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

Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

frontiersin.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 163 posts

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#41

Post by andai »

conductr wrote: post #38
kqr wrote: post #29

This can be tricky. I know my mother loves me unconditionally, but I also have strong memories of her shutting herself inside her study to read textbooks and journals, and children were not allowed to disturb unless she was strictly needed to handle an accident. I have the same need for cognition as my mother, but I opt not to lock myself in my office. Instead I tell my kids, "I'm around if you need me and I'll keep…

[flagged]

My mom was always distracted so that's mostly how I remember her. We have all kinds of wonderful memories together but, what I think of her, the first thing that comes her mind is, her being in the same room as me but ignoring me.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#42

Post by apsurd »

conductr wrote: post #38
kqr wrote: post #29

This can be tricky. I know my mother loves me unconditionally, but I also have strong memories of her shutting herself inside her study to read textbooks and journals, and children were not allowed to disturb unless she was strictly needed to handle an accident. I have the same need for cognition as my mother, but I opt not to lock myself in my office. Instead I tell my kids, "I'm around if you need me and I'll keep…

[flagged]

+1 as adults we intellectualize way too much what kids are reasoning… they aren’t reasoning! they aren’t fully developed. it’s literally not that deep to them.

every year that passes, the idea of the only personal time one has is in the bathroom on the toilet hits harder and harder. there’s a whole back catalog of jokes about this; hiding in the bathroom, talking extra long. yep, checks out.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#43

Post by andai »

irjustin wrote: post #6
paytonjjones wrote: post #2

This is a weak study that is exemplary of psychology's weak experimentation culture and correlation/causation laundering, especially with regard to self-report. The heavily hinted implication is that device use damages relationships. But look at what they actually measured. They ask adolescents to answer questions like: "My primary caregiver ignores me when they are on a device." (DAIS, their new scale) And then also…

I largely agree this is a weak study, but it also feels like no matter how you run this study it's going to be flawed. Parent-child interactions, relationships, feelings are probably the hardest thing to quantify at any scale. In the end, it's really, "Pay more attention to your kids", which is a pretty good universal message to put across.

I forget the terminology but I read something recently about how people are paying too much attention to their kids and it's making their kids neurotic.

Like when kids were growing up a couple decades ago they could just do whatever they wanted and those folks turned out all right. And now we've got people obsessing over where their children are and literally tracking their location, and the results don't seem to be so great.

(I heard that this difference had actually been quantified but unfortunately I don't have a link.)

I remember something about how, some percentage of children are not even allowed to leave the yard. Whereas their parents were just roaming for miles, at a much younger age.

Although I suppose at the same time, we're also less present with each other. So I guess there's at least two dimensions to that.

I guess the first one would be, are you relaxed and do you trust them to take care of themselves, even at a young age.

And the second one would be... are you actually there, or is it just your body that's there.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#44

Post by noosphr »

tayo42 wrote: post #36
microtonal wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Changing habits is hard enough on it's own. parenthood and modern life makes that even more difficult It is possible to make changes, I would say this is one of the easier bad habits to beat. The best is to start with fixed moments where you as a family decide phones are forbidden. For example, shortly after our daughter was born, we decided "no phones during eating (breakfast/lunch/dinner)". When both parents are in…

It's not impossible,but on top of all the other stresses in life you need to sit down and figure out this new problem too? You have got to at least sympathize with the situation. I know I've regressed on phone use since my child was born.

Children follow by example. If you're an addict your kids will be too.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#45

Post by neuroticnews25 »

conductr wrote: post #38
kqr wrote: post #29

This can be tricky. I know my mother loves me unconditionally, but I also have strong memories of her shutting herself inside her study to read textbooks and journals, and children were not allowed to disturb unless she was strictly needed to handle an accident. I have the same need for cognition as my mother, but I opt not to lock myself in my office. Instead I tell my kids, "I'm around if you need me and I'll keep…

[flagged]

Are you supposed to allocate 100% of your free time to your kids?

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#46

Post by somenameforme »

makeitdouble wrote: post #17
irjustin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I largely agree this is a weak study, but it also feels like no matter how you run this study it's going to be flawed. Parent-child interactions, relationships, feelings are probably the hardest thing to quantify at any scale. In the end, it's really, "Pay more attention to your kids", which is a pretty good universal message to put across.

There is always a question of whether a bad study is better than no study. I think weak studies validating people's natural intuitions tend to do more damage than we give them credit for. Even if another better d signed study does way more work and comes with clear results that disprove the natural intuiton, it will be buried in the sea of low effort studies and people will already have settle the issue in their mind…

100%. I completely agree with this study's 'findings' but also agree the study is garbage.

So many studies now a days have experiments designed to confirm a hypothesis instead of challenge it. They should be doing everything possible they can to disprove their hypothesis and only accept it after all attempts at falsification fail. But of course that's in idealized science. In reality, publish or perish means you need to get something published and negative results don't get published. And so this study, like what seems to be most now a days, is designed to prove their hypothesis - which ironically proves nothing.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#47

Post by noosphr »

conductr wrote: post #38
kqr wrote: post #29

This can be tricky. I know my mother loves me unconditionally, but I also have strong memories of her shutting herself inside her study to read textbooks and journals, and children were not allowed to disturb unless she was strictly needed to handle an accident. I have the same need for cognition as my mother, but I opt not to lock myself in my office. Instead I tell my kids, "I'm around if you need me and I'll keep…

[flagged]

Kids also need their own time too. Having a parent constantly interfering is just as bad as having one never showing interest. And you're not a playmate, you're a parent.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#48

Post by jstanley »

godwinson__4-8 wrote: post #37
jstanley wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've had a suspicion there is something unethical about this. Why? As a human being who was once born, I am extremely grateful for my existence, and how much thought my parents put into it beforehand is of practically no consequence. You seem to imply that if parents haven't already committed to giving their kids a perfect childhood with perfect parenting then the kids are better off not living at all?

You can browse the Wikipedia article I linked. It offers a few possible answers to this why question. As for myself I would simply summarize that making an important choice such as bringing life into the world, without considering the consequences, is already somewhat unethical. One should think before taking an action that has irreversible consequences to anyone. In this case, the person being born. I wouldn't say I…

I did skim the Wikipedia article but it didn't seem to engage with anything I was thinking about.

Almost everybody's revealed preference is to stay alive rather than to not be alive, otherwise we'd see a lot more suicide.

> making an important choice such as bringing life into the world, without considering the consequences, is already somewhat unethical.

This is a view you can take, but it's not as obviously important as you seem to think.

An alternative view is "making an important choice such as FAILING to bring life into the world, given the opportunity to do so, without considering the consequences, is somewhat unethical."

If the standard was truly that you can't have kids unless you're sure they're going to have a great life, then we would have gone extinct millions of years ago.

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#49

Post by dinfinity »

andai wrote: post #43
irjustin wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I largely agree this is a weak study, but it also feels like no matter how you run this study it's going to be flawed. Parent-child interactions, relationships, feelings are probably the hardest thing to quantify at any scale. In the end, it's really, "Pay more attention to your kids", which is a pretty good universal message to put across.

I forget the terminology but I read something recently about how people are paying too much attention to their kids and it's making their kids neurotic. Like when kids were growing up a couple decades ago they could just do whatever they wanted and those folks turned out all right. And now we've got people obsessing over where their children are and literally tracking their location, and the results don't seem to be…

It's an interesting question:

Are people who are very very securely attached to their parents happy later in life, or is there a ceiling? The terminology invites certain conclusions here.

Maybe the whole attention thing is more a matter of quality, rather than quantity

Re: Parental device use and the adolescent-caregiver attachment bond

#50

Post by tchalla »

mikestorrent wrote: post #27
andsoitis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why so many people have kids Biology / evolution. The drive to reproduce is baked in by natural selection. Organisms that didn’t want offspring didn’t pass on genes.

Sounds like an answer from a non-parent, honestly. There's a lot more to it than that, and virtually every couple I know with children thought about it a lot before going ahead. The number one reason is because they see other families and the love and joy that their children bring into their lives. This is inspiring, and brings people around to making the decision, even if they know the sacrifices they will have to m…

I don’t see a disagreement between you and parent comment.
Post reply on HN