Sensationalist Media Coverage and Parental Screen Guilt:

Testing the Effects of Science Communication on Restrictive Family Media Practices

Headlines vs. Science

Typical news article about children and media, published June 9, 2025

Pappas (2020):

  • Most research is correlational, cross-sectional or based on self-report
  • Often not practical for families to adhere to screentime limits
  • The youngest children generally learn better from face-to-face interactions
  • Preschoolers CAN and DO learn preliteracy and emotion regulation skills from high quality, educational media
  • Media effects depend on child, content, and context

Neuhaus & O’Connor (2025)

keyword search phrases, “study” OR “research” OR “science” AND “screen time.”

Parental Screen Guilt

Wolfers et al. (2025)

“the feeling of transgression parents experience as a function of their children’s screen usage.”

“socially constructed negative perceptions of children’s screen media use [may] influence the effects that use has on the family.”

Parental Screen Guilt

“Finally, this research sheds light on the disservice done by the general framing of media use, especially use by children, as inherently problematic.”

Wolfers et al. (2025)

Screen Guilt in the RAPID Survey

Survey of 1,000+ parents of young children collected by the Stanford Center on Early Childhood in May 2025 & July 2025

“I wish we used less screens and feel guilty about their use.”

“As a single mom…sometimes screentime is the only way I can sleep a little more or clean up and know that my son will be safe and occupied.”

“Turning on the TV after school for 30-45 min has become a habit. I don’t love that we do this but it does give us time to prepare and cook dinner while they are occupied. I would like to lower the amount of TV they watch.”

What contributes to screen guilt and how might it influence families’ attitudes and behaviors around media?

Current Study: Theoretical Framework

flowchart LR
    A["Exposure to<br/>Sensationalist Messaging<br/>"]
    B["Parental<br/>Screen Guilt<br/>"]
    C["Restrictive Family<br/>Media Practices<br/>"]
    D["Controls:<br/>Child screen time<br/>Parent characteristics<br/>Family demographics"]
    
    A -->|a H1| B
    B -->|b H2| C
    A -.-> C
    D -.-> A
    D -.-> B
    D -.-> C
    
    style A fill:#E8F4F8,stroke:#2E86AB,stroke-width:2px
    style B fill:#FFF4E6,stroke:#E67E22,stroke-width:2px
    style C fill:#E8F8F5,stroke:#27AE60,stroke-width:2px
    style D fill:#F5F5F5,stroke:#95A5A6,stroke-width:1px

Path a (H1): Cultivation Theory (Gerbner, 1998) - Repeated exposure to sensationalist messaging predicts higher levels of parental screen guilt independent of screentime

Path b (H2): Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957) - Parental screen guilt predicts increases in restrictive family media practices

Curent Study: Design

Integrating into the ongoing RAPID survey:

  • 5-wave longitudinal study, monthly assessments
  • N = 160-200 parents of children under age 5
  • Wave 1: All measures; Waves 2-5: Guilt + practices

Measures

  • Cumulative exposure composite (frequency + perceived framing + headline recognition)
  • Parental screen guilt (Wolfers et al., 2025)
  • Restrictive family media practices (existing media module items from RAPID)
  • Controls: child screen time, screen use for emotion regulation, parent characteristics, family demographics (existing media module items from RAPID)

Analytic Plan

RQ1: Does exposure predict guilt? (Wave 1)

Multiple regression:

\[\text{Screen Guilt} = \beta_0 + \beta_1(\text{Media Exposure}) + \beta_2(\text{Child Screen Time}) + \text{Controls} + \varepsilon\]

  • Test: \(\beta_1 > 0\) and \(p < .05\)

RQ2: Does guilt predict practice changes? (Waves 1-5)

Multilevel model with lagged predictor:

\[\text{Practices}_{t+1} = \gamma_0 + \gamma_1(\text{Guilt}_t) + \gamma_2(\text{Practices}_t) + u_i + e_t\]

  • Test: \(\gamma_1 > 0\) and \(p < .05\)
  • Controls for prior practices = tests change
  • \(u_i\) = random intercept (person-specific baseline)

Discussion

Neuhaus & O’Connor (2025):

  • Media coverage is systematically biased
  • 73% portray screens as harmful
  • Sensationalist framing dominates

Wolfers et al. (2025):

  • Parents experience screen guilt
  • Guilt stronger predictor of stress and relationship dissatisfaction than screen time

Does biased media coverage → parental guilt → restrictive family practices?

  • Theoretically: Novel indirect pathway of media effects on children (through parents)
  • Practically: Identifies science communication as intervention point
  • Ethically: If media create unnecessary parental distress and suboptimal parenting, that’s addressable
  • Bottom line: What environments support children’s flourishing? How do informational contexts—including media—enable or constrain parents’ ability to create those environments?

References

Neuhaus, R., & O’Connor, E. (2025). The interplay between sensationalism and scientific information framing: Examining the representation of screen time research online and on social media in the United States. Journal of Children and Media, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2025.2455566
Pappas, S. (2020). What do we really know about kids and screens? Monitor on Psychology, 51(3). https://www.apa.org/monitor/2020/04/cover-kids-screens
Wolfers, L. N., Nabi, R. L., & Walter, N. (2025). Too much screen time or too much guilt? How child screen time and parental screen guilt affect parental stress and relationship satisfaction. Media Psychology, 28(1), 102–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2024.2310839