New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Pediatricians: No More than 2 Hours Screen Time Daily for Kids

The American Academy of Pediatrics' new guidelines also advise against TVs or Internet access in children's bedrooms

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Children should be limited to less than two hours of entertainment-based screen time per day, and shouldn't have TVs or Internet access in their bedrooms, according to new guidelines from pediatricians.

The new policy statement was released by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) today (Oct. 28) in the journal Pediatrics.

The average 8-year-old spends eight hours a day using various forms of media, and teenagers often surpass 11 hours of media consumption daily, according to the authors of the AAP statement. More than three quarters of teenagers have cell phones, and teens ages 13 to 17 send an average of 3,364 texts per month. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Several studies have linked high media consumption with poor health outcomes. For example, children with TVs in their bedrooms are more likely to be obese.

But teasing apart cause and effect in those studies is difficult, said Lisa Guernsey, director of the Early Education Initiative at the New America Foundation and the author of "Screen Time: How Electronic Media — From Baby Videos to Educational Software — Affects Your Young Child," (Basic Books, 2012), who was not involved establishing the new guidelines.

New rules

In addition to limiting all entertainment screen time — including TV, the Internet and various smart devices — to less than two hours daily, the guidelines recommend children under age 2 get no screen time.

Parents should watch TV shows and movies with children, and monitor their media usage, according to the recommendations. Finally, families should define clear rules, such as curfews for Internet use, or limits on cell phone use during dinner.

"I think that many parents are clueless about media and the impact of media on their kids," said Dr. Vic Strasburger, the policy statement's lead author and a professor of pediatrics at the University of New Mexico.

Children shouldn't have Internet access or televisions in their rooms, because that makes it too hard for parents to monitor kids' media use, Strasburger said.

"If you have a 14-year-old son and he has an Internet connection in his bedroom, I guarantee you, he's looking at pornography," Strasburger told LiveScience.

Balanced approach

Unlike earlier AAP policy statements, the new recommendations acknowledge the benefits of media, such as shows like "Sesame Street" that teach children letters and numbers.

That seems like a more balanced approach, Guernsey said.

Families are "trying to understand how to navigate media instead of being told, 'no, no keep it away from their children,'" Guernsey told LiveScience. "Not only is that unrealistic, it may not be the best way to model good media use with children."

The new guidelines may still be tough for most families to follow, she said.

Still, the recommendations are a good starting point, said Oren Amitay, a psychologist in Toronto.

"The part about watching things with kids is important," because otherwise parents have no idea what their kids are seeing, he said.

Limiting all entertainment screen time to less than two hours per day may be difficult given modern life, but "these are best practices, and you can be flexible," Amitay told LiveScience.

Follow Tia Ghose on Twitter and Google+.Original article on LiveScienceCopyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

LiveScience is one of the biggest and most trusted popular science websites operating today, reporting on the latest discoveries, groundbreaking research and fascinating breakthroughs that impact you and the wider world.

More by LiveScience

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe