Screaming at Screens?

Neuroscientist Dr. Kathryn Birkenback tells us how it REALLY is

People say “life-changing” like it has to be a huge thing. Sometimes small things can change one’s daily life in small ways that really add up.

People say “it doesn’t make an ounce of difference”, but… let’s make this literal! An ounce of difference per day would mean 22.8 lb (10kg) in a year. Suddenly that “ounce of difference” looks like a lot more!

Fun fact: a year from now, you’ll be a year older than you are today, whether you make any given change or not

Plot twist: while this could be about bodyweight, it doesn’t have to be! It could be about any small change that adds up over time.

Question: what do you wish you’d started a year ago, or five years ago? Start it now!

It’s Expert Insights Tuesday here at 10almonds, and today we have the latest word from neuroscientist Dr. Kathryn Birkenbach on what those electronic device screens are (and aren’t!) doing to young brains. In today’s line-up:

  • Healthy Eating Made Easier—For when “knowing isn’t the problem”

  • Screen Time And Developing Brains—What is (and isn’t) it doing for them?

  • Nonverbal Epiphany—If you interact with people, this hoard of data will be of use to you!

👀 WATCH AND LEARN

🥗 More Healthy Eating, Less Effort?

We all have a general idea of what healthy eating looks like, even if sometimes there are opposing schools of thought on some aspect of it.

Alas, it’s one of those things where all too often, “knowing isn’t the problem”!

Nutritionist and Health Motivation Expert Claudia Canu is here to offer a short (4:41) video packed with 7 tips to make healthy eating a breeze:

🧠 MAIN FEATURE

🖥 I Screen, You Screen, We All Screen For…?

Dr. Kathryn Birkenbach is a postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Neuroscience at Columbia University, and Manager of Research at Early Medical in New York.

Kathryn has things to tell us about kids’ neurological development, and screen time spent with electronic devices including phones, tablets, computers, and TVs.

From the 1960s criticism of “the gogglebox” to the modern-day critiques of “iPad babies” as a watchword of parental neglect, there’s plenty people can say against screen time, but Dr. Birkenbach tells us the that the reality is more nuanced:

Context Is Key

Contrary to popular belief, children do not in fact learn by osmosis!

Interaction Is Far More Valuable Than Inaction

Kathryn advises that while adults tend to quite easily grasp things from instructional videos, the same does not go for small children.

This means that a lot of educational programming can be beneficial to small children if and only if there is an adult with them to help translate the visual into the practical!

There’s a story that does the rounds on the Internet: a young boy wanted to train his puppy, but didn’t know how. He asked, and was told “search for puppy training on YouTube”. His parents came back later and found him with his iPad, earnestly showing the training videos to the puppy.

We can laugh at the child’s naïvety, knowing that’s not how it works and the puppy will not learn that way, so why make the same mistake in turn?

❝The phenomenon known as the “video deficit effect” can be overcome, when an on-screen guide interacts with the child or a parent is physically present and draws the child’s attention to relevant information.

In other words, interaction with others appears to enhance the perceived salience of on-screen information, unlocking a child’s ability to learn from a medium which would otherwise offer no real-world benefit.

Screens Can Supplement, But Can’t Replace, Live Learning & Play

Sci-fi may show us “education pods” in which children learn all they need to from their screen… but according to our most up-to-date science, Dr. Birkenbach says, that simply would not work at all.

Screen time without adult interactions will typically fail to provide small children any benefit.

There is one thing it’s good at, though… attracting and keeping attention.

Thus, even a mere background presence of a TV show in the room will tend to actively reduce the time a small child spends on other activities, including live learning and exploratory play.

The attention-grabbing abilities of TV shows don’t stop at children, though! Adult caregivers will also tend to engage in fewer interactions with their children… and the interactions will be shorter and of lower quality.

In Summary:

  • Young children will tend not to learn from non-interactive screen time

  • Interactive screen time, ideally with a caregiver, can be educational

  • Interactive screen time, not with a carer, can be beneficial (but a weak substitute)

    • Interactive screen time refers to shows such as Dora The Explorer, where Dora directly addresses the viewer and asks questions…But it’s reliant on the child caring to answer!

    • It can also mean interactive educational apps, provided the child does consciously interact!

    • Randomly pressing things is not conscious interaction! The key here is engaging with it intelligently and thoughtfully

  • A screen will take a child’s time and attention away from non-screen things: that’s a genuine measurable loss to their development!

Absolute Bottom Line:

Screens can be of benefit to small children, if and only if the material is:

  • Age-Appropriate

  • Educational

  • Interactive

If it’s missing one of those three, it’ll be of little to no benefit, and can even harm, as it reduces the time spent on more beneficial activities.

Sharing is Caring! Our newsletter relies heavily on word-of-mouth; if you think someone you know might enjoy our health and productivity tips and related content, please pass it on to them!

📖 ONE-MINUTE BOOK REVIEW

Nonverbal Epiphany - by Dr. Stephen Furlich

The subtitle of this book, “Steps To Improve Your Nonverbal Communication” suggests that this is principally an instructional book—it’s not. Rather, it’s mostly informational, and it is left to the reader to interpret what to do with that information.

But, what a lot of information!

And well-sourced, too: this book has scientific paper citations at a rate of one or two per page, with many diagrams and infographics too. It is, in effect, a treasure trove of physiological, psychological, and sociological data when it comes to nonverbal communication and the various factors that influence it.

So, what can you hope to gain from this book? A lot of sorting out of science vs suppositions, mostly.

From digit ratios to crossed arms, from eye-contact to attire, do things really mean what we’ve been told they mean?

And if they don’t, will people perceive them that way anyway, or will textbook rules go out the window in a real conversation? How about in real nonverbal interactions?

(What’s a nonverbal interaction? It’s the behavior exhibited between strangers in the street, it’s the impression given and received by your profile picture, things like that).

Bottom line is that this book is data, data, and more data. If ever you wanted to sort the psychology from the pseudoscience, this is the book for you.

What did you think of today's newsletter?

Sorry to bother you. But the feedback really helps us.

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

Wishing you and yours a whole world of health and productivity,

The 10almonds Team