In this longitudinal study, cumulative average screen viewing time was associated with lower academic performance but not working memory, with the strongest effect sizes seen for single screen viewing time occurring in early infancy.

Cumulative average exposure models showed that screen viewing time over childhood was consistently associated with poorer academic performance but not working memory.

I guess that's hard to measure, higher screen time could be correlated with less caregiving from parents - screen will not teach them.

Interesting. I have bad hopes for the data on children growing up with AI, which makes it easy to never apply critical thinking and finding own solutions.

An average of two hours of screen time at age 1 seems insane to me. Should be measured in seconds as far as I'm concerned.

Though I admit I'm privileged by living in Norway and don't have to work crazy hours to make ends meet.

"Screen viewing" seems very vague. What did they do with their screens? Did they read an encyclopedia, or did they watch entertainment content videos? It's an important distinction.

I hope to have my first child soon; I am fucking terrified.

Shouldn't the title be changed to the conclusion? "Screen viewing time from age 1 to 8 years associated with lower academic performance, but not working memory"

There is a lot missing here. Without paying £30 I cannot see what the adjustments in the adjusted models are.

There is no breakdown for different ages. Its very likely that the effect on a one year old and an eight year old would be very different.

There is no breakdown of what they are watching.

A whole of of confounding variables. Screen time is inevitably going to be associated with less adult attention which is known to be a major factor in development. Lots of others.