Sorry Video Games: TV Still Reigns as Kids’ Favorite Media

| April 8, 2011 | 9 Comments
  • Email Post

Mobile phones, the Internet, and video games might be growing in popularity with kids, but according to one report, the trusty television is still the predominant media of choice.

“Even as technology evolves and young children increasingly turn to games and mobile media, they still love television best.” The statement comes from “Always Connected,” a recent report from the Joan Ganz Cooney Center, which reviewed seven recent studies (some of them never before released), and provides a comprehensive look at the implications of media exposure and use.

Kids age 8-10 watch 3.5 hours of television everyday. “Although computer and Internet use are rising, they are still just a fraction of children’s overall media use, and nowhere near the amount of time spent with television.”

In one example illustrated in the report, an 8-year-old named Gabriela watches Disney shows after school for 45 minutes, works on her homework while watching “Oprah,” and after dinner, watches the Discovery Channel and other shows with her parents, easily adding up to three or more hours per day.

I asked the authors of the study, Dr. Lori Takeuchi, Dr. Jennifer Kotler, along with the center’s executive director Dr. Michael Levine, some questions to help put the study into context.

Q. What’s the implication of children ages 8-10 spending 3.5 hours watching TV everyday? How is watching television different from playing games online, whether on a laptop or on a mobile device?

A. It depends. The jury is still largely out about whether interactive game play is better than TV or vice versa. One could argue that the interactivity that these newer formats offer are “better” for kids than the lean-back nature of TV watching. Research has shown that both TV and video can provide experiences that are educational as well as harmful depending on the kind of content to which children have been exposed.

Kids are certainly better off watching high-quality, educational TV shows than playing video games that are either age inappropriate or which offer no educational value. The research on the educational benefits of video games is beginning to build, but risks are still well described in the research literature, especially around violent content. Intriguingly even some of the offensive play mechanics associated with some video games may be able to be turned around if placed in the right context. Recent research by neuroscientists such as Dr. Daphne Bevalier at the University of Rochester has shown that playing first-person shooter games can improve players’ number sense (and consequently mathematical achievement). Others have shown that online multi-player games like World of Warcraft can improve teamwork and collaboration skills. And a study by the Mayo Clinic demonstrated the benefits of playing physical action games such as Dance Dance Revolution in developing healthy exercise habits for kids. Much of this research, however has been conducted on older players (teens and older), so we’re not certain if the same benefits will hold true with younger children. For a good review of the research on games, learning and health habits, readers might wish to read the Center’s report, Game Changer.

Q. Why do you think kids 2 – 5 years old watch more TV than 6 – 11 year olds?

A. Younger children spend more time with television for the simple reason that they spend less time in school. Younger kids haven’t yet developed the cognitive and physical capacities to interact with or manipulate what are, in essence, representational worlds. Simply watching these representational worlds is easier. Another reason younger kids aren’t playing video games is because parents are more closely regulating their media consumption.  They may worry more about little fingers breaking mobile devices/laptops than TV sets. Or believe that video games just aren’t appropriate for their very young children.

Q. How does children’s media consumption change around age 8?

A. The developmental readiness factor described above is responsive to this shift in media consumption. The new focus is also influenced by peer interactions inside schools and by parents’ loosening of the controls on the more sophisticated and costly technologies that allow independent game play and early use of mobile devices.

Q. Do you think this will change once younger kids spend more time with mobile games?

In the next few years, our trends data and that of other researchers indicates that more young children will be likely spending more time with interactive media at younger ages. There will however continue to be developmental and parental factors that make it less likely to ever rival the kind of use of older children. But who knows: one day children might literally be wired for learning from birth.

Q. When we talk about kids using 8 hours of media everyday, should all media be clumped into one category?

A. No, it is useful to break out the categories of media consumption just as the Kaiser Family Foundation and the recent Cooney Center/Sesame Workshop study did. That way we have a more fine grained sense of which types of media are gaining currency and which types of media multitasking behaviors are underway. For example listening to an iPod while playing a videogame is a different experience from watching television while surfing the internet.

Q. Which specific apps or media do you recommend for parents who want to interact with kids while they’re using media?

We don’t recommend specific apps that promote “coviewing” among kids and adults, but tablets such as iPads do appear to hold potential as an intergenerational learning platform given the ease with which kids and parents can mutually view and interact on them. iPad apps that are like board games look especially promising, as do electronic books that come on this format. TV console-based games such the Wii and other gesture-based systems such as the Kinect game system are also appealing to both generations. However there’s a need for more games that are both educational and possess intergenerational appeal — like Sesame Street the TV show!

Related

Explore: , ,

  • Email Post
  • jack7507

    Our method of education, especially K -12 has not changed much in almost a century. Yet the innovation and technological advances we have made in this country (in the same time) is astounding. We have reached a level of complacency where most states has dropout rates close to 50% in high schools. Most of these kids will end up in prison or be dependent on some sort of welfare. We need to address the need to educate our children better to embrace the challenges of tomorrow.

    It starts when they are born, with the parents. If the kids have a great foundation and a passion for learning, they will succeed even if in troubled school systems. Early learning is key to every child’s academic success. Tools such as the iPad create a whole new arena of opportunity for parents to motivate and empower their children at a very young age. There are some awesome apps for early learning out there.

    http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/smart-kids-early-learning/id429447180?mt=8

    http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-deep-blue-kingdom/id425904157?mt=8

    http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/an-amazing-day-at-the-zoo/id420420133?mt=8

  • Jenelle

    Oh dear. The title alone is a sad testament to…K-12. One has to wonder who’s holding the reins, because nobody’s guiding grammar. I’m from Seattle, where it rains, and was once to London where a queen yet reigns.

    • Anonymous

      Guilty as charged, Jenelle! Apologies for the error. Humility reigns over me.

      • Jenelle

        Thank you for the correction and for the lesson in humility, which did my heart good, just when I needed it!

        I’d remove my comment, but don’t know how…

  • Sgreen

    Parents should be guiding their children to outdoor play where they can experience, learn, and enjoy the wonders of nature.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1386052857 John Eaton Morris

      To paraphrase the immortal words of Yoda: “That is why you fail”.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1386052857 John Eaton Morris

      And…before you become indignant and post some frothing-at-the-mouth refutation, here’s the OTHER reason you fail.

      You view this as dichotomous. It’s not. There’s no reason whatsoever that kids can’t enjoy both the benefits of gaming INSIDE and of “outdoor play” OUTSIDE. The wonders of nature are great. However, unless you want your child to be some kind of Grizzly Adams wannabe survivalist-type, it’s a bit ridiculous to suggest that “guiding children to outdoor play” is the ONLY encouragement that parents should give.

      Growing up, in addition to reading voraciously and playing a fair number of video games, I studied piano, played soccer, was a Boy Scout, studied Judo under an international champion and Olympic athlete, participated in school theatrical productions, took gymnastics, and sang in the church choir…among other things.

      So…seriously. Get a grip. You can enjoy the wonders of nature AND the wonders of Mass Effect 2, all in the same day.

      • Sgeen

        I find your response rather impolite and immature. (“you fail”)

        I did grow up playing video games.

        Nowhere in my post did I use the word ‘only’. If parents balance indoor time with outdoor time I think that is a positive step.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1386052857 John Eaton Morris

    Sigh…I see that a variety of studies that suggest that gaming is advantageous to development continue to be ignored. Looks like this particular “et al.” needs to do a more thorough literature review.

    There have been a number of studies over the past several years, both original research and replication studies, that have suggested a variety of benefits from moderate gaming. Spatial relations, eye-hand coordination, socialization (in the case of online-enabled games), problem-solving, reaction time, basic cognitive skills…

    Of course, the popular party line is that games are bad. This particular logic ignores the simple fact that video games are, for the generations brought up from the 80s on, the equivalent of board games and similar logical challenges. Those responsible for the studies are almost exclusively outside this generational group, and typically dismiss and distrust things outside their experience.

    It’s obviously escaped their notice that most of the graduate students and post-grads coming from our universities today not only played video games as children, but continue to do so into adulthood.