rigorously tested to ensure educational benefits, at least for preschoolers (Anderson et al. 2001). By contrast, many infantdirected products have yet not been empirically tested but make a number of explicit and implicit educational claims (Garrison and Christakis 2005). Infants were in the room with others during television exposure and 70% of parents reported that they sat and talked with their infants. Furthermore, those with siblings frequently co-viewed child-directed programming with their siblings. That is, there is ample opportunity for parents to provide active co-viewing experiences for their infants because of the need to maintain high proximity to their infants. Researchers are beginning to examine individual differences in co-viewing practices (see Barr et al. 2008; Fidler, Zack, and Barr 2010). Researchers have not yet examined what role siblings may play in learning from television during infancy. A major limitation for the study was its relatively homogenous sample population. Most families were Caucasian, with a high socio-economic index, which limits its generalisability, particularly to those populations that might be most at-risk. Future studies should certainly focus on more vulnerable populations (i.e., low-income, minority families; see Mendelsohn et al. 2008; Tompoulos et al., in press). In this study, higher SEI status was associated with higher exposure to child-directed programming. There were also several notable exploratory findings related to television exposure and ethnicity Latino infants tended to view higher proportions of child-directed programming, and African-American children tended to view higher overall amounts of television than Caucasians but due to low power and problems of interpretation these findings are only exploratory. This sample had relatively little variance in terms of socio-economic status and race, so it would be valuable to investigate high-risk children in a larger sample size. Television is now clearly part of the early educational environment. Exposure to television during infancy is likely to have long-term consequences, which remain largely unknown. These consequences are very likely to vary as a function of the content and context of the viewing experience. Demographic factors such as siblings and socio-economic status, and parental restrictions are associated with the content and context of television usage. Content my be more important than viewing time for young children and programmes with age-specific curricula, coupled with adultmediated viewing, could allow children to learn more efficiently and effectively

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

120

R. Barr et al.

(Skouteris and McHardy 2009; Thakkar, Garrison, and Christakis 2006). Because studies have shown that television shows produced with childrens development in mind can have positive effects for the cognitive and prosocial development of preschoolers (Anderson et al. 2000; Thakkar, Garrison, and Christakis 2006), it is possible that childrens educational television and infant-directed videos/DVDs might also have the potential for a positive influence on infants cognitive skills (but see also Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff 2007b), particularly if parents sit and talk with their children during viewing (Barr et al. 2008; Fidler, Zack, and Barr 2010). Certain and Kahn (2002) found that higher television viewing during the first two years of life predicted higher television usage in preschoolers and kindergartners. It is quite possible that early restrictions surrounding content and co-viewing may be the start of a trajectory that predicts later media diet. Acknowledgements
Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

This research was funded by grant numbers HD043047-01 from the National Institute Child Health and Development to Rachel Barr and an NSF grant to Childrens Digital Media Center (# NSF 0126014). We thank the parents for their participation in this study.

References
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Public Education. 1999. Media education. Pediatrics 104: 3413. Anderson, D.R., J. Bryant, A. Wilder, A. Santomero, M. Williams, and A.M. Crawley. 2000. Researching Blues Clues: viewing behavior and impact. Media Psychology 2: 17994. Anderson, D.R., D.E. Field, P.A. Collins, E.P. Lorch, and J.G. Nathan. 1985. Estimates of young childrens time with television: A methodological comparison of parent reports and time-lapse video home observation. Child Development 56: 134557. Anderson, D.R., A.C. Huston, K.L. Schmitt, D.L. Linebarger, and J.C. Wright. 2001. Early childhood television viewing and adolescent behavior: The recontact study. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 66: 1147. Anderson, D.R., and T. Pempek. 2005. Television and very young children. American Behavioral Scientist 48: 50522. Barr, R., A. Lauricella, E. Zack, and S.L. Calvert. 2010. The relation between infant exposure to television and executive functioning, cognitive skills, and school readiness at age four. Merrill Palmer Quarterly 56: 2148. Barr, R., P. Muentener, A. Garcia, M. Fujimoto, and V. Chavez. 2007. The effect of repetition on imitation from television during infancy. Developmental Psychobiology 49: 196207. Barr, R., E. Zack, A. Garcia, and P. Muentener. 2008. Infants attention and responsiveness to television increases with prior exposure and parental interaction. Infancy 13: 356. Bronson, P., and A. Merryman. 2006. Baby Einstein vs. Barbie [Electronic version]. Time. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1538507,00.html Certain, L., and R. Kahn. 2002. Prevalence, correlates, and trajectory of television viewing among infants and toddlers. Pediatrics 109: 63442. Christakis, D.A., F.J. Zimmerman, D.L. DiGiuseppe, and C.A. McCarty. 2004. Early television exposure and subsequent attentional problems in children. Pediatrics 113: 70813. Dale, P.S., E. Bates, J.S. Reznick, and C. Morisset. 1989. The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months. Journal of Child Language 16: 23949. Fidler, A., E. Zack, and R. Barr. 2010. Television viewing patterns in 6- to 18-month-olds: the role of caregiverinfant interactional quality. Infancy 15: 17696. Garrison, M., and D.A. Christakis. 2005. A teacher in the living room: Educational media for babies, toddlers, and preschoolers. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Kirkorian, H.L., T.A. Pempek, L.A. Murphy, M.E. Schmidt, and D.R. Anderson. 2009. The impact of background television on parentchild interaction. Child Development 80: 13509.

International Journal of Early Years Education

121

Lanhuis, C.E., R. Poulton, D. Welch, and R.J. Hoancox. 2007. Does childhood television viewing lead to attention problems in adolescence? Results from a prospective longitudinal study. Pediatrics 120: 5327. Linebarger, D.L., and S.E. Vaala. 2010. Screen media and language development in infants and toddlers: an ecological perspective. Developmental Review 30, no. 2: 176202. Linebarger, D.L., and D. Walker. 2005. Infants and toddlers television viewing and language outcomes. American Behavioral Scientist 48: 62445. Mendelsohn, A.L., S.B. Berkule, S. Tomopoulos, C.S. Tamis-LeMonda, H.S. Huberman, J. Alvir, and B.P. Dreyer. 2008. Infant television and video exposure associated with limited parentchild verbal interactions in low socioeconomic status households. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 162: 41117. Mervis, C.B., C.A. Mervis, K.E. Johnson, and J. Bertrand. 1992. Studying early lexical development: The value of the systematic diary method. In Advances in infancy research, ed. C. Rovee-Collier and L. P. Lipsitt, Vol. 7, 291378. New York: Ablex Publishing. Miller, C.J., D.J. Marks, S.R. Miller, O.G. Berwid, E.C. Kera, A. Santra, and J.M. Halperin. 2007. Brief report: Television viewing and risk for attention problems in preschool children. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 32: 44852. Nakao, K., and J. Treas. 1992. The 1989 Socioeconomic Index of Occupations: Construction from the 1989 Occupational Prestige Scores (No. 74). Chicago, IL: NORC. Obel, C., T.B. Henriksen, S. Dalsgaard, K.M. Linnet, E. Skajaa, P.H. Thomsen, and J. Olsen. 2004. Does childrens watching of television cause attention problems? Retesting the hypothesis in a Danish cohort. Pediatrics 114: 13723. Rideout, V., and E. Hamel. 2006. The media family: Electronic media in the lives of infants, toddlers, preschoolers, and their parents. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Rideout, V., E. Vandewater, and E. Wartella. 2003. Zero to six: Electronic media in the lives of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Schmidt, M.E., T.A. Pempek, H.L. Kirkorian, A.F. Lund, and D.R. Anderson. 2008. The effects of background television on the toy play behavior of very young children. Child Development 79: 113751. Singer, D.G., and J.L. Singer. 2001. Handbook of children and the media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Skouteris, H., and K. McHardy. 2009. Television viewing habits and time use in Australian pre-school children: An exploratory study. Journal of Children and Media 3: 809. Stanger, J. 1997. Television in the home: 1997 National Survey of Parents and Children. Annenberg Public Policy Center Survey Series No. 2. University of Pennsylvania. Thakkar, R.R., M. Garrison, and D.A. Christakis. 2006. A systematic review for the effects of television viewing by infants and preschoolers. Pediatrics 1118: 202531. Thompson, D.A., and D.A. Christakis. 2005. The association between television viewing and irregular sleep schedules among children less than 3 years of age. Pediatrics 116: 8516. Tomopoulos, S., B.P. Dreyer, S. Berkule-Silberman, A.H. Fierman, C. Brockmeyer, and A.L. Mendelsohn. In press. Infant media exposure: Adverse effects on toddler development. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. Vandewater, E.A., S.E. Park, X. Huang, and E.A. Wartella. 2005. No you cant watch that: Parental rules and young childrens media use. American Behavioral Scientist 48: 60823. Weber, D., and D. Singer. 2004. The media habits of infants and toddlers: Findings from a parent survey. Zero to Three 25: 306. Zimmerman, F.J., and D.A. Christakis. 2005. Childrens television viewing and cognitive outcomes: A longitudinal analysis of national data. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 159: 61925. Zimmerman, F.J., and D.A. Christakis. 2007. Associations between content types of early media exposure and subsequent attention problems. Pediatrics 120: 98692. Zimmerman, F.J., D.A. Christakis, and A. Meltzoff. 2007a. Television and DVD/video viewing by children 2 years and younger. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 161: 17.

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010

122

R. Barr et al.

Zimmerman, F.J., D.A. Christakis, and A. Meltzoff. 2007b. Associations between media viewing and language development in children under age 2 years. Journal of Pediatrics 151, no. 4: 3648. Zimmerman, F.J., G.M. Glew, D.A. Christakis, and W. Katon. 2005. Early cognitive stimulation, emotional support, and television watching as predictors of subsequent bullying among grade-school children. Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine 159: 3848.

Downloaded By: [Barr, Rachel] At: 03:58 7 December 2010