Suchergebnisse

Social media apps are useful sources of information. They help us catch up with the activities of friends, news, current affairs, government COVID updates and the latest happenings in celebrity and sport. But during the pandemic, you may have felt you spend too much time on social media. On occasion you may have seen the phrase "social media detox" posted by users who want to stop their social media use entirely for a period of time, presumably because they feel that it's become excessive. With concerns about the frequency of social media use, particularly among young people, allied with language such as "detox", it's no surprise researchers who work in the field of addictions have started to assess whether social media engagement might be an activity which could cross a threshold from frequent use to addictive behaviour. In our new study, we investigated whether people who use social media a lot display one key aspect of addiction – something called an attentional bias.

BackgroundChildren with intellectual disabilities have high rates of behaviour problems. This study explored parents' causal beliefs and attributions for general problematic child behaviour in children with different aetiologies of intellectual disabilities.Materials and MethodsTen parents of children with intellectual disabilities participated in interviews about their child's problematic behaviour.ResultsThematic analysis using NVivo revealed that parents viewed their child's problematic behaviour not only as caused by the child's intellectual disabilities but also by other causes unrelated to the intellectual disabilities, as well as by aspects of the social environmental context. Some causes were viewed as stable and uncontrollable and others as unstable and controllable. In addition, parents showed a strong sense of responsibility for child behaviour.ConclusionsParents of children with intellectual disabilities do not solely interpret their child's problematic behaviour through the intellectual disabilities but incorporate the environment and causes and attributions that are not related to the intellectual disabilities, which may help to promote more effective parenting.

AbstractThis study assessed the concurrent and prospective (fall to spring) associations between peer victimization and four humor styles, two of which are adaptive (affiliative and self‐enhancing) and two maladaptive (aggressive and self‐defeating). Participants were 1234 adolescents (52 percent female) aged 11–13 years, drawn from six secondary schools inEngland. Self‐reports and peer reports of peer victimization were collected, as were self‐reports of humor styles. In cross‐sectional analyses, peer victimization was associated with all four humor styles, most strongly with self‐defeating and affiliative humor. Across the school year, peer victimization was associated with an increase in self‐defeating humor and a decrease in affiliative humor (and vice‐versa). These results have implications for models of humor development and how we understand the continuity of peer victimization.

Background: Hate-motivated behaviour (HMB) ranges from microaggressions to criminal acts and is a public health concern with wide-ranging consequences. Aims: The current study aimed to examine the mental health correlates of HMB perpetration, victimisation and co-occurring victimisation/perpetration. Methods: Participants ( n = 447) completed an online cross-sectional survey assessing demographic factors, HMB (perpetration and victimisation), positive mental wellbeing and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Results: HMB victimisation was associated with lower positive mental wellbeing and increased symptoms of anxiety and depression. However, neither HMB perpetration nor co-occurring perpetration/victimisation were associated with any of the three mental health outcome measures. Conclusion: Experiencing HMB as a victim is linked to increased psychological distress. Additional research, which focuses on sampling populations who are known to be at greater risk for involvement in HMB, is needed to fully understand the impact of the victim-offender overlap on mental health outcomes.

Background: Paediatric recommendations to limit children's and adolescents' screen based media use (SBMU) to less than two hours per day appear to have gone unheeded. Given the associated adverse physical and mental health outcomes of SBMU it is understandable that concern is growing worldwide. However, because the majority of studies measuring SBMU have focused on TV viewing, computer use, video game playing, or a combination of these the true extent of total SBMU (including non-sedentary hand held devices) and time spent on specific screen activities remains relatively unknown. This study assesses the amount of time Australian children and adolescents spend on all types of screens and specific screen activities. Methods: We administered an online instrument specifically developed to gather data on all types of SBMU and SBMU activities to 2,620 (1373 males and 1247 females) 8 to 16 year olds from 25 Australian government and non-government primary and secondary schools. Results: We found that 45% of 8 year olds to 80% of 16 year olds exceeded the recommended < 2 hours per day for screen use. A series of hierarchical linear models demonstrated different relationships between the degree to which total SBMU and SBMU on specific activities (TV viewing, Gaming, Social Networking, and Web Use) exceeded the < 2 hours recommendation in relation to sex and age. Conclusions: Current paediatric recommendations pertaining to screen use exposure may no longer be tenable because screen based media are central in the everyday lives of children and adolescents. In any reappraisal of SBMU exposure times, researchers, educators and health professionals need to take cognizance of the extent to which screen use differs across specific screen activity, sex, and age.

Abstract Background Paediatric recommendations to limit children's and adolescents' screen based media use (SBMU) to less than two hours per day appear to have gone unheeded. Given the associated adverse physical and mental health outcomes of SBMU it is understandable that concern is growing worldwide. However, because the majority of studies measuring SBMU have focused on TV viewing, computer use, video game playing, or a combination of these the true extent of total SBMU (including non-sedentary hand held devices) and time spent on specific screen activities remains relatively unknown. This study assesses the amount of time Australian children and adolescents spend on all types of screens and specific screen activities. Methods We administered an online instrument specifically developed to gather data on all types of SBMU and SBMU activities to 2,620 (1373 males and 1247 females) 8 to 16 year olds from 25 Australian government and non-government primary and secondary schools. Results We found that 45% of 8 year olds to 80% of 16 year olds exceeded the recommended < 2 hours per day for SBMU. A series of hierarchical linear models demonstrated different relationships between the degree to which total SBMU and SBMU on specific activities (TV viewing, Gaming, Social Networking, and Web Use) exceeded the < 2 hours recommendation in relation to sex and age. Conclusions Current paediatric recommendations pertaining to SBMU may no longer be tenable because screen based media are central in the everyday lives of children and adolescents. In any reappraisal of SBMU exposure times, researchers, educators and health professionals need to take cognizance of the extent to which SBMU differs across specific screen activity, sex, and age.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric recommendations to limit children's and adolescents' screen based media use (SBMU) to less than two hours per day appear to have gone unheeded. Given the associated adverse physical and mental health outcomes of SBMU it is understandable that concern is growing worldwide. However, because the majority of studies measuring SBMU have focused on TV viewing, computer use, video game playing, or a combination of these the true extent of total SBMU (including non-sedentary hand held devices) and time spent on specific screen activities remains relatively unknown. This study assesses the amount of time Australian children and adolescents spend on all types of screens and specific screen activities. METHODS: We administered an online instrument specifically developed to gather data on all types of SBMU and SBMU activities to 2,620 (1373 males and 1247 females) 8 to 16 year olds from 25 Australian government and non-government primary and secondary schools. RESULTS: We found that 45% of 8 year olds to 80% of 16 year olds exceeded the recommended < 2 hours per day for SBMU. A series of hierarchical linear models demonstrated different relationships between the degree to which total SBMU and SBMU on specific activities (TV viewing, Gaming, Social Networking, and Web Use) exceeded the < 2 hours recommendation in relation to sex and age. CONCLUSIONS: Current paediatric recommendations pertaining to SBMU may no longer be tenable because screen based media are central in the everyday lives of children and adolescents. In any reappraisal of SBMU exposure times, researchers, educators and health professionals need to take cognizance of the extent to which SBMU differs across specific screen activity, sex, and age.