Skip to main content
Browse Subject Areas

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Parenting style and family type, but not child temperament, are associated with television viewing time in children at two years of age

  • Anna S. Howe ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Anna S. Howe, Andrew R. Gray, Rachael W. Taylor

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Current address: Department of General Practice and Primary Healthcare, School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Affiliation Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Anne-Louise M. Heath ,

    Roles Methodology, Resources, Writing – review & editing

    ‡ These authors also contributed equally to this work.

    Affiliation Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Julie Lawrence ,

    Roles Project administration, Writing – review & editing

    ‡ These authors also contributed equally to this work.

    Affiliation Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Barbara C. Galland ,

    Roles Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    ‡ These authors also contributed equally to this work.

    Affiliation Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Andrew R. Gray ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Anna S. Howe, Andrew R. Gray, Rachael W. Taylor

    Roles Formal analysis, Methodology

    Affiliation Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Barry J. Taylor ,

    Roles Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    ‡ These authors also contributed equally to this work.

    Affiliation Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Rachel Sayers ,

    Roles Writing – review & editing

    ‡ These authors also contributed equally to this work.

    Affiliation Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

  • Rachael W. Taylor

    Contributed equally to this work with: Anna S. Howe, Andrew R. Gray, Rachael W. Taylor

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand



Despite the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommending that electronic media be avoided in children under two years of age, screen use is common in infants and toddlers. The aims of this study were to determine how parenting style, infant temperament, and family type are associated with television viewing in two-year-old children.

Study design

Participants were from the Prevention of Overweight in Infancy (POI) randomized controlled trial (n = 802) (Dunedin, New Zealand). Demographic information was collected at baseline (late pregnancy), and television and other screen time assessed by questionnaire at 24 months of age. Parenting style (Parenting Practices Questionnaire), infant temperament (Colorado Childhood Temperament Inventory), and family type (7 categories) were reported by both parents.


Data were available for 487 participants (61% of the original participants). Median television viewing was relatively low at 21 minutes per day, or 30 minutes in those watching television (82%). Children who watched television played with mobile phones (12% of children) or iPads/tablets (22% of children) more frequently than children who did not (6% of children). In terms of parenting style, children of more authoritarian mothers (β = 17, 95% CI: 6–27 minutes), more authoritarian partners (β = 14, 95% CI: 2–26 minutes), or more permissive mothers (β = 10, 95% CI: 3–17 minutes) watched significantly more television. No significant relationships were observed between child temperament and time watching television after adjustment for confounding variables. Children from “active” families (as rated by partners) watched 29 minutes less television each day (P = 0.002).


Parenting style and family type were associated with television viewing time in young children, whereas child temperament was not.


Energy-dense foods, low levels of physical activity, and sedentary behaviors (including use of electronic media such as television) have all been implicated in childhood obesity [1, 2]. Independent of obesity, childhood “screen time” is also associated with an increased risk of sleep disturbances [3] and problems with attention [4], and may displace time in other developmentally important activities including reading [5] and creative play [6]. Despite clear recommendations that parents should discourage media use, including television viewing, in children less than two years of age [7, 8], it is clear that many infants and toddlers [9], perhaps as many as 90% [10], are exposed to television and other electronic media. Limited evidence suggests New Zealand toddlers may be watching as little as 1–3 hours per week [11] or as much as 90 minutes per day [12].

Given this high exposure, it is surprising that relatively few studies have examined factors that may predict levels of television viewing in young children [13]. Higher viewing hours have been associated with ethnic minority status, lower levels of maternal education and employment, marital status, and maternal depression in some [10, 14, 15], but not all [16, 17], studies in infants and preschool children. Parenting behaviors, such as allowing a television in the child’s bedroom [18, 19], fewer rules around television use [20], and greater maternal television viewing [17, 21, 22], have also been associated with higher viewing time in children, although these findings have not been unanimous [13].

Investigation of wider issues, including parenting style and family “type”, is warranted given the over-riding influence of the home environment in the early years [23]. In one study, low-income families in which parents valued complete compliance had pre-school children who watched more television [15], but other studies have observed no relationship between parenting style and screen use [19, 22]. Infant temperament may be important if parents of young children with more challenging behaviors use screen time as a distraction [24], for instance, it has been reported that infants whose mothers perceived them to be fussy or cry frequently, were more likely to watch television daily [17]. Both parenting style [25] and ratings of infant temperament [26] can differ between mothers and fathers, yet no studies appear to have evaluated media viewing in young children in relation to these characteristics assessed separately in both parents.

Whilst television viewing has previously been the main source of screen use, computers, gaming consoles, smart phones, and tablets are increasingly popular [27]. In particular, the rise of touchscreen devices which are small and relatively easy to use can facilitate engagement by the very young [27]. One survey of infants and toddlers suggests that as many as 50 percent of children under 2 years of age could be allowed to use touch screens by their parents [28]. Some parents believe that touchscreen devices teach the child new skills and knowledge, are fun and entertaining, or occupy the child when the parent needs to do something [28]. However, in children 3–5 years of age, while touchscreen devices were found to be used for educational games and apps, traditional television viewing was still more common, making up 60% of the reported viewing time [29]. Concurrent screen use is common in adolescents and young adults, and 40% of pre-schoolers have been found to multitask with screen devices [29]. While the amount of time the children spent using touchscreen devices was positively associated with concurrent screen use, preference for television viewing was unrelated to concurrent device use [29].

Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the extent to which parenting style, infant temperament, and family type, as estimated separately by mothers and their partners, were associated with screen time in two-year-old children. In addition, it was of interest to us to see what associations might exist between the amount of time a toddler watches television and the use of other media.


These data were obtained from the Prevention of Overweight in Infancy (POI) study, a randomized controlled trial investigating whether extra education and support around food, activity, breastfeeding and sleep reduced rates of excessive weight gain in the first two years of life (clinical trials registration at (Clinical Trials NCT00892983)). As a protocol paper has been published [30], only methods relevant to the current study are described briefly here. The New Zealand Lower South Regional Ethics Committee approved the study (LRS/08/12/063), and all adult participants gave written informed consent for themselves and their children. A cohort of 802 women were recruited in late pregnancy for the two-year intervention and randomized to one of four groups: 1) control, 2) FAB (food, activity, breastfeeding), 3) Sleep or 4) Combination (both interventions). Those in the FAB and Combination groups received a total of 8–9 contacts, covering a wide range of topics, including education on restricting television (and other media) viewing in children before two years of age. Those in the Sleep (and Combination) groups received an educational programme (2 sessions) discussing normal sleep patterns, safe sleep practices and prevention of sleep problems. All participants received standard government-funded well-child care ( There were no significant differences among the intervention groups in the time spent watching television at 24 months [31]. Therefore, data from all four groups were combined in the current analysis, and intervention group was included as a confounder in analyses as described below.

Data collected at baseline (third trimester) included estimated maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI), current estimated paternal BMI, and maternal and partner (all fathers for this sub-study population) age and ethnicity. The level of household deprivation was provided by the New Zealand Deprivation Index (NZDep2006), which ranges from 1 (indicating areas of least deprivation) to 10 (areas of highest deprivation) [32]. Infant birth characteristics (date of birth, weight, gestational age) were collected from hospital records. Maternal depression was assessed using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) [33], validated for use in the prenatal period [34]. Scores were dichotomized into ‘not depressed’ (< 10), and ‘possibly depressed’ (≥ 10).

Data collected when the children were 24 months of age included anthropometry, parent and child media usage, parenting style, child temperament, family type, and maternal and child physical activity. Weight (WB-100MA, Tanita (kg)) and height (Holtain Model 603VR, Harpenden and Leicester Height Measure Mk II, Invicta (cm)) were measured in duplicate with the subject dressed only in light clothing (diaper and singlet for children, minimal clothing for adults) following standard techniques [35] in both parents and in the child. Child body mass index (BMI) z-score was calculated using World Health Organization growth standards [36]. Mothers reported their own usual screen time (television, computers and tablets, video games) in minutes per day. Mothers provided child viewing time (television, DVDs and videos) as both frequency (days per week) and time (usual minutes per day on days watched), from which minutes of viewing per day was calculated (this was the variable used to describe television watching in subsequent hypothesis testing). In addition, mothers provided frequency of child media use (television, DVDs or videos, computer, mobile phone, and tablet use) categorized as: does not use, occasional (up to 2 times per week), regular (3–5 times per week), and daily (every day). Maternal physical activity was assessed using the short form of the New Zealand Physical Activity Questionnaire which is based on the International Physical Activity Questionnaire [37], so that metabolic equivalents (MET) minutes per week could be calculated [38]. Physical activity was assessed in children using Actical accelerometers (Mini-Mitter Co., Bend, OR) worn over the right hip 24-hours a day for 5–7 days, and expressed as counts per minute once all sleep time had been removed individually from the data using an automated algorithm [39, 40]. Parenting style was assessed in mothers and fathers using a 30-item questionnaire which provided scores for three sub-scales: authoritarian (13-items), authoritative (13-items), and permissive (4-items) parenting, assessed on a six-point scale (never to always) [41]. Dimensions of authoritative parent style were assessed using statements about responsiveness to child’s feelings/needs, encouraging child to speak freely, and treating child as an equal member of family. Dimensions of authoritarian parenting were assessed with statements about reminding the child I am the parent, using threats as a form of punishment, and criticism to improve behaviour, while dimensions of permissive parenting was assessed with statements about finding it difficult to discipline the child, and ignoring bad behaviour. Both parents also completed the 30-item Colorado Childhood Temperament Inventory [42] which yields six sub-scales: sociability (prefers the presence of others to being alone), emotionality (tendency to get easily distressed and upset), activity (activity level), attention span-persistence (distractability), reaction to food (extent to which a new food is taken without fussing), and soothability (ease with which the infant can be calmed when upset). Cronbach’s alpha for all subscales in our study population ranged from 0.98–1.00. Each parent was also asked to indicate the extent to which they felt their family was i) “active or sporty”, ii) “media savvy”, iii) “bookish”, iv) “outdoor people”, v) “musical”, vi) “religious/spiritual”, and vii) “creative or arty” using possible response options of “not really us”, “a little like us”, or “definitely like us”.

Statistical analysis

“Minutes of television per day” was used to examine whether children met the 2011 AAP guideline [7]: no television was coded as meeting the guideline, and any minutes of television was coded as not meeting the guideline. While the 2016 AAP guidelines [8] recommend avoiding digital media use for children younger than 18–24 months, we have categorized television use based on the 2011 AAP guidelines of discouraging media use in those younger than 2 years [43]. To compare differences between groups, Chi-square tests or Fisher’s exact test (where more than 20% of cells had expected frequencies below 5) were used for categorical variables with pair-wise comparison undertaken for categorical variables with more than two categories if there was evidence of a significant difference between the categories overall. Mann-Whitney tests were used for continuous or ordinal variables. As the continuous data were non-normally distributed, they are presented as medians with inter-quartile ranges (IQR). Due to the non-normal distribution of the residuals, quantile regression using the 50th percentile (median) was used to investigate associations between demographic variables and television minutes, and to examine the unadjusted and adjusted associations between independent variables (parenting style, infant temperament, family type) and television minutes. Continuous independent variables were tested for nonlinearity by adding a quadratic term (none were significant). Quantile regression models were adjusted for intervention group, demographic variables from the unadjusted models that had P ≤ 0.25, and household deprivation and maternal parity (stratification variables used when randomizing participants to the POI study groups). Although children’s physical activity reached the statistical threshold for inclusion in the models, it was not included in the fully adjusted models because the limited number of children with accelerometry data would have reduced the number of participants available for the analysis. Investigation into the missing data indicated that those with missing data did not differ with those who had complete data in respect to demographic variables. Some missingness was due to erroneous data discovered during data cleaning, and some was because some participants refused to take part in the collection of the physical activity data. These missing data were not imputed because imputing data ‘missing not at random’ can introduce more bias when using multiple imputation than complete case analysis [44]. Wald tests were used to determine the overall effect for categorical variables in the regression models, with pairwise comparisons between different levels of the variable conducted for categorical variables with more than two categories if there was evidence of a significant difference between the categories overall. The effect sizes for quantile regression models are the predicted change (95% CI) to median minutes of children’s television viewing per day for every unit change in the independent variable, or between reference and non-reference levels of categorical variables.

Two-sided P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were conducted using Stata 12.1 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).


At 24 months of age, 686 participants remained in the POI study (86%), although only 487 families provided questionnaire data (61% of the original participants) (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Flow of POI study participants through to 24 months of age.

Table 1 demonstrates that the only differences between participants who had usable data and those who did not were: maternal and partner age (those with useable data were older), and partner ethnicity (those with useable data were more likely to be New Zealand European).

Table 1. Characteristics of the study sample at baseline (n = 802).

Minutes of television watched did not differ between the four study groups and ranged from 0 (18% of children) to 120 minutes per day, with median (IQR) viewing of 21 (IQR 54) minutes per day in the total sample (Table 1), and 30 (IQR 46) minutes in those who watched television. In our sample, most children watched DVDs or videos (75%), television (76%) and played games on computers and gaming consoles (73%) at least once a week, and a number of children were using mobile phones (17%), and tablets (18%). (Table 2). Not surprisingly, children who did not meet the AAP 2011 television guideline [7] (18%) used all forms of device more frequently than children who met the guidelines.

Table 2. Frequency of children’s use of different devices, by whether or not the American Academy of Pediatrics guideline for television viewing was met.

Unadjusted models found higher maternal pre-pregnancy BMI (1 minute per unit BMI, P = 0.013) and maternal screen time (6 minutes per hour of maternal screen time, P < 0.001) were positively associated with child television viewing time. Mothers depressed in pregnancy had children who watched an extra 11 minutes of TV per day compared to children of non-depressed mothers (P = 0.030). Child’s physical activity (P = 0.014) was negatively associated with children’s viewing time (Table 3).

Table 3. Association between demographic, anthropometric, physical activity, screen time, and depression variables and child television viewing at 24 months of age.

There were significant associations between authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting styles and child television viewing in the unadjusted models (Table 4). However, only the positive association between the mother having an authoritarian or permissive style, and the partner having an authoritarian style, remained statistically significantly associated with minutes of television watching in adjusted models (Table 4). In the current sample, mothers (and partners) with the more authoritarian parenting style had children who watched a median of 17 (and 14) extra minutes of television per day compared to children with less authoritarian parents. More permissive mothers had children who watched a median of an extra 10 minutes of television a day.

Table 4. Association between parenting style[41] and child television viewing at 24 months of age.

Although being perceived as being more emotional (by mother), more fussy with food (by mother or partner), or more outgoing (by partner) was associated with watching more television at 24 months of age in the unadjusted models, no infant temperament variables remained statistically significant after adjustment for potential confounders (Table 5).

Table 5. Association between child temperament [42] and child television viewing at 24 months of age.

The mother reporting that their family was “active or sporty” (negative relationship), or “musical” (positive relationship) was associated with television watching in unadjusted models, but neither of these relationships remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders (S1 Table). By contrast, the partner reporting that their family was “active or sporty” was associated with significantly fewer hours of television viewing by toddlers in both models (adjusted model: 29 minutes less, P = 0.002), whereas the partner reporting that their family was “media savvy” was associated with significantly more television viewing per day in both models (adjusted model: 20 minutes more, P = 0.049) (S2 Table). The partner reporting that their family was “outdoor” was associated with 11 fewer minutes of television watching per day (P = 0.011) in the adjusted model.


Our study investigated associations between parenting style, infant temperament, and family type, and television viewing in a large community sample of two-year old children. Parents who scored higher on the authoritarian or permissive parenting scales had children who viewed approximately quarter of an hour more television each day, even after adjustment for confounding variables. Although several components of infant temperament were initially associated with television viewing, these were no longer significant after adjustment. Partner description of family type was also associated with either less (“active or sporty” or “outdoor” families) or more (“media savvy” families) television viewing at this age.

Our findings regarding parenting style are in agreement with the limited existing research in older children. More television viewing has been observed in children of more permissive mothers [45], and in those who valued complete compliance, that is, having children who did as they were told [15]. Parents who are more permissive are likely to give their child more freedom to do what they like, so it is of little surprise that their children watch more television. Authoritarian parents are more likely to be angry towards their child, to be openly critical, and to use criticism to improve behavior [41], so it is possible that a child avoids these parental responses when they are watching television quietly, or perhaps authoritarian parents use television as a coping strategy. Another possible explanation is low parental involvement as authoritarian and permissive parents may be similar in their relative detachment, and in the ineffectiveness of their communication [23]. Low parental involvement has been found to be associated with high screen use in pre-schoolers [46], and interventions aimed at increasing parent-child interactions and parental stimulation in the home have significantly reduced screen time compared to controls [47, 48].

In our study, unadjusted analyses suggested an association between television watching and mothers perceiving that their toddler got upset more easily, their other parent thinking that the toddler was more sociable, and either parent believing the toddler was fussy about food. However, these differences were very small (less than 2 minutes) and were no longer significant once potential confounders had been controlled for in the multivariate model. Other research has indicated that young children who are considered to be fussy by their parents may watch more television, perhaps as a coping strategy for parents [17]. Infants from low-income homes whose mothers believed they were fussy were 23% more likely to be exposed to at least one hour of television per day [17]. Similarly, infants classified as having poor self-regulation (defined as being unpredictably fussy, or having problems with sleep, feeding, or regulating mood and behavior) at 9 months of age watched 14 more minutes of television at two years of age [24]. The observation that these relationships were stronger in those with lower socioeconomic status [24] may explain the lack of effect in our study, given our sample was well educated and had relatively high socioeconomic status.

Parental description of family type was strongly associated with television viewing in the current study: children from “media-savvy” families watched about 20 more minutes per day, with children from “active or sporty” families watching half an hour less, and those from “outdoor” families watching 14 minutes less. Our findings are in agreement with a number of studies that have reported an association between access to media, and screen viewing time in young children [49]. However, relationships between physical activity and television viewing appear more inconsistent [50]. It is interesting in this context that, in the current study, toddler physical activity, and the two most active family types, were all associated with less television viewing.

Children in the current study had considerably lower television viewing times than are typically reported in the literature (21 minutes compared to 1.3–3.6 hours per day) [4, 10, 15, 16]. This may be because very young children in New Zealand watch less television. Certainly one study has suggested that New Zealand toddlers may be watching as little as 1–3 hours per week [11], although other New Zealand data suggest children this age could be watching 90 minutes of television a day [12]. Thus is more likely to be a reflection of differences in the way viewing time is assessed. Alternatives range from assessing television watching based on discrete hourly response options [15], to asking parents to report how long their child watches each of several different types of content [10], both of which approaches may over-estimate total viewing time. In addition, existing studies in preschoolers include a wide age range (0–5 years), with lower levels of television viewing (46 minutes per day) having been reported in children aged 1–2 years [21]. Whether background television is included in the measurement is also important, given that children under the age of 24 months have been reported to be exposed to very high levels (5.5 hours per day in one study [51]). Our viewing times were specific to the child’s viewing, but mothers reported that the television was on in the background for 210 minutes per day.

The strengths of our study include the examination of parenting style, infant temperament and family type in relation to toddler television viewing in a large cohort of families, with comprehensive assessment of a variety of measures which allowed many factors to be investigated as potential confounders. The main limitation of our study was its reliance on maternal report of usual television viewing in toddlers. Although we cannot be sure that the values reported always refer to times when the child was actively watching television, rather than background television, this seems unlikely given the low median viewing times in our sample. Previous research has found negative outcomes for both forms of exposure to television [52], and parental reports of children’s television viewing have been shown to be highly correlated with media time when measured by video recording in the home [53, 54]. We were also only able to include television viewing as our outcome variable which may under-estimate the total screen time toddlers were exposed to. However, we were able to provide insight into the frequency of other media use, which was generally less than that of television. We acknowledge that our family type questionnaire is not validated as such, but were interested in examining how both parents viewed their family type to provide a more holistic view of family life. Finally, we were unable to control for other potential confounders, such as child’s physical activity, paternal screen time, day care attendance, and number of siblings. However, parity (a proxy for number of siblings) was examined, but was not included in the adjusted models as it did not reach the required significance level. Exclusion of those participants who refused physical activity data from the current study likely biases our results towards the positive and inflates the magnitude of our associations. This is because there is likely residual confounding between physical activity and TV watching, as those excluded may have watched more television, as indicated by our significant result between child’s physical activity and daily TV viewing. However, all studies of this nature are likely to have some degree of residual confounding.

In conclusion, our study shows parenting style and family type are associated with television watching in young children. Future longitudinal research needs to examine associations between the evolution of parenting style as the child ages and screen time in children to determine whether these associations persist, ideally in a more economically diverse sample. Parenting style is not necessarily modifiable, but future interventions are likely to need to understand the impact of parenting style in order to assist families with effective strategies for encouraging activity and reducing screen time. Further research is also required to determine the extent to which family type is modifiable, and whether any specific characteristics of family type are both related to television viewing, and transferable.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Associations between family type as indicated by the mother and child television viewing at 24 months of age.

* Models were adjusted for items from unadjusted models in Table 3 if P<0.25 (child’s sex, child’s BMI z-score, maternal age at birth, maternal ethnicity, maternal pregnancy BMI, maternal screen time), with additional adjustment for POI study groups and NZ Deprivation category [32] and maternal parity (variables used for the stratified randomization of the POI participants into groups).

Quantile regression (ß): predicted change to median minutes of children’s television viewing per day between reference and non-reference levels of categorical of family type.

Wald test.

** Reference group.


S2 Table. Associations between family type as indicated by the partner and child television viewing at 24 months of age.

* Models were adjusted for items from unadjusted models in Table 3 if P<0.25 (child’s sex, child’s BMI z-score, maternal age at birth, maternal ethnicity, maternal pregnancy BMI, maternal screen time), with additional adjustment for POI study group and household deprivation category [32] and maternal parity (variables used for the stratified randomization of the POI participants into groups).

Quantile regression (ß): predicted change to median minutes of children’s television viewing per day between reference and non-reference levels of categorical of family type.

Wald test.

** Reference group.



  1. 1. Lobstein T, Baur L, Uauy R. Obesity in children and young people: a crisis in public health. Obesity Reviews. 2004;5(Suppl 1):4–85.
  2. 2. Reilly JJ. Physical activity, sedentary behaviour and energy balance in the preschool child: opportunities for early obesity prevention. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2008;67:317–25. pmid:18700053
  3. 3. Thompson DA, Christakis DA. The association between television viewing and irregular sleep schedules among children less than 3 years of age. Pediatrics. 2005;116:851–6. pmid:16199693
  4. 4. Christakis DA, Zimmerman F, DiGiuseppe D, McCarty C. Early televison exposure and subsequent attentional problems in children. Pediatrics. 2004;113(708–713). pmid:15060216
  5. 5. Tomopoulos S, Valdez PT, Dreyer BP, Fierman AH, Berkule SB, Kuhn M, et al. Is exposure to media intended for preschool children associated with less parent-child shared reading aloud and teaching activities? Ambulatory Pediatrics. 2007;7:18–24. pmid:17261478
  6. 6. Vandewater E, Bickham D, Less J. Time well spent? Relating televison use to children's free-time activities. Pediatrics. 2006;117:181–91.
  7. 7. American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Public Education. Children, adolescents and television. Pediatrics. 2001;107:423–6. pmid:11158483
  8. 8. AAP Council on Communications and Media. Media and Young Minds. Pediatrics. 2016;138:e20162591. pmid:27940793
  9. 9. Downing KL, Hnatiuk J, Hesketh JD. Prevalence of sedentary behavior in children under 2 years: a systematic review. Preventive Medicine. 2015;78:105–14. pmid:26231111
  10. 10. Zimmerman F, Christakis DA, Meltzoff A. Television and DVD/video viewing in children younger than 2 years. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. 2007;161:473–9.
  11. 11. Watkins L, Aitken R, Robertson K, Thyne M. Public and parental perceptions of and concerns with advertising to preschool children. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 2016;40:592–600.
  12. 12. Morton SMB, Atatoa Carr PE, Grant CC, Berry SD, Bandara DK, Mohal J, et al. Growing Up in New Zealand: A longitudinal study of New Zealand children and their families. Now we are Two: Describing our first 1000 days. Auckland: Growing Up in New Zealand, 2014.
  13. 13. Duch H, Fisher EM, Ensari I, Harrington A. Screen time use in children under 3 years old: a systematic review of correlates. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2013;10:102. pmid:23967799
  14. 14. Certain L, Kahn R. Prevalence, correlates, and trajectory of television viewing among infants and toddlers. Pediatrics. 2002;109:634–42. pmid:11927708
  15. 15. Conners N, Tripathi S, Clubb R, Bradley R. Maternal characteristics associated with television viewing habits of low-income preschool children. Journal of Family Studies. 2007;16:415–25.
  16. 16. Vandewater E, Rideout V, Wartella E, Huang X, Lee J, Shim M. Digital childhood: electronic media and technology use among infants, toddlers and preschoolers. Pediatrics. 2007;119:1006–15.
  17. 17. Thompson A, Adair L, Bentley M. Maternal characteristics and perception of temperament associated with infant TV exposure. Pediatrics. 2013;131:390–7.
  18. 18. Dennison BA, Erb TA, Jenkins PL. Television viewing and television in bedroom associated with overweight risk among low-income preschool children. Pediatrics. 2002;109(6):1028–35. pmid:12042539
  19. 19. Veldhuis L, van Grieken A, Renders C, HiraSing R, Raat H. Parenting style, the home environment, and screen time of 5-year old children: the 'Be Active, Eat Right' study. Plos ONE. 2014;9:e88486. pmid:24533092
  20. 20. Spurrier NJ, Magarey AA, Golley R, Curnow F, Sawyer MG. Relationships between the home environment and physical actvity and dietary patterns of preschool children: a cross-sectional study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2013;5:31.
  21. 21. Kourbala G, Kondaki K, Liarigkovinos T, Manios Y. Factors associated with television time in toddlers and preschoolers in Greece: the GENESIS study. Journal of Public Health. 2009;31:222–30. pmid:19224946
  22. 22. Xu H, Wen LM, Rissel C. Associations of maternal influences with outdoor play and screen time of two-year olds: findings from the Healthy Beginnings Trial. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health. 2014;50:680–6. pmid:24893682
  23. 23. Darling N, Steinberg L. Parenting style as context: an integrative model. Psychological Bulletin. 1993;113:487–96.
  24. 24. Radesky JS, Silverstein M, Zuckerman B, Christakis DA. Infant self-regulation and early childhood media exposure. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e1172–e8. pmid:24733868
  25. 25. Simons LG. Linking mother-father differences in parenting to a typology of family parenting styles and adolescent outcomes. Journal of Family Issues. 2007;28(2):212–41.
  26. 26. Bayly B, Gartstein M. Mother's and father's reports on their child's temperament: does gender matter? Infant Behavior and Development. 2013;36(1):171–5. pmid:23260988
  27. 27. Holloway D, Green L, Livingstone S. Zero to eight. Young children and their internet use. LSE, London: EU Kinds Online, 2013.
  28. 28. Nevski E, Siibak A. The role of parents and parental mediation on 0-3-year olds digital play with smart devices: Estonian parents' attitudes and practices. Early years. 2016;36:227–41.
  29. 29. Kostyrka-Allchorne K, Cooper NR, Simpson A. Touchscreen generation: children's current media use, parental supervision methods and attitudes towards contemporary media. Acta Paediatrica. 2017;106:654–62. pmid:27987374
  30. 30. Taylor BJ, Heath A-LM, Galland BC, Gray AR, Lawrence JA, Sayers R, et al. Prevention of Overweight in Infancy ( study: a randomised controlled trial of sleep, food and activity interventions for preventing overweight from birth. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:942. pmid:22182309
  31. 31. Taylor BJ, Gray AR, Galland BC, Heath A-L, Lawrence JA, Sayers RM, et al. Targeting sleep, food, and activity in infants for obesity prevention: an RCT. Pediatrics. 2017;139(3):e20162037. pmid:28242860
  32. 32. Salmond C, Crampton P, Atkinson J. NZDep2006 Index of Deprivation User's Manual. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Public Health, 2007.
  33. 33. Cox J, Holden J, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression: development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. British Journal of Psychiatry. 1987;150:782–6. pmid:3651732
  34. 34. Murray D, Cox JL. Screening for depression during pregnancy with the Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDDS). Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology. 1990;8:99–107.
  35. 35. de Onis M. The use of anthropometry in the prevention of childhood overweight and obesity. International Journal of Obesity. 2004;28(Suppl 3):S81–S5.
  36. 36. WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group. WHO child growth standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Paediatricia. 2006;Suppl 450:76–85.
  37. 37. Maddison R, Ni Mhurchu C, Jian Y, Vander Hoorn S, Rodgers S, Lawes CMM, et al. International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and New Zealand Physical Activity Questionnaire (NZPAQ): a doubly labeled water validation. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2007;4:62. pmid:18053188
  38. 38. IPAQ Research Committee. Guidelines for data processing and analysis of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). 2005.
  39. 39. Galland BC, Kennedy GJ, Mitchell RA, Taylor BJ. Algorithms for using an activity-based accelerometer for identification of infant sleep-wake states during nap studies. Sleep Medicine. 2012;13(6):743–51. pmid:22542788
  40. 40. Meredith-Jones K, Williams SM, Galland BC, Kennedy G, Taylor RW. 24hr accelerometry: Impact of sleep-screening methods on estimates of physical activity and sedentary time. Journal of Sport Sciences. 2015;21:1–7 (Epub ahead of print).
  41. 41. Robinson C, Mandleco B, Olsen S, Hart C. Authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting practices: development of a new measure. Psychological Reports. 1995;77:819–30.
  42. 42. Rowe D, Plomin R. Temperament in early childhood. Journal of Personality Assessment. 1977;41:150–6. pmid:856967
  43. 43. American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Public Education. Media Use by Children Younger Than 2 Years. Pediatrics. 2011;128:1040–5. pmid:22007002
  44. 44. Sterne JAC, White IR, Carlin JB, Spratt M, Royston P, Kenward MG, et al. Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls. BMJ. 2009;338:b2393. pmid:19564179
  45. 45. Jago R, Davison K, Thompson J, Page A, Brockman R, Fox K. Parental sedentary restriction, maternal parenting style, and television viewing among 10-11-year-olds. Pediatrics. 2011;128:e572–e8. pmid:21859910
  46. 46. Mistry KB, Minkovitz CS, Strobino DM, Borzekowski DLG. Children’s television exposure and behavioral and social outcomes at 5.5 years: does timing of exposure matter? Pediatrics. 2007;120(4):762–9. pmid:17908763
  47. 47. Dennison BA, Russo TJ, Burdick PA, Jenkins PL. An intervention to reduce television viewing by preschool children. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. 2004;158(2):170–6.
  48. 48. Mendelsohn AL, Dreyer BP, Brockmeyer CA, Berkule-Silberman SB, Huberman HS, Tomopoulos S. Randomized controlled trial of primary care pedatric parenting programs. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. 2011;165(1):42–8.
  49. 49. Hoyos Cillero I, Jago R. Systematic review of correlates of screen-viewing among young children. Preventive Medicine. 2010;51(1):3–10. pmid:20417227
  50. 50. De Craemer M, De Decker E, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Vereecken C, Deforche B, Manios Y, et al. Correlates of energy balance-related behaviours in preschool children: a systematic review. Obesity Reviews. 2012;13(Suppl 1):13–28.
  51. 51. Lapierre MA, Piotrowski JT, Linebarger DL. Background television in the homes of US children. Pediatrics. 2012;130:839–46. pmid:23027166
  52. 52. Anderson DR, Pempek TA. Television and very young children. The American Behavioral Scientist. 2005;48:505–22.
  53. 53. Anderson DR, Field DE, Collins PA, Lorch EP, Nathan JG. Estimates of young children's time with television: a methodological comparison of parent reports with time-lapse video home observation. Child Development. 1985;56:1345–57. pmid:4053746
  54. 54. Borzekowski DLG, Robinson TN. Viewing the viewers: ten video cases of children's television viewing behaviors. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 1999;43:506–28.