how technology has improved the lives of parents essay

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 7: Technology’s Influence on Parent-Child Relationships

7.1 Technology’s Influence on Parent-Child Relationships

Well, an element of conflict in any discussion’s a very good thing.

It means everybody is taking part and nobody is left out.

― from Harvey by Mary Chase

Chapter Insights

• Two concepts that underlie parent-child relationships: the emotional context of parenting style as the balance (or imbalance) of demandingness and warmth; and relationship dynamics as the coordination of agency/communion perspectives by parent and by child.
• Parental mediation can be active, restrictive, and indirect. Active mediation involves parent-child communication, parent engagement in media content exposure, and coordinated activity to negotiate rules.
• A variety of factors related to the parents (e.g., mediacentrism), the child (e.g., age) and the context (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic) can affect parent behavior on regulating children’s use.
• Reverse mediation, or when children’s knowledge of technology exceeds parents’ and enacted to aid the parent’s use, can be a potential conflict in the relationship.
• Conflict in the parent-child relationship might occur in several ways related to technology (e.g., through parental attempts to control technology use, negotiations on content).
• Differences exist in perceived conflict in families by child age (e.g., fewer parents report conflict with children under 8 years), and changes in parent control with age. Influences on parental control can relate to the child’s advancing development (e.g., confidence, knowledge of child’s actual use, ability to stick with plans).
• Potential conflict to the parent-child relationship, to parenting, and to the child’s well-being can occur through the parent’s own technology use while with the child. Distractedness (or “technoference”) has been related to a variety of parenting consequences.
• After reading this chapter, identify what you feel inspired by, the questions that remain for you, and the steps you can take for your own technology use to be more intentional.

The Parent-Child Relationship

Relationships between parents and children are key to family well-being: as a vehicle to “successful” parenting, which means healthy child development; in the ongoing happiness of children and of parents; and in overall family satisfaction. The dynamic between parent and child is a reciprocal, emotional context through which information is communicated that guides the child’s understanding of themselves and the world; through which the parent expresses their knowledge, experience, goals, and dreams for their child; and through which the parent develops (Azar, 2006; Harach & Kuczynski, 2005). And as parenting is a social role, one conferred with certain responsibility and expectation by the society and culture in which the family lives, the relationship with the child may be viewed differently. Some may view the role with more authoritarian rights; others may view the child’s agency as a vehicle for expression that calls for a more democratic, authoritative approach (Bornstein, 2012). And some may be so overwhelmed by society’s demands and challenges that they view the role with near resignation and give authority to the child to determine their path.

And each parent-child experience is different. As we viewed Belsky’s multiple determinant model in Chapter 6, we saw how parents’ perspectives change with experience, age, gender, socialization, and developmental history. Their interactions also depend on unique characteristics of the child. And the social context factors heavily on the parent-child dynamic, particularly as support is available to buffer stressors. In short, each relationship between a parent and child is like no other. It is forever in the life of the child, and it changes over time and with changes that occur in the lives of the parent and of the child. This transactional, developmental, contextual consideration of the parent-child relationship over time has led scholars to call for using a life-course perspective when characterizing the enduring nature of the unique human experience as facilitated by technology (Dworkin et al., 2019; Shin et al., 2021).

In previous chapters we’ve gleaned the systemic, ecological, and biological forces on individuals in families and on family member subsets, and understood technology as an external force that influences the family through facilitating communication, aiding family life, and at times introducing conflict through differences in the ways that family members use technology. In Chapter 5 we understood the many ways technology can impact all domains of children’s development — cognitive, social, psychological, and physical — and differences in use and impacts as children age from infants through young adults. In Chapter 6 we reviewed basic functions of parenting that emphasize the physical health and well-being of the child (keeping the child safe and thriving); guiding the many social, emotional, cognitive, and physical aspects of the child’s development; and at times being an advocate for the child. We saw that technology could support the parent’s role in childrearing — primarily as it supports the parent as a vehicle to social and informational support, and as an expression of the parent’s identity. We also introduced other ways that parents use technology in the parenting role — with their children, and with technology as the focus of their parenting.

In this chapter we take a closer look at these dynamic elements of technology in the parent-child relationship, including how parents enact their role in childrearing through parenting about technology. Parents mediate, monitor, and moderate children’s use, and in keeping their children safe and their technology use effective, parents also model ways to use technology through their own behavior.  Parents mediate, monitor, and moderate children’s use, and in keeping their children safe and their technology use effective, parents also model ways to use technology through their own behavior. Yet there are certain “paradoxes” that affect technology’s application to the parent-child relationship (Hessel & Dworkin, 2018; Jarvenpaa & Lang, 2005). For example, we see that generational differences in exposure to technology, comfort and skill in use, and motivations for use can create a shift in a relationship’s power dynamic. This may result in friction between parent and child. This chapter will explore those possibilities and recommendations for peaceful negotiation.

This chapter will also look at technology use as it positively facilitates and influences the quality of parent-child relationship. Applications like FaceTime, texting, and social media are used to maintain communication and feelings of connectedness between parent and child, and can promote feelings of cohesion. This can be seen by the time college students spend texting or making video or voice calls to their parents while away (Vaterlaus et al., 2019), and in the heavy use of videoconferencing between parents and children, and grandparents and children, during COVID (Hamilton, et al, 2021). Indeed many parents and children are quite positive about having mobile devices as a means for continued family contact. Media multiplexity theory posits that when a “repertoire” of technologies are used, the relationship is closer (McCurdy et al., 2022).

Yet relational use can also mean the nonverbal communication that comes when a parent or child ignores the other, distracted by technology. Sadly this is an all too real scenario that can disrupt quality in the relationship. Studies suggest that parental distraction by technology can compromise secure attachment and, consequently, child development (Kildare & Middlemiss, 2019; McDaniel, 2019). Parents can also overshare online, much to the embarrassment of the child (Blum-Ross & Livingstone, 2017). These elements of technology and the parent-child relationship are explored in this chapter.

Finally, analysts of the existing literature identify both assets and challenges of current technology and the ways in which they are used to facilitate the parent-child relationship (e.g., Shin et al., 2021). The chapter closes with their observations and questions to move us forward in this important family topic.

Parenting Frameworks

To set the stage for a deeper understanding of the parent-child relationship dynamic, we’ll explore two parenting frameworks. One is a frequently used construct of the parent’s style of communicating which offers an emotional context for the relationship. The other is less well known, yet presents the balanced perspective of both actors in the relationship and the balance required for connection.

Parenting style

Parenting style is frequently studied as the emotional context through which parents assert authority or invite children’s input while guiding children’s behavior (Darling & Steinberg, 1993, 2017; Smetana, 2017). Because of this, parenting style has been conceptually and empirically related to measurable elements of childrearing, such as demonstration of support, relational depth, and parent–child conflict (Aloia & Warren, 2019), which in turn contribute to myriad child outcomes (Smetana, 2017).

Baumrind’s (1971) parenting style construct uses demonstrations at the intersection of warmth and demandingness as indication of authoritative (balanced), authoritarian (high demandingness, low warmth), permissive (low demandingness, high warmth), and neglectful (low demandingness, low warmth) childrearing. Contemporary perspectives on Baumrind’s construct encourage adaptations through a cultural and contextual lens, and consideration of factors such as parenting beliefs that moderate demonstrations of style (Smetana, 2017). More domain-specific applications have been suggested which are sensitive to the interplay between parent’s goals, child’s needs, and parenting processes. [1]

Examples of parenting style and parental mediation have found, in general, that those who are more permissive (higher in warmth over control) are less likely to restrict children’s screen time, while those who are more authoritarian are more likely to do so. In a 2009 study, Bumpass and Werner explored types of parental technology regulation. They studied 113 children in 3rd to 6th grades and 109 mothers, identifying four clusters based on rules, enforcement strategies, consequences, and child adjustment. Traditional mothers reported rules related to time, permission, and co-viewing. Technology-specific mothers used blocking software, filtering, and removal of privileges. Passive mothers voiced rules that required only minimal parental supervision, and they were more watchful of the child’s interest. And the children of parents with few rules (e.g., neglectful) reported slightly higher levels of internalizing problems such as depression and anxiety, and demonstrated slightly lower levels of prosocial behavior.

Wartella et al. (2013) found a parallel between parenting style and family media practices. Looking at families with children between birth to 8 years, those in mediacentric households (reporting approximately 11 hours or more per day) were more permissive than those who were media moderate or “media light.” Children in mediacentric homes are also more likely to have televisions in their bedrooms.

As demonstration of the complexity of applying the parenting style construct to the parent-child relationship with technology, a study of 504 parent-teen (12–17 year old) pairs proposed a model linking parenting style, online relational behaviors, and relational quality (Aloia & Warren, 2019). The researchers hypothesized that parental behaviors such as sending comforting messages and sharing material would mediate (i.e., be a conveyor for) parenting style and parent-child relationship quality including parent-child conflict and relational depth. In fact, although they validated previous research linking parenting style to relationship quality (e.g., enhanced parent-child conflict with authoritarian or permissive parenting), they found no relationship between parenting style, online relational behaviors by the parents, and relationship quality. Authoritarian parenting showed no relationship to any of the online strategies (comforting messages, material sharing, planning behaviors), and authoritative parenting showed positive and significant relationships to all three, yet permissive parenting also related significantly to two of the actions (comforting messages and material sharing). Planning behaviors and positive messages online were positively related to parental comfort, yet planning behaviors and material sharing were also related to perceived conflict. The authors observed methodological limitations (e.g., data from self-report) as a cause for the unexpected result, but also suggested that, ​​with regard to mediated communication channels, parents and children may develop unique norms (p. 53). As Dworkin, et al. (2019) observe,

“The insurgence of technology has completely changed the family landscape, challenging what we know and requiring a reassessment of how we understand family relationships during adolescence, a time when technology acquires new meaning for developing and maintaining interpersonal relationships. (p. 514).”

Agency and Communion

Facilitating the child’s well-being related to technology through and while maintaining a positive relationship with the child is no small feat for parents. In promoting the child’s development, the relationship must be a balance of agency and communion by both individuals: assertion of the parent’s power while keeping in mind communion with the child; promotion of the child’s agency and independence, while keeping in mind the relationship. In promoting the child’s development, the relationship must be a balance of agency and communion by both individuals: assertion of the parent’s power while keeping in mind communion with the child; promotion of the child’s agency and independence, while keeping in mind the relationship. Unlike parenting style, which assesses the actions of the parent, perspectives of agency and communion regard both actors in the relationship (Heck & Pincus, 2001; Wiggins, 1991). Each person, in interaction with the other, asserts an action reflecting dimensions of both coordinates. Conflict arises when both are seeking agency (or power) more than communion. As related to parent-child relationships, conflicts occur with both child noncompliance and resistance to parents requests (high agency/low communion) and with parent resistance to children’s requests (high agency/low communion) (Eisenberg, 1992).

For example, if my partner and I are deciding on a vacation location, and I want to go to the mountains and they want to go to the beach, as we both assert our agency (power) in our desires, we compromise the value of communion (joint happiness). We are at a standstill and our relationship suffers. If, however, through discussion, we listen to each other about the interests of the other with a true value for the relationship and we come to compromise, we are more balanced in our individual agency and communion. Within the parent-child relationship, the parent’s actions are tempered by understanding the developmental age and ability of the child, and changes in that development over time (Heck & Pincus, 2001). Agency by the parent is, in part, a personal expression of fulfilling the responsibilities of childrearing. The joint balance of agency and communion between parent and child in negotiation and understanding is within this structure of safety and growth.

The ecological context is a consideration for both parent-child relationship models when applied to new media and digital technology. As observed in previous chapters, interactions and dynamics of the relationship are influenced by ecological contexts of the microsystem of the family, and by exosystems, macrosystems, and chronosystems. These systems create influences on the development of both the child and the parent, and on the conditions in which the family lives. Technology access and use and qualities of the devices and applications are external and inherent influences in each of the systems that can both facilitate and challenge relational dynamics (Navarro & Tudge, 2022; Lanigan, 2009).

Parental Mediation and the Parent-Child Relationship

Fully 98% of parents in a recent U.S. study believe it is the parent’s responsibility to protect children from online content (Auxier et al., 2020), compared to 65% expecting the government or technology (78%) companies to bear responsibility. While most parents (71%) are aware of and concerned about the amount of time children 11 and younger are spending with screens (Auxier et al., 2020), more (84%) report feeling confident that they know how much screen time is too much. Most (71%) believe that widespread use of smartphones might be harmful to their children’s socioemotional learning. There is also concern by most about exposure to online predators (63%), sexually explicit content (60%), and violent content (59%). While bullying is a general concern of many parents, the majority (96% of parents of children 5–11) report that their child has not been bullied online (Auxier et al., 2020).

As parents assert their responsibilities to keep children safe online and guide their development, potential areas of conflict include:

• Parental attempts to regulate use.
• Parental concern over potentially negative consequences of internet use that can lead to over-restrictions on use.
• An imbalance of power as expertise in technology use varies between parent and child.
• Counter modeling of technology by parents’ own use (e.g., do as I say, not as I do)
• Parent invasion of children’s online social space.

The majority of families don’t perceive significant conflict around technology. Parents of young children (birth to age 8) don’t perceive regulating children’s technology use to be a conflict (Wartella et al., 2013). Even parents of older children (8 to 18 years) don’t report significant struggles. In a 2016 Commonsense Media report, nearly two-thirds of parents (62%) disagreed that getting a child to turn off their smartphone or tablet was a struggle. The majority (85%) agreed that monitoring child safety was important, and nearly the same amount (81%) disagreed that the child was less likely to communicate face-to-face. That said, parents of boys and of those children with lower grades did report greater struggle. Similarly, a 2018 report of families in the European Union also determined that most do not report conflict on technology use (Livingstone et al., 2015).

In large part, there is optimism that the lack of conflict observed in families is the result of technology oversight integrated into parenting practices and the parent-child relationship. Technology and adolescence researcher Candice Ogders (2018) observes,

Because online problems can be largely predicted by young people’s vulnerabilities offline, much of our existing knowledge about what promotes healthy child development is applicable even in what seems like a foreign digital landscape. Strategies such as the maintenance of supportive parent–child relationships that encourage disclosure, parental involvement in the activities of their children, and the avoidance of overly restrictive or coercive monitoring will help to support adolescents and keep them safe online, just as they do offline.

In the next section we explore types of mediation practices in families, and the potential for conflict, and the opportunities for parent-child communication.

Mediation practices

Mediation practices vary by type and family (Rudi & Dworkin, 2018). Frequently, mediation practices are labeled as active  or “enabling” (of positive technology use) or restrictive. A recent qualitative study with 40 parents of Australian teens (Page, 2021) identified five mediation strategies, three of which were active: physical observation, digital surveillance, and trust-based and discursive strategies; one restrictive: restriction and control through social or technical means; and one (as alluded to in Chapter 6), indirect: talking with other parents. Parents’ active mediation occurs through direct parent-to-child interaction and conversation about media’s effects. Co-viewing or co-participation (such as playing games) enables parents to actively mediate and monitor children’s exposure and scaffold healthy use. More restrictive mediation means setting rules regarding the time spent or content viewed. It can also mean “e-rewards,” in which parents withhold or grant technology use in recognition of good behavior. More restrictive mediation means setting rules regarding the time spent or content viewed. It can also mean “e-rewards,” in which parents withhold or grant technology use in recognition of good behavior. Across the approaches, restrictive mediation can reduce negative media effects, and co-viewing or “enabling” can enhance or facilitate media’s positive effects (Coyne et al., 2017).

The EU Kids Online report (2020) surveyed children age 9–16 years in 19 countries. An average of 33% said their parents actively talk to them about the internet, 30% said sometimes, and 37% said never. Across countries, on average, higher percentages of children at younger ages reported parent discussion about the internet “at least sometimes:” 67% of 9–11 year olds, 61% of 12–14 year olds, and 54% of those 16 and older. When asked about active mediation strategies by parents, friends, and teachers, the highest percentages were reported for parents (e.g., 64% reported that parents “help me when something bothers me on the internet,” compared with 45% friends and 35% teachers). Internet safety is a common topic of mediation, with 85% of EU children reporting that their parents talk about this. More technical controls are far less frequently reported (22%, on average, report parental control through GPS monitoring, use of software that blocks or filters internet content, or tracking applications) . Also, a minority of children — about 15% — reported restrictions on using a web camera, downloading music, or using social media. That said, there are very clear differences in social media use restrictions by age, with the majority of children age 9–11 indicating that they cannot use social media.

The resolution of “conflict” with mediation is more nuanced than might be believed. Recent research with Australian families of teens revealed the range of ways that parents negotiating technology use with their teenagers (Page, 2021). Traditional mediation strategies may be used, but when they are not successful parents turn to other strategies, such as trust-based and discursive (reasoned negotiation) ones. Similarly, in interview research with pre-teen and teenage children (n=23) and their parents (n=18, Blackwell et al., 2016), children expressed the desire for shared expectations, rather than more attention to the issue of technology. They claimed that parents primarily told them what not to do, and didn’t have a very accurate perception of either the quantity or quality of their screen time, or its effects on them. The interviews unlocked a more complex dynamic than of parents establishing rules and children breaking them. They identified a give-and-take in negotiating family life, in which children’s needs and desires for technology use are taken into consideration, and reflect nuance — for example, when “rule violation” is acceptable. The authors concluded that families respect the developing teen’s need for privacy and independence, while maintaining  consistent and realistic expectations around work, attention, and the interests of the whole family to better manage household technology use.

Influences on parental mediation

Age of child.

Parental restrictions on children’s technology use largely curve with the child’s age — with monitoring occurring through co-use in early childhood and middle childhood, then tapering off through adolescence.

Naab (2018) refers to early childhood parenting mediation as “trusteeship,” as the cognition and communication skill limitations of the very young child confer responsibilities on the parent to oversee their access and safe use as they make the transition to mediating children’s own active, independent use. Co-viewing with young children appears to be predominantly through traditional media including books, TV, smartphones, and tablets, and less so with games (Connell et al., 2015). As an indication of the blend of parental agency in the role and accommodating a child’s need, some parents may use media to soothe babies who are fussy and demonstrate poor self-regulation. Mediation with school age children can be restrictive (limiting use of hardware or software, including taking away technology as a punishment), monitoring (tracking use, messages, and the child’s location), and active (talking to children about their technology use) (Auxier et al., 2020; Blum-Ross et al., 2018; Livingstone et al., 2015).

Parents’ conversations with their children about the content of their media also varies by child age. In Commonsense Media’s 2016 study of parents and their teens and “tweens,” parents were more likely to talk with their 12–14 year olds about media content while watching television, viewing apps on a device, using a computer for something other than homework, and playing videogames than with their teenagers; only when it came to social media did parents report higher frequencies of discussing content with children. Coyne et al. (2017) observe that research has yet to determine the interplay between parents’ mediation strategies and more specific child characteristics.

Family demographic differences

Parents’ education, income, gender, and age may influence mediation. Parents who are higher in income and educational attainment and who demonstrate more comfort with technology may exercise more mediational practices. Livingstone et al. (2015) determined socioeconomic differences in mediation strategies and attitudes in a sample of parents of primarily 4- to 7-year-old children in seven countries, including England, Finland, and Russia. Families with less income, formal education, who are non-White, and whose parents measure higher on depression are more likely to report higher rates of media consumption. When surveyed, many parents note that media provides a safe, inexpensive, and available form of entertainment for their children (Livingstone et al., 2018). Similarly, Wartella et al.’s (2013) observation of permissive parenting style and mediacentrism, noted earlier, also showed demographic correlations. Parents who were lower-income and single reported greater consumption of media in the household than those with other demographic characteristics. Media was reported as a favorite family activity, and mothers were more likely to report using it as a parenting tool (e.g., keeping a child occupied and safe while she attended to other duties).  It should be noted, however, that in a U.S. sample Connell et al. (2015) found scant relationships to co-viewing with young children by parent education level or race. Parents in the EU with more education and income used a diversity of mediation strategies and encouraged non-school media use for learning. Cross national variation in parent mediation strategies has been found among the Finnish (actively engaged), Czech (passive), and in EU and UK countries and Russia (restrictive) (Helsper et al., 2013).

Mothers are more likely to demonstrate mediation than fathers (Connell et al., 2015; CSM, 2016). In their research among Portuguese school-age children, Ferreira et al. (2017) identified not only parent gender differences in mediation by type of activity (e.g., fathers actively mediating children’s use while playing videogames), but gendered perspectives by children of parents’ technology mediation. Children perceived fathers as more skilled in using technology, reported that their technology was for work (vs. mothers’ devices that were to be shared), and that the father’s mediation was more technical (e.g., uploading, removing software) and mother’s more digital (e.g., exposure to content quality).

Parents’ technology use, comfort, and skill

Parents’ mediation strategies appear to relate to their attitudes toward technology, their competencies, and their own use, as observed in research in EU countries (Brito et al., 2017; Livingstone et al., 2018) and research in the US (e.g., Commonsense Media, 2016; Wartella et al., 2013). Observing the construct of reasoned action applied to technology acceptance (Ajzen, 1985), Nikken and Opree’s (2018) survey of parents of young children (ages 1–9) in the Netherlands identified basic proficiency associated with the ease of active co-use. Advanced and basic proficiency with technology related to restrictive mediation, and advanced proficiency related to imposing technical restrictions. As Naab (2018) observed from in depth interviews with 29 parents of young children, parents are often uncertain about digital strategies and gain proficiency over time through interaction with their child, acquisition of knowledge about technology’s affordances and challenges, and their own comfort with the interplay between themselves and their child’s needs. Parents are often uncertain about digital strategies and gain proficiency over time through interaction with their child, acquisition of knowledge about technology’s affordances and challenges, and their own comfort with the interplay between themselves and their child’s needs.

Parental use can influence the effectiveness of their mediation strategies. In the Commonsense Media study with over 1100 parents in 2016, parents spend more than 9 hours a day with screen media (especially personal media like smartphones) . A majority (78%) believe they are good media and technology models for their children. Yet research with parent-teen pairs indicates that when teens see parents’ time on their phones similar to their own, they question parental advice and role modeling (Commonsense Media, 2016; Livingstone et al., 2018).

Child guidance and the power differential

Children are challenged when their parents are ‘all thumbs’ with using technology.

The picture of parental mediation can get complicated as a generation of children grow up with technology in ways far different than those of their parents, and a potential power dynamic is shifted. Livingstone et al. 2018 observe this particularly in lower-income and immigrant homes, as children gain more comfort and skill with technology than their parents (Livingstone et al., 2018), or when children need to assist parents with language translation and technology. Perhaps this is why teens don’t turn to parents for safety issues related to technology (Blum-Ross et al., 2018; Commonsense Media, 2018), or for information on sexual health. Flores and Barroso (2018) identified SES differences in parental technology comfort and use and the ability to talk to their teenagers about sex. Limited knowledge of how technology works, including realities of peer communication, privacy issues and laws, and the potential for exposure to imagery, act as barriers to parental communication that supports the child’s sexual health.

Various scholars have characterized this complicated parent-child power dynamic (Dworkin et al., 2019). Livingstone across 19 countries, on average 40% of 9–16-year-olds report often or very often helping parents when they found something difficult online, and 29% sometimes helping parents. This differential in knowledge can upset the traditional family hierarchy. (2009) refers to tech-knowledgeable children in the household as “youthful experts,” while Katz (2010) calls them ‘media brokers.’ Correa (2014) labels the knowledge sharing as “bottom-up technology transmission,” and the EU Kids on the Internet 2020 report calls this “reverse mediation.” The latter reports that, across 19 countries, on average 40% of 9–16-year-olds report often or very often helping parents when they found something difficult online, and 29% sometimes helping parents. This differential in knowledge can upset the traditional family hierarchy. In interviews with parent-teen pairs in 1995, Kiesler et al. (2000) determined that fathers’ attitudes prevented them from seeking help from their children about internet-related issues; the fathers voiced concern about a shift in their parental authority.

In a later study with Belgian parents and teens, Nelissen and Van den Bulck (2017) predicted that reports of conflict would correlate with parental requests for assistance with technology. The survey included questions like “Do you ever get into an argument with your child/with your parent about (a) television use, (b) tablet use, (c) smartphone use, or (d) computer/laptop use?” It used a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “(almost) never” (=0) to “(almost) always” (=4). With regard to media guidance, the pairs were asked “If you think about your children, how often do they teach you to use the following media, technologies, and/or applications?/If you think about your parents, how often do you teach them to use the following media, technologies, and/or applications?” Again, a 5-point Likert scale was used and applied to 13 technologiesm including smartphones, online purchases, and tablets. After controlling for demographic variables (including parent and child gender and age), there were significant associations between a parent help seeking/guidance by children and parent-child conflict. The authors observed that child guidance was dominant on some technologies — smartphones and specific apps — but not all.

An example of context as influence on parental mediation: The COVID-19 pandemic

When conditions encourage children’s technology use, parental mediation can shift. Clearly, the COVID-19 pandemic was an influence. As their children connected with friends, attended school, and sought out hobbies online during isolation and quarantine, parents’ efforts to mediate children’s screen time changed. As a report by Pew (2021) indicates, fewer parents reduced children’s time on screens and took away children’s smartphone privileges. On the other hand, more parents were active in checking children’s exposure online, and parents’ beliefs that their children spent too much time online nearly doubled. Among parents of children 11 or younger, in 2020, 28% felt their children spent too much time on their phones. In 2021, that percentage climbed to 42%. (See figure below).

With regard to older children, parents reported that, during COVID, connections through videoconferencing, and with resident children through gaming and time spent together, deepened personal relationships (Joyce et al., 2021).

Technology’s Role in Parent-Child Communication

The primary reason that parents secure phones for their children, even before age 12, is to communicate with them (Auxier et al., 2020). Through texting and through voice and video calls, parents can convey information to children that supports their development, enable coordination, and promote closeness. The efficiency of using ICT for communication also makes co-parenting relationships easier, such in the case of divorced and separated parents (Ganong et al., 2012; Saini & Pollack, 2018), and maintains parent-child connections during separations, including military deployment (Carter & Renshaw, 2016) and immigration (Casmiro & Nico, 2016; Karraker, 2015).

Shin et al.’s (2021) literature review on technology designs that foster the parent-child relationship identified factors indicative of family qualities and technology-specific conditions. They include:

• reciprocity in the family,
• reinforcement of transparency,
• affection and trust,
• physical proxy of each other through an object or interface design,
• accessibility, level of technology sophistication and communication resource, and
• enjoyable, age-appropriate shared content between parents and children, and situational awareness and routine.

When parents and children are at a distance, system design that favors media richness (closer approximation of real life) and synchronicity, and the ability to maintain privacy, are positive. Challenges to the parent-child relationship occur through discrepancies in expected communication between parent and child(ren), through parents’ complex emotions toward parenting due to their busy schedule, and, from the technological standpoint, from access limitations. As this section of the chapter indicates, the use of technology as a means to facilitate parent-child relationships is quite a complex issue. Although there are elements specific to digital media and the programming of the for communication and interaction, challenges arise through human factors inherent in the individuals and their relationships.

Connections, for example, may not always be smooth, and whether due to technology or the actor, complications can arise. Use of technology to maintain the parent-child relationship may lead to what Parrenas and Boris (2010, as cited by Karraker, 2015 p. 13) refer to as the “antithesis of intimacy.” Expectations for maintaining communication through the ease afforded by digital media can impinge on children’s or parents’ independence. Connections, for example, may not always be smooth, and whether due to technology or the actor, complications can arise. The complicated power dynamics discussed above can and do interfere with satisfaction when using technology for parent-child communications. And although teleconferencing made parent-child visits possible during COVID-19 for those facing separation due to welfare issues, technological and human barriers prevented this alternative to in-person visits from being successful (Goldberg et al., 2021).

Shin et al. (2021) observe developmental differences reflected in the availability of technology and use by parents and children that affect satisfaction. For young children, technology that is playful, age-appropriate, and encourages creativity can foster engagement by both parent and child. School-age children and their parents have a strong desire to be together, learn more about each other, and feel a sense of warmth and security. Yet designs may not be user- or communication-friendly, and differences in ability and access can create barriers to effective use. For older children (e.g., adolescents), when parents and teens have access to phones and social media, and when a common time for interaction is apparent, communication appears effective. Yet as Dworkin et al. (2019) observe, the paradox of connecting and distancing can make parents’ use of social networking and unscheduled calls feel intrusive and like a privacy invasio.

Assets and challenges are apparent for specific populations of parents and children as well. Parents and children attempting to maintain communication through technology across legal separations face particular scrutiny with regard to child privacy and safety (Saini & Pollack, 2018).  In a survey with 106 family caseworkers, Saini and Pollack (2018) identified that the majority of legally separated parents and children use technology to maintain communication. This can be quite positive, as they can each keep abreast of the life details of the other and maintain connectedness, particularly when a child is long-distance and living in the other parent’s home or in a foster home. Caseworkers also saw it as a way to protect the child from conflict in the parent-to-parent relationship, and enhance the child’s feeling of safety. Yet rampant posting on social media diminishes the child’s safety, as well as the privacy of the parent who may closely monitor and track the child. As with other cases representing the range of technologies’ uses and affordances, the picture is a complex one. Because of this, the caseworkers in Saini and Pollack’s study advocates for ICT not as a replacement for parent-child connections, but as a way to enhance communication.

Possible disruption in the relationship: Parents’ own technology use

As noted above, parents’ own technology use is a significant factor in their attitudes about monitoring and mediating children’s use, and in shaping and modeling children’s technology consumption. Samual’s (2017) counter response to the argument that smartphones were destroying a generation (Twenge, 2017) was that smartphones distracted parents, leading them to demonstrate “minimal parenting.” McDaniel’s (2019) and Kildare and Middlemiss’ (2017) reviews of the literature concerning parents’ use of technology when with their children paint a third picture of communication in the relationship: that of nonverbal messaging through distracted use. Noting that the majority of research in this area has focused on parents of young children, McDaniel observes the many reasons parents would use their phones with a child present. Not only do they seek information and communicate with others, seek emotional support, or continue work, but their use attempts to relieve the boredom of childrearing. This “ technoference ” (McDaniel’s term for the “everyday intrusions and interruptions of devices in our face-to-face interactions”) can have potentially serious consequences to the child through the parents’ ability to connect and engage and through the child’s own observation of the parent’s distracted action, and can negatively impact the parent’s own emotional state. Parenting outcomes of being distracted by one’s phone include reduced verbal and nonverbal interactions with the child, reduced awareness and sensitivity to the child’s needs and responses, and reduced coordination and communication in co-parenting. McDaniel, and Kildare and Middlemiss, note that these responses are directly associated with the relational mechanisms in attachment formation, although longitudinal research to date hasn’t validated these assumptions.

Additional parenting consequences of being distracted by technology include the difficulty of multitasking between the device and the needs and attention of the child, and time displacement (e.g., focusing on a phone compared to active time with a child). From the child’s perspective, they may express dissatisfaction in the time spent with the parent and in turn, feel ignored. Kildare and Middlemiss cite a study in which 32% (of 6,000) children reported feeling unimportant when their parents were distracted by a phone. As the authors of both review articles observe, more research is needed to more definitively understand specific dimensions of parental technology use with children (e.g., how much time is spent on phones when with children, specific activities parents do while on their phones) and impacts on parenting, the relationship, and child development. They also observe that it’s not reasonable to expect parents not to engage with technology when with their children, observing the complex reasons that parents use technology. They advocate for education on appropriate use, and engagement in ways that are healthy for the relationship and for the child. This resource from Zero to Three offers parents ways to focus on their children, not their phones.

“Sharenting”

As discussed in Chapter 6, parents express their caregiver and relational identities online through blogging, posting on social media, and texting ideas and images of the children to others (Blum-Ross & Livingstone, 2017). A challenge can occur in the parent-child relationship when children object to their images and information about themselves being shared, particularly without permission ( Saner (2018 ) refers to this as a “permanent digital tattoo”). While not as overt an expression of distraction by technology use as those discussed above, “sharenting” can still send a message to the child that their feelings are not being considered. Blum-Ross and Livingstone (2017) determined that when parents of younger children share images and experiences of their child and childrearing, they may also have misgivings about the archival nature of the internet and the possibility of their posts resurfacing when the child is older. Parents also express a certain element of guilt, part of the complex feelings parents describe, as discovered in Shin et al. (2022)’s review of the literature of parent-child relationships through technological innovation. Parents hold an awareness of the child’s aging to the point of awareness and expressing feelings of dissatisfaction with their private information being shared. Blum-Ross and Livingstone share this incident, which directly points to the potential conflict with “sharenting” and the need for parent-child communication to maintain communion:

Harvey confronted this issue when his 6-year-old son Archie began to express discomfort at appearing on the blog. Harvey described how Archie had begun to ask what the photos Harvey took were for, questioning “is this a photo for you, Daddy, or is it a photo for the blog”’ Increasingly Archie would refuse to be in pictures, eventually exacting revenge by covertly using Harvey’s phone to post an unflattering picture of Harvey eating a sandwich on his dad’s Instagram feed. Harvey was working with Archie to help Archie decide what “he wants me to write” so he could be more in control. Yet, finding himself cajoling his son, Harvey described a struggle between respecting his son’s boundaries and keeping his commitment to the blog and his readership among the wider blogging community. (Blum-Ross & Livingstone, 2017, p. 116).

Focus on technology-facilitated parent-child relationships in young adulthood

A significant amount of research has examined the role of technology in the parent-child relationship during young adulthood. One conclusion is that the availability and use of ICT is a positive influence on this relationship. A review by Hessel and Dworkin (2018) identified differences in how young adults use technology to communicate with parents, compared with siblings and grandparents. The authors indicated that when children go to college (given that college students are an often sampled group in this research area), there may be a stronger focus on the relationship, and technology has an intentional purpose. While they indicate that the research on persons other than parents is limited, young adults appear to use a variety of methods to maintain relationships with parents through technology, including adding parents as “friend”’ on social media, texting, and sending email (though the Hessel and Dworkin review and McCurdy et al.’s 2022 research with college students validates that email use has declined). Purposes include utility (sharing, asking for help), immediacy, and emotional connections. Relationship quality appears to be positive, as demonstrated by emerging adults’ reports of satisfaction, feelings of intimacy, and the number of types of media used for communication.

As an example, Vaterlaus et al. (2019), surveyed 766 young adults and adolescents (just over 10% of the sample) Young adults’ reports of using computer-mediated communication with parents (particularly text messaging when it came to both mothers and fathers) were significantly associated with feelings of closeness, togetherness, and connection in their time spent with the parent. and their parents on their use of technology together and on the notions of quantity and quality time spent. Not surprisingly (given that the young adults were away and in college), teens reported spending more time with their parents. Among the whole sample, there was a clear perceptual difference between quantity time and quality time. Young adults still sought and identified having quality time with parents. Type of media was differentiated when considering connectivity: synchronous media such as telephone calls, video chat, and texting facilitated quality interactions; fewer young adults reported using email, social networking, and texting for quality interactions. And young adults’ reports of using computer-mediated communication with parents (particularly text messaging when it came to both mothers and fathers) were significantly associated with feelings of closeness, togetherness, and connection in their time spent with the parent. The authors observe the role that technology can play in maintaining quality relationships between parents and teens, and acknowledge the challenges brought about through an individual being distracted by media when in the presence of the other. They recommend additional research and educational efforts on the benefits of using technology together in ways that foster and facilitate relationships.

Yet Hessel and Dworkin indicate that a dominant theme in the literature indicates potential challenges with autonomy, or rather the lack thereof. Frequency of contact with parents and parental over-involvement related to lower feelings of autonomy, whereas those with a strong parent-child relationship reported higher levels of autonomy. They also observe that, as noted in Chapter 5, there are differences by generational cohort, as research with college students just two years apart indicates differences in email and social networking behavior with parents.

McCurdy et al. (2022) also point to differences in communication behavior and perceived young adult/parent relationships. In interviews with 44 college students, those who used a rich communication repertoire for connection with their parents reported more closeness. Citing media multiplexity theory, the authors identified that students perceived stronger relationships due to multiple technologies affording more contact frequency, more ways to make connection, and a stronger parental social presence. Interestingly, young adults also were strategic about differentials in technology competence and access by their parents to maintain boundaries. Knowing what skills their parents had, and which applications they did and didn’t use, worked to their advantage as ways to find necessary separation for their individuation. From Miller-Ott et al.’s (2014) research, frequent texting, establishing rules around availability, repetitive contact, and relational arguments were more direct strategies for healthy individuation with connectedness.

Research also suggests new opportunities for connecting with parents: gaming, social media, video creation, even family genealogy applications. Given the range of potential technologies for interaction and differentials in access and use together, Hessel and Dworkin (2018, p. 369) wisely observe,

Rather than building research around specific technology, such as Facebook, categorizing technology options by context will produce findings that are more transferable and durable. Using theoretical foundations such as Media Richness Theory may help to identify which technology choices complement which types of communication between which family members for what purpose.

This chapter reveals complexities in the notion of the parent-child relationship and technology. Most families don’t perceive conflict, though when the focus of research, perception may be skewed depending on who is being interviewed. Positively, many children and parents manage negotiations around children’s healthy technology use, and parents practice active or other types of mediation that encourage children’s positive use. many children and parents constructively negotiate healthy technology use, and parents practice active or other types of mediation that are encouraging and maintain trust and communication in the relationship  There isn’t a need for practices that are restrictive or punitive. Active mediation strategies align with a life-course model of relationships and developmental growth that balances a respect for each individual’s ability for agency and for the communion of the relationship.

The chapter also examined the many factors that can influence the ways parents’ mediate, which can contribute to conflict or to the lack thereof. Key within these is the generational difference in parents’ own knowledge and use of technology. When children grow up knowing more, and “reverse mediation” occurs, the power dynamic can shift. In some homes, this can be sensitive. The dynamic shifts as well when parents’ technology use leads to their being distracted from their children. This sends a strong non-verbal message about the importance of the relationship, and can have damaging effects on parenting, on the relationship, and consequently on child development. As technology continues to evolve, and as generations of children and parents change in their knowledge, skills, comfort, and expectations about using technology individually and with each other, the clear message for both parents and children is one of intentionality.

As technology continues to evolve, and as generations of children and parents change in their knowledge, skills, comfort, and expectations about using technology individually and with each other, the clear message for both parents and children is one of intentionality. Shin et al. (2021) advocate for a life-course perspective in the future design of technology to promote the parent-child relationship:

Technology design that supports relationships must be responsive to the dynamic environment and transactional nature of relationships; accordingly, designers should be aware of technology’s role, and find ways to provide users with timely suggestions. The family life course development approach provides a theoretical lens by which design can incorporate a family’s transactional nature. The theory’s central assumption is that the family’s developmental process is inevitable, and that individuals’ lives change dynamically over time. It further explains how the lives of individual family members, such as parents and children, are interconnected, and how families transmit their assets and disadvantages to the next generation. [p.441:22]

For parents, technology visionary and parent danah boyd suggests approaching technology with an attitude of flexibility (Tippet, 2017):

From my perspective, it’s about stepping back and not assuming that just the technology is transformative, and saying, okay, what are we trying to achieve here? What does balance look like? What does happiness look like? What does success look like? What are these core tenets or values that we’re aiming for, and how do we achieve them holistically across our lives? And certainly, when parents are navigating this, I think one of the difficulties is to recognize that this is what your values are, and they may be different from your child’s values. And so how do you learn to sit and have a conversation of “Here’s what I want for you. What do you want? And how do we balance that?” And that’s that negotiation that’s really hard. And so I think about it in terms of all of us — how do you find your own sense of grounding?

• The volume of research on parenting styles should motivate readers interested in this concept and in parent-child relationships and technology to seek out specific, current, and cross-cultural/cultural literature. ↵

Critical Perspectives on Technology and the Family Copyright © 2022 by Susan K. Walker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Trying to Conceive
• Signs & Symptoms
• Pregnancy Tests
• Fertility Testing
• Fertility Treatment
• Weeks & Trimesters
• Staying Healthy
• Preparing for Baby
• Complications & Concerns
• Pregnancy Loss
• Breastfeeding
• School-Aged Kids
• Raising Kids
• Personal Stories
• Everyday Wellness
• Safety & First Aid
• Immunizations
• Food & Nutrition
• Active Play
• Pregnancy Products
• Nursery & Sleep Products
• Nursing & Feeding Products
• Clothing & Accessories
• Toys & Gifts
• Ovulation Calculator
• Pregnancy Due Date Calculator
• How to Talk About Postpartum Depression
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board

How Technology Gets in the Way of Parenting

Why it matters, taking control of your technology use, be a good role model.

If you are like most parents, you worry about what technology is doing to your kids. Are they on their phones too much? Are they sharing too much on social media ? Do they know how to have a face-to-face conversation? In fact, research indicates just how addicted to technology kids truly are and how it is impacting them. For instance, this generation's technology use is increasing bullying , decreasing their ability to empathize , and robbing them of creativity. In fact, colleges and corporations are reporting that young people who have grown up in this tech-savvy world are lacking in emotional skills compared to kids a decade ago.

So, what is a parent to do? Many times, as parents we develop cell phone contracts , limit screen time , set timers, and take away technology as a form of discipline. But, what if the issue with technology, social media, and the Internet in our kids' lives has more to do with how much we parents allow our own technology use to interfere with our parenting? What if checking email and social media is robbing our kids of crucial interactions with us?

They want to have a conversation or ask us a tough question, but we are busy checking our phones, running through emails from work, or scrolling through social media. So, they see the device in our hands and either give up or go search the Internet for the answer instead. When this happens, we are missing out on crucial parenting opportunities.

According to a study in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics , parents' use of technology may not only be robbing families of learning opportunities, but it is also causing negative interactions as well as internal conflicts and tension in the home.

Not only are parents struggling to balance it all, but smartphones, tablets, and other electronic devices are blurring the lines between the office and the home allowing parents to be "on call" for work at all hours. This turns into too little time spent interacting with kids, and too much time devoted to technology use.

It's Hard to Find Balance

In fact, the researchers from the University of Michigan C.S. Mott's Children's Hospital and Boston Medical Center who conducted the study discovered that parents are struggling to balance family time—and the desire to be present when at home—with technology-based expectations like responding to work and other demands. For instance, participants in the study consistently vocalized an internal struggle between work, technology, and family time.

You're Emotionally Disconnected

What's more, study participants reported that their emotional response to what they were reading on their mobile devices also resulted in more frequent negative reactions with their family members, especially if the email or message they were reading was bad news or contained stressful information. Parents in the study also described more attention-seeking behaviors from their children when they were engrossed in using technology, which also resulted in them snapping at their kids.

In another part of the study, the researchers observed parents eating with their children in fast-food restaurants. What they discovered is that there are fewer verbal and nonverbal reactions with children when mobile devices are being used.

It Becomes a Way to Escape

Meanwhile, other participants in the study defended their technology-use, indicating that it allowed them to plug into the outside world and served as a vital reminder that there is life beyond parenting. Many parents also reported using technology as a way to alleviate the boredom and the mundaneness that can come with parenting. All in all, it is estimated that parents use mobile devices like smartphones, wearables, and tablets upwards of three hours a day or more.

While the researchers acknowledge that parents do not have to be available to their children 100% of the time and that a little time on their own creates independence in kids , they also noted that parents are overloaded and exhausted from being pulled in so many different directions. What's more, technology has transformed the way parents interact with their kids. Unlike traditional books, newspapers, or magazines, technology commands more of a parent's attention and requires a greater emotional investment. This significant emotional investment means there is less of you available to invest in your kids.

Researchers offer some tips on taking control of your technology use . These include setting family boundaries, tracking your mobile use, and identifying your top device stressors.  

Ask the Right Questions

If you truly want to take control of your technology use, you have to ask yourself the tough questions. For instance, how often do you pull out your smartphone during dinner to check your email or respond to a text? How much time do you spend loading photos and selfies to social media rather than truly experiencing what is taking place? Or, how much time do you spend documenting your kids' lives on social media rather than truly investing in your relationship with them. Once you have taken a hard look at your own behavior, then you will know where you need to make changes.

Set Boundaries

Create a plan for your technology use. For instance, you could establish certain spaces in your home or times of day when you are completely unplugged. The obvious choices are unplugging at the dinner table or breakfast table, or refraining from using your device while in your kids' rooms at bedtime. You also could establish certain rooms in your home as technology-free zones such as a reading room or family room.

Track Your Mobile Use

Consider getting an app like "Moment" or "Quality Time" that will track your mobile use. This information can be useful in determining where and when you are spending too much time. Consequently, if 90 percent of your time is spent on social media or going through work emails, you can look for ways to reduce your technology use. You also could create a filter or block on your device to avoid the temptation to use technology during certain times at home, such as when the kids get home from school, when you get home from work, or at bedtime.

Identify Stressors

One of the key issues parents report is that sometimes interacting with their mobile device leads them to be short with their kids or snap at them. Think about when this happens in your life. If you get stressed reading work emails or you need absolute silence when working on a project for work, schedule times to do these things when you know your kids are occupied with sports or another activity. This way, you have the space and time you need to complete your tasks rather than taking away time from your kids or risk snapping at them when they interrupt you with a question.

When it comes to technology use, it's important to remember your kids are watching you. In fact, some informal studies indicate that a high percentage of kids indicate that they would like for their parents to turn off their technology.

Help Kids Discover the Benefit of Quiet

Too many times, technology is always running. The iPad is playing videos or the computer has a YouTube video on it. But, research has shown that quiet time without the interference of technology is crucial to brain development.   Think about your own situation. How many times have you been folding laundry or taking a shower and come up with a great idea for a project at work? It is during these quiet times that our brains are allowed to be most creative. Teach your kids the importance of quiet by modeling it yourself. Turn off your device and walk the dog. Resist turning on the television while you are folding laundry. If your kids see you do these things, they are more likely to model your behavior.

Use "Captured" Time to Talk

Riding in the car, sitting at the dinner table, gathering at a restaurant - those times all represent "captured" time with your kids. Consequently, you want to take advantage of that time and put the devices away. For instance, kids are more agreeable to talk with you when you are riding in the car. They do not have to make eye contact with you, especially if you are talking about a difficult or embarrassing topic. They can look out the window if they want. So, consider making short car rides to practices, to church, or to the grandparents' home technology-free. This way, you can take advantage of that time to talk. You would be surprised what you might discover while riding in the car.

Create a Technology Basket

Put a basket by the door where your family comes in and out and put your devices in that basket as soon as you get home. Ask your kids to do the same. The technology comes out of the basket when homework is done, dinner is finished, and chores are complete - whatever guidelines you want to establish. This way, you have limited distractions during crucial communication time for both you and the kids.

Provide Other Options

Too many times, parents rely on technology to fill the void during the day not only for themselves but for their kids as well. One idea for reducing technology use for the entire family is to provide other options in the home. For instance, put a few board games or a deck of cards on the table. Set a ball or frisbee by the door. Lay out Mad Libs or word search books on the coffee table. If these things are in full view, kids (and parents) are more likely to take advantage of them rather than turning to technology for entertainment.

Make Media Viewing a Family Event

Watch things together with your kids and then talk about them afterward. For instance, if your kids like watching a particular movie or YouTuber, then watch with them. Then have a conversation afterward. Consider how these things intersect with your family values. Not only are you doing something with your kids, but you also are teaching them how to use technology in a way that requires them to think about what they are watching rather than just simply consuming it.

Put Your Technology Down

Yes, it is as simple as that. If your kids see you limiting your technology use or walking away for your screen to do something else, they will likely emulate these actions in their own lives. Kids learn by example more than anything else. And, if you actively set limits on your own technology use (including not using your phone while driving) then they are likely to do the same.

Be Intentional

In other words, decide what you want your family to look like. Then, based on this picture, set goals and make a plan. There is no perfect answer or a specific line to draw when it comes to technology and parenting. Consequently, you have to decide what is right for you and your family.

Pay attention to how often your family is using technology and if you do not like what you see, make changes, starting with your own behavior. You cannot expect your kids to limit their technology if you are not doing the same thing.

A Word From Verywell

Technology has transformed the way parents interact with their children. From having kids and teens tethered to their devices and being in constant contact with parents, to splitting attention between their kids and their mobile devices, parenting does not look the same as it did a decade ago. Some of these changes are good things, like being able to text your kids when they are out.

But, some of these changes are impacting the way parents communicate with their kids in a negative. Still, it is manageable. With a little effort and a commitment to being fully present, parents can easily make technology work for them rather than against them.

Common Sense Media. Technology Addiction: Concern, Controversy, and Finding Balance .

Cyberbullying Research Center. School Bullying Rates Increase by 35% .

Radesky JS, Kistin C, Eisenberg S, et al. Parent Perspectives on Their Mobile Technology Use: The Excitement and Exhaustion of Parenting While Connected .  Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics . 2016;37(9):694-701. doi:10.1097/DBP.0000000000000357

Michigan Medicine. Plugged-In Parenting: How Parental Smartphone Use May Affect Kids .

Pew Research Center. How Teens and Parents Navigate Screen Time and Device Distractions .

Hutton JS, Dudley J, Horowitz-Kraus T, DeWitt T, Holland SK. Associations Between Screen-Based Media Use and Brain White Matter Integrity in Preschool-Aged Children .  JAMA Pediatr . 2020;174(1):e193869. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3869

By Sherri Gordon Sherri Gordon, CLC is a published author, certified professional life coach, and bullying prevention expert. 

10 ways technology has changed parenting in the last 20 years

• Raising a child is no easy feat, and a lot of factors that go into being a parent have changed over the past few decades.
• Social media can cause parents to questions themselves often or feel pressure to have perfect kids, but it can also help parents have an online network where they can seek out advice and support. 
• Parents today may sometimes opt to put their children in front of screens rather than let them play outside, which wasn't really the case 20 years ago. 
• Both parents and children can be more disconnected and less present because of screen time, so they must actively try to be mindful. 
• Visit Insider's homepage for more stories.

Today's parents are living in a very different world than the one their own parents grew up in — or raised children in.

Oftentimes parents are influenced by their environment and certain trends, so it's really not surprising that raising a child is now is different than it was a few decades ago, especially when you look at all of the new technological advances we've seen since. 

Here's a look at how being a parent has changed in the last 20 years because of technology.

Social media can cause parents to second guess themselves.

Social media can impact children , and it can also affect parents by making them feel like there is someone watching and judging everything they're doing. 

Dr. Harvey Karp, pediatrician, children's environmental health advocate and founder of Happiest Baby , told Insider that seeing the polished, idealized visions of what being a parent should be on social media can make parents seriously question their choices. 

"[Idealized online posts] can make new moms and dads doubt that they're 'doing it right,' and can lead to analysis paralysis every time they enter a discussion about parenting, like figuring out the best, smartest, most moral decisions on things like vaccinations and bed-sharing," said Karp. 

Today, some parents might feel inclined to be "best friends" with their children.

These days, there's a good chance you've seen parents post photos of their kids with captions like "My best friend."

But some experts say this relatively new urge for parents to feel like they need to be friends with their children isn't exactly ideal. And, constantly displaying a parent-child relationship online doesn't exactly help. 

Alison Rogers, former child and family therapist and co-author of " Breathing Space for New Mothers ," told Insider that she believes many adults act like friends instead of parents because they feel a lot of guilt about their time spend at work. 

"They feel like they are rarely completely with their child as their attention is divided between work obligations and parenting. They compensate by making decisions that please their child. In the past, parents were more likely to make decisions for their child's long-term welfare, even if it made their child mad at them," said Rogers. 

"Over the past few decades, I increasingly see parents who want to be their child's best friend. They'd rather not be the authority figure if it makes their child unhappy in the moment," she told Insider.

They are also expected to be part of every aspect of their kid’s lives.

Some experts argue that in today's world, parents are much more involved in their child's life than they ever were before, whether they're using online systems to track exam grades or making long-distance video calls.

But, this also means kids don't have that sense of independence that they once had.

Dr. Lea Lis, adult and child psychiatrist, told Insider that she believes much of this comes from the increased set of rules and regulations parents feel they have to follow in order to get parenting "right." 

"Parents are encouraged to get more involved. We have seen the rise of the helicopter parent; monitoring homework and every second of their free time," Lis said.

She told Insider that this is especially an issue for teenagers and their parents, as these young adults often feel like they should be doing more at every second of the day because they feel pressured to get into a good college.

"Their parents suffer from the same anxiety, push them to perform, rather than socialize, and are afraid to let them fail," she added. 

Today’s parents seemingly have it easier when it comes to keeping track of their kids.

Figuring out your kid's location wasn't always so simple and it likely led many parents 20 years ago to worry about their child, especially in the case of changed plans or missed curfews. 

Thanks to cell phones and modern technology, a watchful parent can keep a pretty close eye on their kids, which can be a positive thing in terms of safety.

Janice M. Robinson-Celeste, founder and editor-in-chief of Successful Black Parenting magazine, told Insider that being able to track a child's location can "offer some peace of mind" to parents who tend to worry often. 

Today, parents need to pay more attention to what their kids are absorbing online.

Dr. Rick Capaldi, practicing family therapist and author of "21st Century Parenting," told Insider that it's important for people to recognize that children face dangers and challenges, like cyberbullying, that a lot of older adults didn't experience when they were growing up.

After all, decades ago, the internet was still in some of its earliest stages in terms of developing social-media platforms and chat rooms. Plus, kids weren't able to access the internet at all times from portable devices.

Today, though, parents are often expected to monitor their children's internet access closely, which can be a huge challenge.

"[Kids] spend more time staring into screens than we ever imagined possible, absorbing incredible amounts of information, oftentimes beyond a parent's control. The consequence of these influences and societal pressures can be horrifying," he added. 

Both parents and children can feel more disconnected and less present because of screen time.

All of that screen time has other negative effects as well, like leaving parents and children feeling more disconnected than ever before.

Joree Rose , a licensed marriage and family therapist, told Insider that this means "parents have to work extra hard in practicing and role-modeling presence with their children."

Rose explained that, in recent years, mindfulness plays a much more important role in parenting.

"This is a very different paradigm from the 'kids should be seen and not heard' mindset of the 1950s. Now, parents not only need to hear their kids, but also value their experience and help them to increase their emotional intelligence so they can learn to self-regulate their overwhelming thoughts and emotions," she told Insider.

Read More : 10 ways you're sabotaging your relationship with your kids

There's often pressure for parents to create the illusion of perfection for social media.

Social media can put a lot of pressure on kids, but these platforms also make parents feel like they need to step up their game no matter what they're doing.

Rebecca Jackson, vice president of programs and outcomes at Brain Balance Achievement Centers, told Insider that this added pressure "of unrealistic perfection" is just another thing some parents tend to stress over.

"The widespread addition of social media to our lives has turned what used to be private family moments into a public stage, with all of the celebrations and pressure that go along with having an audience for our every move," she added.  

She said this can put pressure on parents to make sure their kids have clean faces, brushed hair, coordinated outfits just so daily life is "post-worthy." 

Parents may opt to put their children in front of screens rather than let them play outside.

20 years ago, it may not have been unusual to let your kids independently play outside for hours on end. But Jackson said over the past few years, many parents have changed what their kids can and cannot do and have become focused on "structured activities, including more time inside." 

"Time inside for most kids beyond 8 years of age seems to revolve around various versions of screens and technology. While much of this technology can be entertaining, educational, and provide value, it nearly always involves less movement and muscle engagement," she said.

In some cases, seriously restricting outdoor playtime can make it tough for kids to foster a sense of independence or feel comfortable being out in the world on their own. 

With so much convenient technology, parents also have an easier time capturing memorable moments with their children.

Fortunately for today's parents who are a bit tech-savvy, smartphones with cameras make it easy to capture and remember every special moment, said Robinson-Celeste.

"Cell phones allow for daily documentation of your baby's life from newborn to college via now easily accessible cell-phone videos and photos instead of carrying a separate camera around," she told Insider. 

And parents have more of a community to turn to than they may have before.

Having an online network isn't always a bad thing for parents — it can give them more of a platform and allow them to connect with other parents who are dealing with similar struggles and successes.

"Communities, both online and offline, have blossomed across the country to help kith and kin commiserate and boost their confidence with a flow of smart ideas and trusted resources," said Karp.

He said the internet has created a space for parents to share solace, support, and guidance with one another, which can be incredibly valuable for anyone who may feel alone or lost while raising their kids. 

• 10 pieces of parenting wisdom from 'Fixer Upper' stars Chip and Joanna Gaines
• 10 shows for kids that are actually educational
• 7 ways parents can support their child when they come out
• Letting your baby 'cry it out' can actually be good for them, according to an expert

Follow INSIDER on Facebook .

• Main content

• Reflections
• In the news
• Research shows…
• Our publications
• Editorial guidelines

Olaf Kapella

May 19th, 2021, families, technology use, and daily life: parents’ role in building resilience and mitigating harm.

0 comments | 149 shares

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

Screen time vs. screen activity

When trying to mediate children’s internet use, parents sometimes limit the amount of screen time , which not only might create conflicts but is also not the best approach . Recent research indicates that time spent online is less important for children’s well-being and health than the online activities they engage in. For example, the passive use of social media can have adverse effects, while active communication on social networks is related to more positive outcomes. In addition, parental mediation related to screen time and online activities should reflect children’s age and digital competence:

• Children are more likely to benefit from longer online engagement when they are older and more competent than when they are very young.
• Establishing routines about device and internet use is more helpful than having flexible or ad hoc rules which can be harder to explain to children.
• Understanding the rules can help children to follow them as research shows that children accept rules more when they are explained to them.

Joint media engagement 

One aspect of parental mediation that brings along many advantages is the co-use of digital technologies . By playing online games together or watching the child’s favourite TV show, YouTube channel or TikTok, parents can review the content and can discuss issues that arise. Besides, doing something together as a family forms a collective experience and can facilitate communication beyond the seen content.

• Children appreciate that parents are interested in their favourite media and enjoy being the knowledgeable party.
• By using ICT together parents can support their children in gaining better skills, taking advantage of a wider range of online opportunities, and learning how to use technologies safely. It can also create a supportive and trusting environment so that children feel that they can approach their parents when they need help.

Show interest but respect the child’s privacy

Children and young people want their parents to understand their views and what the digital world means to them. They would appreciate it if parents focus not only on the negative aspects of digital technologies but also discuss the positive aspects of ICTs and how digital technologies can benefit children. At the same time, it is important that parents respect children’s privacy and don’t become over-invasive in their online activities. Parental supervision is always a balancing act of protecting the child without undermining their independence and individual development. Overprotective and controlling parental mediation denies children their right to privacy and prevents them from opportunities to develop into autonomous and responsible individuals.

• Children could experience some parental involvement as violating their privacy , for example, if parents comment on the child’s social media profile or monitor their browsing history.
• Many children do not want their parents to send or post photos of them without permission . This can be particularly frustrating if the shared pictures are perceived as embarrassing.

Promoting resilience instead of total risk shielding

ICTs offer a lot of unique opportunities for creating and maintaining relationships, exploring identities and developing a sense of self, or acquiring a range of useful skills. These positive and helpful aspects, however, go hand in hand with the possibility of experiencing harmful or inappropriate content, contact, or conduct . If children are completely shielded from the digital world they would be less likely to experience harm online but simultaneously they would be deprived of all digital opportunities .

• Instead of banning children from being online, parents should talk to their children about the possible online risks, advise them on how to minimise risky situations and support them to deal with harmful experiences. This helps children build resilience and reduces the negative effects on their wellbeing .
• Children need support from parents and educators to develop competencies needed to safely navigate in the digital world and encouragement to seek help when they face a difficult situation.

Parents are role models for their children

Children mirror their parents’ ICT practices and adapt their behaviour depending on how parents use digital technologies. Scholars who studied adults’ technology behaviour while taking care of children found that technology distraction can lead to reduced parental attention and changes in the carer-child interaction. In some cases, this might lead to missed out opportunities to foster the child’s development of a healthy relationship with technology . If parents spend a lot of time on their smart­phone children also start to question the rules they need to follow and they are disappointed if this behaviour leads to less family time.

The existing evidence suggests that the ways families engage with digital technologies are complex, and so are their consequences. ICTs offer unique opportunities for families and their diverse individual members, but children – and also adults – face online risks and challenges. Adequate parental mediation and essential digital competencies can help to mitigate the adverse effects of children’s and young people’s online activities on their health and wellbeing. Hence, whether the overall impact on family life is positive or negative highly depends on the combination of digital behaviours families implement in their daily lives. In addition to families, society – including its multiple institutions – is also essential for promoting digital competence and strengthening children’s resilience.

For more detailed findings from the evidence reviews see also Children’s ICT use and its impact on family life (by Theresa Lorenz & Olaf Kapella) and ICT use across Europe – a literature review and an overview of existing data (by Sara Ayllón and colleagues).

First published at www.parenting.digital , this post gives the views of the authors and does not represent the position of the LSE Parenting for a Digital Future blog, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

You are free to republish the text of this article under Creative Commons licence crediting www.parenting.digital and the author of the piece. Please note that images are not included in this blanket licence.

Image credits: in-text images by Christer Hyggen, DigiGen; featured image Tima Miroshnichenko on Pexels

About the author

Dr. Olaf Kapella is a Senior Research Fellow and research coordinator in the Austrian Institute for Family Studies at the University of Vienna. In addition to families and digital technologies, his main research areas include family policies, violence in the family, sexual education and child welfare. He also works as a counsellor at a family counselling centre focusing on parental support, children and young people and sexuality.

Related Posts

Implementing children’s rights in a digital world

November 27th, 2019.

School posts on Facebook could threaten student privacy

November 23rd, 2021.

Digital imaginaries and networked computers at home: Working-class Latino/Hispanic immigrant parents in the US

April 13th, 2016.

Encountering a surprising response to cyberbullying among an immigrant community

April 13th, 2015.

clock This article was published more than  9 years ago

How technology has changed our parenting lives

Each new crop of parents thinks that it faces its own unique challenges. I suppose every generation feels like they are exploring new and foreign terrain because, well, as parents we all are.

My generation’s uncharted territory, our seemingly unsolvable Rubik’s Cube is clearly technology.

More specifically: the ways that we parents use technology – the Internet in particular – and the relevance (maybe prevalence is more accurate?) that it has assumed in our lives. It hasn’t just created new parenting dilemmas with respect to our children. It has also changed the way that we interact with each other as parents, how we see other parents, and even how we see ourselves.

For one thing, the Internet has increased our access to information. Have a question about potty training, thumb-sucking, time-outs, or breastfeeding? Just ask the experts at Google. Parents have questions and the Internet has the answers. (Or at least an answer.)

By the same token, technology has made it easier for parents to connect with each other and find their tribe. After my first son was born, I suffered from post-partum depression and often felt like I was drowning in loneliness. Thanks to an online group I found through Meetup.com (which was a lot like Internet dating for parents), I met a handful of women who became some of my very closest friends. It wasn’t until I found a handful of online communities where parents talked openly and with a certain kind of raw beauty about post-partum depression that I began to move past the shame and toward self-forgiveness and healing.

So yes, technology – the Internet and social media in particular – has made it possible for parents to connect in more meaningful ways. Put another way, technology has made it easier for us to whisper to each other that thing we are all so desperate to hear: You aren’t the only one; you’re not alone.

But technology isn’t necessarily creating a utopic camaraderie to parenting. There is a dangerous side, as well. Due to the grip that social media has on our culture there is a slippery slope into “snapshot parenting” – the rush of assumptions and comparisons based on the snippets we see online; the romanticism of parenthood; the inaccurate representations of our children; and the cyclical tendency to share (publicly and privately) only the rosy sides of parenting.

Do I believe in celebrating the beauty of childhood and parenting? Of course. But are we at risk of slipping into a cycle of lies by omission through our online persona? Perhaps. And are we changing the rules of the game with our own inaccurate depictions of parenthood and our “snapshot” mentality? Definitely.

I recently read a popular article that romanticized motherhood, and after a little eye-rolling at the Madonna-esque tone, I felt like a less adequate mother because I didn’t share the feelings of the author – feelings that had been “validated” by millions of likes and shares and Internet high-fives. Similarly, a recent Facebook status update of a friend of a friend praising herself for never EVER feeding her kids fast food stirred up pangs of guilt about our family’s trips through the McDonald’s drive-through. And while scrolling through Facebook over the holidays, I was inundated with pictures of smiling families and twinkly-eyed kids, but few posts mentioned the tantrums, tears, and disappointments that we all know are part of the holiday drama.

Whatever the parenting soft spot, there will always be something that wiggles its way into that vulnerable place. We are bombarded with information from all directions, much of which has the potential to needle our soft spots, even if doing so inadvertently.

This can be scary and troubling, even for the most confident, self-assured parents among us. Parenting is inherently wrought with challenges, but the Internet and social media have amplified those challenges – for children and parents alike.

It is a challenge to sift through the overwhelming amount of information and opinions in order to find helpful advice and to connect with a supportive community. It is a challenge to maintain perspective when social media has a tendency to paint broad brushstrokes of perfection over something as imperfect as parenting. It is a challenge to remember that technology is a tool, and that it can have only as much power over us as we let it.

So how can we, as parents, help our children take advantage of the benefits of technology while managing its pitfalls if we aren’t sure how to deal with them in our own lives?

Perhaps the first step is to acknowledge that our online behavior heavily impacts the way that we interact as parents, the ways that we see each other, and the ways that we think about ourselves. Then, maybe, with some practice, we can remind ourselves that, even though we are bombarded with examples of “best practices,” love, pure and simple, is really what matters. There might be a mountain of information and advice out there about how we can be better parents (with countless, divergent opinions about what that even means), but perhaps we could all stand to be a little kinder and gentler with each other and ourselves as well. Maybe “good enough” needs to override “best practices” every now and then.

And, like most things, meeting the challenges takes honesty, authenticity, and open-heartedness. As a writer and a mother, I have the privilege of using technology as a platform to reach readers and, consequently, I have an obligation to paint a realistic picture of parenting. It is for this reason that I try to write about not just the sweet sides of parenting, but the bitter sides as well. I have no interest in sugar-coating things; parenting is hard, good work.

But even more than that, it takes honest conversations with each other so that we can balance out the snapshot parenting that has become so pervasive in our digital lives. Tell me your worries, your ideas, your war stories; trust me, I will tell you mine. Because even though technology might have changed the rules, parenting is still the same game. And aren’t we all on the same team?

Christine Organ blogs here . You can find her on Twitter @christineorgan .

Like On Parenting on Facebook for more essays, advice and news.

You might also be interested in:

How the over-glorification of motherhood hurts us all

Parenting in the age of iEverything

What happens when  you embrace shame

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Lifting a few with my chatbot

Hate mosquitoes? Who doesn’t? But maybe we shouldn’t.

‘Harvard Thinking’: Climate alignment is no easy task

Urs Gasser and John Palfrey discuss how parents can manage children and their use of technology.

Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer

Helping your child make the best use of time online

Harvard Staff Writer

Experts offer advice on how to become a ‘connected parent’

Teenagers spend an average of nine hours a day online, and many parents worry about the impact of screen time on their children. There is no need to worry, said digital experts Urs Gasser and John Palfrey, authors of the newly released book “The Connected Parent: An Expert Guide to Parenting in a Digital World.” The Gazette spoke with Gasser, professor of practice at Harvard Law School and executive director of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society , and Palfrey, president of the MacArthur Foundation and former faculty director of the center, on ways parents can embrace the philosophy of “connected parenting” and help children be safe online and make the most of new media and technology.

Urs Gasser and John Palfrey

GAZETTE: What changes have you seen in the landscape of the new media and technology over the past 12 years since you published your book “Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives” in 2008?

GASSER: A first change has to do with the types of technology young people are using to navigate the digital space. When we wrote “Born Digital,” smartphones were not a thing, and today they are the key device. Another change is the types of platforms young people are using and the issues that come up with these uses. Twelve years ago, for instance, there was a big challenge around music and entertainment; it was very hard for young people to find music online, and they got into trouble because they used file-sharing services to download their favorite tunes, which was illegal. Now that largely has been resolved by innovative business models, whether it’s Spotify or other platforms, where youth have music on the go, everywhere.

On the flip side, we’ve seen new issues emerging in the technology and business environments. One of the biggest concerns is around the use of [user behavioral] data, or what is called “surveillance capitalism.” Also, when we started our work, youth and technology was more like a niche topic, and that awareness has changed a lot. Parents are very concerned about issues such as screen time, and so are educators who are dealing with it in the face of COVID. It’s a general trend. Both policy- and lawmakers are thinking about youth and technology issues too — whether it’s about how we can mitigate some of the risks associated with it, but also how we can embrace the new opportunities that technologies offer to young people to engage in society and become participants in the digital economy.

5 keys to connected parenting

Keep an open conversation about digital issues. Embrace the positive about new technology, while building skills to mitigate risks. Seek a balance between offering support and independence. Keep an open mind rather than fear new technologies. Engage with the technology yourself so you can remain credible, model good behavior. Source: “The Connected Parent: An Expert Guide to Parenting in a Digital World,” Urs Gasser and John Palfrey

Illustration by Claudia Thomas

GAZETTE: Can you explain your philosophy of “connected parenting”?

PALFREY: One thing that is distinctive about this book is that it presents the data and the advice we have for parents with a consistent philosophy. Anyone can go online and look up parenting advice tips. We think this book is helpful insofar as you embrace the philosophy of connected parenting. The ideas are very simple, but quite important and grounded in the research.

One is the importance of parents keeping the lines of conversation open with the young people in your life. This seems like an obvious point, but it is not always done, and it involves making sure that kids know that they can ask questions of you, in general, not just about technology.

That leads to a second point: We urge parents to get their hands dirty with the technology. We suggest that they use it to build credibility with their children. You don’t have to be on Snapchat all day long, or whatever is the latest technology at that moment, but you need to be credible for your advice to resonate with young people.

We also think that you should be led in your parenting not by fear, but by the data. And that’s what we hope to do through this book: to introduce what the real facts are relative to the research in the context of the most common questions that parents ask of us. It’s also about being open to the positive sides of the technology and the ways in which young people are learning and connecting to one another through these technologies.

GASSER: The only thing I would perhaps add is that parents need to connect with their kids first, and then connect with the technology.

GAZETTE: How have new media and technology affected parenting?

PALFREY: Most of the research has been looking specifically at the experiences that young people have, and the approach we’ve taken for the last 15 years at the Berkman Klein Center’s Youth and Media Lab has really been to ask the questions from the viewpoint of the young person. That is very important because it grounds the research in the realities of the child. We urge parents to focus on the lived experience of young people because our job as parents is important, but it is secondary to what they are experiencing. That’s really the most important takeaway.

I’ll take one specific example, which is bullying. People often talk about cyberbullying. Our argument is that while there is cyberbullying that happens online, there’s regular bullying that happens in the schoolyard. It’s actually all just bullying. It just plays out in multiple dimensions and in different environments. What we’re urging parents to do is to see them as connected, so if somebody is bullying somebody in the cafeteria, they’re probably also bullying them online and vice versa. The strategies to deal with bullying are going to be pretty similar in most cases. The research shows that most of the strategies that have worked for us historically in good parenting are going to hold up in this new world too.

GASSER: My sense is that parenting at its core is still similar to what we experienced in the offline age. But the rate of change that technology introduces is just a game-changer in many ways. The connected parent has to learn new things all the time to keep track of technological developments and understand how their children are using technology, with its risks and possible benefits. The very rapid pace of change creates a challenge for us parents because we have to make parental decisions without having the benefit of years of experience or advice from grandparents or evidence from researchers. I’ve experienced this challenge myself. As a parent, I feel I have to constantly learn, readjust, and figure out how can I empower my children: Where do I need to step in to protect them or what tools do we use to have these conversations?

GAZETTE: Could you talk about the importance of being a connected parent in this age?

PALFREY:   If a parent abdicates in this area and doesn’t engage with young people on issues related to their technology use, then those parents are leaving their kids in a tough spot. Having hard conversations to help a young person navigate a world where they have a device connected to them 24/7 is literally necessary. Partly what we’re saying to parents is that they should jump on in because the water is fine, and it is going to be OK. You don’t get a manual for how to be a parent when a child is born; you just do some version of what you’ve learned from those who raised you, and you might adjust in one direction or another. But that doesn’t exist in this case because there is a generational turn, and what you don’t want to do is to leave kids on their own. We hope this book can serve as that “missing manual” for parents in this case.

GAZETTE: Most parents are scared and worried about the impact of technology in their children’s lives. What are the most common misconceptions about the influence of new media and technology?

GASSER:   Adults often underestimate how integrated digital technologies are in the lives of young people. As adults, we still tend to make a distinction between “online” and “offline,” and yet, for young people, these distinctions are no longer meaningful. Both the interconnectedness and the embeddedness of digital technology shape the lives of young people in profound ways.

At the same time, there is a notion among adults that young people are tech-savvy because it’s in their DNA or because they’re young and interact with technology all the time. We know from research, however, that there are serious participation gaps. Not all children have access to digital technologies in the same way. These gaps are persistent here in the U.S. We also see big differences in the distribution of the skills that are needed to use these technologies in a meaningful way. There are really big equity issues, and we, as adults, have a deep responsibility to ensure that we put policies in place that allow every young person to access technology and use it in a productive way.

PALFREY: One reason for writing this book and our previous book, “Born Digital,” before that, is the number of myths that pervade adult understanding of how young people are growing up. We consider our work to be myth-busting work because there are many myths that make parents underestimate the positives that young people can get from their experiences with new media as well as the actual contours of the dangers they face. One thing we always say is that for young people there is not an offline life and an online life; it’s just life.

Among the positive aspects of technology is the high levels of civic activism among young people in the United States and in different parts of the world. This is connected in many ways to the kinds of things that they are able to do through technology and new media and the sense of agency young people have relative to new technologies. They can start new organizations and are able to spread the word across geographic boundaries. I would highlight the Black Lives Matter protests, which have grown in part through a networked set of technologies.

Another example is climate activism, which has spread throughout the United States and other places globally in part because of the internet. Some people it’s just “clicktivism” because they’re just clicking “likes” on Facebook. That’s not seeing the fullness of the ways in which young people are using technology and how it does shift the way they engage with the world.

GAZETTE: Some people worry that the internet is making people dumber. Is that a myth?

PALFREY:  I don’t think there’s anything in the research that says that this is a dumber generation. It made for a clever book title (“The Dumbest Generation”) that sold a lot of copies, but I do not think there is merit in the data. There are certainly questions about the long-term effects of the extensive technology use on young people’s learning, but as with other things, I wouldn’t blame the technology itself. It’s the way in which we use it and choose to use it. I, for one, believe this is going to be the most educated generation in history, not the dumbest generation in history. We’ll see.

GAZETTE: Your book says that teenagers spend an average of nine hours per day online. What does the research say about the impact of so much screen time on young people? What is your advice to parents?

GASSER: The important point is that how much time young people spend online matters. When it comes to screen time, perhaps surprisingly, studies suggest that moderate use of technology can have actually a positive impact on the social and emotional well-being of young people. The problem appears with excessive time spent in front of screens. A particular area of concern is sleep, because often kids who use technology in excessive ways don’t sleep enough. The difficulty is to determine what the right amount of screen time is, and that depends on the age range. Our book offers some guidance based on research. However, the biggest insight from research is that what matters is not only how many hours someone spends in front of screens, but what type of activities is the young person engaging with. For instance, if a kid uses a cellphone, does she use it for gaming? If so, what kinds of games is she playing? Or does she use it to communicate with her friends, to engage in some types of activism, or does she use it to do her homework and learn online in the time of COVID? All these types of activities can have a different impact on the young person’s well-being and development, and future research will look into these qualitative questions.

PALFREY: The most important thing about screen time is quality versus quantity. It’s especially important when it comes to this moment of COVID-19 because with students being out of school, they are connected to other people through their devices almost exclusively. The debate over screen time has therefore changed enormously. It used to be adults being concerned that kids were spending too much time online, but there’s no choice during COVID. It fortunately lines up with the research that shows that the qualitative point is more important than the quantitative.

GAZETTE : What are the real effects of social media and screen time in the increase in depression and anxiety among young people?

PALFREY: The research is telling us that there is an increase for many young people in stress, anxiety, depression, and suicidality in general. We also know that kids are using technology more than before. We do not know that there is a causal link between those two. It’s important, as researchers, to say the things that we do know and the things we don’t know. A hypothesis is that the technology can exacerbate conditions that young people have. An example is an eating disorder, which can be an extreme form of anxiety, obsessive compulsive disorder, and so forth, a young person might be prone to by genetics and by environment to have this disorder. When they go on Instagram and they see the most beautiful and skinny version of everybody else, they might internalize that as part of the anxiety they’re having. In cases like that, technology can exacerbate underlying situations, but they don’t cause it. The challenge is having to parse things out and respond appropriately given each person’s situation.

“Both young people and digital technology are better than their reputation.” Urs Gasser

More like this

On internet privacy, be very afraid

Raising successful kids

The do’s and don’ts of sharing about your children online

GASSER: Research also shows that kids with moderate anxieties can actually benefit and find support in social media, as a way to cope with their challenges. There is a positive role that social media can play in not only being part of a complex problem, but part of the solution.

GAZETTE: What can parents do to keep their children safe online?

GASSER: The easiest point is parents should start by respecting their children’s privacy. We see lots of parents posting baby pictures on Facebook, and as kids grew up, they continue to use social media to share cute pictures with their friends, which is understandable. But this raises privacy concerns as the young person grows older. There are conversations that need to happen over time between parents and young people about sharing of particularly sensitive data, so that kids develop an awareness about what happens if you post a selfie or a snapshot of your friends on social media that later may be part of your children’s digital dossier and may be seen by their school admission’s office. Perhaps that’s the hardest part for adults and parents, but we need to understand what is going on with all the data and the traces we leave online as we use these technologies. That goes back to the topic of surveillance capitalism mentioned earlier. Parents or young people are limited by what they can do to safeguard their privacy. That’s where legislators and governments have to step in and provide, particularly here in the U.S., more robust privacy and data protection and safeguards for young people and adults. The Europeans are ahead of us, and we need desperately to catch up.

PALFREY: A few additional words about safety. We’ve been led to believe that the rate of harm to young people has gone way up during the internet era. But it turns out that the data suggest quite the opposite, which is that children are less likely to be physically or sexually harmed by a stranger they meet outside the home over the last few decades, during the growth of these technologies. That’s not to say that young people can’t get in trouble online, whether that’s in a chat function of a game or in an edgy web community that is devoted to sex, for instance. These are areas where certainly young people can connect with people who wish to do them harm. Ensuring that parents are giving good advice to young people about the way they engage with others remains important.

GAZETTE: What do you think is the main takeaway from your book?

GASSER:   If I could say it in a tweet, I would say this: Both young people and digital technology are better than their reputation.

This interview has been condensed and lightly edited for length and clarity.

Share this article

You might like.

Sociologist Sherry Turkle warns against growing trend of turning to AI for companionship, counsel

Entomologist says there is much scientists don’t know about habitats, habits, impacts on their environments

Experts at the Salata Institute outline tensions between global and local priorities

College accepts 1,937 to Class of 2028

Students represent 94 countries, all 50 states

Pushing back on DEI ‘orthodoxy’

Panelists support diversity efforts but worry that current model is too narrow, denying institutions the benefit of other voices, ideas

So what exactly makes Taylor Swift so great?

Experts weigh in on pop superstar's cultural and financial impact as her tours and albums continue to break records.

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Parenting children in the age of screens, two-thirds of parents in the u.s. say parenting is harder today than it was 20 years ago, with many citing technologies – like social media or smartphones – as a reason.

Pew Research Center has long studied the changing nature of parenting and family dynamics as well as the adoption of digital technologies. This report focuses on how children engage with digital technologies, screens and social media, as well as parents’ attitudes about these behaviors, their concerns about their child’s use of technology, and their own assessment of their parenting and experiences with digital tech. These findings are based on a survey conducted March 2-15, among 3,640 U.S. parents who have at least one child or children ages 17 and under. This includes those who took part as members of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses, as well as respondents from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample is plus or minus 2.2 percentage points.

Recruiting ATP panelists by phone or mail ensures that nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. This gives us confidence that any sample can represent the whole U.S. adult population (see our Methods 101 explainer on random sampling). To further ensure that each ATP survey reflects a balanced cross section of the nation, the data is weighted to match the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories.

For more, see the report’s methodology  about the project. You can also find the questions asked, and the answers the public provided in this topline .

Parenting has never been easy. But the widespread adoption of smartphones and the rise of social media has introduced a new wrinkle to the challenges of parenthood. In fact, a majority of parents in the United States (66%) – who include those who have at least one child under the age of 18, but who may also have an adult child or children – say that parenting is harder today than it was 20 years ago, with many in this group citing technology as a reason why, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in March.

One of the most highly discussed – and debated – topics among parents today is screen time. How much is too much? And what impact will screens have on children’s development? Amid these growing questions, the World Health Organization issued guidelines last year on the amount of time young children should spend in front of screens.

Parents with young children themselves make clear they are anxious about the effects of screen time. Fully 71% of parents of a child under the age of 12 say they are at least somewhat concerned their child might ever spend too much time in front of screens, including 31% who are very concerned about this. 1 And some parents with a child in this age range already believe their child spends too much time on certain devices, including a smartphone. (It is important to note that this survey was fielded before the COVID-19 outbreak in the U.S. that closed many schools and led to widespread shutdowns and stay-at-home orders throughout the country.)

While a majority of parents with a young child say they are very (39%) or somewhat confident (45%) in knowing the appropriate amount of screen time for their child, they are also seeking out advice from others. Some 61% of parents of a child age 11 or younger say they have received advice or information about screen time from a doctor or other medical professional and 55% say the same about other parents, while 45% of parents of a child age 5 to 11 have turned to teachers for help.

Parents overall are also apprehensive about the long-term effects of smartphones on children’s development: 71% believe the widespread use of smartphones by young children might potentially result in more harm than benefits.

These worries come at a time when it is fairly common for children of all ages to engage – in some way – with digital devices. 2 For example, 80% of parents say their child age 5 to 11 ever uses or interacts with a tablet computer, while 63% say the same about smartphones. For parents of children under the age of 5 those shares are also notable: 48% and 55%, respectively. At the same time, roughly one-third of parents of a child 11 or younger (36%) say their child ever uses or interacts with a voice-activated assistant, like Apple’s Siri or Amazon Alexa. But there are wide age gaps: parents who have an older child, between the ages of 5 and 11 (46%), are more likely than parents with a child age 3 to 4 (30%) or 2 or younger (14%) to say their child uses or interacts with this type of technology.

Terminology

Several terms used in this report are related to parents, age of children and the technology adoption practices of children. This reference guide explains each term.

Parent is used to refer to an adult who reports being a parent or guardian of at least one child under the age of 18, but who may also have an adult child or children.

Parents of a child age 11 or younger is used to refer to parents who report having a child age 11 or younger. In cases where families have more than one child in this age range, these questions asked the parents focus on one of those children, either their oldest or youngest child in this age range (based on random assignment).

Parents of a child age 4 or younger is used to refer to parents whose randomly assigned child is under the age of 5 (0 to 4).

Parents of a child age 5 to 11 is used to refer to parents whose randomly assigned child is between the ages of 5 and 11.

Young child is used to describe children under the age of 12.

Engagement and interaction with digital technology among children was measured by asking parents about the devices their child “uses or interacts with.”

But the conversation around screen time is not limited to children. Parents themselves grapple with their own device distractions. When asked if they spend too much, too little or not enough time on their phone, more than half of parents overall (56%) say they spend too much time on their smartphone, while about seven-in-ten (68%) say they are at least sometimes distracted by their phone when spending time with their children.

These findings come from a nationally representative survey of 3,640 U.S. parents who have at least one child under the age of 18, but who may also have adult children, conducted online March 2-15, 2020, using Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel and the Ipsos KnowledgePanel . The following are among the other major findings.

Many parents cite technology as a reason why parenting is harder today than in the past

Across demographic groups, parents are more likely to say that parenting today is more difficult rather than easier when compared with the past, but there are some modest differences by age. About seven-in-ten parents ages 50 and older (71%) say parenting is harder today, versus 66% of 30- to 49-year-old parents and 60% of those ages 18 to 29.

Parents cite a number of different reasons why they think parenting has grown more difficult over the years. Some of the most common responses tend to stress the impact of digital technology (26%), the rise of social media (21%) and how access to technology exposes children to things at a young age (14%). Other commonly cited reasons for parenting growing more difficult include changing morals and values and the costs associated with raising a child.

Parents are wary of the impact of mobile devices, and relatively few think children under 12 should have their own smartphone

The ages of 12 to 14 seem to be a major milestone in parents’ eyes for smartphones. This survey finds that a majority of parents (73%) believe it is acceptable for children to have their own phone only after they have reached at least the age of 12. Some 45% say smartphone ownership is acceptable between the ages of 12 and 14, and 28% say it is acceptable between the ages of 15 and 17. Just 22% think it is OK for a child under the age of 12 to have one.

When asked about the appropriate age for a child to have their own tablet, parents are more accepting of children having one at a younger age. Fully 65% of parents say it is acceptable for child to have their own tablet computer before the age of 12.

Parents who have at least one minor child but who may also have adult children weighed in on whether they thought the use of smartphones by young children would help or hurt their ability to do a variety of things such as develop healthy friendships or do well in school. Parents are concerned about the impact that smartphones could have on children’s interpersonal skills. Fully 71% of parents say the use of smartphones by children age 11 or younger will hurt their ability to learn effective social skills a lot or a little, while a similar share says the same about developing healthy friendships. Just over half of parents think these devices will hurt children’s ability to do well in school, while parents are more evenly split when it comes to how smartphones will impact children’s ability to be creative or pursue their hobbies and interests.

YouTube is widely used by children, with parents seeing both benefits and drawbacks to the platform

A clear majority of parents who have a child age 11 or younger say this child ever watches videos on YouTube. Among parents who say their child watches videos this way, 53% say their child does this daily, including 35% who say their child watches these videos on the platform several times a day.

But these numbers vary significantly by race and ethnicity. Black (50%) or Hispanic parents (40%) who have a child in this age range who watches YouTube are more likely to say their child does this several times a day, compared with white parents (29%).

Vast majority of parents say they limit when and how long their child can use screens, while digital ‘grounding’ is a relatively common practice for parents

Amid these worries, parents report that they monitor their young child’s digital activities in a number of ways, with most limiting screen time and using digital “grounding” as a disciplinary tactic.

Fully 86% of parents of a child age 5 to 11 say they limit the time of day or length of time their child can use screens, while eight-in-ten say they take away their child’s smartphone or internet privileges as punishment. About three-quarters of parents of a child age 5 to 11 say they check the websites this child visits or the mobile apps they use (75%) and use parental controls to restrict how much this child uses screens (72%).

At the same time, more than half of parents of a child 11 or younger say they are at least somewhat concerned about their child ever being the target of online predators (63%), accessing sexually explicit content (60%) and accessing violent content online (59%). Somewhat similar shares (56%) report they are very or somewhat concerned that their child might ever be bullied or harassed online.

Parents have their own struggles and experiences with smartphones and social media

In addition to monitoring their children’s screen time and use of digital devices, parents also acknowledge how their own phones have led to distracted parenting.

More than half (56%) of parents who report having at least one minor child, but who may also have an adult child or children, say they spend too much time on their smartphone, while smaller shares say they spend too much time on social media (36%) or playing video games (11%).

Parents’ assessments of their technology use vary by age. For example, parents ages 18 to 49 are more likely than those ages 50 and older to say they spend too much time on their smartphone (59% vs. 36%). Similarly, parents under the age of 50 are more likely than those ages 50 and older to say they often or sometimes feel distracted by their smartphone when spending time with their children (70% vs. 55%).

There are also differences by educational attainment: Parents with a college degree or higher (59%) or those with some college experience (60%) are more likely than those with a high school education or less (47%) to say they spend too much time on their smartphones. When it comes to feeling distracted by their mobile device, 75% of parents with a college degree say they are least sometimes distracted by their phone when they are spending time with their kids, compared with 68% who have some college experiences and 61% of those who have a high school education or less.

• Throughout this report there are references to parents who have children of various ages. In cases where parents have more than one child in the age ranges discussed, the parents were randomly assigned to talk about a specific child in the relevant age range. ↩
• Questions about technology adoption in Pew Research Center surveys are typically asked to the respondents directly. This survey, however, does ask parents to indicate whether or not their child engages or interacts with various digital technologies. ↩
• YouTube provides a YouTube Kids platform with enhanced parental controls and curated video playlists, but the analysis in this report focuses on YouTube as a whole. ↩
• A Pew Research Center survey conducted in 2014 and 2015 on parents of teens found some monitoring practices – like checking websites they visited and their social media profiles – to be common, while others, like using parental controls and monitoring their location with their cellphone, were less prevalent. ↩

Sign up for our Internet, Science and Tech newsletter

New findings, delivered monthly

Report Materials

Table of contents, how parents’ views of their kids’ screen time, social media use changed during covid-19, bhutanese in the u.s. fact sheet, 59% of u.s. parents with lower incomes say their child may face digital obstacles in schoolwork, in changing u.s. electorate, race and education remain stark dividing lines, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Featured Webcast

The State of Pastors Summit

Replay the free webcast to explore six trends shaping the future of pastoral leadership. Discover how pastors are doing, along with brand new findings from Barna's brand new research report, The State of Pastors, Volume 2. Watch the replay for free today.

Featured Report

The State of Pastors, Volume 2

This report takes an in-depth look at how pastors are navigating post-pandemic life and ministry, focusing on self-leadership, church leadership and cultural leadership.

Featured Podcast

The Resilient Pastor

Join pastors Glenn Packiam, Rich Villodas and Sharon Hodde Miller as they invite leaders to think out loud together about the challenges and opportunities of leading a church in a rapidly changing world. In each episode, they will have a conversation about church leadership and the challenges pastors are facing. Then, they’ll share a conversation with a pastor, church leader, thinker or theologian about the health of the pastor, the state of the church and what it looks like to love well and lead faithfully.

Featured Service

Custom Research with Barna

Partner with Barna on customized research projects. Gain knowledge to understand the unique needs of your ministry.

Get full access to Barna insights, research & more

May 20, 2011

How Technology is Influencing Families

The digital age is affecting more than how America communicates. It is also shaping parent-child relationships in striking new ways. Barna Group recently completed a study about the influence of technology in families, releasing the findings in a new digital report, The Family & Technology Report.

Barna Access Plus

Strengthen your message, train your team and grow your church with cultural insights and practical resources, all in one place.

The research was conducted in partnership with Orange, which is part of the reThink Group. The innovative study included nationwide interviews among parents and 11- to 17-year-olds from the same households, allowing comparisons between the parents and the tweens and teenagers who reside in the same home.

Highlights from the study included the following five findings:

1. Parents are just as dependent on technology as are teens and tweens. Most people assume that teenagers are driving the technology gap in families. Yet the research points out that the gap is much smaller than most imagine. In reality, parents are using technology and media to nearly the same degree as their 11- to 17-year-olds.

* Parents are more likely than their tween and teen offspring to report regular use of cell phones and desktop computers. They are just likely as their teens and tweens to use laptop computers and tablet-like devices. * Parents watch just as much television and movies, use the Internet for as many minutes per day, and spend more time on the telephone and emailing than do their tween- and teen-aged children. * The technology and media-related tasks that young people do more often than their parents are listening to music, texting, and playing video games. Even in these categories, most parents are surprisingly active.

Like other national studies have shown, parents are spending nearly the same amount of time per day as their tween and teen-aged kids consuming media and using various digital technologies. The gap was even smaller among families with parents who are still in their thirties or early forties. In other words, younger parents are even more technology- and media-dependent than older parents. All of this points to the fact that the digital world has influenced all members of the family, not just teens.

2. Most family members, even parents, feel that technology has been a positive influence on their families. While many assume that families are fed up with technology, by nearly a two-to-one ratio parents think of technology like computers, cell phones and video game systems as making their family life better rather than worse (32% to 18%). Most describe the influence as neutral (51%). Interestingly, parents are actually even more favorable toward entertainment like music, movies and television than toward technology, saying its influence is more positive than negative by a five-to-one ratio (38% versus 7%). A slim majority of parents feel entertainment is neither good nor bad (55%).

As relatively unconcerned as parents are about technology and media, the students in their home are even more positive about these elements of modern life. Tweens and teens are substantially more likely to describe technology’s influence as positive rather than negative (47% to 6%); similar ratings hold true for young people’s view toward entertainment (56% to 2%).

The conclusion is that most families welcome technology and media with open arms, rather than with suspicion. One of the reasons for this may be that many families use technology, including television, movies and video games, as a shared experience.

3. Very few adults or youth take substantial breaks from technology. Americans’ dependence on—what some might call addiction to—digital technology is apparent in the study’s findings. One out of three parents and nearly half of 11- to 17-year-olds say there are not any specific times when they “make the choice to disconnect from or turn off technology so they can have a break from it.” And those who take such breaks tend to be driven by convenience rather than intentionality. For example, only 10% of parents and 6% of teenagers say they try to take off one day a week from their digital usage.

This reliance translates into some interesting behaviors and habits. Nearly half of both parents and teens said they emailed, texted or talked on the phone while eating in the last week. Two out of five youth and one-third of parents have used two or more screens simultaneously during this time period. And half of students and one-fifth of parents have checked email or text messages in bed in the last seven days. The question arises whether families are in control of their technology or being controlled by it.

4. Families experience conflict about technology, but not in predictable ways. First, parents and their children experience conflict about technology, but not frequently. Only about one in every four parents said they had “strong disagreements about the limits on media and technology” on a weekly basis. About the same proportion says that “technology causes tension between me and my parents / kids.” Still, half of parents (49%) worry about technology and media wasting their children’s time, among other things. For their part, one-fifth of youth (21%) say their parents have a “double standard when it comes to technology.” And one-sixth of these tweens and teens (17%) say their parents “bring their work home with them too much,” a habit certainly abetted by pervasive technology.

Second, parents and youth are most disappointed by technology because it is “so expensive to get the latest,” not because of the unwanted content or the isolation it can bring. In fact, only 39% of parents and 27% of tweens and teens say they get frustrated by technology because it “makes it hard to have conversations.” The conclusion stemming from the research is that technology seems to amplify the relational patterns and problems already in place: families that have healthy and frequent conversations find technology aiding that process, while families without such healthy interactions find that technology exacerbates the isolation of its members.

5. Few families have experienced—or expect—churches to address technology. Most parents and tweens/teens have not heard any kind of teaching in a church, religious setting, or public forum (like a school) about how families can best use media, entertainment or technology. In other words, most families are not getting any coaching or assistance when it comes to integrating technology into their family life. When asked if they would be open to one version of such training—“a Christian or faith-based perspective about how to be a good user of entertainment and technology without letting things negatively impact your family relationships”—about two-fifths of parents (42%) and one-third of tweens and teens (33%) expressed interest. The implication is that faith communities could take a leadership role in teaching about the proper use of technology in healthy families.

Commentary on the Findings David Kinnaman, president of Barna Group, expressed the need for the Christian community to expand its concept of stewardship. “Perhaps technology should be added to discussions about stewardship. Technology is as old as craftman’s tools. But today’s digital and emerging technologies are in a different class than hundreds of other hobbies or interests because they have come to significantly define the use of time, the development of talent, and the allocation of money.

“Technology is shaping family interactions in unprecedented ways, but we seem to lack a strategic commitment to the stewardship of technology. The Christian community needs a better, more holistic understanding of how to manage existing and coming technological advances. Parents, tweens and teens need more coaching and input in order to face the countless choices they make regarding how technology affects their attention, interests, talents and resources.”

About the Research The research is based on a representative, random sample of 416 U.S. households with parents and tweens and teens (ages 11 to 17). Interviews were conducted among 416 parents and 416 tweens/teens from the same households. The online surveys were conducted March 14, 2011 through March 22, 2011.

The estimated level of sampling precision for each group is +/- 5.0% within a 95% confidence level.

The survey was conducted using the web-enabled KnowledgePanel®, a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. population operated by Knowledge Networks. Initially, participants are chosen scientifically by a random selection of telephone numbers and residential addresses. Persons in selected households are then invited by telephone or by mail to participate in the web-enabled panel. For those who agree to participate, but do not already have Internet access, Knowledge Networks provides at no cost a laptop and ISP connection. People who already have computers and Internet service are permitted to participate using their own equipment. Panelists receive unique log-in information for accessing surveys online and are sent emails each month inviting them to participate in specific research studies. Potential panelists are randomly selected from the population at large to join the panel; those who have not been randomly selected but wish to participate are not able to join in the sample.

The research was conducted in partnership with Orange , a division of the reThink Group. Further information about the research can be found in a new report from reThink entitled The Family & Technology Report.

Barna Group (which includes its research division, the Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization under the umbrella of the Issachar Companies. It conducts primary research, produces media resources pertaining to spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries.

Located in Ventura, California, Barna Group has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from the Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website ( www.barna.org ). Additional research-based resources are also available through this website.

About Barna

Since 1984, Barna Group has conducted more than two million interviews over the course of thousands of studies and has become a go-to source for insights about faith, culture, leadership, vocation and generations. Barna is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization.

Get Barna in your inbox

Subscribe to Barna’s free newsletters for the latest data and insights to navigate today’s most complex issues.

Interplay Between Families and Technology: Future Investigations

• First Online: 21 September 2018

Cite this chapter

• Xiaoran Sun 7   na1 &
• Cassie McMillan 8   na1  

Part of the book series: National Symposium on Family Issues ((NSFI,volume 9))

2495 Accesses

2 Citations

2 Altmetric

Technology has become increasingly pervasive in American society, leading researchers, journalists, parents, teachers, and popular culture alike to question how technology is shaping our daily lives. The influx of technology raises a variety of new issues, many of which are specifically of interest to family scholars. It remains unclear whether technology is changing the way we form, maintain, and understand families—and the conditions under which these changes are for better or worse. In this concluding chapter, we bring attention to three themes that resonate throughout the volume: (1) how technology has shaped power dynamics in families, (2) the role technology has played in redefining and adjusting boundaries between family members and around the family, and (3) the relation between technology, family, and inequality. We conclude with suggestions for future research on family and technology by pointing to the need to integrate more theory and novel methods.

• Elder’s linked lives
• Technology family power dynamics
• Technology family inequality
• Technology family scholars
• Technology family research
• Technology family theory
• Technology changing families
• Technology family boundaries
• Parent-child power structures

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001). The wage penalty for motherhood. American Sociological Review, 66 (2), 204–225.

Article   Google Scholar  

Correll, S. J., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology, 112 (5), 1297–1339.

Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (1997). Families as systems. Annual Review of Psychology, 48 , 243–267.

Drigotas, S. M., Safstrom, C. A., & Gentilia, T. (1999). An investment model prediction of dating infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 (3), 509–524.

Dunbar, N. E. (2004). Dyadic power theory: Constructing a communication-based theory of relational power. Journal of Family Communication, 4 (3&4), 235–248.

Elder, G. H., Jr. (1994). Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57 (1), 4–15.

Felmlee, D. H., & Faris, R. (2016). Toxic ties: Networks of friendship, dating, and cyber victimization. Social Psychology Quarterly, 79 (3), 243–262.

Felmlee, D. H., & Kreager, D. A. (2017). The invisible contours of online dating communities: A social networks perspective. Journal of Social Structure, 18 (1), 1–27.

Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1986). Living with television: The dynamics of the cultivation process. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Perspectives on media effects (pp. 17–40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Google Scholar  

Goldstein, J. R., & Klüsener, S. (2014). Spatial analysis of the causes of fertility decline in Prussia. Population and Development Review, 40 (3), 497–525.

Hessel, H., He, Y., & Dworkin, J. (2017). Paternal monitoring: The relationship between online and in-person solicitation and youth outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46 (2), 288–299.

Kerig, P. K. (2005). Revisiting the construct of boundary dissolution: A multidimensional perspective. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 5 (2–3), 5–42.

Kreager, D. A., Cavanagh, S. E., Yen, J., & Yu, M. (2014). “Where have all the good men gone?” gendered interactions in online dating. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76 (2), 387–410.

Lewis, K. (2013). The limits of racial prejudice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 (47), 18814–18819.

Luke, N., Goldberg, R. E., Mberu, B. U., & Zulu, E. M. (2011). Social exchange and sexual behavior in young women's premarital relationships in Kenya. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73 (5), 1048–1064.

Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development: Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development, 56 (2), 289–302.

Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16 (2), 172–186.

Safilios-Rothschild, C. (1976). A macro-and micro-examination of family power and love: An exchange model. Journal of Marriage and Family, 38 (2), 355–362.

Smetana, J., Crean, H. F., & Campione-Barr, N. (2005). Adolescents’ and parents’ changing conceptions of parental authority. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 108 , 31–46.

Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29 (1), 24–54.

Whitty, M. T., & Carr, A. N. (2006). Cyberspace romance: The psychology of online relationships . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Book   Google Scholar  

Zuckerberg, M. (2018, January 11). [Facebook post]. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10104413015393571

Download references

Author information

Authors contributed equally.

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Penn State, University Park, PA, USA

Xiaoran Sun

Department of Sociology and Criminology, Penn State, University Park, PA, USA

Cassie McMillan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cassie McMillan .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Sociology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Jennifer Van Hook

Social Science Research Institute, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Susan M. McHale

Valarie King

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Sun, X., McMillan, C. (2018). Interplay Between Families and Technology: Future Investigations. In: Van Hook, J., McHale, S., King, V. (eds) Families and Technology. National Symposium on Family Issues, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95540-7_10

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95540-7_10

Published : 21 September 2018

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-95539-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-95540-7

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Dialogues Clin Neurosci
• v.22(2); 2020 Jun

Language: English | Spanish | French

Going digital: how technology use may influence human brains and behavior


Camino a la digitalización: influencia de la tecnología en el cerebro y el comportamiento humano, passage au tout numérique : influence de la technologie sur le cerveau et le comportement humains, margret r. hoehe.

Author affiliations: Department of Computational Molecular Biology, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany

Florence Thibaut

University Hospital Cochin - site Tarnier; University of Paris; INSERM U1266, Institute of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Paris, France

The digital revolution has changed, and continues to change, our world and our lives. Currently, major aspects of our lives have moved online due to the coronavirus pandemic, and social distancing has necessitated virtual togetherness. In a synopsis of 10 articles we present ample evidence that the use of digital technology may influence human brains and behavior in both negative and positive ways. For instance, brain imaging techniques show concrete morphological alterations in early childhood and during adolescence that are associated with intensive digital media use. Technology use apparently affects brain functions, for example visual perception, language, and cognition. Extensive studies could not confirm common concerns that excessive screen time is linked to mental health problems, or the deterioration of well-being. Nevertheless, it is important to use digital technology consciously, creatively, and sensibly to improve personal and professional relationships. Digital technology has great potential for mental health assessment and treatment, and the improvement of personal mental performance.


La revolución digital ha cambiado y continúa cambiando nuestro mundo y nuestras vidas. Actualmente, los principales aspectos de nuestras vidas han migrado hacia el funcionamiento “online” debido a la pandemia del coronavirus, y el distanciamiento social ha requerido de cercanías virtuales. En una sinopsis de 10 artículos, se presenta una amplia evidencia de que el empleo de la tecnología digital puede influir en el cerebro y en el comportamiento humano de manera negativa y positiva. Por ejemplo, las técnicas de imágenes cerebrales muestran alteraciones morfológicas concretas en la primera infancia y durante la adolescencia, las cuales están asociadas con el empleo intenso de medios digitales. En apariencia, la utilización de la tecnología afecta las funciones cerebrales, como la percepción visual, el lenguaje y la cognición. Numerosos estudios no pudieron confirmar las preocupaciones comunes en cuanto a que el tiempo excesivo de pantalla esté relacionado con problemas de salud mental o el deterioro del bienestar. Sin embargo, es importante emplear la tecnología digital de manera consciente, creativa y sensata para mejorar las relaciones personales y profesionales. La tecnología digital tiene un gran potencial para la evaluación y el tratamiento de la salud mental, y el aumento del rendimiento mental personal.

La révolution numérique a modifié et continue à modifier notre monde et nos vies. La pandémie actuelle due au coronavirus a fait basculer en ligne de nombreux pans de notre existence et la distanciation sociale a imposé la virtualité des rassemblements. Les données des dix articles présentés ici attestent de l’influence de la technologie numérique sur les cerveaux et les comportements, de manière positive et négative. Par exemple,l’imagerie cérébrale montre des altérations morphologiques concrètes apparaissant tôt dans l’enfance et pendant l’adolescence lors d’une pratique intensive des media numériques. Cela concernerait certaines fonctions cérébrales comme la perception visuelle, le langage et la cognition. Des études approfondies n’ont pas confirmé les inquiétudes courantes quant aux répercussions d’un temps excessif passé devant un écran en termes de santé mentale ou de qualité de vie. Il est néanmoins important de privilégier une utilisation consciente, créative et raisonnable des technologies numériques afin d’améliorer les relations personnelles et professionnelles. Ces technologies ont un grand potentiel dans l’évaluation et le traitement de la santé mentale ainsi que dans l’amélioration des performances mentales personnelles.

The “Digital Revolution”: remaking the world


Within a few decades, digital technology has transformed our lives. At any time, we can access almost unlimited amounts of information just as we can produce, process, and store colossal amounts of data. We can constantly interact, and connect, with each other by use of digital devices and social media. Coping with the daily demands of life as well as pursuing pleasure in recreational activities appears inconceivable without the use of smartphones, tablets, computers, and access to Internet platforms. Presently, over 4.57 billion people, 59% of the world population, use the Internet according to recent estimates (December 31 st , 2019), ranging between 39% (Africa) and 95% (North America). 1 People are spending an enormous, “insane” amount of time online, according to the latest Digital 2019 report compiled by Ofcom 2 : on average 6 hours and 42 minutes (06:42) each day (between 03:45 in Japan and 10:02 in the Philippines), half of that on mobile devices, on average equating to more than 100 days per year for every Internet user. According to a landmark report on the impact of the “decade of the smartphone,” 3 the average person in the UK spends 24 hours a week online, with 20% of all adults spending as much as 40 hours, and those aged 16 to 24 on average 34.3 hours a week. Britons are checking their smartphones on average every 12 minutes. In the US, teen screen time averages over 7 hours a day, excluding time for homework. Digital technology has become ubiquitous and entwined with our modern lives. As Richard Hodson in the Nature Outlook on “Digital Revolution,” 2018, concluded, “an explosion in information technology is remaking the world, leaving few aspects of society untouched. In the space of 50 years, the digital world has grown to become crucial to the functioning of society.” 4 This period of societal transformation has been considered “the most recent long wave of humanity’s socio-economic evolution”. As a “meta-paradigm of societal modernization based on technological change” induced by the transformation of information, it supersedes earlier periods of technological revolution based on the transformation of material and energy, respectively, spanning over 2 million years altogether (Hilbert, p 189 in this issue). 


In particular, the excessive use of digital technology during adolescence has given rise to grave concerns that this technology is harmful and damages the (developing) brain or may even cause mental health problems. Public concern culminated in Jean Twenge’s 2017 article “Have Phones Destroyed a Generation?,” 5 which linked the rise in suicide, depression, and anxiety among teens after 2012 to the appearance of smartphones. All-too-familiar pictures: parents and children, or couples, or friends, at the table, staring at their phones, texting; colleagues staring at screens, busy with emails; individuals, heads down, hooked on their phones, blind to their surroundings, wherever they are. Individuals interacting with their devices, not with each other. “The flight from conversation,” which may erode (close) human relationships and with them the capacity for empathy, introspection, creativity, and productivity - ultimately, the social fabric of our communities. Sherry Turkle, who has studied the relationship of humans with technology for decades, has articulated these concerns in Alone Together and Reclaiming Conversation . 6 , 7 Thus, “life offline” has become a consideration and advice to limit screen time and practice digital minimalism has become popular. 8 The concerns about screen time and efforts to keep us from staring at our devices and detox our digital lives came to a sudden end with the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. 9 Almost overnight, nearly our entire personal, professional, educational, cultural, and political activities were moved online. The dictum of social distancing necessitated virtual togetherness.


Changing human brains and behavior?


The use of digital technology has changed, and continues to change, our lives. How could this affect human brains and behavior, in both negative and positive ways? Apparently, the ability of the human brain to adapt to any changes plays a key role in generating structural and/or functional changes induced by the usage of digital devices. The most direct evidence for an effect of frequent smart phone use on the brain is provided by the demonstration of changes in cortical activity (Korte, p 101 in this issue). Touching the screen repetitively – the average American user touches it 2176 times a day 10 – induces an increase of the cortical potentials allotted to the tactile receptors on the fingertips, leading to an enlargement, ie, reorganization of the motor and sensory cortex. It remains to be determined whether this reshaping of cortical sensory representation occurs at the expense of other motor coordination skills. Processes of neuroplasticity are particularly active in the developing brain, especially during stages of dynamic brain growth in early childhood. For instance, as demonstrated by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), extensive childhood experience with the game “Pokémon” influences the organization of the visual cortex, with distinct effects on the perception of visual objects even decades later. Furthermore, as shown by diffusion tensor MRI, early extensive screen-based media use is significantly associated with lower microstructural integrity of brain white matter tracts supporting language and literacy skills in preschoolers. 11 Also, adolescence is a time of significant development, with the brain areas involved in emotional and social behavior undergoing marked changes. Social media use can have a profound effect; eg, the size of an adolescent’s online social network was closely linked to brain anatomy alterations as demonstrated by structural MRI. The impact of digital technology use, both negative and positive, on these and many more brain-related phenomena has been elaborated in the review by Korte, who provides a comprehensive overview of the field. 


The most direct approach to assess the effect of excessive digital media use on (adolescent) brains presently appears to be the analysis of the neurobiological mechanisms underlying Internet and Gaming Disorder (IGD) (Weinstein and Lejoyeux, p 113 in this issue). The authors thoroughly survey existing brain imaging studies, summarizing the effects of IGD on the resting state, the brain’s gray matter volume and white matter density, cortical thickness, functional connectivity, and brain activations, especially in regions related to reward and decision making, and neurotransmitter systems. Taken together, individuals with IGD share many typical neurobiological alterations with other forms of addiction, but also show unique patterns of activation specifically in brain regions which are associated with cognitive, motor, and sensory function. The effects of the Internet on cognition have been comprehensively elaborated by Firth et al. 12 Examining psychological, psychiatric, and neuroimaging data, they provide evidence for both acute and sustained alterations in specific areas of cognition, which may reflect structural and functional changes in the brain. These affect: (i) attentional capacities, which are divided between multiple online sources at the loss of sustained concentration on a single task; (ii) memory processes - permanently accessible online information can change the ways in which we retrieve, store, recall and even value knowledge; and (iii) social cognition; the prospects for social interactions and the contexts within which social relationships can happen have dramatically changed. A complementary contribution rounding up these reviews is provided by Small et al (p 179 in this issue). Among the possible harmful “brain health consequences,” these investigators emphasize attention problems and their potential link to symptoms of attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); furthermore the (paradoxical) association of excessive social media use with the perception of social isolation, observable at any age; the impaired emotional and social intelligence, poorer cognitive/language and brain development, and disrupted sleep. A substantial part of this review is devoted to the positive effects benefiting brain health in adults and the elderly, which are referred to below. Independent of ongoing research on the negative and positive implications of digital technology use, there remains a common feeling that there is something about the whole phenomenon that is just not “natural.” “We did not evolve to be staring at a screen for most of our waking hours. We evolved to be interacting with each other face-to-face, using our senses of smell and touch and taste – not just sight and sound… it cannot be healthy to stray so far from the activities for which nature has shaped our brains and our bodies.” Giedd (p 127 in this issue) challenges this notion in his fascinating review on “The natural allure of digital media,” putting the intensive digital media use during adolescence into a grand evolutionary perspective. He argues that the “desire for digital media is in fact exquisitely aligned with the biology of the teen brain and our evolutionary heritage,” with three features of adolescence being particularly relevant to this issue: (i) hunger for human connectedness; (ii) appetite for adventure; and (iii) desire for information.


Screen time: boon or bane?


As with any major innovation that has a profound impact on our lives, finding useful information and orientation means discerning scientific evidence from media narratives. Thus, synthesizing data from recent narrative reviews and meta-analyses including more than 50 studies, Odgers and Jensen (p 143 in this issue) could not confirm a strong linkage between the quantity of adolescents’ digital technology engagement and mental health problems. “There doesn’t seem to be an evidence base that would explain the level of panic and consternation around these issues” said Odgers, in the New York Times. 13 The authors point to significant limitations and foundational flaws in the existing knowledge base related to this topic; for instance, the nearly sole reliance on screen time metrics; the disregard of individual differences; the circumstance that almost none of the study designs allowed causal inference. On the other hand, a highly robust finding across multiple studies was that offline vulnerabilities (such as risks present in low-income families, communities, etc) tend to mirror and shape online risks. The observed social and digital divides are presently being magnified through the coronavirus crisis and most likely to increase in the future, further amplifying the existing inequalities in education, mental health, and prospects for youth. The authors strongly advocate the need and opportunities to leverage digital technology to support youth in an increasingly digital, unequal society in an uncertain age; see their suggestions for parents, clinicians, educators, designers and adolescents in Box 1 . Similarly, performing an in depth overview of the existing literature, Dienlin and Johannes (p 135 in this issue) could not substantiate the common concerns that digital technology use has a negative impact on young (and adult) peoples’ mental well-being. Their findings imply that the general effects are in the negative spectrum but very small – potentially too small to matter. Importantly, different types of use have different effects: thus, procrastination and passive use were related to more negative effects, and social and active use to more positive effects. Thus, “screen time” has different effects for different people. Digital technology use tends to exert short-term effects on well-being rather than long-lasting effects on life satisfaction. “The dose makes the poison”: both low and excessive use are related to decreased well-being, while moderate use increases well-being. With a strong sense for clear explanation, the authors introduce the concepts, terms, and definitions underlying this complex field, a most valuable primer to educate the interested reader, while also addressing the methodological shortcomings that contribute to the overall controversial experimental evidence. 


Thus, against common concerns, digital technology as such does not affect mental health or deteriorate well-being. Its use can have both negative and positive consequences. Technology simply does not “happen” to people. Individuals can shape the experiences they have with technologies and the results of those experiences. Thus, it is important to shift the focus towards an active, conscious use of this technology, with the intention to improve our lives and meaningfully connect with each other. This has become, more than ever, important now: “There is increased urgency, due to coronavirus, to use technology in ways that strengthen our relationships. Much of the world has been working, educating, and socializing online for months, and many important activities will remain virtual for the foreseeable future. This period of physical distancing has shed light on what we need from technology and each other… “ Morris (p 151 in this issue) introduces her article addressing the enhancement of relationships through technology in the most timely manner with a preface on “Connecting during COVID-19 and beyond.” In this synopsis, she sums up five directions to “build on as we connect during and after the pandemic.” Furthermore, in her review, she examines how technology can be shaped in positive ways by parents, caregivers, romantic partners, and clinicians and illustrates with real life examples creative and sensible ways to adapt technology to personal and relational goals (see also ref 14 ). Highlighting the importance of context, motivation, and the nuances of use, this review encourages people to understand how technologies can be optimally used to improve personal and clinical relationships. 


Digital tools in diagnosis and therapy


The use of digital tools for practical clinical applications and improvement of mental health conditions is gaining increasing acceptance, especially due to smartphone accessibility. This could fill at least in part the treatment gap and lack of access to specialized (psychotherapeutic) care, particularly in developing countries. Even in countries with well-developed health care systems, only a minority of patients receives treatment in line with the recommendations provided by evidence-based treatment guidelines. Thus, as elaborated in a thorough, comprehensive review by Hegerl and Oehler (p 161 in this issue), web-based interventions, especially in the case of Major Depression (MD), a highly prevalent and severe disorder, promise to be a method that provides resource-efficient and widespread access to psychotherapeutic support. The authors provide detailed information on available tools for digital intervention and their core principles; these are mostly based on principles of cognitive behavioral therapy, but also include elements of other psychotherapeutic approaches. As evident from meta-analyses summarizing studies that use face-to-face psychotherapy as a comparator, digital interventions can have equivalent antidepressant efficacy. Importantly, web-based interventions are most efficient when accompanied by adequate professional guidance and, if well designed, can be successfully integrated into routine care. The authors also address carefully the risks and limitations as well as unwanted effects of available digital interventions. Another powerful digital technology is gaining importance as a clinical tool in mental health research and practice, virtual reality (VR). According to Valmaggia and collaborators (p 169 in this issue), “At any time or place, individuals can be transported into immersive and interactive virtual worlds that are in full control of the researcher or clinician. This capability is central to recent interest in how VR might be harnessed in both treatment and assessment of mental health conditions.” To date, VR exposure treatments have proven effective across a range of disorders including schizophrenia, anxiety, and panic disorders. In their review, the authors summarize comprehensively the advantages of using VR as a clinical assessment tool, which could “radically transform the landscape of assessment in mental health.” Thus, VR may overcome many of the limitations concerning the diagnosis of psychological phenomena through its ability to generate highly controlled environments, that is, real-world experiences. In addition to increasing ecological validity, VR enhances personalization, that is, VR experiences can be tailored to match individual needs, abilities, or preferences. Furthermore, VR enhances an individual’s engagement with the test or assessment. Additional advantages include the capture of real-time, automated data in real-world contexts. In sum, the authors have thoroughly addressed the opportunities and challenges of VR in any relevant aspect. Finally, to complement the applications of digital technology to improve mental health, Small et al (p 179 in this issue) provide, in the second part of their review, rich information about specific programs, videogames, and other online tools, particularly for the aging brain. These may provide mental exercises that activate neural circuitry, improve cognitive functioning, reduce anxiety, increase restful sleep, and offer many other brain health benefits.


Emerging key messages


Several key messages emerge from these reviews, which cover a substantial amount of studies: first of all, scientific evidence does not support the common concerns that excessive use of digital technology causes mental health problems and a deterioration of well-being. There is increasing consensus that the methodological foundation is weak in many studies, in part explaining the controversial results and small effect sizes obtained to date. Above all, it appears absurd to collapse, as was common practice, the highly complex interaction between “machine and man” into a uniform quantitative screen time measure. Research, public policies, and interventions need to focus on the user , and not the extent of usage of technology. Who spends time and in what form with the digital devices is what is important. This leads us to what should be the main subject of interest, but has mostly — conceptually and factually — been disregarded: the human “individual” with its motivation, intentions, goals, needs, predispositions, familial, educational and social background, and support systems, or lack thereof. Needless to say, this calls for the consideration of individual differences in all aspects of research and application. Thus, digital technology is not intrinsically good or bad: it depends on the uses it is being put to by the user, and it can be utilized by individuals in both negative and positive ways. Now, more than ever, during and post coronavirus times, it is important that technology is taken advantage of to improve communication and enhance personal, professional, and societal relationships, guaranteeing equal opportunities for access and development for all.

• Bachelor’s Degrees
• Master’s Degrees
• Doctorate Degrees
• Certificate Programs
• Nursing Degrees
• Cybersecurity
• Human Services
• Science & Mathematics
• Communication
• Liberal Arts
• Social Sciences
• Computer Science
• Admissions Overview
• Tuition and Financial Aid
• Incoming Freshman and Graduate Students
• Transfer Students
• Military Students
• International Students
• Early Access Program
• About Maryville
• Our Faculty
• Our Approach
• Our History
• Accreditation
• Tales of the Brave
• Student Support Overview
• Online Learning Tools
• Infographics

Home / Blog

Children and Technology: Positive and Negative Effects

January 18, 2022 

Tables of Contents

Evolution of Children’s Use of Technology

Positive and negative effects of technology on children, technology and children statistics, technology and social interaction in children, ensuring safe and nurturing digital environments for children.

Imagine spending a year or more of your childhood almost entirely at home: no time in a classroom, no chance to join friends on the playground, and very few opportunities to enjoy favorite pastimes and experience new places, people, and activities.

The worldwide lockdowns that helped limit the spread of the coronavirus created a kind of twilight zone for children that put much of their environment off-limits and kept them separated from everyone but their immediate families. However, not all was lost. What vestiges of their pre-COVID life children were able to maintain were made possible by a range of technologies that kept them learning, interacting with friends, and entertained.

The growing presence of technology in children’s lives, from their first year through their teens, is a double-edged sword. While technologies are neutral, how they are applied and how children are exposed to them can be either positive or negative.

The impact of children and technology becomes increasingly difficult to gauge as the pace of technological innovation speeds up. This guide presents a snapshot of the many roles that technology products and services play in the lives of children. It balances the pluses and minuses of the effects of technology use by children on their development, social interactions, and prospects for the future.

From the earliest electric model trains in the early 20th century through the first home video game systems and remote-controlled toys, children’s introduction to technology has been through their toys. What were marvels of technology three, two, or even one generation ago seem almost quaint by today’s standards. However, the progress from Pong to Oculus virtual reality games occurred in a relatively brief period of time.

Early Examples of Children and Technology

Children have been interacting with digital technology since the earliest days of the PC revolution . One of the first electronic educational toys was Texas Instruments’ Speak & Spell, which was released in the late 1970s. This relatively simple device was a precursor to the first PCs designed for children in the 1980s. It also presaged the growth of computer-assisted instruction hardware and software in the pre-World Wide Web era.

• The first Speak & Spell toys debuted in 1978 to teach children ages 7 and older how to pronounce and spell 200 commonly misspelled words. It relied on electronic speech synthesis and bubble memory (a precursor to RAM) and was the first such product to use solid-state circuitry to replace all moving parts.
• While Magnavox’s Odyssey was the first gaming console upon its release in 1972, the device was soon eclipsed by the home version of Atari’s Pong arcade video game, which began shipping in 1975. This was followed by the Atari 2600 game console in 1977 and similar devices from Nintendo, Mattel, and Coleco, among other vendors. Sega and Nintendo came to dominate the home video market through the 1980s, along with Commodore, Atari, and Sony’s PlayStation, which was released in 1994.

Evolution of Technology Designed to Educate and Entertain Children

The arrival of the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s changed that nature of tech toys and education hardware and software. Smart Toy Lab , an Intel and Mattel joint venture launched in 1998, developed the first web-connected interactive toys, or “smart toys.” Among the first toys the lab developed were the QX3 Microscope, which featured a built-in video camera that sent images to a PC via a USB link, and the Me2Cam, which let children play interactive games using gestures to move “objects” on the screen.

Some early internet-connected toys and educational devices were criticized for violating children’s privacy by collecting personal information without parental consent. For example, Hello Barbie was released in 2015 and featured a built-in microphone and voice recognition software, as well as a Wi-Fi connection. The doll’s call-and-response function was a precursor to Amazon’s Alexa/Echo and Apple’s Siri voice assistants. However, hackers soon figured out how to break into the toy’s system and access users’ private information.

Today many children — from toddlers to teenagers — regularly use tablets, smartphones, and virtual environments for entertainment and educational purposes. Pandemic-related restrictions have increased children’s reliance on these and other technologies to connect with the outside world. With increased use of these products comes heightened prospects of damage and abuse:

• A recent study published in Children and Youth Services Review identified problematic smartphone use (present in 16.4% of high school students surveyed), daytime sleepiness (20.2%), and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (6.9%) as spiking during pandemic lockdowns.
• A study published in the Italian Journal of Pediatrics found that 66.3% of the children and adolescents surveyed used their smartphone for more than four hours a day during the pandemic, compared with 16.3% who did so before the pandemic. In addition, 56% of the children and adolescents surveyed used their smartphone after midnight at least three times each week, compared with 30.4% before the pandemic.

Back To Top

The shutdown of schools during the COVID-19 pandemic brought the damaging effect of the digital divide between rich and poor families into sharp focus. Pew Research Center data shows that the “homework gap” created by remote learning affected low-income families more than middle- and upper-income families. K-12 students who ever had to do schoolwork on a cellphone: lower income: 37%; middle income: 24%; upper income: 16%. K-12 students who ever lacked access to a home computer to complete schoolwork: lower income: 25%; middle income: 15%; upper income: 2%. K-12 students who ever relied on public Wi-Fi to complete schoolwork: lower income: 23%; middle income: 11%; upper income: 4%.

Children can benefit from technology by gaining new learning opportunities; it’s especially important for children who are physically or developmentally challenged. However, technology use has also been found to contribute to poor self-esteem and isolation in some children. As digital technologies become more ubiquitous, parents struggle to find the optimum amount of technology for their children’s lives.

Positive Effects of Technology on Children

All the “rules” about children’s access to computers and the internet were rewritten by the COVID-19 pandemic , according to parenting expert Anya Kamenetz. Technology provides children with easy access to information and boosts their creativity. Tech hardware and software helps children develop social skills and introduces them to various arts and sciences.

These are among the less obvious positive effects of technology on children:

• Technology allows children to connect with their family, friends, and others in ways that enrich their relationships, especially when using video chat and other real-time interactions.
• Parents and caregivers are learning to slow down and tone down the applications, games, and other content children use to avoid overloading their senses. This teaches children how to moderate their own use of technology.
• Rather than trying to eliminate all risk to children when using technology, the goal should be reducing the risk and adapting when problems arise, such as preventing children from accessing devices at specific times of the day.

Many parents hesitate to allow their preschool-age children to use technology products and services due to concerns about how it’ll impact their well-being and development. However, the children are surrounded by technology, much of which offers them significant benefits , as BSD Education explains:

• Technology helps children become independent learners more quickly. Once they learn how to access digital information sources safely, they’re able to explore the topics that interest them on their own.
• Children learn the importance of building communities and how to interact with people in social situations. When circumstances prevent children from establishing physical bonds with family members, friends, and others, they’re able to use technology to create “virtual bonds.”
• Early access to technology teaches the digital literacy skills that children will need for their future success in school and as adults.
• Many technology products promote hand-eye coordination in young children, while others focus on developing their language and problem-solving skills.

Negative Effects of Technology on Children

Children are especially susceptible to technology overuse. The American Psychological Association (APA) recommends limiting the use of technology to one hour per day of high-quality programming for children ages 2 to 5. For children ages 6 and up, it’s most important to set consistent limits on various types of media, such as gaming devices and smartphones.

APA suggests that parents focus on the content on children’s screens and how the children are interacting with it. A survey of research on the possible negative effects of technology on children establishes a connection between the level of a child’s use of technology and various developmental and behavior problems.

• Lack of attention, aggressive behaviors, obesity, physical inactivity, sleep problems
• Musculoskeletal problems related to a sedentary lifestyle
• Greater risk of lifetime obesity and cardiovascular disease
• Sleep disturbances and poor-quality sleep for children who overuse social media or keep mobile devices in their bedroom

These are among the negative effects of technology on children:

• Exposure to harmful online content and sexual exploitation: A study by Irish researchers found that children of all ages are able to bypass the age verification systems of social media apps, such as Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook. This can bring children into direct contact with potential predators and other dangers.
• Cyber bullying: The Cyberbullying Research Center reports that incidents of cyber bullying are most prevalent at ages 12 to 15. A recent survey by the center of 13- to 17-year-olds found that 23.7% of girls, 21.9% of boys, and 35.4% of transgender teens had experienced being bullied.
• Low self-esteem and increased anxiety: CNN reports that teens and adolescents are using image filters on Instagram to enhance their appearance even though the result looks nothing like them. “Self-esteem addiction” can make young people feel inadequate. As children spend more time on social media, they may become withdrawn or find themselves obsessively checking their social media feeds.

Resources on Ways Children Are Affected by Technology

• The Register, “Technology Does Widen the Education Divide. But Not Always in the Way You Expect” — One educator found that upon returning from online education during lockdown, children had turned away from technology, preferring real books and nontech activities because tech is no longer seen as “fun.”
• Edutopia, “Helping Parents Feel More Comfortable with Tech” — Advice for teachers about how to convince parents to support technology in the classroom.
• UNICEF, “Harnessing the Power of Technology and Digital Innovation for Children” — A report describing the initiatives and successes of the Digital UNICEF 2020 program, which is intended to extend the reach of UNICEF’s aid efforts.

When it comes to children’s access to technology, the digital divide between rich and poor persists. The increased reliance of children on technology for remote schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic adds a new and dangerous dimension to the problem, which some analysts refer to as the “ homework gap .”

• A survey by Common Sense Media found that 49% of 8- to 18-year-olds in the U.S. had attended classes fully or partially online since the start of the pandemic.
• Hispanic/Latinx students (48%) and Black students (39%) were much more likely than their white counterparts (20%) to attend school fully online.
• Similarly, students from low-income families (42%) were more likely to rely completely on online instruction than those from middle-income and high-income families (31% and 27%, respectively).
• While 92% of white students had a computer at home, only 87% of Hispanic/Latinx students and 78% of Black students did.
• Broadband access at home was available to 90% of students from families with high incomes, compared with 80% for middle-income families and 61% for lower-income families.
• In addition, 88% of white families had broadband access at home, while 76% of Black families and 68% of Hispanic/Latinx families had broadband access at home.

Common Sense Media estimates that closing the digital divide for K-12 public school students will cost between $6 billion and $11 billion in the first year, and between $4 billion and $8 billion annually in subsequent years. An additional $1 billion will be required to upgrade the remote access technologies that teachers use.

In 2020, TikTok surpassed YouTube to become the most frequently used app by teens and preteens in the U.S., according to MMGuardian. 1. TikTok: average daily usage, 105.1 minutes; % of children who use it, 32%. 2. YouTube: average daily usage, 102.6 minutes; % of children who use it, 69.7%. 3. Roblox: average daily usage, 90 minutes; % of children who use it, 24%. 4. Amino: average daily usage, 89.5 minutes; % of children who use it, 1.18%. 5. Avakin Life: average daily usage, 86.6 minutes; % of children who use it, 1.32%. 6. YouTube Kids: average daily usage, 85.8 minutes; % of children who use it, 6.9%. 7. Wattpad: average daily usage, 80.6 minutes; % of children who use it, 2.9%. 8. Netflix: average daily usage, 80.6 minutes; % of children who use it, 27.4%. 9. IMVU: average daily usage, 72.8 minutes; % of children who use it, 1.3%. 10. Hulu: average daily usage, 71 minutes; % of children who use it, 9.2%.

Statistics on Children’s Online Activities

The most common activity for children online is accessing software, audio, and video content (44% of children had done so between March 2020 and April 2021). The next most popular activities are using internet-based communications (22%); playing video games (14%); accessing online stores, banks, or payment systems (13%); and reading news media (4%).

A study by the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children’s learning and development determined that children lost learning opportunities at home and in preschool programs. This resulted in “unusually high” rates of socio-emotional and mental health problems in children as reported by their parents.

• Twenty-two percent of 4- to 7-year-olds had high levels of conduct problems in the fall of 2020, compared with 11% who did so in a survey conducted before the pandemic.
• Higher levels of hyperactivity (15% vs. 10%), peer problems (17% vs. 9%), lack of prosocial behavior (20% vs. 8%), and total difficulties (15% vs. 8%) were also recorded among 4- to 7-year-olds during the pandemic.

How Children’s Screen Time Correlates to Their Mental and Physical Health

A primary concern among parents about their children’s use of technology is the amount of time children spend in front of a television, computer, smartphone, or another screen. Researchers have established a link between the amount of time adolescents spend in front of a screen , their level of moderate or vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and the amount of sleep they get.

• Screen time involves sedentary activities that detract from MVPA and delay bedtime and that interrupt sleep with digital notifications.
• The result is an increased risk of children becoming overweight or obese, as well as more sleepiness during the day and lower academic achievement.
• While most of the 13- and 14-year-olds in the study met the recommendations for total screen time (less than two hours per day) and MVPA (at least one hour per day), only half met the recommendation for sleep (8.5 hours per night). Meeting the recommendation for screen time and one of the other two factors led to better academic outcomes.

Some research into the connection between children’s screen time and their psychological well-being has been brought into question because of discrepancies between actual and reported use of digital media by children. A recent meta-analysis of research on the impact of screen time on children found either no significant impact or only a moderate impact. More indicative of potential psychological or developmental problems in children than overall screen time is the type of content that children view and interact with.

However, studies have established a link between excessive screen time and children’s levels of attention deficit symptoms; impaired emotional and social intelligence; social isolation; phantom vibration syndrome; and diagnosable mental illnesses, such as depression, anxiety, and technology addiction.

Finding the Right Amount of Time Online for Children

Many activities that benefit children can become dangerous if used too much. During the pandemic, the time that adolescents spent in front of a screen nearly doubled, according to a study published in JAMA Pediatrics . Adolescents were spending an average of 7.7 hours a day in front of a screen early in the pandemic, compared with 3.8 hours per day before the pandemic. Indications are that the elevated level of screen time will persist.

Determining the optimal amount of screen time for children has become challenging for parents because of the potential problems arising related to children’s vision, posture, and other physical development concerns. While the standard recommendation of experts remains that children under the age of 8 spend less than two hours per day in front of a screen, many factors must be considered when setting a limit for children:

• Allow more screen time for positive educational activities.
• Encourage children to take breaks from the screen that involve outdoor activities.
• Avoid using screens as “babysitters” that keep children occupied. Find other nonscreen activities, such as creative toys, coloring books, and storybooks.
• Don’t let children’s use of electronics cut into their sleep time.
• Make sure that children take short breaks from the screen every 20 minutes or so to protect their vision.
• Check the area of the screen activity to ensure that the lighting is neither too dark nor too bright.

Tech Companies’ Growing Impact on Children

After pressure from government regulators, Facebook shelved its plans to develop a version of Instagram called Instagram Kids that targeted children under the age of 13, as The New York Times reports. In 2019, YouTube paid $170 million to settle claims that it targeted children under the age of 13 in its advertising and collected personal information about them.

These are just two of the many examples of giant tech companies targeting children to meet their need for continuous growth. In the absence of federal privacy laws, companies such as Google (which owns YouTube), Facebook (now known as Meta), Amazon, and TikTok are left to self-regulate their privacy and other policies.

• The Verge reports that Facebook is exploring the use of playdates to spur children to use its Messenger Kids application.
• According to Reuters, attorneys general of several states are investigating Instagram for its attempts to attract young children in violation of consumer protection laws.
• YouTube is being sued in the U.K. over alleged violations of children’s privacy and data rights, according to Tech Monitor.
• A recent survey by Accountable Tech found that 74% of parents believe that Facebook cares more about profits than about keeping their children safe on the site.

Parents, educators, and regulators are also concerned about the safety of educational technology platforms that use machine learning and other artificial intelligence technologies to harvest massive amounts of data about children. Many fear that ubiquitous surveillance will lead to behavioral control and potentially a total loss of privacy for children. They’re calling for more accountability from such platforms, as well as legislation that guarantees children’s “right to future tense.”

Resources Providing Statistics on Children and Technology

• International Central Institute for Youth and Educational Television, International Data Youth and Media 2021 — Statistics on the types of technologies that children use in countries around the world, as well as daily use of media by children in various age groups.
• Family Online Safety Institute, “Healthy Screen Time: Mobile Technology’s Relationship with Children’s Exercise” — A study reporting a sharp decrease in the amount of time children spend playing outdoors and the growing reliance on applications that entail physical activity, such as Nintendo’s Wii console.

Half of children ages 10 to 12 and one-third ages 7 to 9 use social media, according to a recent Mott poll of parents with children ages 7 to 12. Parents identified the areas of children’s social media use that they struggle to control; for instance, one in six parents don’t use parental controls. Additionally, 39% of parents don’t have time to monitor their children’s social media use, 21% of parents can’t find information to set up monitoring, and 32% of children find ways to circumvent parental controls.

The lockdowns deprived young children of opportunities to develop social skills by interacting with other children. As a result, educators report that some children returning to school are struggling with classroom routine. However, the pandemic has disrupted the lives of many families of students and teachers.

• Some children are experiencing anxiety in the classroom that may relate to separation anxiety after spending a prolonged period with family.
• While most students readjust quickly to their school routine, those who’ve experienced trauma at home are most likely to struggle in school. This is especially true for children in kindergarten and first grade.
• Children are showing their resilience in adapting quickly to masking and social distancing requirements.

Research presented at a recent conference of the Society of Neuroscience indicates that isolation in adolescents can change the development of the brain systems related to fear, risk and reward, and social recognition. This may make it more difficult for them to distinguish friendly behavior from threatening behavior in their peers, for example.

A good way to break feelings of social isolation that developed as a result of the pandemic is to increase the amount of school time devoted to physical activities.

Child Development and Technology

Researchers are studying how the way young children play with technology compares with the way they play with real-world toys. They’ve found that all the types of play in the nondigital environment are present in the digital realm as well.

• Digital play develops a range of abilities in children, including subject knowledge and understanding; digital skills; and skills related to social, emotional, cognitive, and creative development.
• Because digital and physical play are intermixed in children’s lives, it’s more appropriate to look at play holistically.

Most research on children and technology relates to children ages 9 to 16, but interactions with technology may have a greater impact on the development of children ages 3 to 8. Digital education for young children increasingly takes the form of applications running on tablets and smartphones, language development applications, and physical coordination from manipulating game controls and videos that teach dancing and other activities.

Since the advent of Apple’s iPad in 2010, computer use by young children has skyrocketed , especially as teaching philosophies focus on play activities over traditional classes and formal teaching. Some schools now test each child’s digital skills and teach children digital competence, such as knowing when and why digital tools are used.

One approach to understanding the complexity of technology’s impact on children is the domestication theory that compares the introduction of digital tools into society to the process of taming a wild animal. The four phases of the domestication process render the tools nonthreatening and also make them useful, important, and meaningful.

• Appropriation is the reason for acquiring the digital tool.
• Objectification of the digital tool instills a personal meaning for the tool in the child using it.
• Incorporation describes how the digital tool becomes a part of the child’s life. It also explains appropriate and inappropriate uses of the tool.
• Conversion occurs when the digital tool has redefined the child’s worldview and relations with others.

Resources on the Impact of Technology on Children’s Development and Social Interactions

• Early Childhood Education Journal, “Investigating Young Children’s Interactions During Digital Play” — Research into children’s social behaviors within digital play environments found that adding a social dimension increased a child’s engagement in the activity.
• OECD iLibrary, “Children and Digital Technologies: Trends and Outcomes” — Topics include use of social robots to help treat children with chronic diseases and the impact of digital technologies on children’s physical health.

Technological advances happen so quickly that parents and educators don’t have much opportunity to consider how children’s growth and well-being may be improved or impaired by the types of technologies they interact with and the ways in which those interactions occur. However, technology continues to play a more important part of the lives of most children when they’re in school, at home, and at play. The judicious application of technology will enhance a child’s education and other aspects of life.

Infographic Sources

Associated Press, “TikTok Is Now the Most-Used App by Teens and Pre-teens in the U.S.”

Mott Poll Report, “Sharing too Soon? Children and Social Media Apps”

Pew Research Center, “The Internet and the Pandemic”

Bring us your ambition and we’ll guide you along a personalized path to a quality education that’s designed to change your life.

Take Your Next Brave Step

Receive information about the benefits of our programs, the courses you'll take, and what you need to apply.

Is Technology Creating a Family Divide?

Technology and families don't always play nice together..

Posted March 13, 2013 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

Nowhere is the impact of popular culture and technology on children’s relationships more noticeable than in families. Both influences have contributed to a growing divide between the traditional roles that children and their parents play while, at the same time, blurring those same lines between parents and children. Over the past two decades, children who, for example, watch television, have received messages from popular culture telling them that parents are selfish, immature, incompetent, and generally clueless, for example, from Malcolm in the Middle , Tool Time , Family Guy , Two and a Half Men , and I Hate My Teenage Daughter, not to mention reality TV shows such as SuperNanny and the Housewives franchise.

This divide has grown due to the increased use of technology among children in several ways. First, children’s absorption in technology, from texting to playing video games, does by their very nature limit their availability to communicate with their parents. One study found that when the working parent arrived home after work, his or her children were so immersed in technology that the parent was greeted only 30 percent of the time and was totally ignored 50 percent of the time.

Another study reported that family time was not affected when technology was used for school but did hurt family communications when used for social reasons. Interestingly, children who spent considerable time on a popular social networking site indicated that they felt less supported by their parents.

Second, as digital immigrants, parents can struggle to gain proficiency and comfort with the new technology that their digital-native children have already mastered. This divergence in competence in such an important area of children’s lives makes it more difficult for parents to assume the role of teacher and guide in their children’s use of technology. Because of the lack of technological acumen on the part of many parents, they lack the authority, at least in the eyes of their children, to regulate its use.

Due to parents’ anxiety or apprehension about the use of technology, they may be unwilling to assert themselves in their children’s technological lives. Because of their children’s sense of superiority and lack of respect for parents’ authority in these matters, children may be unwilling to listen to their parents’ attempts to guide or limit their use of technology.

Third, computer and mobile technology have provided children with an independence in their communications with friends and others. Consider this. In previous generations, if children wanted to be in touch with a friend, they had to call them on the home phone which might be answered by a parent. Thus, parents had the opportunity to monitor and act as gatekeepers for their children’s social lives.

Times have changed. New technology offers children independence from their parents’ involvement in their social lives, with the use of mobile phones, instant messaging, and social networking sites. Of course, children see this technological divide between themselves and their parents as freedom from over-involvement and intrusion on the part of their parents in their lives. Parents, in turn, see it as a loss of connection to their children and an inability to maintain reasonable oversight, for the sake of safety and overall health, of their children’s lives.

At the same time, perhaps a bit cynically, children’s time-consuming immersion in technology may also mean that parents don’t have to bother with entertaining their children, leaving them more time to themselves.

There is little doubt that technology is affecting family relationships on a day-to-day level. Children are instant messaging constantly, checking their social media , listening to music, surfing their favorite web sites, and watching television or movies. Because of the emergence of mobile technology, these practices are no longer limited to the home, but rather can occur in cars, at restaurants, in fact, anywhere there’s a mobile phone signal.

It’s not only the children who are responsible for the growing divide between parents and their offspring. Parents can be equally guilty of contributing to the distance that appears to be increasing in families. They are often wrapped up in their own technology, for example, talking on their mobile phones, checking email, or watching TV, when they could be talking to, playing with, or generally connecting with their children.

Interestingly, parents have attempted to counteract this growing divide not with actual face-to-face communication with their children, but by joining their children in cyberspace. A phenomenon that has caused considerable debate involves parents “friending” their children on Facebook (about 50 percent). Some parents use Facebook to keep track of their children’s coming and goings. Other parents friend their children as a means of feeling closer to them. What is their children’s reaction to being “friends” with their parents? An informal survey I conducted with dozens of teenagers found that the dominant reaction can best be characterized as “EEEWWW!” Most children don’t want their parents to be their “friends” or their friends, for that matter.

The fact is that family life has changed in the last generation quite apart from the rise of technology. The size of homes has grown by 50 percent, meaning family members can retreat to their own corners of the house, so there’s less chance that parents and children will see each other. Because everyone is so busy with work, school, and extracurricular activities, there’s less time for families to spend together. Add technology to the mix and it only gets worse. It’s gotten to the point where it seems like parents and children are emailing and texting each other more than they’re talking—even when they’re at home together.

The ramifications of this distancing are profound. Less connection—the real kind—means that families aren’t able to build relationships as strong as they could be nor are they able to maintain them as well. As a result, children will feel less familiarity, comfort, trust, security, and, most importantly, love from their parents. There is also less sharing which means that parents know less about what is going on in their children’s lives and, consequently, have less ability to exert influence over them.

Parents are also less able to not only offer appropriate supervision and guidance, but, at a more basic level, they are less able to model healthy behavior, share positive values, and send good messages to their children.

Jim Taylor, Ph.D. , teaches at the University of San Francisco.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Home — Essay Samples — Information Science and Technology — Impact of Technology — How Technology Has Changed Our Lives

How Technology Has Changed Our Lives

• Categories: Impact of Technology

About this sample

Words: 1130 |

Updated: 9 November, 2023

Words: 1130 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Table of contents

Hook examples for technology essay, technology essay example.

• A Digital Revolution: Enter the era of smartphones, AI, and the Internet of Things, where technology is the driving force. Join me as we explore how technology has transformed our lives and the profound impact it has on society.
• An Intriguing Quote: Arthur C. Clarke once said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Let's delve into the magical world of modern technology and how it shapes our daily existence.
• The Paradox of Connectivity: Technology promises to connect us, yet it can also lead to isolation. Explore with me the paradox of our hyperconnected world and how it affects our relationships, both online and offline.
• The Impact on Work and Leisure: Discover how technology has revolutionized our work environments, blurring the lines between office and home. Together, we'll examine the changing landscape of leisure and entertainment in the digital age.
• Looking Ahead: As technology continues to advance, what lies on the horizon? Join me in discussing the future implications of emerging technologies and how they will further reshape our world in the years to come.

The Dark Side of Technological Advancement

• Increased Bullying
• Lack of Privacy
• Constant Distraction

Balancing Technology in Our Lives

Works cited.

• Anderson, M. (2018). The Effects of Technology on Teenagers. Verywell Family.
• Brown, B. W., & Bobkowski, P. S. (2011). Older and newer media: Patterns of use and effects on adolescents’ health and well-being. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 95-113.
• Calvillo, D. P., & Downey, R. G. (2010). Mobile phones and interruption in college classrooms: Instructors’ attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 223-231.
• Clarke-Pearson, K., & O'Keeffe, G. (2011). The impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics, 127(4), 800-804.
• Livingstone, S., & Smith, P. K. (2014). Annual research review: Harms experienced by child users of online and mobile technologies: The nature, prevalence and management of sexual and aggressive risks in the digital age. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(6), 635-654.
• Oulasvirta, A., Rattenbury, T., Ma, L., & Raita, E. (2012). Habits make smartphone use more pervasive. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(1), 105-114.
• Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2017). A large-scale test of the goldilocks hypothesis: Quantifying the relations between digital-screen use and the mental well-being of adolescents. Psychological Science, 28(2), 204-215.
• Rosen, L. D., Lim, A. F., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2011). An empirical examination of the educational impact of text message-induced task switching in the classroom: Educational implications and strategies to enhance learning. Psicologia Educativa, 17(2), 163-177.
• Schulte, B. (2018). The human costs of bringing smartphones to every student. The Atlantic.
• Twenge, J. M., Joiner, T. E., Rogers, M. L., & Martin, G. N. (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among US adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-17.

Video Version

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Information Science and Technology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 468 words

3 pages / 1416 words

2 pages / 819 words

1 pages / 974 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Impact of Technology

In recent decades, technological advancements have transformed the daily lives of Americans, exerting profound influence on political, economic, and social aspects of modern society. These changes have been primarily driven by [...]

Technology is a blend of two Greek words, techne and logos. In Greek, the word techne alludes to the utilization of an instrument, or the usage of an art or logic, and logos alludes to a word or discussion about a specific [...]

Technological change is the ability to increase the quality of efficiency of a process or product so as to achieve more profits while reducing the inputs. In the contemporary world, technologies are being developed every [...]

Roberts, J. A., & David, M. E. (2016). My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone: Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 134-141. [...]

Due to limited mobility, ill-stricken individuals have lots of free time. They have all the time to spend online in social media. The addictive nature of the browsing trend catches up with them. Spending much of the time in [...]

Information technology has made a significant impact with tremendous pace in the last few years. Either with the invention of the telephone or the internet, with each passing day, technology finds its way to development. The [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay

Do you wish to explore the use of information technology in daily life? Essays like the one below discuss this topic in depth. Read on to find out more.

Introduction

Technology in communication, technology in healthcare, technology in government, technology in education, technology in business, negative impact of technology.

Technology is a vital component of life in the modern world. People are so dependent on technology that they cannot live without it. Technology is important and useful in all areas of human life today. It has made life easy and comfortable by making communication and transport faster and easier (Harrington, 2011, p.35).

It has made education accessible to all and has improved healthcare services. Technology has made the world smaller and a better place to live. Without technology, fulfilling human needs would be a difficult task. Before the advent of technology, human beings were still fulfilling their needs. However, with technology, fulfillment of needs has become easier and faster.

It is unimaginable how life would be without technology. Technology is useful in the following areas: transport, communication, interaction, education, healthcare, and business (Harrington, 2011, p.35). Despite its benefits, technology has negative impacts on society. Examples of negative impacts of technology include the development of controversial medical practices such as stem cell research and the embracement of solitude due to changes in interaction methods. For example, social media has changed the way people interact.

Technology has led to the introduction of cloning, which is highly controversial because of its ethical and moral implications. The growth of technology has changed the world significantly and has influenced life in a great way. Technology is changing every day and continuing to influence areas of communication, healthcare, governance, education, and business.

Technology has contributed fundamentally in improving people’s lifestyles. It has improved communication by incorporating the Internet and devices such as mobile phones into people’s lives. The first technological invention to have an impact on communication was the discovery of the telephone by Graham Bell in 1875.

Since then, other inventions such as the Internet and the mobile phone have made communication faster and easier. For example, the Internet has improved ways through which people exchange views, opinions, and ideas through online discussions (Harrington, 2011, p.38). Unlike in the past when people who were in different geographical regions could not easily communicate, technology has eradicated that communication barrier. People in different geographical regions can send and receive messages within seconds.

Online discussions have made it easy for people to keep in touch. In addition, they have made socializing easy. Through online discussions, people find better solutions to problems by exchanging opinions and ideas (Harrington, 2011, p.39). Examples of technological inventions that facilitate online discussions include emails, online forums, dating websites, and social media sites.

Another technological invention that changed communication was the mobile phone. In the past, people relied on letters to send messages to people who were far away. Mobile phones have made communication efficient and reliable. They facilitate both local and international communication.

In addition, they enable people to respond to emergencies and other situations that require quick responses. Other uses of cell phones include the transfer of data through applications such as infrared and Bluetooth, entertainment, and their use as miniature personal computers (Harrington, 2011, p.40).

The latest versions of mobile phones are fitted with applications that enable them to access the Internet. This provides loads of information in diverse fields for mobile phone users. For business owners, mobile phones enhance the efficiency of their business operations because they are able to keep in touch with their employees and suppliers (Harrington, 2011, p.41). In addition, they are able to receive any information about the progress of their business in a short period of time.

Technology has contributed significantly to the healthcare sector. For example, it has made vital contributions in the fields of disease prevention and health promotion. Technology has aided in the understanding of the pathophysiology of diseases, which has led to the prevention of many diseases. For example, understanding the pathophysiology of the gastrointestinal tract and blood diseases has aided in their effective management (Harrington, 2011, p.49).

Technology has enabled practitioners in the medical field to make discoveries that have changed the healthcare sector. These include the discovery that peptic ulceration is caused by a bacterial infection and the development of drugs to treat schizophrenia and depressive disorders that afflict a greater portion of the population (Harrington, 2011, p.53). The development of vaccines against polio and measles led to their total eradication.

Children who are vaccinated against these diseases are not at risk of contracting the diseases. The development of vaccines was facilitated by technology, without which certain diseases would still be causing deaths in great numbers. Vaccines play a significant role in disease prevention.

Technology is used in health promotion in different ways. First, health practitioners use various technological methods to improve health care. eHealth refers to the use of information technology to improve healthcare by providing information on the Internet to people. In this field, technology is used in three main ways.

These include its use as an intervention tool, its use in conducting research studies, and its use for professional development (Lintonen et al, 2008, p. 560). According to Lintonenet al (2008), “e-health is the use of emerging information and communications technology, especially the internet, to improve or enable health and healthcare.” (p.560). It is largely used to support health care interventions that are mainly directed towards individual persons. Secondly, it is used to improve the well-being of patients during recovery.

Bedside technology has contributed significantly in helping patients recover. For example, medical professionals have started using the Xbox computer technology to develop a revolutionary process that measures limb movements in stroke patients (Tanja-Dijkstra, 2011, p.48). This helps them recover their manual competencies. The main aim of this technology is to help stroke patients do more exercises to increase their recovery rate and reduce the frequency of visits to the hospital (Lintonen et al, 2008, p. 560).

The government has utilized technology in two main areas. These include the facilitation of the delivery of citizen services and the improvement of defense and national security (Scholl, 2010, p.62). The government is spending large sums of money on wireless technologies, mobile gadgets, and technological applications. This is in an effort to improve their operations and ensure that the needs of citizens are fulfilled.

For example, in order to enhance safety and improve service delivery, Cisco developed a networking approach known as Connected Communities. This networking system connects citizens with the government and the community. The system was developed to improve the safety and security of citizens, improve service delivery by the government, empower citizens, and encourage economic development.

The government uses technology to provide information and services to citizens. This encourages economic development and fosters social inclusion (Scholl, 2010, p.62). Technology is also useful in improving national security and the safety of citizens. It integrates several wireless technologies and applications that make it easy for security agencies to access and share important information effectively. Technology is widely used by security agencies to reduce vulnerability to terrorism.

Technologically advanced gadgets are used in airports, hospitals, shopping malls, and public buildings to screen people for explosives and potentially dangerous materials or gadgets that may compromise the safety of citizens (Bonvillian and Sharp, 2001, par2). In addition, security agencies use surveillance systems to restrict access to certain areas. They also use technologically advanced screening and tracking methods to improve security in places that are prone to terrorist attacks (Bonvillian and Sharp, 2001, par3).

Technology has made significant contributions in the education sector. It is used to enhance teaching and learning through the use of different technological methods and resources. These include classrooms with digital tools such as computers that facilitate learning, online learning schools, blended learning, and a wide variety of online learning resources (Barnett, 1997, p.74). Digital learning tools that are used in classrooms facilitate learning in different ways. They expand the scope of learning materials and experiences for students, improve student participation in learning, make learning easier and quick, and reduce the cost of education (Barnett, 1997, p.75). For example, online schools and free learning materials reduce the costs that are incurred in purchasing learning materials. They are readily available online. In addition, they reduce the expenses that are incurred in program delivery.

Technology has improved the process of teaching by introducing new methods that facilitate connected teaching. These methods virtually connect teachers to their students. Teachers are able to provide learning materials and the course content to students effectively. In addition, teachers are able to give students an opportunity to personalize learning and access all learning materials that they provide. Technology enables teachers to serve the academic needs of different students.

In addition, it enhances learning because the problem of distance is eradicated, and students can contact their teachers easily (Barnett, 1997, p.76). Technology plays a significant role in changing how teachers teach. It enables educators to evaluate the learning abilities of different students in order to devise teaching methods that are most efficient in the achievement of learning objectives.

Through technology, teachers are able to relate well with their students, and they are able to help and guide them. Educators assume the role of coaches, advisors, and experts in their areas of teaching. Technology helps make teaching and learning enjoyable and gives it meaning that goes beyond the traditional classroom set-up system (Barnett, 1997, p.81).

Technology is used in the business world to improve efficiency and increase productivity. Most important, technology is used as a tool to foster innovation and creativity (Ray, 2004, p.62). Other benefits of technology to businesses include the reduction of injury risk to employees and improved competitiveness in the markets. For example, many manufacturing businesses use automated systems instead of manual systems. These systems eliminate the costs of hiring employees to oversee manufacturing processes.

They also increase productivity and improve the accuracy of the processes because of the reduction of errors (Ray, 2004, p.63). Technology improves productivity due to Computer-aided Manufacturing (CAM), Computer-integrated Manufacturing (CIM), and Computer-aided Design (CAD). CAM reduces labor costs, increases the speed of production, and ensures a higher level of accuracy (Hunt, 2008, p.44). CIM reduces labor costs, while CAD improves the quality and standards of products and reduces the cost of production.

Another example of the use of technology in improving productivity and output is the use of database systems to store data and information. Many businesses store their data and other information in database systems that make accessibility of information fast, easy, and reliable (Pages, 2010, p.44).

Technology has changed how international business is conducted. With the advent of e-commerce, businesses became able to trade through the Internet on the international market (Ray, 2004, p.69). This means that there is a large market for products and services. In addition, it implies that most markets are open 24 hours a day.

For example, customers can shop for books or music on Amazon.com at any time of the day. E-commerce has given businesses the opportunity to expand and operate internationally. Countries such as China and Brazil are taking advantage of opportunities presented by technology to grow their economy.

E-commerce reduces the complexities involved in conducting international trade (Ray, 2004, p.71). Its many components make international trade easy and fast. For example, a BOES system allows merchants to execute trade transactions in any language or currency, monitor all steps involved in transactions, and calculate all costs involved, such as taxes and freight costs (Yates, 2006, p.426).

Financial researchers claim that a BOES system is capable of reducing the cost of an international transaction by approximately 30% (Ray, 2004, p.74). BOES enables businesses to import and export different products through the Internet. This system of trade is efficient and creates a fair environment in which small and medium-sized companies can compete with large companies that dominate the market.

Despite its many benefits, technology has negative impacts. It has negative impacts on society because it affects communication and has changed the way people view social life. First, people have become more anti-social because of changes in methods of socializing (Harrington, 2008, p.103). Today, one does not need to interact physically with another person in order to establish a relationship.

The Internet is awash with dating sites that are full of people looking for partners and friends. The ease of forming friendships and relationships through the Internet has discouraged many people from engaging in traditional socializing activities. Secondly, technology has affected the economic statuses of many families because of high rates of unemployment. People lose jobs when organizations and businesses embrace technology (Harrington, 2008, p.105).

For example, many employees lose their jobs when manufacturing companies replace them with automated machines that are more efficient and cost-effective. Many families are struggling because of the lack of a constant stream of income. On the other hand, technology has led to the closure of certain companies because the world does not need their services. This is prompted by technological advancements.

For example, the invention of digital cameras forced Kodak to close down because people no longer needed analog cameras. Digital cameras replaced analog cameras because they are easy to use and efficient. Many people lost their jobs due to changes in technology. Thirdly, technology has made people lazy and unwilling to engage in strenuous activities (Harrington, 2008, p.113).

For example, video games have replaced physical activities that are vital in improving the health of young people. Children spend a lot of time watching television and playing video games such that they have little or no time for physical activities. This has encouraged the proliferation of unhealthy eating habits that lead to conditions such as diabetes.

Technology has elicited heated debates in the healthcare sector. Technology has led to medical practices such as stem cell research, implant embryos, and assisted reproduction. Even though these practices have been proven viable, they are highly criticized on the grounds of their moral implications on society.

There are many controversial medical technologies, such as gene therapy, pharmacogenomics, and stem cell research (Hunt, 2008, p.113). The use of genetic research in finding new cures for diseases is imperative and laudable. However, the medical implications of these disease treatment methods and the ethical and moral issues associated with the treatment methods are critical. Gene therapy is mostly rejected by religious people.

They claim that it is against natural law to alter the gene composition of a person in any way (Hunt, 2008, p.114). The use of embryonic stem cells in research is highly controversial, unlike the use of adult stem cells. The controversy exists because of the source of the stem cells. The cells are obtained from embryos. There is a belief among many people that life starts after conception.

Therefore, using embryos in research means killing them to obtain their cells for research. The use of embryo cells in research is considered in the same light as abortion: eliminating a life (Hunt, 2008, p.119). These issues have led to disagreements between the science and the religious worlds.

Technology is a vital component of life in the modern world. People are so dependent on technology that they cannot live without it. Technology is important and useful in all areas of human life today.

It has made life easy and comfortable by making communication faster and travel faster, making movements between places easier, making actions quick, and easing interactions. Technology is useful in the following areas of life: transport, communication, interaction, education, healthcare, and business. Despite its benefits, technology has negative impacts on society.

Technology has eased communication and transport. The discovery of the telephone and the later invention of the mobile phone changed the face of communication entirely. People in different geographical regions can communicate easily and in record time. In the field of health care, technology has made significant contributions in disease prevention and health promotion. The development of vaccines has eradicated certain diseases, and the use of the Internet is vital in promoting health and health care.

The government uses technology to enhance the delivery of services to citizens and the improvement of defense and security. In the education sector, teaching and learning processes have undergone significant changes owing to the impact of technology. Teachers are able to relate to different types of learners, and the learners have access to various resources and learning materials. Businesses benefit from technology through the reduction of costs and increased efficiency of business operations.

Despite the benefits, technology has certain disadvantages. It has negatively affected human interactions and socialization and has led to widespread unemployment. In addition, its application in the healthcare sector has elicited controversies due to certain medical practices such as stem cell research and gene therapy. Technology is very important and has made life easier and more comfortable than it was in the past.

Barnett, L. (1997). Using Technology in Teaching and Learning . New York: Routledge.

Bonvillian, W., and Sharp, K. (2011). Homeland Security Technology . Retrieved from https://issues.org/bonvillian/ .

Harrington, J. (2011). Technology and Society . New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

Hunt, S. (2008). Controversies in Treatment Approaches: Gene Therapy, IVF, Stem Cells and Pharmagenomics. Nature Education , 19(1), 112-134.

Lintonen, P., Konu, A., and Seedhouse, D. (2008). Information Technology in Health Promotion. Health Education Research , 23(3), 560-566.

Pages, J., Bikifalvi, A., and De Castro Vila, R. (2010). The Use and Impact of Technology in Factory Environments: Evidence from a Survey of Manufacturing Industry in Spain. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology , 47(1), 182-190.

Ray, R. (2004). Technology Solutions for Growing Businesses . New York: AMACOM Div American Management Association.

Scholl, H. (2010). E-government: Information, Technology and Transformation . New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Tanja-Dijkstra, K. (2011). The Impact of Bedside Technology on Patients’ Well-Being. Health Environments Research & Design Journal (HERD) , 5(1), 43-51.

Yates, J. (2006). How Business Enterprises use Technology: Extending the Demand-Side Turn. Enterprise and Society , 7(3), 422-425.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, August 28). How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/

"How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." IvyPanda , 28 Aug. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay'. 28 August.

IvyPanda . 2023. "How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." August 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

1. IvyPanda . "How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." August 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "How Technology Affects Our Lives – Essay." August 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/technology-affecting-our-daily-life/.

• Pros and Cons of Mobile Phones
• Are Cell Phone Dangerous?
• Relationship with Cell Phones
• Mobile Phone Base Stations: Overview of Technology
• Development of Mobile Phones and the Future
• Is Using Cell Phone Dangerous?
• Mobile Phone Use Effects on People’s Lifestyles
• Mobile Phones and True Communication
• You Cannot Live Without Mobile Phones
• Future in Marketing using the Mobile Phone
• Inventions That the World Would Do Without
• Technology and Its Impact in the World
• The Evolution of the Automobile & Its Effects on Society
• How Computers Affect Our Lives
• Evolution of Power Production

• Previous Article
• Next Article

Promises and Pitfalls of Technology

Politics and privacy, private-sector influence and big tech, state competition and conflict, author biography, how is technology changing the world, and how should the world change technology.

[email protected]

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Guest Access
• Get Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Josephine Wolff; How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?. Global Perspectives 1 February 2021; 2 (1): 27353. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/gp.2021.27353

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Technologies are becoming increasingly complicated and increasingly interconnected. Cars, airplanes, medical devices, financial transactions, and electricity systems all rely on more computer software than they ever have before, making them seem both harder to understand and, in some cases, harder to control. Government and corporate surveillance of individuals and information processing relies largely on digital technologies and artificial intelligence, and therefore involves less human-to-human contact than ever before and more opportunities for biases to be embedded and codified in our technological systems in ways we may not even be able to identify or recognize. Bioengineering advances are opening up new terrain for challenging philosophical, political, and economic questions regarding human-natural relations. Additionally, the management of these large and small devices and systems is increasingly done through the cloud, so that control over them is both very remote and removed from direct human or social control. The study of how to make technologies like artificial intelligence or the Internet of Things “explainable” has become its own area of research because it is so difficult to understand how they work or what is at fault when something goes wrong (Gunning and Aha 2019) .

This growing complexity makes it more difficult than ever—and more imperative than ever—for scholars to probe how technological advancements are altering life around the world in both positive and negative ways and what social, political, and legal tools are needed to help shape the development and design of technology in beneficial directions. This can seem like an impossible task in light of the rapid pace of technological change and the sense that its continued advancement is inevitable, but many countries around the world are only just beginning to take significant steps toward regulating computer technologies and are still in the process of radically rethinking the rules governing global data flows and exchange of technology across borders.

These are exciting times not just for technological development but also for technology policy—our technologies may be more advanced and complicated than ever but so, too, are our understandings of how they can best be leveraged, protected, and even constrained. The structures of technological systems as determined largely by government and institutional policies and those structures have tremendous implications for social organization and agency, ranging from open source, open systems that are highly distributed and decentralized, to those that are tightly controlled and closed, structured according to stricter and more hierarchical models. And just as our understanding of the governance of technology is developing in new and interesting ways, so, too, is our understanding of the social, cultural, environmental, and political dimensions of emerging technologies. We are realizing both the challenges and the importance of mapping out the full range of ways that technology is changing our society, what we want those changes to look like, and what tools we have to try to influence and guide those shifts.

Technology can be a source of tremendous optimism. It can help overcome some of the greatest challenges our society faces, including climate change, famine, and disease. For those who believe in the power of innovation and the promise of creative destruction to advance economic development and lead to better quality of life, technology is a vital economic driver (Schumpeter 1942) . But it can also be a tool of tremendous fear and oppression, embedding biases in automated decision-making processes and information-processing algorithms, exacerbating economic and social inequalities within and between countries to a staggering degree, or creating new weapons and avenues for attack unlike any we have had to face in the past. Scholars have even contended that the emergence of the term technology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries marked a shift from viewing individual pieces of machinery as a means to achieving political and social progress to the more dangerous, or hazardous, view that larger-scale, more complex technological systems were a semiautonomous form of progress in and of themselves (Marx 2010) . More recently, technologists have sharply criticized what they view as a wave of new Luddites, people intent on slowing the development of technology and turning back the clock on innovation as a means of mitigating the societal impacts of technological change (Marlowe 1970) .

At the heart of fights over new technologies and their resulting global changes are often two conflicting visions of technology: a fundamentally optimistic one that believes humans use it as a tool to achieve greater goals, and a fundamentally pessimistic one that holds that technological systems have reached a point beyond our control. Technology philosophers have argued that neither of these views is wholly accurate and that a purely optimistic or pessimistic view of technology is insufficient to capture the nuances and complexity of our relationship to technology (Oberdiek and Tiles 1995) . Understanding technology and how we can make better decisions about designing, deploying, and refining it requires capturing that nuance and complexity through in-depth analysis of the impacts of different technological advancements and the ways they have played out in all their complicated and controversial messiness across the world.

These impacts are often unpredictable as technologies are adopted in new contexts and come to be used in ways that sometimes diverge significantly from the use cases envisioned by their designers. The internet, designed to help transmit information between computer networks, became a crucial vehicle for commerce, introducing unexpected avenues for crime and financial fraud. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, designed to connect friends and families through sharing photographs and life updates, became focal points of election controversies and political influence. Cryptocurrencies, originally intended as a means of decentralized digital cash, have become a significant environmental hazard as more and more computing resources are devoted to mining these forms of virtual money. One of the crucial challenges in this area is therefore recognizing, documenting, and even anticipating some of these unexpected consequences and providing mechanisms to technologists for how to think through the impacts of their work, as well as possible other paths to different outcomes (Verbeek 2006) . And just as technological innovations can cause unexpected harm, they can also bring about extraordinary benefits—new vaccines and medicines to address global pandemics and save thousands of lives, new sources of energy that can drastically reduce emissions and help combat climate change, new modes of education that can reach people who would otherwise have no access to schooling. Regulating technology therefore requires a careful balance of mitigating risks without overly restricting potentially beneficial innovations.

Nations around the world have taken very different approaches to governing emerging technologies and have adopted a range of different technologies themselves in pursuit of more modern governance structures and processes (Braman 2009) . In Europe, the precautionary principle has guided much more anticipatory regulation aimed at addressing the risks presented by technologies even before they are fully realized. For instance, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation focuses on the responsibilities of data controllers and processors to provide individuals with access to their data and information about how that data is being used not just as a means of addressing existing security and privacy threats, such as data breaches, but also to protect against future developments and uses of that data for artificial intelligence and automated decision-making purposes. In Germany, Technische Überwachungsvereine, or TÜVs, perform regular tests and inspections of technological systems to assess and minimize risks over time, as the tech landscape evolves. In the United States, by contrast, there is much greater reliance on litigation and liability regimes to address safety and security failings after-the-fact. These different approaches reflect not just the different legal and regulatory mechanisms and philosophies of different nations but also the different ways those nations prioritize rapid development of the technology industry versus safety, security, and individual control. Typically, governance innovations move much more slowly than technological innovations, and regulations can lag years, or even decades, behind the technologies they aim to govern.

In addition to this varied set of national regulatory approaches, a variety of international and nongovernmental organizations also contribute to the process of developing standards, rules, and norms for new technologies, including the International Organization for Standardization­ and the International Telecommunication Union. These multilateral and NGO actors play an especially important role in trying to define appropriate boundaries for the use of new technologies by governments as instruments of control for the state.

At the same time that policymakers are under scrutiny both for their decisions about how to regulate technology as well as their decisions about how and when to adopt technologies like facial recognition themselves, technology firms and designers have also come under increasing criticism. Growing recognition that the design of technologies can have far-reaching social and political implications means that there is more pressure on technologists to take into consideration the consequences of their decisions early on in the design process (Vincenti 1993; Winner 1980) . The question of how technologists should incorporate these social dimensions into their design and development processes is an old one, and debate on these issues dates back to the 1970s, but it remains an urgent and often overlooked part of the puzzle because so many of the supposedly systematic mechanisms for assessing the impacts of new technologies in both the private and public sectors are primarily bureaucratic, symbolic processes rather than carrying any real weight or influence.

Technologists are often ill-equipped or unwilling to respond to the sorts of social problems that their creations have—often unwittingly—exacerbated, and instead point to governments and lawmakers to address those problems (Zuckerberg 2019) . But governments often have few incentives to engage in this area. This is because setting clear standards and rules for an ever-evolving technological landscape can be extremely challenging, because enforcement of those rules can be a significant undertaking requiring considerable expertise, and because the tech sector is a major source of jobs and revenue for many countries that may fear losing those benefits if they constrain companies too much. This indicates not just a need for clearer incentives and better policies for both private- and public-sector entities but also a need for new mechanisms whereby the technology development and design process can be influenced and assessed by people with a wider range of experiences and expertise. If we want technologies to be designed with an eye to their impacts, who is responsible for predicting, measuring, and mitigating those impacts throughout the design process? Involving policymakers in that process in a more meaningful way will also require training them to have the analytic and technical capacity to more fully engage with technologists and understand more fully the implications of their decisions.

At the same time that tech companies seem unwilling or unable to rein in their creations, many also fear they wield too much power, in some cases all but replacing governments and international organizations in their ability to make decisions that affect millions of people worldwide and control access to information, platforms, and audiences (Kilovaty 2020) . Regulators around the world have begun considering whether some of these companies have become so powerful that they violate the tenets of antitrust laws, but it can be difficult for governments to identify exactly what those violations are, especially in the context of an industry where the largest players often provide their customers with free services. And the platforms and services developed by tech companies are often wielded most powerfully and dangerously not directly by their private-sector creators and operators but instead by states themselves for widespread misinformation campaigns that serve political purposes (Nye 2018) .

Since the largest private entities in the tech sector operate in many countries, they are often better poised to implement global changes to the technological ecosystem than individual states or regulatory bodies, creating new challenges to existing governance structures and hierarchies. Just as it can be challenging to provide oversight for government use of technologies, so, too, oversight of the biggest tech companies, which have more resources, reach, and power than many nations, can prove to be a daunting task. The rise of network forms of organization and the growing gig economy have added to these challenges, making it even harder for regulators to fully address the breadth of these companies’ operations (Powell 1990) . The private-public partnerships that have emerged around energy, transportation, medical, and cyber technologies further complicate this picture, blurring the line between the public and private sectors and raising critical questions about the role of each in providing critical infrastructure, health care, and security. How can and should private tech companies operating in these different sectors be governed, and what types of influence do they exert over regulators? How feasible are different policy proposals aimed at technological innovation, and what potential unintended consequences might they have?

Conflict between countries has also spilled over significantly into the private sector in recent years, most notably in the case of tensions between the United States and China over which technologies developed in each country will be permitted by the other and which will be purchased by other customers, outside those two countries. Countries competing to develop the best technology is not a new phenomenon, but the current conflicts have major international ramifications and will influence the infrastructure that is installed and used around the world for years to come. Untangling the different factors that feed into these tussles as well as whom they benefit and whom they leave at a disadvantage is crucial for understanding how governments can most effectively foster technological innovation and invention domestically as well as the global consequences of those efforts. As much of the world is forced to choose between buying technology from the United States or from China, how should we understand the long-term impacts of those choices and the options available to people in countries without robust domestic tech industries? Does the global spread of technologies help fuel further innovation in countries with smaller tech markets, or does it reinforce the dominance of the states that are already most prominent in this sector? How can research universities maintain global collaborations and research communities in light of these national competitions, and what role does government research and development spending play in fostering innovation within its own borders and worldwide? How should intellectual property protections evolve to meet the demands of the technology industry, and how can those protections be enforced globally?

These conflicts between countries sometimes appear to challenge the feasibility of truly global technologies and networks that operate across all countries through standardized protocols and design features. Organizations like the International Organization for Standardization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and many others have tried to harmonize these policies and protocols across different countries for years, but have met with limited success when it comes to resolving the issues of greatest tension and disagreement among nations. For technology to operate in a global environment, there is a need for a much greater degree of coordination among countries and the development of common standards and norms, but governments continue to struggle to agree not just on those norms themselves but even the appropriate venue and processes for developing them. Without greater global cooperation, is it possible to maintain a global network like the internet or to promote the spread of new technologies around the world to address challenges of sustainability? What might help incentivize that cooperation moving forward, and what could new structures and process for governance of global technologies look like? Why has the tech industry’s self-regulation culture persisted? Do the same traditional drivers for public policy, such as politics of harmonization and path dependency in policy-making, still sufficiently explain policy outcomes in this space? As new technologies and their applications spread across the globe in uneven ways, how and when do they create forces of change from unexpected places?

These are some of the questions that we hope to address in the Technology and Global Change section through articles that tackle new dimensions of the global landscape of designing, developing, deploying, and assessing new technologies to address major challenges the world faces. Understanding these processes requires synthesizing knowledge from a range of different fields, including sociology, political science, economics, and history, as well as technical fields such as engineering, climate science, and computer science. A crucial part of understanding how technology has created global change and, in turn, how global changes have influenced the development of new technologies is understanding the technologies themselves in all their richness and complexity—how they work, the limits of what they can do, what they were designed to do, how they are actually used. Just as technologies themselves are becoming more complicated, so are their embeddings and relationships to the larger social, political, and legal contexts in which they exist. Scholars across all disciplines are encouraged to join us in untangling those complexities.

Josephine Wolff is an associate professor of cybersecurity policy at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. Her book You’ll See This Message When It Is Too Late: The Legal and Economic Aftermath of Cybersecurity Breaches was published by MIT Press in 2018.

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link to 'How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?' and will not need an account to access the content.

Subject: How Is Technology Changing the World, and How Should the World Change Technology?

(Optional message may have a maximum of 1000 characters.)

Citing articles via

Email alerts, affiliations.

• Special Collections
• Review Symposia
• Info for Authors
• Info for Librarians
• Editorial Team
• Emerging Scholars Forum
• Open Access
• Online ISSN 2575-7350
• Copyright © 2024 The Regents of the University of California. All Rights Reserved.

Stay Informed

Disciplines.

• Ancient World
• Anthropology
• Communication
• Criminology & Criminal Justice
• Film & Media Studies
• Food & Wine
• Browse All Disciplines
• Browse All Courses
• Book Authors
• Booksellers
• Instructions
• Journal Authors
• Journal Editors
• Media & Journalists
• Planned Giving

About UC Press

• Press Releases
• Seasonal Catalog
• Acquisitions Editors
• Customer Service
• Exam/Desk Requests
• Media Inquiries
• Print-Disability
• Rights & Permissions
• UC Press Foundation
• © Copyright 2024 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Privacy policy    Accessibility

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Table of Contents

Ways technology improves our daily life, influence of technology, improved quality of life , downsides to consider, positive and negative impact of technology on modern businesses, has technology improved our lives.

As it is rightly said that necessity is the mother of invention, all technologies that have emerged and thrived so far have been invented to meet the needs of society. As newer technology is introduced, it certainly reflects the very essence of a population’s needs and wants. Nowadays, technologies and societies are inseparable. It is like a cycle, where each one significantly affects the other. As humans evolve and their needs and wants change over time, advanced and modern technology come to the rescue to fulfill these needs. 

Technology is molding our society today. Following are some of the ways it is improving our daily lives. 

• Business Efficiency: A tidal wave of exponential technological progress is sweeping away the business world. Today’s marketplace offers more than different ways to improvise, adapt and leap forward by means of the available technology. To enhance the customer experience, the utilization of business analytics has proved to be beneficial. Such business tools, which are powered by technology, have taken the aspects of business to different heights. Personalized messaging and user behavior analysis has also helped businesses to mark their fruitful presence in the marketplace. 
• Expedited Communication: The only certain answer to how technology has improved our lives is, it has dramatically changed the way we communicated with each other. It has led to the birth of several modes of electronic communication such as smartphone communication and social media. We have reached a certain point in civilization where instant and glitch-free communication is easily available. Speed is undeniably the significant improvement that technology has brought forth for communication. Instant and easy communication is now possible from the comfort of our homes.      
• Advanced Lifestyle: With technology at its helm, societies have been reshaped throughout history. Technology has played a pivotal role in the way humans behave and operate in the world. Technological improvements around us are a continuous thing. New advancements are emerging and it is surely impacting our lifestyles. Our lives are now radically different compared to earlier decades, thanks to technology. The touch of technology and its presence is felt everywhere such as commuting, farming, education, etc. On the other hand, the Internet of Things (IoT) has made our lives super easy. Smart homes and advanced electronic gadgets, through the medium of IoT, have drastically improved our daily routines. It has made several aspects of life easier.  
• Information Accessibility: Technology has heavily influenced the way we transfer and access information. Nowadays, any information is available at the tip of our fingertips. We constantly find answers and gather information from the internet. Technology is readily accessible to us, both in terms of its authenticity and relevance, only if one knows how to browse better. To speak of the advantages of technology, information accessibility could be considered as the best one.   

The influence of technology in our daily lives is far more widespread than we actually think. It is growing and progressing at a rapid pace. It has changed the way we access resources. It has also changed the way we learn new things. Nowadays, people tend to rely on technology for everything. Whenever we need to contact someone, we can just text that person instantly. Earlier, it was much slower with letters and meetings. This is the way technology has disrupted the way we communicate. Our requirements and technical demands continue to grow, which is eventually pushing the boundaries of technology and the way it influences us. 

Become a Data Science & Business Analytics Professional

• 28% Annual Job Growth By 2026
• 11.5 M Expected New Jobs For Data Science By 2026

Data Scientist

• Add the IBM Advantage to your Learning
• 25 Industry-relevant Projects and Integrated labs

Full Stack Java Developer

• Kickstart Full Stack Java Developer career with industry-aligned curriculum by experts
• Hands-on practice through 20+ projects, assessments, and tests

Here's what learners are saying regarding our programs:

A.Anthony Davis

Simplilearn has one of the best programs available online to earn real-world skills that are in demand worldwide. I just completed the Machine Learning Advanced course, and the LMS was excellent.

I encountered problems when trying to solve the projects in my Data Science class for Python. The Teaching Assistant was accommodating and provided step-by-step guidance through web chat sessions to resolve the issues.

We have reached a point where it is difficult to imagine life without technology. It has considerably changed the quality of life. By seeping into every aspect of our life, technology has changed the way we behave and operate. From communication and transport to healthcare and connectivity, technology has enhanced our lives for the better. The best part is that it is ever-evolving by facilitating more advanced features. For instance, we have come far from traditional audio calls to instant messaging and facetime. Not to forget, technology has come to rescue during the pandemic. When the world was in lockdown mode, video calling and putting out words on the internet has paved the way for connecting with each other. Technology helped us stay together by living apart. Whilst the pandemic was fading away, work from home situation was possible only due to technology which further rolled the wheels of economy. 

Since the dotcom boom, over time, the world is increasingly getting access to the internet. It is disrupting many lives and the way they interact with their daily matters. It all started with industrial automation which made work easy and efficient, further it penetrated into every aspect of life. Ever since it is changing every dimension of life. 

Though technology has changed things up, there are some downsides to consider. There are some pros and cons of technology. Privacy is the foremost concern that technology has brought forth. Digital technology means that enormous quantities of data are being collected and stored. This includes private information with regards to individuals and organizations. It is a challenging task to keep this information safe and secure. A single mistake or voluntary breach of data means that the private information landing into the hands of hackers, terrorists, etc. 

On the other hand, real-life contact has been diminishing away since the advent of technology. People tend to meet and greet online rather than interacting in-person. This ultimately results in isolation and a sense of disconnect from society. Several studies have suggested that lesser interaction with the society has further brought forth various kinds of mental health issues such as depression and social anxiety. 

With a slew of benefits of technology, there are some other downsides to consider such as job insecurity due to increasing automation, addiction to gadgets, less experience to life events, etc.  

There are so many pros of technology. Technology is continuously redefining the way organizations conduct their businesses by being more visible over the internet, accessible to customers. It is dramatically enhancing internal modus operandi as well as services they offer. Strategies concerning the execution of digital technologies have gained some ground of immense popularity over the last decade owing to the perks that businesses have been privileged to enjoy as a result of adapting to such technologies. By incorporating digital solutions, avant-garde tools and technologies, organizations have seamlessly managed processes, expedited production cycles and have been able to offer high quality products and improved customer experience whilst cutting down cost and boosting productivity and profitability. Technology has made organizations competitive with its sweeping impact.  

Positive and negative impacts are two sides of the same coin. Face to face communication is decreased due to the availability of audio and video calls. This influences decision making and can lead to misunderstanding. Also, organizational data is sensitive. If someone hacks into the system, it can lead to irreparable loss. Dependency is another issue which can hamper productivity.   

If you're eager to gain the skills required to work in a challenging, rewarding, and dynamic IT role - we've got your back! Discover the endless opportunities through this innovative Post Graduate Program in Full Stack Web Development course designed by our partners at Caltech CTME. Enroll today!

While technology has certainly increased our standard of living in numerous ways, it has also brought a whole host of new challenges and dangers that must be addressed. Our lives are now more interconnected than ever, yet this can come at the cost of our privacy and security. Cybersecurity threats are now commonplace and can cause serious disruption to our lives, while issues such as cyberstalking, sexting, and cyberbullying have all become issues that must be addressed by responsible adults and children alike.

Technology has changed our lives in countless ways, from the way we communicate with each other to the way we watch TV. As technology advances, more and more of our daily lives are being impacted.

If you are looking to enhance your software development skills, we would recommend you to check Simplilearn’s Post Graduate Program in Full Stack Web Development in collaboration with Caltech CTME. This course can help you hone the right technological skills and make you job-ready.

If you have any questions or queries, feel free to post them in the comments section below. Our team will get back to you at the earliest.

Our Software Development Courses Duration And Fees

Software Development Course typically range from a few weeks to several months, with fees varying based on program and institution.

Get Free Certifications with free video courses

Data Science & Business Analytics

Introduction to Data Science

Software Development

Getting Started with Full Stack Java Development

Learn from Industry Experts with free Masterclasses

Open Gates to a Successful Data Scientist Career in 2024 with Simplilearn Masters program

Learner Spotlight: Watch How Prasann Upskilled in Data Science and Transformed His Career

Career Fast-track

Redefining Future-Readiness for the Modern Graduate: Expert Tips for a Successful Career

Recommended Reads

How to Improve Your Company’s Training Completion Rates

The Future of Robotics: How Robots Will Transform Our Lives

What is Blockchain Technology? How Does It Work?

Why Blended Learning Improves Training

Email Deliverability: Why It Matters and How to Improve It

An Ultimate Guide That Helps You to Develop and Improve Problem Solving in Programming

Get Affiliated Certifications with Live Class programs

• PMP, PMI, PMBOK, CAPM, PgMP, PfMP, ACP, PBA, RMP, SP, and OPM3 are registered marks of the Project Management Institute, Inc.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Subscriber-only Newsletter

Jessica Grose

Screens are everywhere in schools. do they actually help kids learn.

By Jessica Grose

Opinion Writer

A few weeks ago, a parent who lives in Texas asked me how much my kids were using screens to do schoolwork in their classrooms. She wasn’t talking about personal devices. (Smartwatches and smartphones are banned in my children’s schools during the school day, which I’m very happy about; I find any argument for allowing these devices in the classroom to be risible.) No, this parent was talking about screens that are school sanctioned, like iPads and Chromebooks issued to children individually for educational activities.

I’m embarrassed to say that I couldn’t answer her question because I had never asked or even thought about asking. Partly because the Covid-19 era made screens imperative in an instant — as one ed-tech executive told my colleague Natasha Singer in 2021, the pandemic “sped the adoption of technology in education by easily five to 10 years.” In the early Covid years, when my older daughter started using a Chromebook to do assignments for second and third grade, I was mostly just relieved that she had great teachers and seemed to be learning what she needed to know. By the time she was in fifth grade and the world was mostly back to normal, I knew she took her laptop to school for in-class assignments, but I never asked for specifics about how devices were being used. I trusted her teachers and her school implicitly.

In New York State, ed tech is often discussed as an equity problem — with good reason: At home, less privileged children might not have access to personal devices and high-speed internet that would allow them to complete digital assignments. But in our learn-to-code society, in which computer skills are seen as a meal ticket and the humanities as a ticket to the unemployment line, there seems to be less chatter about whether there are too many screens in our kids’ day-to-day educational environment beyond the classes that are specifically tech focused. I rarely heard details about what these screens are adding to our children’s literacy, math, science or history skills.

And screens truly are everywhere. For example, according to 2022 data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, only about 8 percent of eighth graders in public schools said their math teachers “never or hardly ever” used computers or digital devices to teach math, 37 percent said their math teachers used this technology half or more than half the time, and 44 percent said their math teachers used this technology all or most of the time.

As is often the case with rapid change, “the speed at which new technologies and intervention models are reaching the market has far outpaced the ability of policy researchers to keep up with evaluating them,” according to a dazzlingly thorough review of the research on education technology by Maya Escueta, Andre Joshua Nickow, Philip Oreopoulos and Vincent Quan published in The Journal of Economic Literature in 2020.

Despite the relative paucity of research, particularly on in-class use of tech, Escueta and her co-authors put together “a comprehensive list of all publicly available studies on technology-based education interventions that report findings from studies following either of two research designs, randomized controlled trials or regression discontinuity designs.”

They found that increasing access to devices didn’t always lead to positive academic outcomes. In a couple of cases, it just increased the amount of time kids were spending on devices playing games. They wrote, “We found that simply providing students with access to technology yields largely mixed results. At the K-12 level, much of the experimental evidence suggests that giving a child a computer may have limited impacts on learning outcomes but generally improves computer proficiency and other cognitive outcomes.”

Some of the most promising research is around computer-assisted learning, which the researchers defined as “computer programs and other software applications designed to improve academic skills.” They cited a 2016 randomized study of 2,850 seventh-grade math students in Maine who used an online homework tool. The authors of that study “found that the program improved math scores for treatment students by 0.18 standard deviations. This impact is particularly noteworthy, given that treatment students used the program, on average, for less than 10 minutes per night, three to four nights per week,” according to Escueta and her co-authors.

They also explained that in the classroom, computer programs may help teachers meet the needs of students who are at different levels, since “when confronted with a wide range of student ability, teachers often end up teaching the core curriculum and tailoring instruction to the middle of the class.” A good program, they found, could help provide individual attention and skill building for kids at the bottom and the top, as well. There are computer programs for reading comprehension that have shown similar positive results in the research. Anecdotally: My older daughter practices her Spanish language skills using an app, and she hand-writes Spanish vocabulary words on index cards. The combination seems to be working well for her.

Though their review was published in 2020, before the data was out on our grand remote-learning experiment, Escueta and her co-authors found that fully online remote learning did not work as well as hybrid or in-person school. I called Thomas Dee, a professor at Stanford’s Graduate School of Education, who said that in light of earlier studies “and what we’re coming to understand about the long-lived effects of the pandemic on learning, it underscores for me that there’s a social dimension to learning that we ignore at our peril. And I think technology can often strip that away.”

Still, Dee summarized the entire topic of ed tech to me this way: “I don’t want to be black and white about this. I think there are really positive things coming from technology.” But he said that they are “meaningful supports on the margins, not fundamental changes in the modality of how people learn.”

I’d add that the implementation of any technology also matters a great deal; any educational tool can be great or awful, depending on how it’s used.

I’m neither a tech evangelist nor a Luddite. (Though I haven’t even touched on the potential implications of classroom teaching with artificial intelligence, a technology that, in other contexts, has so much destructive potential .) What I do want is the most effective educational experience for all kids.

Because there’s such a lag in the data and a lack of granularity to the information we do have, I want to hear from my readers: If you’re a teacher or a parent of a current K-12 student, I want to know how you and they are using technology — the good and the bad. Please complete the questionnaire below and let me know. I may reach out to you for further conversation.

Do your children or your students use technology in the classroom?

If you’re a parent, an educator or both, I want to hear from you.

Jessica Grose is an Opinion writer for The Times, covering family, religion, education, culture and the way we live now.

How technology is reinventing education

Stanford Graduate School of Education Dean Dan Schwartz and other education scholars weigh in on what's next for some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom.

Image credit: Claire Scully

New advances in technology are upending education, from the recent debut of new artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots like ChatGPT to the growing accessibility of virtual-reality tools that expand the boundaries of the classroom. For educators, at the heart of it all is the hope that every learner gets an equal chance to develop the skills they need to succeed. But that promise is not without its pitfalls.

“Technology is a game-changer for education – it offers the prospect of universal access to high-quality learning experiences, and it creates fundamentally new ways of teaching,” said Dan Schwartz, dean of Stanford Graduate School of Education (GSE), who is also a professor of educational technology at the GSE and faculty director of the Stanford Accelerator for Learning . “But there are a lot of ways we teach that aren’t great, and a big fear with AI in particular is that we just get more efficient at teaching badly. This is a moment to pay attention, to do things differently.”

For K-12 schools, this year also marks the end of the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funding program, which has provided pandemic recovery funds that many districts used to invest in educational software and systems. With these funds running out in September 2024, schools are trying to determine their best use of technology as they face the prospect of diminishing resources.

Here, Schwartz and other Stanford education scholars weigh in on some of the technology trends taking center stage in the classroom this year.

AI in the classroom

In 2023, the big story in technology and education was generative AI, following the introduction of ChatGPT and other chatbots that produce text seemingly written by a human in response to a question or prompt. Educators immediately worried that students would use the chatbot to cheat by trying to pass its writing off as their own. As schools move to adopt policies around students’ use of the tool, many are also beginning to explore potential opportunities – for example, to generate reading assignments or coach students during the writing process.

AI can also help automate tasks like grading and lesson planning, freeing teachers to do the human work that drew them into the profession in the first place, said Victor Lee, an associate professor at the GSE and faculty lead for the AI + Education initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning. “I’m heartened to see some movement toward creating AI tools that make teachers’ lives better – not to replace them, but to give them the time to do the work that only teachers are able to do,” he said. “I hope to see more on that front.”

He also emphasized the need to teach students now to begin questioning and critiquing the development and use of AI. “AI is not going away,” said Lee, who is also director of CRAFT (Classroom-Ready Resources about AI for Teaching), which provides free resources to help teach AI literacy to high school students across subject areas. “We need to teach students how to understand and think critically about this technology.”

Immersive environments

The use of immersive technologies like augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality is also expected to surge in the classroom, especially as new high-profile devices integrating these realities hit the marketplace in 2024.

The educational possibilities now go beyond putting on a headset and experiencing life in a distant location. With new technologies, students can create their own local interactive 360-degree scenarios, using just a cell phone or inexpensive camera and simple online tools.

“This is an area that’s really going to explode over the next couple of years,” said Kristen Pilner Blair, director of research for the Digital Learning initiative at the Stanford Accelerator for Learning, which runs a program exploring the use of virtual field trips to promote learning. “Students can learn about the effects of climate change, say, by virtually experiencing the impact on a particular environment. But they can also become creators, documenting and sharing immersive media that shows the effects where they live.”

Integrating AI into virtual simulations could also soon take the experience to another level, Schwartz said. “If your VR experience brings me to a redwood tree, you could have a window pop up that allows me to ask questions about the tree, and AI can deliver the answers.”

Gamification

Another trend expected to intensify this year is the gamification of learning activities, often featuring dynamic videos with interactive elements to engage and hold students’ attention.

“Gamification is a good motivator, because one key aspect is reward, which is very powerful,” said Schwartz. The downside? Rewards are specific to the activity at hand, which may not extend to learning more generally. “If I get rewarded for doing math in a space-age video game, it doesn’t mean I’m going to be motivated to do math anywhere else.”

Gamification sometimes tries to make “chocolate-covered broccoli,” Schwartz said, by adding art and rewards to make speeded response tasks involving single-answer, factual questions more fun. He hopes to see more creative play patterns that give students points for rethinking an approach or adapting their strategy, rather than only rewarding them for quickly producing a correct response.

Data-gathering and analysis

The growing use of technology in schools is producing massive amounts of data on students’ activities in the classroom and online. “We’re now able to capture moment-to-moment data, every keystroke a kid makes,” said Schwartz – data that can reveal areas of struggle and different learning opportunities, from solving a math problem to approaching a writing assignment.

But outside of research settings, he said, that type of granular data – now owned by tech companies – is more likely used to refine the design of the software than to provide teachers with actionable information.

The promise of personalized learning is being able to generate content aligned with students’ interests and skill levels, and making lessons more accessible for multilingual learners and students with disabilities. Realizing that promise requires that educators can make sense of the data that’s being collected, said Schwartz – and while advances in AI are making it easier to identify patterns and findings, the data also needs to be in a system and form educators can access and analyze for decision-making. Developing a usable infrastructure for that data, Schwartz said, is an important next step.

With the accumulation of student data comes privacy concerns: How is the data being collected? Are there regulations or guidelines around its use in decision-making? What steps are being taken to prevent unauthorized access? In 2023 K-12 schools experienced a rise in cyberattacks, underscoring the need to implement strong systems to safeguard student data.

Technology is “requiring people to check their assumptions about education,” said Schwartz, noting that AI in particular is very efficient at replicating biases and automating the way things have been done in the past, including poor models of instruction. “But it’s also opening up new possibilities for students producing material, and for being able to identify children who are not average so we can customize toward them. It’s an opportunity to think of entirely new ways of teaching – this is the path I hope to see.”

How seniors’ lives are improved by technology

Posted: October 19, 2023 | Last updated: October 19, 2023

The joke is, grandparents who are befuddled by technology will turn to their grandkids for help. However, statistics show that seniors are increasingly comfortable with technology that will help them stay healthy, keep in touch with their friends and family, age in place, get around and do much more. Not only are seniors spending more on technology to improve their lives, but they may be getting to the point where they can make a few helpful purchase suggestions for the younger generation.

Seeing to hear better

Hearing loss is a sad fact of life for many older adults. Of course, there is a wide range of increasingly sophisticated and smaller hearing aids. But what about a technology that lets users see what others are saying? XanderGlasses (in the prototype stage) can display real-time captions of what others are saying, letting the user follow what is being said by looking directly at the speaker.

Interacting with AI-powered companions

To help with isolation and loneliness, seniors can now get companionship from AI-powered devices. A case in point is the ElliQ, a stationary companion for stay-at-home adults 65 years and older, named one of Time magazine’s Best Inventions of 2022 . The device can make small talk, initiate conversation, contact care specialists, and help “develop healthy habits—social, physical, and mental.”

Getting more social online

According to Pew Research , the number of American seniors who use social media platforms such as ​​Facebook, Twitter (now known as X) or Instagram has grown fourfold since 2010. They can look at their feeds to see images of their grandkids as they are growing, or to see what shenanigans the youngsters get up to in college. Direct messages and audio or video calls are also a great way to stay in touch with far-flung family and friends.

Using smartphones

There is a sharp increase in the number of senior citizens owning smartphones, rising from 53% to 61% over two years. Smartphone makers are beginning to target this demographic with a range of easy-to-use and easy-to-see features, such as simplified home screens, simple-to-access emergency buttons, print manuals, text magnification, adjustments for hearing aids, and much more.

Monitoring health with biometric devices

Biometric devices enable seniors (and their families) to keep track of health issues such as blood sugar levels, blood pressure and oxygen saturation levels in red blood cells. If a reading is high or missed, an alert can automatically be sent to the smartphone of a senior, their family, or a healthcare provider. Not only does the technology put more power into the hands of senior adults, it can cut back on the number of visits needed to doctors and hospitals.

Staying in touch with video calls

Spurred on by the isolation of the COVID-19 pandemic, many seniors have turned to videoconferencing platforms such as Skype and Zoom to stay in touch with their social and family circles. Says one home care provider : “Video calls can help seniors feel less lonely and more connected, which can have a positive impact on their overall well-being.”

Getting help from a home robot

Want a household robot that can show you who is at the door, carry a cup of coffee around for you, let you know if there is an intruder in the house, and respond to simple voice commands? The voice-activated Amazon Astro promises to do all that while integrated with the Alexa virtual assistant. One son was able to use the device remotely to discover that his father had fallen out of his wheelchair (so couldn’t answer his phone call), then arranging for emergency help and letting his father know it was on its way.

Playing with GrandPads

As the name suggests, a GrandPad is a tablet designed for grandparents, with easy navigation, large buttons and enhanced sound. It enables seniors to stay in touch with family, engage in multiplayer games, and surf to their heart’s delight. During the pandemic, the St. Louis County Library used US$2 million in relief funds to launch a program that gave GrandPads to older residents in the community. A built-in data connection was also provided free with each device.

Relying on medical alert systems

If a senior lives independently and has a fall or other emergency, how do they get help? Fortunately, various wearable medical alert systems are available that can be activated by the touch of a button or voice command to ensure that help is on its way. Some also offer 24 / 7 professional monitoring and GPS location services if the user travels away from home.

Using robot lawnmowers

Yes, most of us know about robot vacuum cleaners but did you realize that there are robot lawnmowers that will work tirelessly to keep your grass trimmed without supervision or work on your part? This could be an excellent aid for seniors who still live in their homes but need help with chores like lawn work. While many older models required boundary wires to keep the device within a property, newer models rely on satellite positioning or onboard sensors and app-based controls to define the property limits, mowing height adjustments, and patterns.

Remaining autonomous with self-driving cars

A difficult day in some seniors’ lives comes when they are forced to give up driving their car because of problems with eyesight, motor skills, reflexes or cognition, and must rely on the help of family or driving services. This is where the promise of self-driving cars comes in. “So if an elderly family member needs a vehicle to get them to their bridge game, their doctor, or the local supermarket, a self-driving car could be the perfect option,” says one assisted living service .

Monitoring sleep patterns

Sleeping less, and having lower-quality sleep, are problems that plague some people as they age. So several sleep-tracking devices are available to help monitor the patterns, habits, and stages of quality sleep. The easy-to-use gadgets usually send reports to smartphones and may provide insights into other health issues, such as heart rate, blood oxygen levels and more. Armed with this knowledge about their sleep patterns, users might make certain health and lifestyle choices, such as cutting out afternoon coffee and late-night TV.

Enjoying robotic pets

Sometimes, a senior can no longer care for a live pet. That’s where a robotic furry companion comes in. A product development team formerly with the Hasbro toy company created Joy for All , offering robotic pets including cats, pups and birds (“Walker Squawkers”). Equipped with sensors, the pets can interact with users offering a variety of sounds, heartbeats and more.

Providing caregivers with a greater understanding

One way for professional caregivers to get greater insight into, and develop empathy for, what their senior patients are coping with is to use the immersive reality simulations of Embodied Labs . Wearing virtual reality headsets, they can take on the persona of an elderly person suffering conditions such as macular degeneration, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease.

Staying alert with a ring video doorbell

As seniors find it harder to move and hear, they can be helped with a ring video doorbell . They can see who has come to their door and make the decision to let them in or to tell them to leave the package at the door. If their hearing is poor, they can get a model that uses bright, flashing lights rather than a sound to get their attention.

Tracking wandering feet

Families of seniors who are given to wandering and getting lost might consider some SmartSole inserts for their shoes. The GPS trackers are hidden within waterproof inserts, updating the user's location every five minutes. If the parent gets lost, the children or other family members can find them easily. Wandering alerts are sent via email and text, including a link to the lost person’s last known location.

Feeling safer with ambient fall detection systems

Besides wearable medical alert devices, ambient fall detection systems are also available. These involve sensors and video cameras placed strategically throughout a residence, which let a monitor service know if a fall is detected. The service can contact the user to see if they are alright and call for help if needed. Ambient detectors may be more accurate location devices than wearables but are also more expensive and, obviously, not mobile for trips away from home.

Getting reminders from smart pill dispensers

As people age, many require more medications for their health, which can be hard to keep track of. There are a lot of different pill dispensers out there to help you monitor what medication you need to take and when. Among these are smart dispensers, such as Hero . This electronic device can hold up to 90 days of medication, and provide visual and audible reminders when it’s time to take dosages. It also has an app that can notify your smartphone or your caretaker’s. Such smart units can be expensive and require subscription fees.

Using a walking cane with confidence

Some seniors using canes to help them walk may fear falls. They can go forth more confidently using a WeWALK handle attached to their cane. The smart device uses ultrasound to detect above-ground obstacles and provides buzz warnings to your hand. Other smart features include turn-by-turn navigation, exploration options, and help with public transportation.

Tracking more than just the time

A senior may want to avoid lugging around a smartphone, or may be prone to forgetting it, so another good option is a smartwatch . Some senior-friendly features of these devices may include easy-to-read screens, fall detection, GPS tracking, emergency medical alerts, fitness tracking metrics, and monitoring of various health conditions. Oh yes, they will also tell the time.

More for You

Supreme Court Refuses to Take Amy Coney Barrett's Case

McDonald’s brings beloved breakfast sandwich back to select locations

How to get rid of stink bugs, according to an entomologist

The first interracial kiss aired on TV more than 50 years ago—and more shows that broke racial barriers

Broadway Actors Michael Stuhlbarg And John Cardoza Latest Victims Of New York City Crime

Two Warner Bros. Discovery Directors resign from board due to Justice Department investigation

Judge slaps expanded gag order on Trump after attacks on his daughter

12 Ordering Mistakes You're Making At Subway, According To Employees

France Hands Ukraine Massive Arms Boost

The Best Way To Keep Bananas From Turning Brown Too Fast

Dairy Queen is giving out free Blizzards in April

"That's a risk": Mike Johnson warns Jeffries could become speaker

New on Netflix April 2024: Ripley, Anyone But You, Scoop & More

IHOP’s New Sonic-Inspired Menu Is Real And Not An April Fools' Prank

Giancarlo Esposito Is Spellbinding in New Crime Drama ‘Parish’

The 28 most popular TV hosts of all time

7 Genius Tricks That Will Keep Your Bird Bath Clean

Tennessee fires women's basketball coach Kellie Harper week after NCAA Tournament ouster

Don’t pack these 9 TSA-prohibited items in your checked baggage

Lost cities hidden for thousands of years discovered under forest