I do not have any research. My personal observation and belief is:
A young child (0 to ~3 years) does not understand electronics. The input output response from a battery device cannot be easily guessed from only physical examination, thus it is not a good toy to develop a mental model.
I would much rather my child (at a very early age), form the basic mental models of the physical world so that she can predict how the world will react around her. Throwing a ball, banging a percussive instrument, stacking blocks. These all help form physical models of the world.
What solidified this belief for me was watching my ~11 month old frantically pushing the button on a battery operated rocking horse she had received as a present from her aunt. My child could not understand why the horse had made noise before, but (once I took the batteries out) did not make noise. After seeing that, I realized that we needed to make things simpler before we made them more complex.
> A young child (0 to ~3 years) does not understand electronics.
On the other hand, my 2 year old niece can easily take an iPad, unlock it, swipe through the pages and folders, find YouTube, and watch videos. And in an ever-increasing electronics-driven world, I don't think it's bad to learn some of those skills at that age. (Though her screentime is limited and she also plays with wooden toys etc.)
Ofcourse explaining a battery or 'the internet' would be too complex at that age, but apparently the 'input output response from a battery device can be easily guessed'.
I agree that certain toys can be age-appropriate while others are not. But a blanket ban on all electronic toys seems unjustified by this reasoning. (Parent said they have 6 children, it's likely that at least one or two of them would be able to appreciate battery operated toys.
I see comments like this all the time and it bothers me. When someone disagrees with something online, all of a sudden their bar for acceptance of the idea is peer-reviewed scientific research.
Tell me, where do you draw the line in your personal life for needing scientific evidence before making a choice? Surely you did not have scientific evidence for every single decision you've made.
I disagree. The comment looked like an honest question. Nothing should be taken at face value, especially these days when we are also being bombarded with platitudes about breast feeding and organic produce. As a new dad, I’m inclined to believe it, but I would still want to know if it was just the fad feeling of the day or if there was any actual science behind it (if there wasn’t any science behind it, that wouldn’t discredit the idea as these things are difficult to test, though it is definitely master or PhD degree worthy).
Then it's kind of a non-sequitur of a question. If it weren't, it would be either assuming that the parent commenter uses scientific research behind all of their parenting decisions, or would be implying that the parent is making ignorant choices on parenting.
It would be a non sequitor if they were trying to invalidate some kind of conclusion, there is actually none of that there. Quite frankly, people have read way too far into a simple question, inferring that it has nefarious intent, when none of that actually exists in the words written.
There are millions of n=1 studies across the globe. Most of the ones I’m familiar with reached a similar conclusion, but YMMV.
That’s the thing about parenting: you will have to make thousands and thousand of decisions without the benefit of rigorous peer-reviewed studies. You can’t wait for the science, because your kids are growing up now.
There are also millions of n=1 studies across the globe, in which parents did the opposite and kids turned out fine anyway.
It's true you can't wait for science. But it's important to realize when something is mostly an arbitrary choice. The anti-tech sentiment that's popular in parenting these days is exactly that - an arbitrary choice without solid foundations.
Perhaps there is a sort of knee-jerk retro-hippie back-to-the-basics trend happening nowadays. But the choice to limit children's exposure to electronic gadgets really isn't arbitrary anywhere I've seen it.
It's more typically reasoned, even painstakingly thought-out choice. One made based on insufficient information, yes, but also with limited time to make the decision.
For example, it is obvious to me from direct observation of my own kids that a box of polished wooden blocks leads to higher-quality play than any of the electronic mainstream crap that they've gotten as gifts: the creative process of building, non-predetermined outcomes, some thinking required, trial-and-error is rewarded, obvious self-satisfaction (and alternatively, frustration), etc.
Likewise, I could provide a litany of reasons why I think spending 30 minutes with a paper coloring or drawing book is an unambiguously better activity for my kids than an unrestricted iPad (which == YouTube, nearly 100% of the time).
An iPad locked to one of the drawing programs — that's pretty different. Once they've mastered crayons and pens on paper, I'll let them do that pretty much as long as they want to.
These decisions might not all have "solid foundations" — perhaps I'm wrong in some of my assumptions. But they also aren't "arbitrary". There is reasoning behind them, even if the reasoning may not be totally correct, and the data is necessarily incomplete.
There may not be any evidence that this policy is beneficial for the kids, but the accompanying sense of smug self-satisfaction is probably very enjoyable for the parents.
Is that something like the sense of smug satisfaction that people who don’t have any children get from making condescending comments on Internet forums about parenting decisions made by people who do?
Outsmugging the smug surely does not count as substantive discussion so can we please just not go there?
If it helps we can argue that it breaks the "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize" guideline.
I do this. I also like to throw in that my child only eats organic products, that have not been fried, that are also free of added salt and sugar. We also use cloth diapers, which I like to mention.
My wife and I agree on these things and think it best for our child. Our relatives and cousins look at us like we are from another planet LOL!
