Are fears of the 'iPad baby' overblown? The screen time debate gets a reality check

Concerns about children and screen use may be overblown, new research suggests, with experts saying worries about an 'iPad baby' generation may be "premature".

A new international study, based on data from over 3,000 children, found no link between screen use duration and developmental difficulties at ages five or 10.

Researchers in the UK spoke with the families of children back in 2009 and 2010 and followed their development for the subsequent 10 years.

Over that time, there has been some criticism and debate about the role of technology in parenting, and whether young people born in the 21st century will be a screen-addicted generation.

The iPad was released in Australia in 2010, and a child growing up around this time is sometimes referred to as an 'iPad baby'.

While the findings are limited by self-reported survey data, Australian experts say the results counter popular messaging about parenting and technology.

"Fear from parents around screen time is unfounded and premature," Associate Professor David Armstrong from the School of Education at La Trobe University told SBS News.

"It's really a mixed bag over whether there are any adverse effects on kids' development, and it's good to note that there are some advantages of devices for social development."

He described the findings as "robust and methodical", saying they contribute to an emerging body of research calling not for less screen time, but for better use of it.

But Professor Andrew Whitehouse, an autism researcher at The Kids Research Institute Australia, said the findings should be taken with a grain of salt, as young children in 2026 have access to more smart devices than in 2009.

"The saturation of childhood by these devices came in the years afterwards," he said in a statement.

"This means that across early childhood, the children had almost no exposure to the ubiquity of smart devices as now exists."

As content increasingly targets children and is designed to maximise viewing time, experts say the best tools parents have are managing content and ensuring quality time away from screens.

Good vs bad screen time

Screen time is not inherently harmful said Adam Guastella, a clinical psychologist who works with Sydney Children's Hospital at Westmead and the University of Sydney.

Rather, the effects on a child's physical, cognitive and social development come down to content.

"If you're doing the same thing repetitively over and over and over again, in terms of cognitive development, that's not going to be good. Particularly if what you're practising doesn't have any functional significance," he told SBS News.

However, technology can provide opportunities for growth.

"You want children being exposed to opportunities for learning and challenges and problem solving; you want them to be learning information that's going to help them to develop skills," he explained.

On average, Australian children aged five to 17 spend two hours and 51 minutes per day on sedentary recreational screen activity, according to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released in June.

In this way, only one in four Australian children meet national health guidelines, which recommend no more than two hours of sedentary recreational screen time per day, excluding homework.

Guastella said screen time and the opportunities technology offers, such as socialising or education, should be balanced by in-person connections and physical activity.

If a child is missing milestones or exhibiting antisocial behaviour, it could be less about screen time itself and more about the loss of time for other activities like reading and playing, he said.

Children's content is changing

The three main categories of a child's "screen diet" are typically television and streaming, gaming and social media, according to the Australian Institute of Family Studies.

But as newer generations of parents switch from living room screens to tablets and smartphones, the kind of content their children consume could shift as well.

Dr Sam Teague, an NHMRC Emerging Leadership Senior Research Fellow at James Cook University, said today's technology is more targeted at younger children though is typically aimed at engaging them rather than educating them.

"The content is not developed and moderated with children's development in mind, and the algorithms recommending videos are based on maximising watch time rather than what's best for children," she said in a statement.

Today's children aren't just consuming a different type of screen time — the total amount of time they spend on screens has also been rising over the years.

But while television and video games have been studied for decades, there is less evidence on newer technologies such as smartphones and algorithm-driven social media.

"We may see different outcomes for today's five-year-olds than those in this study, and we need more research like this tracking children today to see how they grow and develop in today's digital environments," she concluded.

Other factors could be more important

While harms around screen time should still be debated, Armstrong said there's conclusive evidence on some of the main causes of poor childhood development.

"Poverty is a huge determinant of a child's success, and the adverse effects of poverty are much more established than tech, yet they are rarely discussed," he said.

"Kids experiencing poverty and marginalisation consistently have poorer outcomes, yet we focus a lot of policy debate on social media and tech."

Armstrong said that children with disability and those from diverse backgrounds also tend to experience worse social, behavioural and physical outcomes.

"That’s not to say that screen time or social media aren’t harmful at all, but the large amount of discussion of them is disproportionate to the impact."

For the latest from SBS News, download our app and subscribe to our newsletter.