Parenting in Cyberspace: What Parents Know and What They Don’tDaniel H Erickson, Noel A. Card & Sheri A. Bauman

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONAAbstract

BackgroundIn addition to entertainment purposes, students find many educational andsocial benefits to using technology. As family relationships become moreinfused with technology, dynamics are likely to change. Though parentshave generally positive views on technology (Wong, 2011), children’stechnology use and behavior still needs to be regulated. Indeed, parentsfind themselves faced with the responsibility to ensure their children haveaccess to educational resources while also protecting them from risks anddistractions (Davies, 2011). Yet, attempts to restrict child access totechnology seems to have little effect on actual usage (Lee & Chae, 2007).The purpose of this study is to evidence that parents are largely unaware oftheir children’s behavior in cyberspace, while echoing researcherssentiments of the need for more valiant attempts at effective monitoringand regulation of technology.

Methods

Conclusions and Implications

AcknowledgementsThe authors thank the National Science Foundation for supporting this research (NSF 1019196).The authors acknowledge funding from the Frances McClelland Institute for Children, Youth, and Families.A PDF version of this academic poster is available at: http://mcclellandinstitute.arizona.edu/posters

Data were collected from 1,372 students grades 3-8 in SouthernArizona school districts. The students primarily identified as either Hispanic(42%) or Caucasian (26%). Nearly half (668) of parents also participatedin this study. Both parents and students were asked to complete a survey

As seen in Figure 1, children self-reported higher frequencies of technologicalactivities than their parents perceived for all but “looking up informationonline”.

Results

Further, parents reported higher frequency of parental regulation than theirchildren reported (as seen in Figure 3). Though difficult to ascertain actualfrequency from self-report items, the difference in perceptions of children andparents with regards to parenting behaviors regarding technology is of note.

These results suggest that parents largely underestimate their child’sactivities in cyberspace, and largely overestimate their own regulativeefforts. Technological advances will continue to flourish, and society’scivilization of cyberspace will only become more established. Simplyforbidding or restricting technology use will not be the effective parenting.Though uncharted territory, parents are accountable to step up to theirresponsibilities of parenting in cyberspace.

A more excellent way of parenting in the cyber-age includes opencommunication about online behaviors and more comprehensive monitoringof when and how children are using technology. In addition, takingresponsibility to not only install

As technology continues to permeate society, individuals and families willneed to adapt accordingly. Regardless of a parent’s esteem for or distrustof the cyber-world, parents in our current society face the challenge ofparenting in cyberspace. From a sample of 668 parents and students,students’ self-reported behavior technology usage was significantly greaterthan their parents perceived. Parents also reported more frequent onlinemonitoring than their children reported. These results suggest thatparents are either largely unaware of or greatly underestimate theirchildren’s use of technology. Though parents being largely unaware ofchildren’s social is not a new phenomenon, further efforts are needed toguide and protect children in cyberspace and establish responsible cyber-citizens.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Send/ReceiveEmails

Send/ReceiveTexts

Play Games onInternet

Look upInformation on

Internet

Use SocialNetworking Sites(like Facebook)

Shop OnlineFr

equen

cy –

0(N

ever

) to

4(D

aily

)

Child Use of Technology (Child Report vs. Parent Report)

Child Parent

Child use of social networking sites and sending or receiving text messagesincreased by grade. Though parents’ perceptions of child’s sending orreceiving text messages and visiting social networking sites show a similartrend, parents consistently perceived lower frequencies of use than theirchildren reported (as seen in Figure 2). Of note is that many socialnetworking sites, such as Facebook, have a minimum age requirement of 13,yet an average of 33% of students younger than 7th grade self-reportedhaving a Facebook profile.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Parents limit amount oftime child spends on

computer

Parents check the historyof websites child visits

Parents put filters orblocks on home computer

Parents talk with childrenabout appropriate behavior

using technology

Freq

uen

cy –

0(N

ever

) to

4 (

Daily

)

Parental Technology Supervision (Child Report vs. Parent Report)

Male Student Female Student Parent of Male Student Parent of Female Student

filters or blocks on theInternet, but also taking thetime to model and teach goodcitizenry and appropriateonline behavior to the risinggeneration of cyber-citizens.By bridging the digital gap andestablishing more effectiveparenting techniques, childrencan benefit from safely usingtechnology.

addressing issues such as generaltechnology use, perceptions of parenttechnology use (for children) andperceptions of child technology use (forparents). Reported results come frompaired-samples t-test analyses conductedto compare self-reports with perceptionsof either the child (for parents) or theparent (for children) use of technology.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Freq

uen

cy –

0(N

ever

) to

4 (

Daily

)

Child Use of Two Types of Technology by Grade(Child Report vs. Parent Report)

3rd

Grade

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

4th

Grade5th

Grade6th

Grade7th

Grade8th

Grade

Send/Receive Text Messages Visit Social Networking Sites (like Facebook)

3rd

Grade4th

Grade5th

Grade6th

Grade7th

Grade8th

Grade

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Fig

ure

1

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Ch

ild

Pare

nt

Fig

ure

2

Fig

ure

3