Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

jamanetwork.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#41

Post by cynthedesign »

mc32 wrote: post #20
CadmiumYellow wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"screens have not changed since then" What? They've changed massively. The displays are different sizes, they're made of different materials, they're more portable, they're more interactive, the colors are brighter, the resolution is better. Our current generation of screens are ubiquitous in a way that TV was not, and they are qualitatively different. Surely the effect on our brains could be different. Not saying th…

Moreover parents (the vast majority) use these screen as babysitters —TV did some of that some of the time, but mostly not. But with mobile devices they are ubiquitous in cars, restaurants, airplanes and the home. It’s a long stretch to say they are equivalent for sure. If nothing else they deserve to be studied for effects rather than dismiss it as “yet another moral panick”

Near the end of the article, or my attention span, they mention that they urgently need to contrast the actual screen time from societal factors that influence the parents to use the screen as babysitter.

I think there are a bunch of studies about the amount of babble conversation, "I spy" or other awareness games, etc. from primary caregiver is paramount and the moms [etc.] out on walks generally have their baby just zoning out while they surf fast fashion with one hand on the stroller.

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#42

Post by cynthedesign »

medler wrote: post #13
georgeburdell wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Screens are far more interactive now. Perhaps that’s a component as well

This study was pretty much only about TV time. It took place before handheld devices were ubiquitous in Singapore, where the subjects live

Very important point for the discussion

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#43

Post by cynthedesign »

This is why there need to be better apps, games, with an enriching, artistic, educational or human-interactive component. We can never fight the flashy colors, but we could have an artistic renaissance if everyone grew up using digital art and musical collab/composition apps, global polyrythmic percussion, multilingual etc games.

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#44

Post by noodles_nomore »

CadmiumYellow wrote: post #27
superkuh wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Have you not noticed changes in your own attention span, memory, and thought processes since the advent of smartphones and tablets? I have never owned a smart phone or tablet. I use a dumb phone (Nokia 6030) and desktop (or laptop) computers. Smartphones and tablets are terrible computers, not because they have magic screen powers to influence your brain but because they have limited volume for heat dissipation/ener…

It honestly does feel like they have magic screen powers to influence your brain. You'd likely understand what I'm talking about if you'd ever owned one. The interactivity, the high quality and brightly colored displays, the touch feedback and notifications...these devices are like brain candy. They're extremely pleasurable to use and if you get used to using them often it's very hard to pull yourself away from them.

What you're describing is a dopamine rush. I get the same thing when I watch videos of games I was addicted to once. It's not the device itself that causes it.

As a counter-experience: I'm over thirty and only got a modern smartphone a few years ago. The thing is awful. The touch interface is finicky, even after long use. Holding the thing for an extended amount of time is uncomfortable, even after long use. UI design seems universally terrible. All the apps I tried were disorganized and didn't quite serve the purpose I had expected, but they did always give me way too many unlabeled buttons and random pop-ups to tap, and asked for my money/attention every few minutes. The Android OS is obscurantic and loves to give you completely meaningless things to tap: "Tap here to optimize your device", like fucking what? I downloaded a game that appealed to me with loot boxes and sexy characters, but after an initial "wow, phone hardware has come a long way," the novelty wore off very quickly. Frankly, I now loathe the thing. The amount of frustration I've had with it, and the idea that it will just become ever more mandatory as every asshole company and government office loves the idea of shoving you through exactly, for their purposes, calibrated UI that you can't control or argue with -- it outweighs any positive experience I've had from it by a large factor. I don't feel any magic feel-good screen powers, only irritation.

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#45

Post by red-iron-pine »

raverbashing wrote: post #26
superkuh wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Have you not noticed changes in your own attention span, memory, and thought processes since the advent of smartphones and tablets? I have never owned a smart phone or tablet. I use a dumb phone (Nokia 6030) and desktop (or laptop) computers. Smartphones and tablets are terrible computers, not because they have magic screen powers to influence your brain but because they have limited volume for heat dissipation/ener…

So you never owned a smartphone or tablet but think they're "terrible computers"? That sounds like an uninformed opinion. Power dissipation sucks on PCs because they're PCs using x86 basically.

And, like, they make ARM / RISC laptops. Lotta articles about them recently, too.

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#46

Post by CadmiumYellow »

noodles_nomore wrote: post #44
CadmiumYellow wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It honestly does feel like they have magic screen powers to influence your brain. You'd likely understand what I'm talking about if you'd ever owned one. The interactivity, the high quality and brightly colored displays, the touch feedback and notifications...these devices are like brain candy. They're extremely pleasurable to use and if you get used to using them often it's very hard to pull yourself away from them.

What you're describing is a dopamine rush. I get the same thing when I watch videos of games I was addicted to once. It's not the device itself that causes it. As a counter-experience: I'm over thirty and only got a modern smartphone a few years ago. The thing is awful. The touch interface is finicky, even after long use. Holding the thing for an extended amount of time is uncomfortable, even after long use. UI desig…

Well, yeah, but how is it not the device itself that causes it? I'm addicted to the dopamine rush from interacting with the device. The cause is both the addiction in my brain and the addictive properties of the device that gave rise to it in the first place.

I used a flip phone for a year after having had a smartphone for a decade and I felt similarly to you when I first went back to my smartphone. It was overstimulating and I hated it. I have always used an iPhone, though, and I find that they're a significantly better user experience than Android so I didn't notice the UX problems you described. More like the entire thing was just TOO MUCH COMING AT ME ALL THE TIME AHHHHHH! After a few months I was back to being addicted and it all felt normal again. I miss my flip phone a lot but life without a smartphone was just too annoying.

Basically, I despise my smartphone, but I'm still addicted to it. I use it even when I don't want to and when it prevents me from doing other things I'd rather be doing. I try to stop and eventually I always give in. It's a legitimate behavioral addiction and I believe the problem is both the design of specific apps and properties inherent to the device itself.

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#47

Post by roundandround »

superkuh wrote: post #3

I wonder why this effect was not discovered when screens were first invented and entered the home back in the early 20th century when televisions came about. It really makes me doubt the entire premise as screens have not changed since then. It just seems like another unfounded moral panic like when people blamed books, newspapers, or radio for youth misbehavior. Every generation has it's own. It's weird that we've g…

> I wonder why this effect was not discovered when screens were first invented and entered the home back in the early 20th century

I wonder why I was required to sit 1.5 meters away from the screen a generation after TV entered the home. Do modern kids sit this far away from tablets?

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#48

Post by ultrarunner »

H1Supreme wrote: post #35
CadmiumYellow wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"screens have not changed since then" What? They've changed massively. The displays are different sizes, they're made of different materials, they're more portable, they're more interactive, the colors are brighter, the resolution is better. Our current generation of screens are ubiquitous in a way that TV was not, and they are qualitatively different. Surely the effect on our brains could be different. Not saying th…

An anecdotal comment on screens: When I got my first flat-screen HD TV, and watched actual HD content on it, I had a visceral reaction to the higher resolution. I could remember seeing the lines/pores on people's faces, and it was honestly jarring. I almost plugged my old tube TV back in.

I've done some work with the Amish, and the mind-blown can't-look-away effect of a low quality digital picture frame on fully grown adults raised some red flags for me. Brains are very good at adapting to their surroundings. I'm not convinced of the legitimacy of a moral panic, but something about screens is very unnatural.

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#49

Post by martinjacobd »

miriam_catira wrote: post #22
martinjacobd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why it would be true that screen time is not a problem for a Of course, a lack of interaction with humans could be a factor too but in our case we were literally playing with it alongside her and she would still get upset if it was taken away.

Not saying that it wouldn't be an issue at older ages as well, since for millenia children learned by watching the other people around them and learning from them, not from screens. That's my essential point - that's utterly essential for infants, even more at that age than later. Not that suddenly it becomes ok! But if we want to keep the discussion on topic, we should talk about the age group being studied. Beyond…

Ah apologies. In your first post I read "can not" as "cannot"

Re: Associations between infant screen use, EEG markers, and cognitive outcomes

#50

Post by [deleted] »

ultrarunner wrote: post #48
H1Supreme wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An anecdotal comment on screens: When I got my first flat-screen HD TV, and watched actual HD content on it, I had a visceral reaction to the higher resolution. I could remember seeing the lines/pores on people's faces, and it was honestly jarring. I almost plugged my old tube TV back in.

I've done some work with the Amish, and the mind-blown can't-look-away effect of a low quality digital picture frame on fully grown adults raised some red flags for me. Brains are very good at adapting to their surroundings. I'm not convinced of the legitimacy of a moral panic, but something about screens is very unnatural.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN