---
title: "More Screen Time Is Linked to Weaker Development in Children, Study of Nearly 3 Million Finds"
description: "A review in JAMA Pediatrics ties longer screen use to poorer learning, speech, behavior and emotional regulation, with mostly small effects"
author: "rews desk"
published: 2026-09-30T14:32:23.353Z
modified: 2026-10-01T02:49:32Z
url: https://rews.cc/a/more-screen-time-is-linked-to-weaker-development-in-children-0c53c7
language: en
tags: ["health", "children", "development", "psychology", "media", "science"]
publisher: "Rews (https://rews.cc)"
---

# More Screen Time Is Linked to Weaker Development in Children, Study of Nearly 3 Million Finds

*A review in JAMA Pediatrics ties longer screen use to poorer learning, speech, behavior and emotional regulation, with mostly small effects*

By rews desk · September 30, 2026 · https://rews.cc/a/more-screen-time-is-linked-to-weaker-development-in-children-0c53c7

## In brief

- A review in JAMA Pediatrics links more screen time to poorer child development across thinking, learning, speech, behavior and emotions
- The research covered nearly 3 million children aged 18 and under in 64 countries
- The associations were mostly small, and newer studies show stronger links than older ones
- The findings are correlational and do not prove screens cause the difficulties

Children who spend more time on screens tend to show poorer development in how they think, learn, speak, behave and regulate their emotions, according to a review of decades of research covering nearly 3 million children in 64 countries.

The study, published in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, pulled together research on children aged 18 and under. Its senior author, Sheri Madigan, a professor of psychology at the University of Calgary in Canada, described the findings to CNN on Tuesday.

“Most of the associations were relatively small, like most other predictors of child development, but small does not mean meaningless, particularly when we’re talking about an exposure like screen time, which is nearly universal in children’s lives,” she said.

One pattern stood out. Newer studies showed stronger links between screen time and development than older ones did, Dr. Madigan said, and part of the explanation may be that screen time itself has changed.

“Twenty years ago, a child might have spent an hour watching a television program,” she said. “Today, devices are everywhere, carried in our hands, and they are also interactive, engaging, and responsive to the individual. We need to better understand not just how children interact with technology, but how technology interacts with children.”

Dr. Madigan cautioned parents against reading the study as proof that “screens are inherently bad for children.” Digital tools, she said, can support learning, creativity and connection. The risk comes when they “crowd out what children really need to thrive, such as sleep, physical activity, human connection, learning, and play.” Rather than banning devices, she suggested families pick one place to start: device-free dinners, or a set time of day when everyone puts screens aside.

She also said parents should not be left to manage the problem alone. “Governments should treat children’s screen use the way they treat other factors that we know are associated with children’s well-being, including through screen-use guidance for families, education, research, and ensuring children are safeguarded from online harms,” she said.

Two researchers who were not involved in the study offered qualified praise in comments released through the Science Media Centre. Tatiana Íñiguez Berrozpe, a senior lecturer in sociology at the University of Zaragoza in Spain, called it “a methodologically very sound article” built on an “extremely large” sample. Its findings, she said, put “the current media and social moral panic” about young people and screens in perspective: the association with poorer mental health and academic performance is real but very small.

Esther van Sluijs, a professor of behavioral epidemiology at Loughborough University in England, called it “a high-quality study” but said it “cannot draw robust conclusions about specific types of screen use, like social media use or gaming, as there was not enough data to study this.”

The findings are correlational, Dr. Madigan said, so they do not show that screens cause the difficulties. Children who are already struggling may simply turn to screens more. Untangling which direction the relationship runs, she said, is where her team goes next.