Psychological Science

A Large-Scale Test of the Goldilocks Hypothesis: Quantifying

the Relations Between Digital-Screen Use and the Mental Well-
Being of Adolescents
Andrew K. Przybylski, Netta Weinstein
First Published January 13, 2017
Research Article
Find in PubMed
https://doi-org.byui.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0956797616678438

Abstract
Although the time adolescents spend with digital technologies has sparked widespread
concerns that their use might be negatively associated with mental well-being, these
potential deleterious influences have not been rigorously studied. Using a preregistered
plan for analyzing data collected from a representative sample of English adolescents (n =
120,115), we obtained evidence that the links between digital-screen time and mental
well-being are described by quadratic functions. Further, our results showed that these
links vary as a function of when digital technologies are used (i.e., weekday vs. weekend),
suggesting that a full understanding of the impact of these recreational activities will
require examining their functionality among other daily pursuits. Overall, the evidence
indicated that moderate use of digital technology is not intrinsically harmful and may be
advantageous in a connected world. The findings inform recommendations for limiting
adolescents’ technology use and provide a template for conducting rigorous investigations
into the relations between digital technology and children’s and adolescents’ health.

Keywords

screen time, digital technology, adolescents, mental well-being, open data, open
materials, preregistered
The proliferation of digital devices has fundamentally changed how humans work, play,
and socialize. Rapid technological developments in high-speed Internet, flat-panel
displays, and mobile computing power have led to devices that now define and shape
modern childhood (Lenhart, Smith, Anderson, Duggan, & Perrin, 2015). For example, the
amount of time adolescents spend online has more than doubled from an average of 8 hr
per week in 2005 to 18.9 hr per week today (Ofcom, 2015), and the time spent with these
technologies, especially during childhood and adolescence, has sparked concerns that
their use might be negatively associated with mental and social well-being (for a review of
this controversy, see Bell, Bishop, & Przybylski, 2015). Indeed, the American Academy of
Pediatrics has recommended that restrictions be placed on children’s screen time (Council
on Communications and Media, 2013), indicating that there are incremental costs of
screen time for children’s wellness, though the value of this limitation-focused approach
has been questioned by developmental (Linebarger & Vaala, 2010) and clinical (Ferguson
& Donnellan, 2014) researchers.

The goal of the present research was to evaluate different ways of understanding how
screen time is linked to mental well-being, and to empirically quantify and define moderate
engagement in digital activities. To date, one view of the effects of screen time
predominates the literature: the displacement hypothesis (Neuman, 1988), which posits
that the harms of technology are directly proportional to exposure. Effects are claimed to
be negative because digital activities supplant alternate activities such as socializing with
peers and family, reading books, or exercising. We tested an alternate theory, implicit in
the literature but not explicitly studied, which we label the digital Goldilocks hypothesis.
According to this hypothesis, tech use at moderate levels is not intrinsically harmful
(Etchells, Gage, Rutherford, & Munafò, 2016; Parkes, Sweeting, Wight, & Henderson,
2013; Przybylski, 2014) and may be advantageous in a connected world, whereas
“overuse” may indeed displace alternate activities, for example, interfering with school or
with extracurricular or other social activities (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009). In the fairy tale,
Goldilocks identifies moderation (in porridge and beds) as “just right.” Similarly, it might be
that “too little” tech use deprives young people of important social information and peer
pursuits, whereas “too much” may displace other meaningful activities. Our Goldilocks
hypothesis postulates that there are empirically derivable balance points, moderate levels,
that are “just right” for optimally connected young people.

To the extent that digital activities either enrich adolescents or displace more rewarding
activities, they should have, respectively, positive or negative effects on adolescents’
mental well-being, which we define as flourishing characterized by positive emotions,
effective functioning (including psychosocial functioning), and a sense of life satisfaction
(Ryan & Deci, 2000; Tennant et al., 2007). According to the displacement hypothesis, the
relationship between screen time and well-being is negative and monotonic, as each
“dose” of screen time takes the place of alternative pursuits that might be more satisfying.
However, recent research suggests that this account may not accurately describe the role
of digital technology in everyday life. Indeed, adolescents must develop their identity and
build life and social skills, and doing so fosters well-being (Luyckx, Soenens, Goossens,
Beckx, & Wouters, 2008; Yarcheski, Mahon, & Yarcheski, 2001). It may be that technology
provides opportunities to pursue these developmental challenges in a satisfying way. For
example, although many people may think of gaming as a socially isolating activity,
research indicates that online gaming handles are one of the first pieces of information
that 38% of adolescent boys share when they meet someone with whom they would like
to be friends (Lenhart et al., 2015). Similarly, 83% of adolescents say that social media
makes them feel more connected to their friends, and 68% say that they have received
social support using digital technologies in tough or challenging times (Lenhart et al.,
2015). Thus, there is good reason to think that digital engagement, in moderation, may not
be disruptive, and that it may even support development.

Much of what is known regarding the possible influence of screen time comes from the
study of sedentary and nonsedentary activity in young people. Guided by the
displacement hypothesis, existing research has compared activities by looking at physical
health correlates such as body mass index (Anderson, Economos, & Must, 2008; Boone,
Gordon-Larsen, Adair, & Popkin, 2007), amount of rigorous exercise (Anderson et al.,
2008; Sisson, Broyles, Baker, & Katzmarzyk, 2010), or energy expenditure (Lanningham-
Foster et al., 2006). Definitions and operationalizations of what constitutes engagement in
an activity vary, but most studies have tested how doses of activities of interest relate to
physical and psychological outcomes. Nearly all have found statistically significant
differences between sedentary and nonsedentary activities, identifying the former as
deleterious, but patterns evident in the literature hint at a richer dynamic than the
displacement account suggests.

First, these studies have documented only weak links between screen time and health,
which suggests the possibility of a stronger alternative theoretical account (Anderson
et al., 2008; Boone et al., 2007; Iannotti, Kogan, Janssen, & Boyce, 2009). Second,
research indicates that any detrimental effects of screen time on physical health depend
on the type of digital activity, and that some screen activities actually promote physical
activity (Lanningham-Foster et al., 2006). Third, studies examining physical outcomes
(Anderson et al., 2008; Boone et al., 2007; Sisson et al., 2010), and preliminary work
examining psychological ones, have shown inconsistent linear relations (Kremer et al.,
 2014), or used post hoc bucketed predictors, and estimated effects for comparable types
of digital technologies vary widely (Cao et al., 2011; Hamer, Stamatakis, & Mishra, 2009,
2010). A handful of recent large-scale studies indicate that low to moderate levels (i.e., <
2–3 hr per day) of playing video games (Etchells et al., 2016; Przybylski, 2014) and
watching films (Parkes et al., 2013) have little or no relation to emotional and social
functioning, and that such activities may have negative effects for young people only at
higher levels of engagement.

The research reported here was the first to systematically test for curvilinear relations
between well-being and screen time measured continuously, separately for different digital
activities and days of the week. As predicted by the Goldilocks hypothesis, we expected to
find curvilinear associations, with no costs to mental well-being for moderate levels of
screen time and some detriments at high levels. For the first time in this area of research,
we defined low and high levels of screen time empirically by testing for local maxima, the
inflection points, operationalized as the points at which the slopes relating screen time to
well-being approached zero before reversing in sign. Thus, we identified the point at which
each type of media use shifted from having a null or positive relation with mental well-
being to having a negative relation indicating a detrimental effect.

Method
Participants

Participants were identified using the United Kingdom’s Department for Education
National Pupil Database. Fieldwork covered a total of 150 local authorities across
England, with the aim of making sufficient observations of English 15-year-olds to attain a
±0.3% margin of error at a 95% confidence interval. A notification letter sent to parents or
caregivers of potential participants gave them the opportunity to opt their child out of the
survey, and written consent was collected directly from all participants. The original
sampling frame for the study included 298,080 15-year-olds. Of these, 2,835 were lost
because the surveys were undeliverable or adolescent participants opted out of the study
prior to data collection. A total of 120,115 participants provided usable data by responding
to paper (n = 100,850) or online (n = 19,265) questionnaires.

Ethical review

A comprehensive ethical review regarding the data collection was conducted by the
United Kingdom’s National Children’s Bureau, and an ethics review regarding the data
analysis was conducted by the research ethics committee at the University of Oxford.

Measures

Criterion variable: mental well-being

The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (Tennant et al., 2007), a 14-item self-
report instrument validated for use in general population samples of individuals ages 13
years and above, was used to measure the happiness, life satisfaction, psychological
functioning, and social functioning of participants. As found in past research using this
instrument with young people (Stewart-Brown et al., 2009), the scale showed high internal
consistency (Cronbach’s α = .90). Scores ranged from 14 to 70 (M = 47.52, SD = 9.55).

Explanatory variables: digital-screen time

Participants were asked four questions regarding their engagement in different kinds of
digital activities during their free time. Specifically, they were asked about watching films
and other media (e.g., TV programs), playing games (e.g., on computers and consoles),
using computers (e.g., Internet, e-mail), and using smartphones (e.g., social networking,
chatting online).

Control and confounding variables

Past research has linked both the explanatory and the criterion variables to gender and
ethnicity (Clarke et al., 2011) and economic factors (Eynon & Helsper, 2015; Tennant et al.,
2007). These were treated as control variables for the purposes of statistical modeling.
Self-reported gender on the survey was coded 1 for male and 0 otherwise. Aggregate
information derived from postal-code data was used to identify if participants lived in a
relatively deprived local-authority district (Department for Communities and Local
Government, 2015). Residence in an area in the upper two quintiles of the multiple
deprivation index (i.e., an area with high scores on unemployment, crime, poor public
services, and barriers to housing) was coded 1; residence in an area in the lower two
quintiles was coded 0. Minority status was assessed on the survey by asking participants
about their ethnic background; they were instructed that ethnic identification can be based
on many things, such as skin color, culture, language, or family ancestry. Following the
approach taken by the United Kingdom Office for National Statistics (2012), we assigned 0
as the code for participants who self-identified as White and 1 as the code for those who
reported being of other ethnicities.
Results
Analytic strategy

The preregistered analytic strategy is available at the Open Science Framework

(osf.io/b4cgq). There were three deviations from that plan. First, two control variables we
intended to include in the statistical models were not available: (a) whether participants’
parents were married and (b) whether participants were born in the United Kingdom.
Second, it was clear from the plotted data (see Fig. 1) that there were no negative
monotonic relationships between digital-screen time and mental well-being. A negative
linear trend could technically be fit onto the data, but its suitability would be poor, as
outcome values increased across levels of the explanatory variables before decreasing.
Therefore, our regression models considered trends with both linear and quadratic
components. Finally, when we examined the distributions of total digital-screen time, the
sums of the estimates, it was clear that many participants had reported simultaneous
screen use; approximately 20% of the sample reported a sum of more than 12 hr of
engagement on weekdays, and 35% of the sample reported a total of more than 12 hr on
weekend days. Given that these values were consistent with earlier research
demonstrating that digital media are often used in parallel (Eynon & Helsper, 2015), it did
not make theoretical or practical sense to follow the original plan to test these summed
screen-time estimates.
Fig. 1. Mental well-being as a function of daily digital-screen time on weekdays and weekends. Results are
shown separately for time spent (a) watching TV and movies, (b) playing video games, (c) using computers,
and (d) using smartphones. Error bars denote the 95% confidence intervals for the observed means.

Exploratory analyses

Engagement in digital activities was quite popular in our sample, as more than 99.9% of
the participants reported allocating some time to at least one form of digital technology on
a daily basis. Exploratory t tests comparing boys’ and girls’ responses indicated that the
girls reported spending more time using smartphones, using computers, and watching
videos, and the boys devoted more time to playing computer and console games (all ps <
.001; Fig. 2). Across the four types of activities, screen time was between 25 min and 1 hr
5 min longer on weekend days than on weekdays, and paired-samples t tests showed that
these differences were significant, all ps < .001. Repeated measures analyses of variance
using within-subjects contrasts indicated that more time was spent using smartphones
than engaging in the other three categories of screen-based activities, all ps < .001 (Fig.
2). Note that boys devoted far more time to gaming on both weekdays and weekend days
compared with girls.
Fig. 2. Daily digital-screen time on (a) weekdays and (b) weekend days, separately for male and female
participants. Error bars denote the 95% confidence intervals for the observed means.

Confirmatory analyses

A series of regression models tested how weekday and weekend engagement with digital
screens was related to mental well-being, assessed with the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental
Well-Being Scale. These analyses, which included both linear and nonlinear components,
indicated that the quadratic trends evident in Figure 1 were statistically significant for all
four types of digital activities. Concave-down quadratic functions were evident for
watching films and TV on weekdays and weekends, for playing games on weekdays and
weekends, for using a computer on weekdays and weekends, and for using a smartphone
on weekdays (see Table 1 for the results of the regression models). Consistency across
both weekdays and weekends and across four different types of digital activities provided
support for the Goldilocks hypothesis. In sum, a direct comparison of the relation between
screen time and mental well-being at low versus high levels of screen time—a comparison
that, to our knowledge, has not been made in previous work—revealed that this relation
does in fact vary with the level of screen time. When we treated gender, economic factors
and technology access, and ethnicity as control variables in the models, half of the
observed effect sizes were noticeably reduced, but the direction and significance of the
effects were unchanged (Table 2).

Table 1. Results of Models Linking Mental Well-Being to Daily Digital-

Screen Engagement Without Adjustments for the Control Variables

Table 2. Results of Models Linking Mental Well-Being to Daily Digital-

Screen Engagement With Adjustments for the Control Variables

Empirically derived inflection points

To further define the quadratic patterns present in the data, we calculated local extrema
for the models statistically controlling for variance linked to potential confounds. If indeed
the relations between mental well-being and digital-screen time are nonlinear,
systematically quantifying the point at which engagement shifts from benign to harmful is
important (Nelson & Simonsohn, 2014). Results from these analyses revealed clear
inflection points relating screen time to well-being (Table 3, Fig. 3). Local extrema were at
1 hr 40 min for weekday video-game play and 1 hr 57 min for weekday smartphone use.
In contrast, watching videos and using computers for recreational purposes appeared to
be less potentially disruptive at these levels, as the local extrema for these activities on
weekdays were 3 hr 41 min and 4 hr 17 min, respectively. Indeed, some digital activities
might be better suited than others to weekdays. For example, it is relatively easy to switch
between different tasks using a computer, whereas an activity such as playing a video
game requires more dedicated attention. For weekends, the derived inflection points
ranged from 3 hr 35 min for playing video games to 4 hr 50 m for watching videos. Thus,
the pivot points between moderate and potentially harmful screen time were notably
higher and less variable for weekend days than for weekdays, which suggests that the
nature and amount of engagement matter for understanding the relations between digital-
screen time and mental well-being.

Table 3. Trends in Mental Well-Being for Engagement Levels Below

and Above the Observed Extrema
Fig. 3. Linear trends in the relation between daily digital-screen time and mental well-being for values of screen
time falling below the local maxima and for values of screen time falling above the local maxima. Results are
shown separately for time spent (a) watching TV and movies, (b) playing video games, (c) using computers,
and (d) using smartphones on weekdays and on weekends. Error bars denote the 95% confidence intervals for
the observed slopes. Asterisks indicate slopes significantly different from zero (*p = .001, **p < .001).

Below these thresholds, the relations between screen time and mental well-being were
either positive (p ≤ .001) or flat (ps > .183), except for a negative link in the case of
weekend smartphone use (Fig. 3, Table 3). Above these thresholds, the consistent
negative monotonic relationships for all forms of digital-screen time (bs ≤ −0.53, ps < .001,
|d|s = 0.14–0.20) indicated a detrimental relation between screen time and mental well-
being. These findings further support the goldilocks hypothesis. It appears that with the
exception of using smartphones during weekends, moderate digital activity as defined by
the reported inflection points does not displace other, more enriching activities essential
for adolescents to experience mental well-being. Devoting time to smartphone screens
during weekends may be an exception because socializing through virtual means when
time is otherwise unstructured may be particularly susceptible to dysregulation or may
indeed displace other beneficial weekend social activities (Ryan, Bernstein, & Brown,
2010).
 Observed effect sizes

Although it is not typical for publications on effects of digital activities to qualify statistically
significant differences by reporting the amount of variability that is accounted for by these
recreational activities, doing so is crucial for understanding the scope of the potential
influence of screen time. In this study, we found that the average effect size (Cohen’s d)
for engagement in excess of the inflection points was –0.18. In other words, these
negative slopes accounted for 1.0% or less of the observed variability in the mental well-
being of the young people in the sample. Exploratory analyses examining links between
individual difference measures in the data set and well-being provide some context to
interpret these modest relationships. These analyses indicated that the possible negative
effects of excessive screen time were less than a third of the size of the positive
associations between well-being and eating breakfast regularly (d = 0.54) or getting
regular sleep (d = 0.58). Although the coefficients we have reported are statistically
significant, it is noteworthy that the size of both the linear and the quadratic relations
between screen time and well-being were noticeably diminished in half the cases once
control factors were accounted for, and that incremental increases in screen time above
moderate levels accounted for very little of the variability we observed in mental well-
being.

Discussion
In this study, we found that the relationships between digital-screen time and mental well-
being are nonlinear and that moderate engagement in digital activities is not harmful. The
consistently observed concave-down quadratic relations and empirically derived inflection
points provide evidence supporting our Goldilocks hypothesis, indicating that post hoc
screen-time groupings featured in past research oversimplify the nature of the relations
between digital-screen time and adolescents’ well-being. We quantified moderate screen
engagement and found that the categories of digital activity we examined are unlikely to
present a material risk to mental well-being at these moderate levels, although high levels
of engagement may have a measurable, albeit small, negative influence. These findings
are all firsts, perhaps because previous studies used omnibus measures that did not
differentiate between the diverse types of digital-screen use (Sisson et al., 2010) and
measured doses of screen time on the basis of arbitrary cutoffs (Hamer et al., 2009). Such
approaches are limited because they discard informative variance and therefore pool
nonharmful and potentially harmful amounts of engagement when effects are estimated.
This study informs the field in a number of ways. We discuss two here. First, this study
points to the value of considering the wider social and developmental contexts
surrounding digital-screen use. The relation between screen time and well-being
depended, in part, on whether the activities occurred on weekdays or weekends. The
adolescents could engage in digital activities between 22 min and 2 hr 13 min longer on
weekend days than on weekdays before we found evidence of negative effects. Second,
we found evidence that not all digital activities are “created equal.” Those that were
pervasive (i.e., using smartphones) or required effortful task switching (i.e., playing video
games) had noticeably lower inflection points on weekdays compared with other digital
activities. It is possible that some tech activities do interfere with other structured activities
during weekdays. For example, it is likely that adolescents are less likely to engage in
academic pursuits if they are overusing certain forms of media on weekdays (Junco,
2012), and it may also be the case that these adolescents are less engaged in structured
after-school activities that support intrapersonal and social development, and as a result
promote well-being (Fletcher, Nickerson, & Wright, 2003). Despite these possibilities, our
statistical models suggested that the possible harmful influence of screen time on young
people is fairly small, even if one assumes that our correlational data indicate direct
causal relations.

Avenues for future work

If indeed moderate engagement in digital activities has little detrimental effect on, and
even some positive correlates with, well-being, it is possible that digital technologies,
when used in moderation, afford measurable advantages to adolescents. These benefits
may include avenues for communication, creativity, and development (Granic, Lobel, &
Engels, 2014). In future work, researchers should look more closely at how specific
affordances intrinsic to digital technologies relate to benefits at various levels of
engagement, while systematically analyzing what is being displaced or amplified. For
example, many popular games, such as Minecraft, provide a context for socializing and
creativity, and smartphone-based activities like geocaching provide motivation for physical
activity and discovery (O’Hara, 2008). Engaging in these games and activities may not
displace anything meaningful for development, whereas channel surfing and solitary
reading might. Research building on these findings might examine nonlinear effects over
time, and could consider effects on people both younger and older than the adolescents
we sampled. Finally, future studies should use convergent data sources from caregivers,
peers, and teachers to evaluate the linear and nonlinear relations between screen time
and well-being. This approach would minimize the negative influence of extreme
“mischievous responding” (Robinson-Cimpian, 2014), which might have exaggerated the
 links we observed between screen time and well-being, particularly among our
respondents who reported unrealistically high levels of technology use. More important,
use of other data sources would provide a further robust test of the goldilocks hypothesis.

Closing remarks

These findings highlight the need to revisit broad-stroke recommendations grounded in

the displacement hypothesis (Brown, Shifrin, & Hill, 2015) and offer a new way to
understand the existing research that legitimates those recommendations. Our results
indicated that the possible deleterious relation between media use and well-being may not
be as practically significant as some researchers have argued (Strasburger, Donnerstein,
& Bushman, 2014), and they highlight the continued need to critically reevaluate research
claims that go beyond the available evidence (for more on this, see Ferguson &
Donnellan, 2014). Our findings also suggest the need for a careful cost-benefit analysis of
existing professional advice—which at present supports allocating valuable pediatrician
consultation time to discussing media use with caregivers. Future research and
recommendations building on the goldilocks hypothesis would be sensitive to the various
types and contexts of media use and would be based on peaks and drops in well-being as
well as other meaningful outcomes identified systematically. Paired with open-science
practices, such as preregistration of statistical analyses, which limits researcher degrees
of freedom (Simmons, Nelson, & Simonsohn, 2011), our analytic approach can form the
basis for new robust studies in this area (Morey et al., 2016). There is good reason to think
that caregivers find it extremely difficult to enforce existing guidelines regarding digital-
screen time (Houghton et al., 2015), and that other factors, such as whether caregivers
actively join in with their children during tech activities, may be far more important for
mental well-being.

Acknowledgements
We thank R. D. Morey and C. D. Chambers for critical feedback regarding the analysis
plan. We also thank P. Glossop, P. Niblett, and members of the surveys team at NHS
Digital for their support.

Action Editor

Brent W. Roberts served as action editor for this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interest with respect to their authorship
or the publication of this article.
Open Practices

All data and materials have been made publicly available via the Open Science
Framework. The data can be accessed at osf.io/49rmq/, and the materials can be
accessed at osf.io/4dv6p/. The design and analysis plans were preregistered at the Open
Science Framework and can be accessed at osf.io/b4cgq. The complete Open Practices
Disclosure for this article can be found at
http://journals.sagepub.com.byui.idm.oclc.org/doi/suppl/10.1177/0956797616678438. This
article has received badges for Open Data, Open Materials, and Preregistration. More
information about the Open Practices badges can be found at
https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki/1.%20View%20the%20Badges/ and
http://pss.sagepub.com.byui.idm.oclc.org/content/25/1/3.full.

References
Anderson, S. E., Economos, C. D., Must, A. (2008). Active play and screen time in US children aged
4 to 11 years in relation to sociodemographic and weight status characteristics: A nationally
representative cross-sectional analysis. BMC Public Health, 8(1), Article 366. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-
8-366
Google Scholar | Crossref

Bell, V., Bishop, D. V. M., Przybylski, A. K. (2015). The debate over digital technology and young
people. British Medical Journal, 351, Article h3064. doi:10.1136/bmj.h3064

Google Scholar | Crossref

Boone, J. E., Gordon-Larsen, P., Adair, L. S., Popkin, B. M. (2007). Screen time and physical activity
during adolescence: Longitudinal effects on obesity in young adulthood. International Journal of
Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 4(1), Article 26. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-4-26

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Brown, A., Shifrin, D. L., Hill, D. L. (2015). Beyond “turn it off”: How to advise families on media use.
AAP News, 36(10), 54. doi:10.1542/aapnews.20153610-54

Google Scholar | Crossref

Cao, H., Qian, Q., Weng, T., Yuan, C., Sun, Y., Wang, H., Tao, F. (2011). Screen time, physical activity
and mental health among urban adolescents in China. Preventive Medicine, 53, 316–320. doi:10.101
6/j.ypmed.2011.09.002

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Clarke, A., Friede, T., Putz, R., Ashdown, J., Martin, S., Blake, A., . . .Stewart-Brown, S. (2011).
Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): Validated for teenage school students in
England and Scotland. A mixed methods assessment. BMC Public Health, 11, Article 487. doi:10.118
6/1471-2458-11-487

Google Scholar | Crossref

Council on Communications and Media . (2013). Children, adolescents, and the media. Pediatrics,
132, 958–961. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-2656

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Department for Communities and Local Government . (2015). The English indices of deprivation
2015. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4
65791/English_Indices_of_Deprivation_2015_-_Statistical_Release.pdf

Google Scholar

Etchells, P. J., Gage, S. H., Rutherford, A. D., Munafò, M. R. (2016). Prospective investigation of
video game use in children and subsequent conduct disorder and depression using data from the
Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. PLoS ONE, 11(1), Article e0147732. doi:10.1371/jo
urnal.pone.0147732

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Eynon, R., Helsper, E. (2015). Family dynamics and Internet use in Britain: What role do children play
in adults’ engagement with the Internet? Information, Communication & Society, 18, 156–171. doi:10.
1080/1369118X.2014.942344

Google Scholar | Crossref

Ferguson, C. J., Donnellan, M. B. (2014). Is the association between children’s baby video viewing
and poor language development robust? A reanalysis of Zimmerman, Christakis, and Meltzoff (2007).
Developmental Psychology, 50, 129–137. doi:10.1037/a0033628

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Fletcher, A. C., Nickerson, P., Wright, K. L. (2003). Structured leisure activities in middle childhood:
Links to well-being. Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 641–659. doi:10.1002/jcop.10075

Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI

Granic, I., Lobel, A., Engels, R. C. M. E. (2014). The benefits of playing video games. American
Psychologist, 69, 66–78. doi:10.1037/a0034857

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Hamer, M., Stamatakis, E., Mishra, G. (2009). Psychological distress, television viewing, and physical
activity in children aged 4 to 12 years. Pediatrics, 123, 1263–1268. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-1523

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Hamer, M., Stamatakis, E., Mishra, G. D. (2010). Television- and screen-based activity and mental
well-being in adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 38, 375–380. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.20
09.12.030

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Houghton, S., Hunter, S. C., Rosenberg, M., Wood, L., Zadow, C., Martin, K., Shilton, T. (2015).
Virtually impossible: Limiting Australian children and adolescents daily screen based media use. BMC
Public Health, 15, Article 5. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-15-5

Google Scholar | Crossref

Iannotti, R. J., Kogan, M. D., Janssen, I., Boyce, W. F. (2009). Patterns of adolescent physical activity,
screen-based media use, and positive and negative health indicators in the U.S. and Canada. Journal
of Adolescent Health, 44, 493–499. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.10.142

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook
activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58, 162–171. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.20
11.08.004

Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI

Kremer, P., Elshaug, C., Leslie, E., Toumbourou, J. W., Patton, G. C., Williams, J. (2014). Physical
activity, leisure-time screen use and depression among children and young adolescents. Journal of
Science and Medicine in Sport, 17, 183–187. doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2013.03.012

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Lanningham-Foster, L., Jensen, T. B., Foster, R. C., Redmond, A. B., Walker, B. A., Heinz, D., Levine,
J. A. (2006). Energy expenditure of sedentary screen time compared with active screen time for
children. Pediatrics, 118, e1831–e1835. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1087

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Lenhart, A., Smith, A., Anderson, M., Duggan, M., Perrin, A. (2015). Teens, technology and
friendships. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/06/teens-technology-and-friendships/

Google Scholar

Linebarger, D. L., Vaala, S. E. (2010). Screen media and language development in infants and
toddlers: An ecological perspective. Developmental Review, 30, 176–202. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2010.03.0
06

Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI

Luyckx, K., Soenens, B., Goossens, L., Beckx, K., Wouters, S. (2008). Identity exploration and
commitment in late adolescence: Correlates of perfectionism and mediating mechanisms on the
pathway to well-being. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 27, 336–361. doi:10.1521/jscp.2008.2
7.4.336

Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI

Morey, R. D., Chambers, C. D., Etchells, P. J., Harris, C. R., Hoekstra, R., Lakens, D., . . .Zwaan, R.
A. (2016). The Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative: Incentivizing open research practices through
peer review. Royal Society Open Science, 3(1), Article 150547. doi:10.1098/rsos.150547

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Nelson, L. D., Simonsohn, U. (2014, September 17). Thirty-somethings are shrinking and other U-
shaped challenges. Retrieved from http://datacolada.org/27

Google Scholar

Neuman, S. B. (1988). The displacement effect: Assessing the relation between television viewing
and reading performance. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 414–440. doi:10.2307/747641

Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI

Ofcom . (2015). Children and parents: Media use and attitudes report 2015. Retrieved from http://stak
eholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/research-publications/childrens/children-parents-n
ov-15/

Google Scholar

Office for National Statistics . (2012). Ethnicity and national identity in England and Wales: 2011.
Retrieved from http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/article
s/ethnicityandnationalidentityinenglandandwales/2012-12-11/pdf

Google Scholar

O’Hara, K. (2008). Understanding geocaching practices and motivations. In CHI ’08: Proceedings of
the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1177–1186). New York, NY:
ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1357054.1357239

Google Scholar | Crossref

Parkes, A., Sweeting, H., Wight, D., Henderson, M. (2013). Do television and electronic games
predict children’s psychosocial adjustment? Longitudinal research using the UK Millennium Cohort
Study. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 98, 341–348. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2011-301508

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Przybylski, A. K. (2014). Electronic gaming and psychosocial adjustment. Pediatrics, 134, e716–
e722. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-4021

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Robinson-Cimpian, J. P. (2014). Inaccurate estimation of disparities due to mischievous responders:

Several suggestions to assess conclusions. Educational Researcher, 43, 171–185. doi:10.3102/0013
189X14534297

Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI

Ryan, R. M., Bernstein, J. H., Brown, K. W. (2010). Weekends, work, and well-being: Psychological
need satisfactions and day of the week effects on mood, vitality, and physical symptoms. Journal of
Social & Clinical Psychology, 29, 95–122. doi:10.1521/jscp.2010.29.1.95

Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI

Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.
68

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed

flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological
Science, 22, 1359–1366. doi:10.1177/0956797611417632

Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI

Sisson, S. B., Broyles, S. T., Baker, B. L., Katzmarzyk, P. T. (2010). Screen time, physical activity, and
 overweight in U.S. youth: National Survey of Children’s Health 2003. Journal of Adolescent Health,
47, 309–311. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.02.016

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Stewart-Brown, S., Tennant, A., Tennant, R., Platt, S., Parkinson, J., Weich, S. (2009). Internal
construct validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): A Rasch analysis
using data from the Scottish Health Education Population Survey. Health and Quality of Life
Outcomes, 7, Article 15. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-7-15

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

Strasburger, V. C., Donnerstein, E., Bushman, B. J. (2014). Why is it so hard to believe that media
influence children and adolescents? Pediatrics, 133, 571–573. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-2334

Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI

Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S., Joseph, S., Weich, S., . . .Stewart-Brown, S. (2007). The
Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): Development and UK validation. Health
and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5, Article 63. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-5-63

Google Scholar | Crossref

Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J. (2009). Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents: A decade of
research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 1–5. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01595.
x

Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI

Yarcheski, A., Mahon, N. E., Yarcheski, T. J. (2001). Social support and well-being in early
adolescents: The role of mediating variables. Clinical Nursing Research, 10, 163–181.

Google Scholar | SAGE Journals

Similar Articles: View all >

Screens, Teens, and Psychological Well-Being: Evidence From Three Time-Use-
Diary Studies

Amy Orben
and more...

Psychological Science

Apr 2019

The Ideal Self at Play: The Appeal of Video Games That Let You Be All You Can
Be

Andrew K. Przybylski
and more...

Psychological Science

Dec 2011

Deciding to Defect: The Effects of Video-Game Violence on Cooperative Behavior

Brad E. Sheese
and more...

Psychological Science

May 2005