User Experience for a Better World
Children & Media
The Kaiser Family Foundation recently released the third round of their reports on US children’s use of media. It’s an impressively comprehensive report which delves in to how US kids, age 8-18, use various forms of media such as tv, computers, video games, music players, and more. They also explore many interacting factors such as age, race, gender, school grades, usage rules, etc. to see how those elements interact with use. A lot of the report didn’t surprise me (and probably wouldn’t surprise you either). For example, kids’ media use has almost universally increased from 1999 through 2004 and now in to 2009 (when the report was done). Or, that kids from families which place limits on the amount or type of media use tend to use less media. There were, however, a number of items that caught my eye:
On the surprising side, there was no relationship between amount of media use and amount of physical activity. This is counter to the popular wisdom that kids who want to spend time surfing the web, playing video games, or whatnot are just couch potatoes. In fact, as some forms of media (e.g., Wii video games) become more physically interactive, the concern becomes even less convincing.
While the average total time per day of media use was about 7.5 hours (wow!), the number grows to about 11 hours when you factor in the time splitting that kids do by using more than one form of media at a time (e.g., listening to music on their iPod while surfing the Web). Eleven hours is a staggering number, but the notion that kids are time splitting is not surprising. What’s interesting to think about, though, is how that time splitting is affecting how the kids consume and use the information they’re getting. Today’s kids have been called the “ADD generation” because of the pervasiveness of media that delivers content in bite-sized chunks and the ease with which they can bounce from one piece of content to another. The study lends credence to the notion that kids are juggling lots of pieces of info. There’s been a lot of concern that this kind of content consumption is detrimental (”they never get a chance to think deeply about any one topic”), but I think you could certainly also make the argument that they are getting good at managing the increasing flow/flood of info and becoming more literate in an evolving information ecosystem. This doesn't necessarily mean that they are any better at thinking or learning in a world of divided attention than their predecessors, just that they are learning new skills of digital literacy.
On the flip side, I’ve seen a lot of “kid splitting” in time. My crew of 8-11 year olds (my sons and their gaggle of friends) are commonly huddled around a computer screen, two and three deep, all multi-playing the same game and tagging each other in and out. So, rather than one kid splitting their attention over multiple streams, we have have multiple kids all focusing on the same stream. Of course, this is due to the practical limits of access (we don’t have ten laptops in our house!) and the rules we establish in our house about use (”you can each have a turn for 15 minutes!”).
Other than these interesting finds, there were a few methodological things that caught my attention. For example, the study works off the premise that the delivery format for the media is the most interesting way to break up the info – tv, computer, video game, music player, etc. However, I would argue that the content format might be a better way of looking at things… or is, at least, a different and equally interesting way of looking at it. The authors go to some length to explain that kids may be watching a television show on the computer but that time would count as computer use, not tv use. Why? If a kid visits a web site on their iPhone (lucky kid), that would count as “cell phone” use, not computer use. Why? To me, an equally interesting differentiation is that the kids are watching “pre-programmed entertainment” or “visiting a web site”… no matter the medium (though medium will clearly affect some things). In today’s media world, it becomes increasingly difficult to split hairs about media format and content type anyway. If a kid visits a web site via her Nintendo DSi, is that playing a video game? If they read a New York Times article on their Kindle, is that using a computer?
Another methodological concern I had was the fact that the authors only counted “recreational” use. Any use for school purposes or similar needs was not counted. Nor was talking on a phone or text messaging. The intent is presumably to get at what kids choose, rather than the broader question of what they use as a whole – an interesting question, but the broader question of use as a whole is also interesting to me. The authors also chose to count time with social media as computer use. Is there really that much difference between interacting with a friend on Facebook or sending a tweet via Twitter and sending a text message? Should one count and the other not?
Having said all of that, I fully acknowledge that doing a report like this is trying to hit a moving target – especially given that they were trying to replicate a study that started in 1999. So, there is great value in the data in the report, but I hope to find equally rich information that addresses some of the methodological issues that I mentioned. Anyone have a pointer or up to the task?
On the surprising side, there was no relationship between amount of media use and amount of physical activity. This is counter to the popular wisdom that kids who want to spend time surfing the web, playing video games, or whatnot are just couch potatoes. In fact, as some forms of media (e.g., Wii video games) become more physically interactive, the concern becomes even less convincing.
While the average total time per day of media use was about 7.5 hours (wow!), the number grows to about 11 hours when you factor in the time splitting that kids do by using more than one form of media at a time (e.g., listening to music on their iPod while surfing the Web). Eleven hours is a staggering number, but the notion that kids are time splitting is not surprising. What’s interesting to think about, though, is how that time splitting is affecting how the kids consume and use the information they’re getting. Today’s kids have been called the “ADD generation” because of the pervasiveness of media that delivers content in bite-sized chunks and the ease with which they can bounce from one piece of content to another. The study lends credence to the notion that kids are juggling lots of pieces of info. There’s been a lot of concern that this kind of content consumption is detrimental (”they never get a chance to think deeply about any one topic”), but I think you could certainly also make the argument that they are getting good at managing the increasing flow/flood of info and becoming more literate in an evolving information ecosystem. This doesn't necessarily mean that they are any better at thinking or learning in a world of divided attention than their predecessors, just that they are learning new skills of digital literacy.
On the flip side, I’ve seen a lot of “kid splitting” in time. My crew of 8-11 year olds (my sons and their gaggle of friends) are commonly huddled around a computer screen, two and three deep, all multi-playing the same game and tagging each other in and out. So, rather than one kid splitting their attention over multiple streams, we have have multiple kids all focusing on the same stream. Of course, this is due to the practical limits of access (we don’t have ten laptops in our house!) and the rules we establish in our house about use (”you can each have a turn for 15 minutes!”).
Other than these interesting finds, there were a few methodological things that caught my attention. For example, the study works off the premise that the delivery format for the media is the most interesting way to break up the info – tv, computer, video game, music player, etc. However, I would argue that the content format might be a better way of looking at things… or is, at least, a different and equally interesting way of looking at it. The authors go to some length to explain that kids may be watching a television show on the computer but that time would count as computer use, not tv use. Why? If a kid visits a web site on their iPhone (lucky kid), that would count as “cell phone” use, not computer use. Why? To me, an equally interesting differentiation is that the kids are watching “pre-programmed entertainment” or “visiting a web site”… no matter the medium (though medium will clearly affect some things). In today’s media world, it becomes increasingly difficult to split hairs about media format and content type anyway. If a kid visits a web site via her Nintendo DSi, is that playing a video game? If they read a New York Times article on their Kindle, is that using a computer?
Another methodological concern I had was the fact that the authors only counted “recreational” use. Any use for school purposes or similar needs was not counted. Nor was talking on a phone or text messaging. The intent is presumably to get at what kids choose, rather than the broader question of what they use as a whole – an interesting question, but the broader question of use as a whole is also interesting to me. The authors also chose to count time with social media as computer use. Is there really that much difference between interacting with a friend on Facebook or sending a tweet via Twitter and sending a text message? Should one count and the other not?
Having said all of that, I fully acknowledge that doing a report like this is trying to hit a moving target – especially given that they were trying to replicate a study that started in 1999. So, there is great value in the data in the report, but I hope to find equally rich information that addresses some of the methodological issues that I mentioned. Anyone have a pointer or up to the task?
Views: 6
Comment
Videos
© 2012 Created by Diane Chojnowski.
You need to be a member of HFI Connect to add comments!
Join HFI Connect