Population Study Article | Published:

Technoference: longitudinal associations between parent technology use, parenting stress, and child behavior problems

Pediatric Research (2018) | Download Citation



Background and objectives

Heavy parent digital technology use has been associated with suboptimal parent–child interactions and internalizing/externalizing child behavior, but directionality of associations is unclear. This study aims to investigate longitudinal bidirectional associations between parent technology use and child behavior, and understand whether this is mediated by parenting stress.


Participants included 183 couples with a young child (age 0–5 years, mean = 3.0 years) who completed surveys at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Cross-lagged structural equation models of parent technology interference during parent–child activities, parenting stress, and child externalizing and internalizing behavior were tested.


Controlling for potential confounders, we found that across all time points (1) greater child externalizing behavior predicted greater technology interference, via greater parenting stress; and (2) technology interference often predicted greater externalizing behavior. Although associations between child internalizing behavior and technology interference were relatively weaker, bidirectional associations were more consistent for child withdrawal behaviors.


Our results suggest bidirectional dynamics in which (a) parents, stressed by their child’s difficult behavior, may then withdraw from parent–child interactions with technology and (b) this higher technology use during parent–child interactions may influence externalizing and withdrawal behaviors over time.

  • Subscribe to Pediatric Research for full access:



Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

Additional information

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


  1. 1.

    Ling R. The mobile connection: the cell phone’s impact on society. (Morgan Kaufmann, Massachusetts, 2004).

  2. 2.

    Radesky, J. S. et al. Parent perspectives on their mobile technology use: the excitement and exhaustion of parenting while connected. J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 37, 694–701 (2016).

  3. 3.

    Oduor E., Neustaedter C., Odom W., Tang A., Moallem N., Tory M., et al. (eds.) The frustrations and benefits of mobile device usage in the home when co-present with family members. In Proc. of the 2016 ACM C onference on Designing Interactive Systems (ACM, New york, 2016).

  4. 4.

    McDaniel, B. T. & Coyne, S. M. “Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 5, 85 (2016).

  5. 5.

    McDaniel, B. T., Galovan, A. M., Cravens, J. D. & Drouin, M. “Technoference” and implications for mothers’ and fathers’ couple and coparenting relationship quality. Comput. Human. Behav. 80, 303–313 (2018).

  6. 6.

    Przybylski, A. K. & Weinstein, N. Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 30, 237–246 (2013).

  7. 7.

    Misra, S., Cheng, L., Genevie, J. & Yuan, M. The iPhone effect: the quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environ. Behav. 48, 275–298 (2016).

  8. 8.

    Lauricella A. R., et al. The common sense census: plugged-in parents of tweens and teens (Common Sense Media, California, 2017).

  9. 9.

    Wartella E., Rideout, V., Lauricella, A. Parenting in the Age of Digital Technology http://cmhd.northwestern.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ParentingAgeDigitalTechnology.REVISED.FINAL_.2014.pdf. 2014. Accessed date October 1, 2017.

  10. 10.

    McDaniel, B. T. & Coyne, S. M. Technology interference in the parenting of young children: implications for mothers’ perceptions of coparenting. Soc. Sci. J. 53, 435–443 (2016).

  11. 11.

    Bornstein, M. H., Tamis-Lemonda, C. S., Hahn, C. S. & Haynes, O. M. Maternal responsiveness to young children at three ages: longitudinal analysis of a multidimensional, modular, and specific parenting construct. Dev. Psychol. 44, 867–874 (2008).

  12. 12.

    Johnson, S. B., Riley, A. W., Granger, D. A. & Riis, J. The science of early life toxic stress for pediatric practice and advocacy. Pediatrics 131, 319–327 (2013).

  13. 13.

    Davidov, M. & Grusec, J. E. Untangling the links of parental responsiveness to distress and warmth to child outcomes. Child Dev. 77, 44–58 (2006).

  14. 14.

    Radesky, J. S. et al. Patterns of mobile device use by caregivers and children during meals in fast food restaurants. Pediatrics 133, e843–e849 (2014).

  15. 15.

    Radesky, J. et al. Maternal mobile device use during a structured parent-child interaction task. Acad. Pediatr. 15, 238–244 (2015).

  16. 16.

    Hiniker A., et al. (eds) Texting while parenting: how adults use mobile phones while caring for children at the playground. In Proc. of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (ACM, New York, 2015).

  17. 17.

    McDaniel, B. T. & Radesky, J. S. Technoference: parent distraction with technology and associations with child behavior problems. Child Dev. 89, 100–109 (2018).

  18. 18.

    McDaniel, B. T., Coyne, S. M. & Holmes, E. K. New mothers and media use: associations between blogging, social networking, and maternal well-being. Matern. Child Health J. 16, 1509–1517 (2012).

  19. 19.

    Sameroff, A. Transactional models in early social relations. Hum. Dev. 18, 65–79 (1975).

  20. 20.

    McDaniel B. T. "Technoference”: Everyday intrusions and interruptions of technology in couple and family relationships. Family communication in the age of digital and social media (Peter Lang Publishing, New York, 2015).

  21. 21.

    Achenbach T. M., Rescorla L. A. Manual for the ASEBA preschool forms & profiles: An integrated system of multi-informant assessment; Child behavior checklist for ages 1 1/2-5; Language development survey; Caregiver-teacher report form. (University of Vermont; Burlington, 2000).

  22. 22.

    Abidin, R. R. Parenting stress index. (Psychological Assessment Resources. Inc, Odessa, FL, 1995).

  23. 23.

    Feinberg, M. E., Brown, L. D. & Kan, M. L. A multi-domain self-report measure of coparenting. Parenting 12, 1–21 (2012).

  24. 24.

    Murphy, S. E., Jacobvitz, D. B. & Hazen, N. L. What’s so bad about competitive coparenting? Family-level predictors of children’s externalizing symptoms. J. Child Fam. Stud. 25, 1684–1690 (2016).

  25. 25.

    Radloff, L. S. The CES-D scale a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 1, 385–401 (1977).

  26. 26.

    McDaniel, B. T. & Teti, D. M. Coparenting quality during the first three months after birth: the role of infant sleep quality. J. Fam. Psychol. 26, 886 (2012).

  27. 27.

    Radesky, J. et al. Media and Young Minds. Pediatrics 138, e20162591 (2016).

  28. 28.

    Arbuckle J. L., Wothke W. Am os 4.0 user’s guide (SmallWaters Corporation, Chicago, IL, 1999).

  29. 29.

    Buhi, E. R., Goodson, P. & Neilands, T. B. Structural equation modeling: a primer for health behavior researchers. Am. J. Health Behav. 31, 74–85 (2007).

  30. 30.

    Rosenblum K. L., Dayton C. J., McDonough S. Comm unicating feelings: Links between mothers’ representations of their infants, parenting, and infant emotional development. (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006).

  31. 31.

    Radesky, J. S. L. C., Appugliese, D., Miller, A. L., Lumeng, J. C. & Rosenblum, K. L. Maternal mental representations of the child and mobile phone use during parent-child mealtimes. J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 39, 310–317 (2018). In press.

  32. 32.

    Uhls, Y. T. et al. Five days at outdoor education camp without screens improves preteen skills with nonverbal emotion cues. Comput. Human Behav. 39, 387–392 (2014).

  33. 33.

    Hiniker A., Patel S. N., Kohno T., Kientz J. A. (eds). Why would you do that? Predicting the uses and gratifications behind smartphone-usage behaviors. In Proc of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (ACM, New York, 2016).

  34. 34.

    Bayer, J. B., Dal Cin, S., Campbell, S. W. & Panek, E. Consciousness and self‐regulation in mobile communication. Hum. Commun. Res. 42, 71–97 (2016).

  35. 35.

    Nakamura, T. The action of looking at a mobile phone display as nonverbal behavior/communication: a theoretical perspective. Comput. Human Behav. 43, 68–75 (2015).

  36. 36.

    Brand, M., Young, K. S. & Laier, C. Prefrontal control and Internet addiction: a theoretical model and review of neuropsychological and neuroimaging findings. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 375 (2014).

  37. 37.

    Bayer, J. B. & Campbell, S. W. Texting while driving on automatic: considering the frequency-independent side of habit. Comput. Human. Behav. 28, 2083–2090 (2012).

  38. 38.

    Hinkley, T. et al. Early childhood electronic media use as a predictor of poorer well-being: a prospective cohort study. JAMA Pediatr. 168, 485–492 (2014).

  39. 39.

    Cheever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M. & Chavez, A. Out of sight is not out of mind: the impact of restricting wireless mobile device use on anxiety levels among low, moderate and high users. Comput. Human. Behav. 37, 290–297 (2014).

  40. 40.

    Chesley, N. Blurring boundaries? Linking technology use, spillover, individual distress, and family satisfaction. J. Marriage Fam. 67, 1237–1248 (2005).

  41. 41.

    Harris T. How Technology is Hijacking Your Mind — from a Magician and Google Design Ethicist. https://journal.thriveglobal.com/how-technology-hijacks-peoples-minds-from-a-magician-and-google-s-design-ethicist-56d62ef5edf3 (2016). Accessed date October 1, 2017.

  42. 42.

    Van Deursen, A. J., Bolle, C. L., Hegner, S. M. & Kommers, P. A. Modeling habitual and addictive smartphone behavior: The role of smartphone usage types, emotional intelligence, social stress, self-regulation, age, and gender. Comput. Human. Behav. 45, 411–420 (2015).

  43. 43.

    Hiniker A., Hong S. R., Kohno T., Kientz J. A. (ed.) MyTime: designing and evaluating an intervention for smartphone non-use. In Proc. of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (ACM, New York, 2016).

Download references


College of Health and Human Development, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, and the Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center at The Pennsylvania State University; NIDA (T32DA017629); NICHD (F31 HD084118).

Author information


  1. Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA

    • Brandon T. McDaniel
  2. University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    • Jenny S. Radesky


  1. Search for Brandon T. McDaniel in:

  2. Search for Jenny S. Radesky in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brandon T. McDaniel.

About this article

Publication history







Rights and permissions

To obtain permission to re-use content from this article visit RightsLink.