Chapter 32: Quiz

1. The strongest evidence-based recommendation about children and screens is: - A) No screens ever - B) Exactly 1 hour per day - C) No screens in the bedroom or in the hour before bedtime — blue light disrupts sleep - D) Only educational content

Answer: C. The sleep evidence is the most solid finding in the children's screen time literature.

2. The AAP's "1 hour per day for ages 2–5" recommendation is: - A) Based on a large RCT showing harm at 61 minutes - B) A consensus recommendation, not an evidence-derived threshold - C) The same in every country - D) Based on brain imaging studies

Answer: B. No study identifies a specific threshold. The guideline is a consensus estimate.

3. Research on Sesame Street viewing found: - A) It harms children's development - B) It is associated with better cognitive and language outcomes in preschoolers - C) It has no effect - D) It only helps children over 5

Answer: B. Educational content genuinely educates — one of the most consistent findings supporting "content matters more than time."

4. The "screens vs. what?" comparison problem means: - A) All screens are the same - B) The effect of screen time depends on what it replaces — if it displaces outdoor play, the effect differs from replacing boredom in an unsafe environment - C) Screens always cause harm - D) Parents should never ask this question

Answer: B. Screen time's impact depends entirely on context, including what activities it displaces.

5. The chapter's overall verdict on children's screen time is: - A) Screens are definitely harmful - B) Screens are completely safe - C) Mostly unresolved — sleep disruption is solid, content matters more than time, specific thresholds aren't evidence-based, and the "screens damage brains" narrative overstates the evidence - D) Only applies to teenagers

Answer: C. The evidence supports specific, practical recommendations (sleep, content quality) but not the panicked narrative or specific time limits.