An Investigation of the Parental Mediation Situations of Preschool Children’s Parents

Abstract

Developments in information and communication technologies caused an increase in the possession of digital tools and facilitated their use. The use of digital tools, especially the internet, now starts below the age of two. In this sense, during early childhood, parents have a great responsibility as they are primarily responsible for their children’s “digital exposure.” They need mediation strategies to determine their children’s use of digital tools. This study aims to examine the parental mediation situations of the parents of preschool children. This study, conducted as a survey model, adapted the Parental Mediation Scale to the preschool level as a data collection tool. The participants of the study consisted of 108 parents of preschool children. The results of the study determined that the parental role (mother‒father) and educational status of parents affected parental mediation strategies; whereas, the number of children, internet usage experience, income status, and the age of the parents or children did not affect said strategies. The qualitative analysis indicated that the parents have many concerns about the social‒emotional and physical problems that may occur due to internet use in children from an early age. It is among the other qualitative results that parents prefer more direct intervention techniques and technical solutions to protect their children from the risks of the internet. As a result of the research, this study presents suggestions to parents and researchers for future studies on children’s conscious use of digital tools.

Keywords

• effects of internet on pre-schoolers
• mediation strategies
• parental mediation

Okul Öncesi Dönem Çocuklarının Ebeveynlerinin Ebeveyn Arabuluculuk Durumlarının İncelenmesi

Abstract

Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerindeki gelişmeler dijital araçların sahiplik durumunun artmasını ve kullanımının kolaylaşmasını sağlamıştır. Dijital araçların ve özellikle internet kullanımının iki yaşın altına düştüğü gözlenmektedir. Bu noktada erken çocukluk dönemi ebeveynlerine büyük sorumluluk düşmektedir. Çünkü çocuklarının dijital araç kullanımından birincil derecede sorumludurlar. Çocuklarının dijital araç kullanımlarını belirlemek için arabuluculuk stratejilerine ihtiyaç duymaktadırlar. Bu çalışmanın amacı okul öncesi dönem çocuklarının ebeveynlerinin ebeveyn arabuluculuk durumlarının incelenmesidir. Tarama modeline dayalı olarak yürütülen çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak Ebeveyn Arabuluculuğu Ölçeği okul öncesi düzeye uyarlanmıştır. Çalışmanın katılımcılarını okul öncesi dönemde çocuğu bulunan 108 ebeveyn oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma sonucunda ebeveyn arabuluculuğu stratejilerinde ebeveyn rolünün (anne-baba), ebeveynlerin eğitim durumlarının etkili olduğu; çocuk sayısının, internet kullanım deneyiminin, gelir durumunun ve ebeveyn veya çocukların yaşının etkili olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Yapılan nitel analizlerde ise ebeveynlerin, çocuklarda erken yaşlardan itibaren internet kullanımına bağlı oluşabilecek sosyal-duygusal ve fiziksel problemlere yönelik kaygılarının yoğunlukta olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Ebeveynlerin çocuklarını internet risklerinden korumak adına daha çok doğrudan müdahale tekniklerini ve teknik çözümleri tercih ettikleri ulaşılan diğer nitel sonuçlar arasındadır. Araştırma sonucunda ise çocukların dijital araçları bilinçli kullanmalarına ilişkin ebeveynlere ve sonraki çalışmalar için araştırmacılara öneriler sunulmuştur.

Keywords

• Okul öncesi çocuklarına internetin etkisi
• arabuluculuk stratejileri
• ebeveyn arabuluculuğu

References

1. AAP Councils on Communications and Media. (2016). Media and young minds. Pediatrics, 138(5), Article e20162591. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-2591
2. Arbuckle, L. J. (2007). Amos user’s guide. USA: Amos Development Corporation.
3. Aslan, A. (2016). The Changes in Safer Internet Use of Children in Turkey between the years of 2010-2015 and Impacts of Related Implementations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Atatürk University Institute of Educational Sciences, Erzurum.
4. Austin, E. W. (1993). Exploring the effects of active parental mediation of television content. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 37, 147–158.
5. Avrupa Çevrimiçi Çocuklar (EU Kids Online) Projesi (2010). http://eukidsonline.metu.edu.tr
6. Baltacı, A. (2017). Nitel veri analizinde Miles-Huberman modeli. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(1), 1-14.
7. Beyens, I., Valkenburg, P. M., and Piotrowski, J. T. (2018). Developmental trajectories of parental mediation across early and middle childhood. Human Communication Research, 45(2), 226-250.
8. Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. (2014). Factors influencing digital technology use in early childhood education. Computers & Education, 77, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.013

9. Blum-Ross, A., and S. Livingstone (2016). Families and screen time: Current advice and emerging research. Media Policy Brief 17. London: Media Policy Project, London School of Economics and Political Science.
10. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, K., E., Akgün, E., Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirci, F. (2008). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi
11. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çokluk-Bökeoğlu, Ö. ve Köklü, N. (2015). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
12. Byrne, S., and Lee, T. (2011). Toward predicting youth resistance to internet risk prevention strategies. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 55, 90–113.
13. Cabello-Hutt, T., Cabello, P., and Claro, M. (2018). Online opportunities and risks for children and adolescents: The role of digital skills, age, gender and parental mediation in Brazil. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2411–2431. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724168
14. Chandrima, R. M., Kircaburun, K., Kabir, H., Riaz, B. K., Kuss, D. J., Griffiths, M. D., & Mamun, M. A. (2020). Adolescent problematic internet use and parental mediation: A Bangladeshi structured interview study. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 12, 100288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100288
15. Chang, C. (2010). Internet safety survey: Who will protect the children?. Berkeley technology Law journal, 25(1), 501-527.
16. Chaudron, S. (2015). Young children (0-8) and digital technology. A qualitative exploratory study across seven countries. Joint Research Centre. European Commission.
17. Chaudron, S., Di Gioia, R., & Gemo, M. (2018). Young Children (0–8) and Digital Technology: A qualitative study across Europe. European Commission Joint Research Centre. https://doi.org/10.2760/294383
18. Cho, C. H., & Cheon, H. J. (2005). Children’s exposure to negative internet content: Effects of family context. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(4), 488–509. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4904_8
19. Cüceloğlu, D. (2016). Geliştiren anne-baba [Developing parents]. Remzi Kitabevi.
20. Duerager, A., and Livingstone, S. (2012). How can parents support children’s İnternet safety? EU Kids Online, London, UK. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/42872 adresinden erişildi
21. Dulkadir Yaman, N. & Kabakçı Yurdakul, I. (2022). Exploring Parental Mediation of Internet Use Through Young Children’s Perspective, Education and Information Technologies, 27, 7451–7469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10939-3 .
22. Eastin, M. S., Greenberg, B. S., and Hofschire, L. (2006). Parenting the internet. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 486-504.
23. Folorunsho, A. I. (2016). Young Children’s Engagement and Interactions with Digital and Non-Digital Activities: A Case Study [Doctoral dissertation, Canterbury Christ Church University]. https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk/item/88319/young-children-sengagement-and-interactions-with-digital- and-non-digital-activities-a-case-study .
24. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill.
25. Hasebrink, U., Görzig, A., Haddon, L., Kalmus, V., and Livingstone, S. (2011) “Patterns of risk and safety online: in-depth analyses from the EU Kids Online survey of 9- to 16-year-olds and their parents in 25 European countries”. LSE Research Online. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/39356/1/Patterns_of_risk_and_safety_online_%28LSERO%29.pdf . Son erişim tarihi: 10 Şubat 2016.
26. Hasebrink, U., Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., and Ólafsson, K. (2009). Comparing children’s online opportunities and risks across Europe: Cross-national comparisons for EU Kids Online. LSE, London: EU Kids Online
27. Ho, S. S., Chen, L., and Ng, A. P. (2017). Comparing cyberbullying perpetration on social media between primary and secondary school students. Computers & Education, 109, 74-84.
28. Hu, L. T. and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
29. Ihmeideh, F. M., & Shawareb, A. A. (2014). The association between internet parenting styles and children’s use of the internet at home. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 28(4), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2014.944723
30. IWS (2019). World Internet Users and 2019 Population Stats. https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm adresinden erişildi.
31. Johnson, G. M. (2015). Young children at risk of digital disadvantage. In K. L. Heider & M. R. Jalongo (Eds.), Young Children and Families in the Information Age: Applications of Technology in Early Childhood (pp. 255–275). USA: Springer.
32. Kenny, D. A. (2010). Measuring model fit. http://davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm . Son erişim tarihi: 11 Nisan 2019
33. Kirwil, L. (2009). Parental mediation of children's internet use in different european countries, Journal of Children and Media, 3(4), 394-409.
34. Konca, A.S., Tantekin Erden, F. Young children’s social ınteractions with parents during digital activities at home. Child Indicators Research, 14, 1365–1385 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-020-09800-1
35. Lee, V. W. P., Ling, H. W. H., Cheung, J. C. S., Tung, S. Y. C., Leung, C. M. Y., & Wong, Y. C. 2021. Technology and Family Dynamics: The Relationships Among Children’s Use of Mobile Devices, Family Atmosphere and Parenting Approaches. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-021-00745-0
36. Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Smith, A., Purcell, K., Zickuhr, K., and Rainie, L. (2011). Teens, Kindness and Cruelty on Social Network Sites: How American Teens Navigate the New World of" Digital Citizenship". Pew Internet & American Life Project.
37. Livingstone, S., & Byrne, J. 2018. “Parenting in the Digital Age”. The Challenges of Parental Responsibility in Comparative Perspective (p. 19-30). In Giovanna Mascheroni, Cristina Ponte & Ana Jorge (eds.) Digital Parenting. The Challenges for Families in the Digital Age. Göteborg: Nordicom.
38. Livingstone, S., & Franklin, K. (2018). Families with young children and ‘screen time’ advice. Journal of Health Visiting, 6(9), 434–439.
39. Livingstone, S., and Das, R. (2014) Media, communication and information technologies in the European family. Family Platform. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/29788/1/EF8_LSE_MediaFamily_Education.pdf . 12 Kasım 2014.
40. Livingstone, S., and Helsper, E. J. (2008). “Parental mediation of children's internet use”, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52(4).
41. Livingstone, S., Davidson, J., Bryce, J., Hargrave, A. M., and Grove-Hills, J. (2012). Children’s Online Activities: Risks and Safety. UK.
42. Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., Dreier, M., Chaudron, S., and Lagae, K. (2015) How parents of young children manage digital devices at home: The role of income, education and parental style. London: EU Kids Online, LSE.
43. Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., Helsper, E. J., Lupiáñez-Villanueva, F., Veltri, G. A., and Folkvord, F. (2017). Maximizing opportunities and minimizing risks for Children online: The role of digital skills in emerging strategies of parental mediation. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 82-105.
44. Lwin, M. O., Stanaland, A. J. S., and Miyazaki, A. D. 2008. “Protecting children’s privacy online: How parental mediation strategies affect website safeguard effectiveness”, Journal of Retailing, 84, 2005–2217.
45. Mascheroni, G., Ponte, C., & Jorge, A. (2018). Digital parenting: The challenges for families in the digital age. Sweden: Nordicom.
46. McFarland, J., Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Wang, X., Wang, K., Hein, S., ... & Barmer, A. (2019). The Condition of Education 2019. NCES 2019-144. National Center for Education Statistics.
47. McPake, J., Plowman, L., & Stephen, C. (2013). Pre-school children creating and communicating with digital technologies in the home. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 421–431.
48. NAEYC & the Fred Rogers Center. (2012). Technology and interactive media as tools in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/topics/PS_technologyWEB.pdf . Accessed 15 Feb 2021.
49. Nevski, E., & Siibak, A. (2016). The role of parents and parental mediation on 0–3-year-olds digital play with smart devices: Estonian parents’ attitudes and practices. Early Years, 36(3), 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2016.1161601
50. Nikken, P., and Jansz, J. (2014). Developing scales to measure parental mediation of young children's internet use. Learning, Media and technology, 39(2), 250-266.
51. Ofcom. (2019). Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/190616/children-media-use-attitudes-2019-report.pdf
52. Palfrey, J., and Gasser, U. (2013). Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books.
53. Papadakis, S., Zaranis, N., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019). Parental involvement and attitudes towards young Greek children’s mobile usage. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 22,100144.
54. Pew Research Center, December 17, 2015, “Parenting in America: Outlook, worries, aspirations are strongly linked to financial situation. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2015/12/2015-12-17_parenting-inamerica_FINAL.pdf
55. Piotrowski, J. T. (2017). The parental media mediation context of young children’s media use. In Media exposure during infancy and early childhood (pp. 205-219). Cham: Springer.
56. Plowman, L., Stevenson, O., Stephen, C., & McPake, J. (2012). Preschool children’s learning with technology at home. Computers and Education, 59(1), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.014
57. Rosen, L. R., Cheever, N. A., and Carrier, L. M. (2008). The impact of parental attachment style, limit setting and monitoring on teen myspace behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 459-471.
58. Saracho, O. N. (2015). Developmentally-appropriate technology and interactive media in early childhood education. In K. L. Heider, & M. Renck Jalongo (Eds.), Young Children and Families in the Information Age: Applications of Technology in Early Childhood (pp. 183–205).
59. Sonck, N., Nikken, P., and de Haan, J. (2013). Determinants of internet mediation: A comparison of the reports by Dutch parents and children. Journal of Children and Media, 7(1), 96-113.
60. Steiger, J. H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling, Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 893-898.
61. Sütçü, S. S. (2017). Çocukların bilişim teknolojileri kullanımlarına yönelik kısıtlamalara karşı tepkileri, Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 13(2), 301-315.
62. Takacs, Z. K., Swart, E. K., & Bus, A. G. (2015). Benefits and pitfalls of multimedia and interactive features in technology-enhanced storybooks: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 698–739.
63. Turow, J., and Nir, L. (2000) The internet and the family: The view from parents, the view from kids. From Report Series. No. 13. The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1409&context=asc_papers . Son erişim tarihi: 10 Ocak 2015.
64. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu ([TÜİK], 2019). Hanehalkı Bilişim Teknolojileri (BT) Kullanım Araştırması, 2019. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Haber Bülteni, 30574. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=30574 .
65. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu ([TÜİK], 2020). Hanehalkı Bilişim Teknolojileri (BT) Kullanım Araştırması, 2020. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Haber Bülteni, 33679. Retrieved from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki- Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2020-33679 adresinden erişildi.
66. Valcke, M., De Wever, B., Van Keer, H. ve Schellens, T. (2011). Long-term study of safe internet use of young children. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1292-1305.
67. Valkenburg, P. M., Krcmar, M., Peeters, A. L., and Marseille, N. M. (1999). Developing a scale to assess three styles of television mediation: ‘Instructive mediation,’ ‘restrictive mediation,’ and ‘social coviewing’, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(1), 52-66.
68. Yavuzer, H. (2016). Ana-baba ve çocuk [Mother-father and child], Remzi Kitabevi.
69. Yörükoğlu, A. (2007). Aile ve çocuk [Family and child], Özgür Yayınları.
70. Wang, R., Bianchi, S. M., and Raley, S. B. (2005). Teenagers’ Internet use and family rules: A research note, Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1249-1258.
71. We Are Social. (2019). “Digital 2019” Retrieved February 18, 2020 (https://wearesocial.com/digital-2019).
72. We Are Social. (2021). “Digital 2021” Retrieved February 25, 2021 (https://wearesocial.com/digital-2021).
73. Wisniewski, P., Xu, H., Rosson, M. B., and Carroll, J. M. (2017). Parents Just Don't Understand: Why Teens Don't Talk to Parents about Their Online Risk Experiences. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (pp. 523-540). ACM.
74. Wright, M. F. (2017). Parental mediation, cyberbullying, and cybertrolling: The role of gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 189-195.
75. Wu, C. S. T., Fowler, C., Lam, W. Y. Y., Wong, H. T., Wong, C. H. M., & Loke, A. Y. (2014). Parenting approaches and digital technology use of preschool age children in a Chinese community. Italian Journal of Pediatrics, 40(1), 1– 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1824-7288-40-44