On Thursday February 5th, members braved torrential rain to come to the club to discuss: ” What impact is digital technology and AI having on child development? There’s a lot of chatter on the Internet about how too much screen time and the use of AI are damaging children’s mental development. Is this true? What is the evidence? Is the supposed damage irreversible?.”
Screen Time:
We first examined the supposed detrimental effects of children spending a lot of time looking at screens, which is a hot topic at present. Google’s Gemini picked out recent research papers e.g.:
>>Early Screen Time Linked to Long-Term Brain Changes, Teen Anxiety (December 1925) https://neurosciencenews.com/anxiety-neurodevelopment-screen-time-30079/ this study apparently demonstrated that “Children exposed to high levels of screen time before age two showed changes in brain development that were linked to slower decision-making and increased anxiety by their teenage years”
This article did not give details of the study’s methodology, but we noted that 168 children were monitored over 10 years.
>>Correlation Between Screen Time and Cognitive Development in Children (August 2025) https://ijmpr.in/article/correlation-between-screen-time-and-cognitive-development-in-children-1318/ In this study they used questionnaires and complex statistics on on the answers from 300 children to justify their conclusion that: ” … children exposed to more than three hours of screen time daily performed significantly worse in cognitive assessments compared to those with limited or moderate exposure” In the discussion they remarked that “Several studies have reported that prolonged screen time is associated with delayed speech, reduced attention span, impaired memory, and lower academic performance“
But is this a real effect? Chris (having had a scientific background) remarked that correlation does not necessarily mean causation. To conclude cause and effect, you would need to study two identical groups of children which differed only in the amount of screen time they were exposed to. This is impossible. Note: there is a statistically significant rise in both ice cream sales and skin cancer symptoms during the summer. Both are related to warmer weather but not to each other: ice creams do not cause skin cancer (See BBC article referenced below)
This BBC article (July 2025) clearly explains how difficult it is to obtain reliable evidence of harm: What screen time does to children’s brains is more complicated than it seems https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d0l40v551o “… there is simply not enough science to make a definitive recommendation (about screen time) , and this is dividing the scientific community – despite a strong societal push to limit children’s access.”
Despite the lack of evidence, some countries (e.g. Australia) are banning smartphones, while screentime guidelines have been rolled out: Helping Kids Find Balance: Simple Ways to Bring Calm After Screen Time https://instituteofchildpsychology.com/helping-kids-find-balance-simple-ways-to-bring-calm-after-screen-time/
We noted:
- Time spent looking at a screen reduces the time for other activities.
- The quality of screen content is important. Using an educational app is different to watching a mindless cartoon.
- Exposure to pornography at a very young age is likely to adversely affect behaviour
- Socioeconomic factors, which are hard to measure, must come into play.
Digital Technology and Education in General
Has the use of digital technology improved standards of education? Data from the US suggest not.
The U.S. spent $30 billion to ditch textbooks for laptops and tablets: The result is the first generation less cognitively capable than their parents https://fortune.com/2026/02/21/laptops-tablets-schools-gen-z-less-cognitively-capable-parents-first-time-cellphone-bans-standardized-test-scores/ “In 2002, Maine became the first state to implement a statewide laptop program….in 2024, the U.S. spent more than $30 billion putting laptops and tablets in schools. But more than a quarter-century and numerous evolving models of technology later..Gen Z is less cognitively capable than previous generations, despite its unprecedented access to technology…is the first generation in modern history to score lower on standardised tests than the previous one.“
However, one might ask: Did the laptops and tablets use well designed educational software? What are the “Standardised tests” measuring? Tests designed for the 20th Century world might not apply in the 21st. We pointed out that IQ tests are not good at measuring the full range of human intelligence, but are still used today.
AI and child development
We looked at this article from the Economist (2025) At home and at school, AI is transforming childhood https://www.economist.com/briefing/2025/12/04/at-home-and-at-school-ai-is-transforming-childhood. It notes that:
Well designed AI apps can have a positive effect: “It is early days, but makers of AI tools point to signs of success, particularly in reading. Participants in a pilot in India for Google’s Read Along app were 60% likelier to improve their proficiency than those in a control group. A study by the World Bank found that students in Nigeria using Microsoft’s Copilot in the first year of high school improved their English by the equivalent of nearly two years’ ordinary schooling. Primary-school children in Taiwan using CoolE Bot, a language-learning app, showed a significant improvement in English; shy students reported that practising with the bot was less intimidating than talking to a human teacher.”
On the other hand, the use of general apps such as ChatGPT, offloads thinking and enables cheating and plagiarism. (We discussed this effect during a previous JCC discussion: https://javeacomputerclub.com/2026/02/14/yes-ai-is-changing-the-way-that-we-think/) AI toys are rolling out because: “Families and children are no longer satisfied with passivity. They crave proactive partners,” and as you might expect, some of these toys have developed troublesome behaviours. If you grew up with a talking toy, the next logical step would be to have AI friends or even romantic partners. These are already easy to sign up for, and you can specify the characteristics of your dream companion, down to reassuring voice and super hot appearance. But will young people be able to have healthy relationships with real, imperfect people when they are so used to interacting with their perfect AI partner?
We looked at the broader picture – The effects of digital technology on Western society in general, such as seeing families on their phones at meals, and generational differences in behaviour. Children born before the 1970s had more independence and less “parenting” when growing up, with the freedom to disappear on their own all day. This fostered independence. Younger generations have had the challenges of growing up in a digital age. Older generations tend to look down at the younger ones as “snowflakes” but are younger generations truly weaker than older ones? https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20220218-are-younger-generations-truly-weaker-than-older-ones Perhaps it’s just a myth and a matter of perspective. If the Internet suddenly stopped working, and we had no electricity, would the younger generations be able to cope? Let’s hope they don’t have to find out, but there will always be those who have “got what it takes” and those who haven’t.
Chris returned to our very human tendency to confuse correlation with cause by referring to the interesting phenomenon of high levels of shortsightedness among the Chinese youth. Why 90% of China’s youth suffer from near-sightedness –
To say that Asia is having an eye problem is an understatement. https://www.zmescience.com/feature-post/myopia-eye-china/ Is it genetic? Or is it because in a highly competitive educational system, young Chinese are straining their eyes staring at books (and now screens), too much? The probable answer is more interesting than that, and we seem to have misunderstood what is behind shortsightedness for centuries!
Christine Betterton-Jones – Knowledge Junkie