Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2026 Feb 14;31(1):e70073. doi: 10.1111/infa.70073

Parents' Decisions Regarding Digital Media Use by Their Children Under Three Years Old in the United Arab Emirates

Charles Raffaele 1,✉, Antje von Suchodoletz 2, Bruce D Homer 3, Jessica Castelyn 4, Peter J Johnson 3, Jan L Plass 1
PMCID: PMC12906337  PMID: 41689822

ABSTRACT

As young children's digital media use increases, more research on parents' decisions, such as preferred digital content and mediation strategies, is necessary, particularly with underrepresented populations. The present study analyzed survey data on Arab parents' decisions regarding digital media use of their children under 3 years in the United Arab Emirates. Most children did not use digital media, and those who did predominantly engaged in “watching” activities. Media content focused on early learning activities and Arabic‐language videos. Most parents engaged in digital media together with their child, and joint engagement was linked to less digital media use. The results suggest Arab parents' media decisions included consideration of content and an emphasis on co‐using media with their children. Implications are suggested for policymakers, media developers, and parental guidelines.

1. Introduction

Globally, young children's digital media use continues to increase, with exposure at younger ages and access to a broader range of devices (Mann et al. 2025; Swider‐Cios et al. 2023; Winter et al. 2025). Recent data from various countries showed a continued rise in digital media use among very young children. According to the 2025 Common Sense Media (CSM) census, digital media use by children in the United States (U.S.) aged 0–8 increased between 2017 and 2024 (Mann et al. 2025). Similar trends were found across Europe. In the United Kingdom (U.K.), nearly all children aged 0–3 years live in households with Wi‐Fi, have access to multiple digital devices, and engage in a range of digital activities (Winter et al. 2025). Likewise, by ages 2–3, over 90% of children in Germany used digital media (Paulus et al. 2024), and more than 75% of children in Switzerland have used a smartphone (Schmid et al. 2025). Comparable trends were also observed in the Middle East, where children aged 1–3 in Saudi Arabia spent more time using digital media than reading or being read to (Alroqi et al. 2021).

1.1. Child and Family Influences on Young Children's Digital Media Use

Previous research identified a range of child, parent, and household characteristics associated with children's digital media use (e.g., Mann et al. 2025; Winter et al. 2025). Unsurprisingly, digital media use increased with age, with the rise already evident in the earliest years of childhood. CSM reported that children under two spent about 1 h per day on digital media, increasing to roughly 2 h for children aged 2–4 (Mann et al. 2025). Similar trends were observed in a prospective cohort study in Australia, which found a steady increase in average daily digital media exposure: approximately 1 h at 6 months, 1.5 h at 12 months, 2.5 h at 24 months, and nearly 3 h by 36 months (Brushe et al. 2023). Comparable age‐related increases have also been reported in Germany and Switzerland (Paulus et al. 2024; Schmid et al. 2025). Findings on gender differences in children's digital media use have been inconclusive. According to CSM, boys aged 0–8 spent over 30 min more on digital media daily than girls. In contrast, the abovementioned study in Australia found that girls were exposed to slightly more digital media than boys, with a 12 min difference at 6 months, narrowing to 5 min by 24 months (Brushe et al. 2023). A study conducted in Germany, however, found no evidence of gender differences in young children's digital media use (Paulus et al. 2024).

Regarding parent and household characteristics, previous research examined associations between household socioeconomic status (SES, e.g., parental education, household access to economic resources) and children's digital media use (Livingstone et al. 2015). CSM found that children with lower parental education or lower income levels had higher digital media use compared to peers from more educated or higher‐income families (Mann et al. 2025). Similarly, the longitudinal study from Australia reported substantial disparities in digital media use based on maternal education (Brushe et al. 2023). At 6 months, children from low‐education households were exposed to 1 h 42 min more digital media per day than those from high‐education households. Although the gap narrowed by 24 months as digital media use increased across both groups, children from low‐education households still averaged nearly 45 min more daily digital media use. SES has also been associated with digital media use in other regions. In Argentina and China, lower SES was associated with greater digital media exposure, including passive and active TV use and increased use of devices for non‐educational purposes (Gago‐Galvagno et al. 2023; Liu et al. 2025). These findings point to a consistent early‐emerging link between lower SES and increased digital media use in young children.

1.2. Parental Mediation Strategies and Their Associations With Children's Digital Media Use

As digital technologies become increasingly embedded in early childhood environments, parents are faced with decisions about whether to incorporate them into daily family life, and if so, then to what extent. The widespread accessibility of digital media devices raises challenges concerning appropriate content, duration, and frequency of use, as well as the management of potential negative effects associated with media exposure (Eichen et al. 2021). Building on Valkenburg et al. ’s (1999) work, Clark (2011) proposed a parental mediation theory for the digital age, emphasizing parents' active role in managing children's digital experiences. She identified four types of mediation: restrictive mediation (setting rules and consequences), active mediation (discussing content), co‐viewing (being present without necessarily engaging), and participatory learning (interacting with and through digital media together).

Restrictive mediation is particularly relevant in early childhood, when children depend on their parents and the responsibility for managing both risks and benefits is placed on the parent (Rodideal 2020). Survey data indicate that many parents of young children implement restrictive strategies, although usage varies across countries. In the U.S., restrictive mediation appeared less common under the age of two, but increased with age. CSM found that 75% of parents did not set time limits and 50% did not restrict content for children under two (Mann et al. 2025). Only 4% used software to limit media use at that age, compared to nearly one‐third of parents of 5‐ to 8‐year‐olds. Content restrictions were also more common among parents of older children (over 50%) than those of very young children (20%). In contrast, survey data from Austria showed higher uptakes of restrictive strategies among parents of toddlers (12–47 months): 73% reported controlling digital media duration, 47% restricted use to specific timings, and 92% imposed content‐related rules (Eichen et al. 2021). These findings highlight considerable variation in parental restrictive mediation practices across cultural contexts.

Importantly, restrictive mediation is often used in combination with active mediation. A systematic review of studies published between 2017 and 2020 concluded that families with young children (0–3 years) typically combine both approaches (Rodideal 2020). In Estonia, 57% of parents of children aged 0–3 reported using restrictive strategies, while 44% also engaged in active mediation (Nevski and Siibak 2016). Some evidence suggests that the association between restrictive mediation and children's digital media use weakens with age, indicating that such rules may be particularly effective during the earliest years (Sanders et al. 2016).

Other parental mediation strategies involve the caregiver's presence during digital media use. These include co‐viewing or co‐presence, where the parent is physically present but not actively involved, and participatory learning, in which caregiver and child actively engage with the digital content (Clark 2011). CSM found that parents of children aged 0–8 years were more likely to co‐view than to co‐engage. While a majority reported watching TV shows (74%) or YouTube videos (62%) with their child, fewer actively participated in app use (42%) or console gaming (27%) (Mann et al. 2025). Similar patterns were observed in the U.K. (Winter et al. 2025). Participatory mediation has particularly been associated with developmental benefits (Swider‐Cios et al. 2023). A recent meta‐analysis found that young children gain the greatest benefit from digital experiences when guided by a supportive adult (Mathers et al. 2025). The effects were particularly strong when parents provided input supporting cognition, intended to enhance children's understanding of and engagement with the digital content.

1.3. Content of Digital Media for Children

The type of digital media content children engage with, such as apps or games, may be as important, or even more important than, the total time spent with digital media in predicting developmental outcomes. A systematic review and meta‐analysis found that while greater overall screen time was associated with lower language skills among 3‐year‐olds, exposure to educational programs correlated with higher language skills (Madigan et al. 2020). Similarly, a study of children aged 6–26 months in rural China found that longer overall screen time was associated with an increased risk of motor developmental delay, while exposure to educational, child‐friendly content for more than 15 min was linked to fewer social‐emotional and behavioral problems and a lower risk of motor delay (Xiao et al. 2025). Reflecting such evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics (2025) recently updated their guidelines to emphasize that educational content can support toddlers' learning of facts, healthy behaviors, and emotion regulation. Together, these findings highlight the potential of high‐quality digital content to promote learning, wellbeing, and cultural understanding in early childhood.

1.4. Children's Digital Environment and Family Demographics in the United Arab Emirates

In recent years, several national and local initiatives in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have aimed to support children's digital wellbeing. These include, for example, the establishment in 2020 of the UAE Council for Digital Wellbeing (2024) and the development of the Children's Digital Wellbeing Pact in 2024 and 2025, led by the Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority (2025). Although prior research has explored children's digital media use and parental mediation in the UAE context, this work has largely focused on older children and shown that parents in the UAE navigate digital safety while seeking to align their children's digital engagement with cultural values (Alhajji et al. 2025) and employ a range of strategies to manage their children's social media use (Badri et al. 2017). More recent data indicate that school‐aged children spent over 8 h online daily (Badri et al. 2023). However, there remains a critical gap in the literature regarding infants' and toddlers' exposure to digital media.

The UAE's population comprises approximately 11.9% Emirati citizens and 88.1% expatriate residents (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2020). The expatriate population represents over 200 nationalities (UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs, n.d.), with many employed in low‐income sectors. However, due to national labor and visa policies, only residents who meet specific income and education thresholds can sponsor family members (UAE Government 2024). As a result, many low‐income migrant workers live in the UAE without their children or spouses. While official statistics on parents are not publicly available, this policy context suggests that the parent population differs markedly from the general population in terms of nationality, income, and education level, a pattern reflected in the demographic characteristics of the present sample.

1.5. Present Study

This study aimed to describe patterns of digital media use among children under the age of three, with a focus on the frequency, content, and context of engagement. Specifically, it examined the factors shaping parents' decisions regarding their child's digital media use, including rules and restrictions related to screen time, the types of digital content selected, and the extent of joint media engagement of parents and children. The research was conducted in Abu Dhabi, an emirate in the UAE. While the UAE has widespread digital connectivity availability similar to or exceeding that of Western countries (International Telecommunication Union: Development Sector 2024), it faces a common challenge among non‐Western regions: the dominance of media content produced in the West, which often lacks cultural relevance (Adway 2022; Steemers and Sakr 2017).

The Arab region remains underrepresented in developmental science, where most existing research on early childhood and digital media has originated from Western contexts (Moriguchi 2022). To our knowledge, no representative study has systematically explored digital media use in early childhood within the Arab region. The few available studies have primarily targeted older children (typically aged 5 and above) and have focused mainly on screen time, with limited attention to content, parental mediation strategies, or co‐engagement with digital media (Badri et al. 2023; Edelman Intelligence 2018).

To address this gap, the present study investigated the following questions:

  1. What are patterns of digital media use among children under 3 years old?

    1. How do child and family demographic characteristics relate to patterns of digital media use among children under 3 years old?

    2. What rules and strategies do parents report using to regulate their child's digital media use, and how do these relate to the child's digital media use patterns?

  2. What digital content do children under 3 years old use?

  3. To what extent are parents jointly engaged with their children during digital media use?

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Participants were drawn from the Digital Use Survey conducted with parents of children aged 0–8 years residing in Abu Dhabi (Suchodoletz et al. 2025). Recruitment took place between July and December 2024 in public spaces such as malls, parks, playgrounds, and cafés. A team of 45 trained enumerators from a market research company explained the survey to potential respondents. Of the 12,615 parents approached, 911 declined participation, 946 were ineligible (e.g., not residing in Abu Dhabi or their child was older than 8 years), and 628 discontinued their participation in the survey before completing it. The final sample comprised 10,123 parents who completed the face‐to‐face survey.

The present study focuses on all respondents from the larger sample whose nationality was from the Arab region and who had a child under the age of three. Data for this group were collected between October and December 2024 and resulted in a final analytical sample of 1115 parents (child: M age = 1.56 years, SDage = 0.5; 45% girls). Participants represented various nationalities, with Emirati citizens comprising the largest group (69%), broadly reflecting the national composition of children under age eight in the UAE (50%; Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority 2024). Egyptians accounted for 13% of the sample, Jordanians and Syrians for 5% each, and the remaining 8% represented other Arab nationalities. Parents (79% mothers) were, on average, 30.90 years old (SD = 4.99). The majority of parents were married (98%). The sample was highly educated, with 79% having completed tertiary education. The educational profile of the sample likely reflects the generally high levels of educational attainment in the population (e.g., 95% literacy rate—Statistics Centre Abu Dhabi, SCAD 2024), though the possibility of some overrepresentation of highly educated parents cannot be ruled out. Most parents were employed (87%). Of the 88% of respondents who provided income information, the majority reported a medium‐to‐high monthly household income (72%), defined as income above 25,000 AED. This threshold was based on the 2023 GDP per capita labeled as “Middle income” (approximately $6300; World Bank Group: Data n.d.). The monthly household income levels align with figures reported by the Statistics Centre Abu Dhabi, SCAD (2008), with somewhat higher incomes among Emirati than expatriate households. Parents reported having one child (32%), two children (34%), three children (23%), or more than three children (10%). A small proportion of parents (6%) indicated that their child required additional support due to a potential risk of developmental delays. Nearly all respondents (93%) reported Arabic as the primary language spoken at home.

2.2. Procedure and Measures

All survey questions are provided in Supporting Information S1: Appendix A. Children's digital media use was assessed by asking parents to report the time their child spent on digital media (i.e., “screen time”) on the last weekday and on one weekend day (in hours and minutes). Differentiating between weekday and weekend is useful as use patterns may differ across these time periods (Chang et al. 2018; Jago et al. 2014; Sigmundová et al. 2016). Reports of no digital media use were recorded accordingly. Parents could indicate if weekend use was “about the same” as on weekdays. When applicable, parents were also asked to estimate the time spent on specific activities: watching content (e.g., television, streaming videos); playing digital games (including apps or console games); reading or being read to from digital sources (e.g., e‐picture books); and other activities (e.g., video calls with family).

To assess digital content exposure, parents were asked: “On a typical day, my child uses digital media that is primarily focused on…” They rated how often their child engaged with each content type using five response options (never, hardly ever, sometimes, often, always). The content categories included: early learning activities (e.g., Arabic alphabet, numbers); everyday life topics (e.g., school routines, brushing teeth); Arabic‐language television or videos; social‐emotional skills (e.g., feelings, friendships); communication or messaging (e.g., WhatsApp, video calls); social networking (e.g., Instagram, TikTok); “social” online gaming with other children (e.g., Minecraft, Roblox). Parents rated each category separately. No additional instructions were given to distinguish potentially overlapping categories (e.g., educational apps presented as video), so responses reflect parents’ own judgments about the content's primary focus.

Parental engagement in digital activities was assessed by asking parents how much of their child's total screen time they spent actively engaging with them. If no active engagement was reported, this was recorded accordingly.

Parents were asked a series of questions regarding rules and practices around their child's digital media use. First, they indicated whether they had specific rules in place (1 = no, 2 = yes). If they responded “yes,” they selected all applicable rule types: “time limits (e.g., less than 1 hour per day)”, “time of the day (e.g., evening use)”, “specific types of content or apps your child is allowed to use”, or to specify any “other” rules they applied. Parents were also asked whether they “ever use any type of device or app for limiting your child's screen time” (1 = no, 2 = yes, 3 = don't know).

Regardless of whether rules were in place, all respondents were asked the following question to assess their general approach to managing digital media use: “When thinking about your child using digital devices, please indicate where your opinion falls on the following scale from not allowing any digital media to allowing unrestricted use whenever they want.” Responses were captured using a slider ranging from 0 (not at all) to 100 (whenever they feel the need or desire). Parents also reported demographic information about themselves, their child, and their household.

The study was approved by the New York University Abu Dhabi Institutional Review Board prior to data collection. Participation was voluntary, and informed consent was obtained. The survey was conducted through face‐to‐face interviews, lasting approximately 12–15 min each. The survey was available in both Arabic and English, and 94% of parents in this subsample completed the survey in Arabic.

3. Results

3.1. Data and Analysis Preparation

The data were prepared and analysis conducted using R Statistical Software, v4.4.3 (R Core Team 2025). For each time‐related question, a report of no use was entered as 0. When weekend screen time was reported as “about the same” as weekday time, the weekday duration was copied over. Any screen time value above 14 h was treated as impossibly high and truncated to a value of 14. If reported joint media engagement time was higher than its corresponding overall‐screen time, it was set to equal the overall‐screen time value.

The high sample sizes (e.g., for full sample, n = 1115) increased the likelihood of inferential analyses showing statistical significance, so effect size was especially important to determine practical significance.

The analysis used Welch's t‐tests rather than Mann‐Whitney U tests, even with non‐normal screen time distributions, because Welch's t‐test is reasonably robust to violation of its normality assumption (Knief and Forstmeier 2021), the Mann‐Whitney U test is sensitive to violations of homoscedasticity (Delacre et al. 2017), and the means aligned conceptually with Welch's t‐test are a more interpretable metric for the full sample than medians typically reported alongside the Mann‐Whitney U test, which were consistently “0” across groups (and thus uninformative in comparisons). Sensitivity analyses comparing Welch's t‐test and the Mann‐Whitney U test were conducted for each group comparison, and the results were similar between the tests. The analysis used Spearman's rank correlation when violations of normality (Shapiro‐Wilk test) and/or homoscedasticity (Breusch‐Pagan test) were found.

3.2. RQ 1: What Are the Patterns of Digital Media Use Among Children Under Three Years Old in Arab Families in Abu Dhabi?

The first research question examined patterns of digital media use. Screen time distribution by bins was similar on weekdays and weekends (Figure 1), and so percentages will be reported together here (as a range when they are different). Most children (68%) did not use digital media at all. Among children who did use digital media, less than 1% used it for less than 10 min per day, 3% used digital media for 11–30 min, and 4%–5% for 31–60 min. For some children daily screen time exceeded 1 h: 9% used digital media for 1–2 h, 7% for 2–3 h, 5%–6% for 3–5 h, and 2%–3% for more than 5 h.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Distribution of digital media use time (full sample) for weekdays and weekends.

Children who used screens were older (M = 1.83 years, SD = 0.37) than those who did not (M = 1.42 years, SD = 0.49), t (911.44) = −15.28, p < 0.001, d = −0.89. The proportion of girls was higher among children who used screens (50%) than children who did not (43%), χ 2 (1) = 5.17, p = 0.02, h = −0.15. The proportion of Emirati children was lower among children who used screens (46%) compared to those who did not (80%), χ 2 (1) = 131.16, p < 0.001, h = 0.72. Children who used screens had older parents (M = 32.31 years, SD = 5.68) than those who did not (M = 30.22 years, SD = 4.47), t (552.18) = −5.98, p < 0.001, d = −0.43. Household income was lower among families of children who used screens, with 53% reporting incomes above AED 25,000 (compared to 81% reporting incomes above AED 25,000 for the group of children who did not use screens), χ 2 (1) = 86.30, p < 0.001, h = 0.61. Parents' education was lower among families of children who used screens, with 76% having completed tertiary education (compared to 82% having not completed tertiary education for the group of children who did not use screens), χ 2 (1) = 5.97, p = 0.01, h = 0.15.

Focusing on the subgroup of children whose parents reported digital media use (n = 362), the average time was 2 h 45 min on weekdays (SD = 1 h 52 min) and 2 h 32 min on weekends (SD = 1 h 46 min). Regarding the type of digital activities, parents reported that the most common activity was watching content (e.g., television, movies, streaming videos), which accounted for 54% of total screen time, followed by playing digital games (33%), and reading or being read to from digital sources (10%). The distribution of these activities was similar on weekdays and weekends.

3.3. Associations Between Child and Family Characteristics and Digital Media Use

The next analysis examined whether child and family characteristics were associated with young children's digital media use. Table 1 shows descriptives of weekday and weekend screen time according to each of the examined characteristics. The first set of analyses was conducted using the full sample of 1115 children. Spearman's rank correlation of child age and screen time indicated a weak‐to‐moderate positive correlation for both weekdays (r s  = 0.40, p < 0.001) and weekends (r s  = 0.41, p < 0.001), suggesting that screen time increased with age. For child gender, t‐tests revealed no significant differences in screen time between boys and girls, weekday: t (1081.06) = 0.95, p = 0.34, d = 0.06; weekend: t (1043.09) = 1.58, p = 0.11, d = 0.10.

TABLE 1.

Mean digital media use times of binary demographics variables for weekdays and weekends.

Variable Weekday digital media use time–M (SD) Weekend digital media use time–M (SD)
Full sample
Gender
Male (n = 612) 51 min (1 h 41 min) 45 min (1 h 30 min)
Female (n = 503) 57 min (1 h 39 min) 54 min (1 h 36 min)
Parental education
Not completed tertiary (n = 219) 48 min (1 h 31 min) 45 min (1 h 26 min)
Completed tertiary (n = 878) 55 min (1 h 42 min) 50 min (1 h 34 min)
Income
< 25,000 AED (n = 281) 1 h 30 min (2 h 3 min) a 1 h 18 min (1 h 51 min) b
> 25,000 AED (n = 700) 45 min (1 h 33 min) a 43 min (1 h 29 min) b
Only children using digital media
Gender
Male (n = 181) 2 h 52 min (1 h 57 min) 2 h 33 min (1 h 46 min)
Female (n = 181) 2 h 37 min (1 h 46 min) 2 h 30 min (1 h 46 min)
Parental education
Not completed tertiary (n = 86) 2 h 1 min (1 h 51 min) a 1 h 53 min (1 h 46 min) b
Completed tertiary (n = 269) 2 h 59 min (1 h 49 min) a 2 h 44 min (1 h 43 min) b
Income
< 25,000 AED (n = 159) 2 h 39 min (2 h 6 min) 2 h 18 min (1 h 56 min) b
> 25,000 AED (n = 178) 2 h 57 min (1 h 43 min) 2 h 48 min (1 h 40 min) b
Open in a new tab
a

Weekday screen time significantly differed by levels of binary demographic variable (p < 0.05).

b

Weekend screen time significantly differed by levels of binary demographic variable (p < 0.05).

Regarding family characteristics, tests for group differences based on parental education and monthly household income were conducted. For education, children whose parents had completed tertiary education were compared with those whose parents had not. No significant differences in screen time were found in t‐tests, weekday: t (366.18) = −1.01, p = 0.31, d = −0.07; weekend: t (359.30) = −0.83, p = 0.40, d = −0.06. In contrast, household income was significantly associated with screen time. Using AED 25,000 as the threshold for middle income, children from households earning less than AED 25,000 had significantly longer screen times compared to those from higher‐income households (> AED 25,000), with moderate effect sizes, weekday: t (412.93) = 5.55, p < 0.001, d = 0.44; weekend: t (431.08) = 4.74, p < 0.001, d = 0.37. Having older sibling(s) was not associated with screen time, weekday: t (655.63) = −0.90, p = 0.37, d = −0.06; weekend: t (631.34) = −1.17, p = 0.24, d = −0.08.

The second set of analyses focused on the subgroup of children whose parents reported any digital media use (n = 362). While the associations between child characteristics and screen time followed a similar pattern as in the full sample, family characteristics showed a different pattern of associations in this subgroup. Using Spearman's rank correlation, child age was again positively associated with screen time on both weekdays and weekends, with older children having longer screen times (weekday: r s  = 0.33, p < 0.001; weekend: r s  = 0.39, p < 0.001). No significant differences were found between boys and girls in weekday or weekend screen time, as determined by t‐tests, weekday: t (356.37) = −1.26, p = 0.21, d = −0.13; weekend: t (359.99) = −0.22, p = 0.82, d = −0.02.

In contrast to the full sample, parents' education was significantly associated with children's screen time: children whose parents had completed tertiary education had longer screen times on both weekdays and weekends compared to those whose parents had not, with moderate effect sizes, weekday: t (140.76) = −4.21, p < 0.001, d = −0.53; weekend: t (139.80) = −3.84, p < 0.001, d = −0.48. For monthly household income, a significant difference was observed only for weekend screen time t (313.42) = −2.55, p = 0.01, d = −0.28, where children from families with more than AED 25,000 household income per month had longer screen times on weekends than those from families earning less, with a small effect size. No significant income‐related differences were found for weekday screen time t (305.14) = −1.38, p = 0.17, d = −0.15. Having older sibling(s) was again not associated with screen time, weekday: t (240.35) = 0.06, p = 0.95, d = 0.01; weekend: t (229.75) = −0.39, p = 0.70, d = −0.04.

3.4. Parental Rules and Associations With Child Digital Media Use

Further analysis explored parents' rules for guiding their child's digital media use and examined associations with screen time. Table 2 shows means and standard deviations of weekday and weekend screen time according to each of the examined characteristics. Analyses were first conducted on the full sample (n = 1115). When asked whether they had specific rules in place, 28% of parents (n = 307) responded “yes”. Parents who reported having rules in place reported significantly longer screen times both on weekdays and weekends for their children's media use compared to parents who reported not having rules, with moderate to large effect sizes, weekday: t (414.79) = −9.52, p < 0.001, d = −0.76; weekend: t (437.59) = −8.54, p < 0.001, d = −0.65.

TABLE 2.

Mean digital media use times for binary rules variables.

Variable Weekday digital media use time—M (SD) Weekend digital media use time—M (SD)
Full sample
Use of rules
Rules (n = 307) 1 h 46 min (2 h 2 min)a 1 h 32 min (1 h 50 min)b
No rules (n = 808) 34 min (1 h 22 min)a 33 min (1 h 21 min)b
Use of time limits
Time limits (n = 185) 1 h 45 min (1 h 46 min) 1 h 30 min (1 h 32 min)
No time limits (n = 122) 1 h 46 min (2 h 24 min) 1 h 34 min (2 h 12 min)
Use of time‐of‐day restrictions
Time‐of‐day restrictions (n = 193) 1 h 58 min (2 h 7 min)a 1 h 40 min (1 h 54 min)
No time‐of‐day restrictions (n = 114) 1 h 24 min (1 h 52 min)a 1 h 18 min (1 h 40 min)
Apps/device settings to limit time
Apps/device settings use (n = 141) 2 h 1 min (1 h 49 min) 1 h 50 min (1 h 45 min)b
No apps/device settings use (n = 142) 1 h 37 min (2 h 13 min) 1 h 22 min (1 h 53 min)b
Only children using digital media
Use of rules
Rules (n = 209) 2 h 35 min (2 h)a 2 h 15 min (1 h 49 min)b
No rules (n = 153) 2 h 58 min (1 h 40 min)a 2 h 55 min (1 h 38 min)b
Use of time limits
Time limits (n = 145) 2 h 14 min (1 h 43 min)a 1 h 55 min (1 h 30 min)b
No time limits (n = 64) 3 h 23 min (2 h 21 min)a 3 h (2 h 13 min)b
Use of time‐of‐day restrictions
Time‐of‐day restrictions (n = 144) 2 h 38 min (2 h 3 min) 2 h 14 min (1 h 53 min)
No time‐of‐day restrictions (n = 65) 2 h 28 min (1 h 52 min) 2 h 17 min (1 h 38 min)
Apps/device settings to limit time
Apps/device settings use (n = 123) 2 h 19 min (1 h 45 min)a 2 h 6 min (1 h 43 min)
No apps/device settings use (n = 78) 2 h 57 min (2 h 14 min)a 2 h 30 min (1 h 55 min)
Open in a new tab

Note: a, b: Significant within‐weekday (a) or within‐weekend (b) screen time differences by demographic variable (p < 0.05).

Among parents who reported having rules (n = 307), the majority indicated they imposed time limits (60%) and determined certain times of the day for digital media use (63%). Many parents also enforced time limits with apps/device settings (50%). To further examine the impact of time limits, screen time of children whose parents set time limits was compared with those whose parents did not. Use time did not differ either on weekdays or weekends for children whose parents imposed time limits compared to parents who did not, weekday: t (206.46) = −0.08, p = 0.93, d = 0.01; weekend: t (198.58) = 0.33, p = 0.74, d = 0.04. Screen time was higher on weekdays for children whose parents allowed it only during a certain time of the day, with a small effect size, t (260.70) = −2.42, p = 0.02, d = −0.28. No significant use time differences on weekends were found for allowing only during a certain time of the day, t (261.34) = −1.76, p = 0.08, d = −0.20. Screen time on weekends was higher for children whose parents utilized apps/device settings to limit it than those who did not, with a small effect size, t (279.72) = −2.13, p = 0.03, d = −0.25. No use time differences related to apps/device settings to limit it were found on weekdays, t (271.17) = −1.69, p = 0.09, d = −0.20.

All parents were also asked to rate their general approach to managing digital media use on a scale from 0 to 100, reflecting perceived strictness. The average rating was 41.13 (SD = 29.62), and the mode was 7. Spearman's rank correlations were used to examine associations between strictness and screen time. Weak but significant correlations were found for both weekdays (r s  = −0.10, p = 0.001) and weekends (r s  = −0.09, p = 0.003), indicating that higher reported strictness was associated with slightly longer screen time.

The analysis was repeated with the subgroup of children whose parents reported digital media use (n = 362). In this group, 58% of parents (n = 209) reported having rules in place. Children with parental rules had significantly lower screen time both on weekdays and weekends than those without, with small to moderate effect sizes, weekday: t (354.05) = 1.97, p = 0.05, d = 0.20; weekend: t (345.41) = 3.67, p < 0.001, d = 0.38.

Furthermore, the types of rules of parents who reported having rules in place were examined. Time limits were endorsed by 69% of parents and determining specific times of day for digital media use by 69% also. Many parents (61%) enforced time limits with apps/device settings. Children whose parents set time limits had significantly less screen time both on weekdays and weekends than those whose parents did not, with moderate effect sizes, weekday: t (93.78) = 3.51, p < 0.001, d = 0.59; weekend: t (89.33) = 3.59, p < 0.001, d = 0.62. Screen time did not differ either on weekdays or weekends for children whose parents only allowed it only during a certain time of the day, weekday: t (134.63) = −0.59, p = 0.55, d = −0.09; weekend: t (141.17) = 0.18, p = 0.86, d = 0.03. Screen time on weekdays was lower for children whose parents utilized apps/device settings to limit it than those who did not, with a small effect size, t (135.78) = 2.10, p = 0.04, d = 0.32. No screen time differences related to apps/device settings to limit it were found on weekends, t (150.83) = 1.50, p = 0.14, d = 0.22.

Finally, among children whose parents reported digital media use (n = 362), for perceived strictness in managing digital media use the average was 37.59 (SD = 32.93) and the mode was 7. Spearman's rank correlations were used to assess associations between strictness and screen time. As in the full sample, higher perceived strictness was weakly but significantly associated with longer screen time on both weekdays (r s  = −0.21, p < 0.001) and weekends (r s  = −0.20, p < 0.001).

3.5. RQ 2: What Digital Content Do Children Under Three Years Old Use?

The second research question examined the types of digital content to which children were exposed among those whose parents reported any digital media use (n = 362). Parents rated the frequency of their child's engagement with various content types, including early learning activities, everyday life topics, social‐emotional skills, communication or messaging, Arabic‐language television or videos, social networking, and “social” online gaming with other children. Table 3 summarizes the reported frequencies across content types.

TABLE 3.

Parents' reports of children's digital content use (only digital media‐using children).

Item Always (%) Often (%) Sometime (%)s Hardly ever (%) Never (%)
1. Early learning activities (e.g. stories, Arabic abjad/alphabet, numbers) 31.77 12.98 20.17 19.61 15.47
2. Everyday life topics (e.g. brushing teeth, first day at nursery) 11.33 10.22 17.13 17.96 41.99
3. Social‐emotional skills 5.52 8.01 18.23 16.30 51.93
4. Communication or messaging (e.g., WhatsApp, SnapChat) 0.55 4.42 5.25 9.94 79.83
5. Watching Arabic‐language videos 27.62 19.06 22.38 22.38 8.56
6. Using a social networking site (e.g., Instagram, TikTok) 5.52 4.42 5.25 6.91 77.90
7. Playing a “social” game online with other children 1.10 5.25 5.25 9.94 78.45
Open in a new tab

Note: The most selected response for each content category is bolded.

Early learning activities and Arabic‐language videos were the most used types of digital content. Specifically, 31.77% of parents reported that their child “always” engaged in early learning activities and 12.98% reported frequent (“often”) use; similarly, 27.62% of children “always” and 19.06% “often” watched Arabic‐language videos. In contrast, content related to everyday life and social‐emotional skills was less commonly reported. A substantial proportion of parents indicated that their children “never” (41.99%) or “hardly ever” (17.96%) engaged with content on everyday life topics. For social‐emotional content, 51.93% reported no engagement and 16.30% reported minimal engagement. Engagement with interactive or communication‐based digital content was least frequent. Most parents reported that their children “never” used digital media for communication or messaging (79.83%), social networking (77.90%), or online gaming with peers (78.45%).

To further examine whether content preferences varied by socioeconomic status, post hoc analyses tested differences in content use by parental education and household income. These analyses were conducted to clarify the finding from RQ 1 that higher parental education and income were associated with greater overall screen time. Because content frequency was measured on ordinal five‐point Likert scales (1 = never to 5 = always), exploratory analyses used Mann‐Whitney U tests to respect the ordinal structure of the data and avoid assumptions of normality (Şimşek 2023).

Parents with higher household incomes (> AED 25,000) reported significantly less frequent use of content related to everyday life topics, social‐emotional skills, communication, social networking, and social gaming (Mann–Whitney ps < 0.001–0.02; ns = 332–337; high‐income medians = 1; low‐income medians = 1–3). Similar patterns were observed for parental education: tertiary‐educated parents reported less frequent engagement with these content types compared to parents without tertiary education (ps < 0.001–0.01; ns = 350–355; medians = 1–2 in both groups). In contrast, no differences by income were observed for learning‐oriented or Arabic‐language content (ps = 0.15–0.59; n = 337; high‐income medians = 4; low‐income medians = 3). Comparable null effects were found for parental education (ps = 0.09; ns = 355; medians = 3 in both groups).

3.6. RQ 3: To What Extent Are Parents Jointly Engaged With Their Children During Digital Media Use?

The third research question examined the extent to which parents actively engaged with their child during digital media use. Analyses were limited to parents who reported any digital media use (n = 362). On average, parents engaged with their child during approximately half of their screen time (weekdays: M = 1 h 24 min, SD = 1 h 12 min; weekends: M = 1 h 10 min, SD = 1 h 11 min). Fourteen percent of children were reported to never use digital media with their parents. Parents' engagement during their child's digital media use varied by the type of digital activity. When children were watching content, which accounted for an average of 54% of their total screen time, 8% never did so with their parents. For digital play (33% of total screen time), 20% of the children always engaged without the parents. In the case of digital reading (10% of total screen time), 14% did so without their parents. Spearman's rank correlations showed significant, negative associations between the proportion of time parents were actively engaged and children's total screen time (weekdays: r s  = −0.43, p < 0.001; weekends: r s  = −0.31, p < 0.001), indicating that increased joint engagement was linked to reduced digital media use.

3.7. Post Hoc Cluster Analysis of Screen Time, Joint Engagement, Rules and SES

To better understand patterns of screen usage in our data beyond descriptive results, we conducted a post hoc cluster analysis based on screen time, joint engagement, rules, and SES. This latent component analysis examined how distinct profiles emerged across these variables, separately on weekdays and weekends, and with or without SES variables included. We selected a four‐cluster structure for each of the four models. Full details of the exploratory analysis and corresponding results are in Supporting Information S1: Appendix B.

In models including only screen time, joint engagement and rules, some notable patterns emerged. Across both weekday and weekend models, most participants belonged to a cluster characterized by no screen time and no rules. For weekday digital media use, the remaining screen time‐reporting participants were divided into two clusters: one with high levels of rules and one with minimal rules, the latter demonstrating high screen time. For weekend digital media use, screen time‐reporting participants split into two clusters distinguished by high versus low joint engagement, both with few rules.

In models that additionally included SES variables, further patterns emerged. Both weekday and weekend models clustered participants identically. Participants clustered predominantly by parental education level. Each of three clusters was uniformly of a certain parental education level: completed secondary education, technical training, or undergraduate degree. Most of the participants were in the undergraduate‐educated cluster. It had the fewest rules, but did not differ substantially from the other clusters in screen time or joint engagement on either weekdays or weekends.

4. Discussion

Results of this study provide the first comprehensive picture of digital media use by Arab children under 3 years old in Abu Dhabi, UAE, with a focus on content of digital media and parental mediation of the activities. Among parents reporting any digital media use of their children, higher parental education and household income were associated with longer screen time, though in the full sample, only income remained significant. Parents reported various strategies to mediate their children's media use, including setting rules, co‐using media, and selecting content focused on early learning and Arabic‐language materials.

When looking solely at average screen time, the numbers in our sample (all children, even those whose parents reported no media use) were lower (53 min on weekdays and 49 min on weekends) than those reported in other countries such as the U.S. (Mann et al. 2025), Australia (Brushe et al. 2023), and Saudi Arabia (Alroqi et al. 2021). This may be because most children in our sample did not use digital media, suggesting that parents may be adhering to common guidelines recommending no screen time for children under age two (WHO 2019). It is also possible that the face‐to‐face survey format contributed to lower reported screen time due to social desirability, with parents potentially reluctant to report behaviors that might be perceived as inconsistent with prevailing guidelines. For comparison, an online survey of Saudi parents of children aged 1–3 years reported higher screen use (approximately 3 h per day, Alroqi et al. 2021). However, these data were collected during the COVID‐19 period, limiting their comparability to the present findings. Further research with Arab parents would benefit from using multiple data collection modalities to better assess the influence of survey context on reported digital media use.

However, among children under age three who used digital media, average use exceeded 2 h per day on both weekdays and weekends, consistent with prior studies (Alroqi et al. 2021; Brushe et al. 2023; Mann et al. 2025). Minimal use (less than 10 min per day) was rare. Most children used digital media for more than an hour daily, with wide variation in usage time across families, similar to the large variation reported by Alroqi et al. (2021). These patterns suggest that parents manage their children's digital media use in diverse ways, underscoring the need for guidance that aligns with their existing approaches rather than relying on a one‐size‐fits‐all solution (Raffaele et al. 2024).

Among children who used digital media, the most common activity was watching content, a passive form of use, for half of their total screen time. Digital play, a more active use, made up about one third. Whether this distribution is problematic remains unclear, as evidence on the benefits of passive versus active use is mixed for this age group and likely influenced by other contextual factors (Ackermann et al. 2020; Children and Scre and ens 2024; Veraksa et al. 2021). The low prevalence of digital reading in this study mirrors findings on traditional book reading, which is often limited in Arab families where oral storytelling remains more common (Dillon et al. 2024). At this age, reading, whether digital or traditional, depends on caregivers. In contexts where shared reading is relatively new, highlighting its developmental benefits may help foster early home literacy practices (Gallagher et al. 2025). Culturally relevant, high‐quality digital content could further support this engagement (Vacková et al. 2023).

Regarding child characteristics, this study replicated previous findings in other cultures showing that digital media use increases with age (Brushe et al. 2023; Mann et al. 2025). No gender differences in screen time were found, aligning with previous research on young children; some studies found higher use among boys (Mann et al. 2025), others among girls (Brushe et al. 2023), and some found no differences at all (Jago et al. 2014). Gender differences in digital media use may become more apparent in older children and adolescents, who have greater autonomy over their media choices (Leonhardt and Overå 2021). For younger children, however, media use is largely determined by parents, suggesting that any observed differences are more likely to reflect parental attitudes and decisions rather than the child's gender.

With regard to family characteristics, patterns differed depending on whether the full sample (including children who did not use digital media) or only digital media users were considered. In the full sample, parental education was not associated with screen time. However, among children who used digital media, those with more highly educated parents had higher use, contrary to previous findings linking higher education to lower use (e.g., Brushe et al. 2023). A similar shift was observed for household income: in the full sample, lower income was associated with more digital media use (in line with Kang 2023), but among users, children from higher income households had higher use. One possible explanation for these findings is that, in the UAE context, higher‐income and more highly educated Arab parents may be more likely to provide their young children with access to digital devices and high‐quality digital media, and may view digital media primarily as a tool for early learning and language development rather than as entertainment alone. Consistent with this interpretation, exploratory analysis showed that higher‐SES parents more systematically restricted children's digital media exposure across multiple content domains (ps ≤ 0.02 for income, ps ≤ 0.01 for education) while reporting comparable levels of exposure to learning‐oriented and Arabic‐language content. Together, these findings suggest that higher‐SES Arab parents in the UAE may be more selective in their children's digital media use, emphasizing high‐quality content over broader or more recreational forms of media exposure. These parents may also be more familiar with, or trusting of, educational content marketed for young children, and thus more permissive in their children's use of such media. In dual‐income households, parents may also turn to digital media as a practical means of occupying or engaging their child during busy periods, particularly when balancing work and caregiving responsibilities. These patterns suggest that SES may shape not just access, but also parental beliefs about the benefits and acceptability of digital media use in early childhood. While plausible, these explanations remain speculative and should be explored in future research examining the specific motivations and decision‐making processes of Arab parents from different backgrounds. Importance of such future exploration is also indicated by post hoc cluster analyses including screen time, joint engagement, rules and SES variables: participants clustered predominantly by parental education level. Most participants belonged to three clusters, each uniformly reporting a distinct educational level (completed secondary education, technical training, or undergraduate degree).

One third of parents in our sample reported having rules to guide their child's digital media use, primarily reflecting restrictive mediation strategies. Among them, 60% limited the duration of use, and 63% restricted usage to specific times of day. These rates are higher than those reported by parents in the U.S. (Mann et al. 2025), but somewhat lower than in Austria (Eichen et al. 2021), highlighting cross‐cultural variation in restrictive mediation practices. Having rules was associated with higher digital media use, and similarly, the use of time‐limiting apps or device settings was linked with greater media use. At first glance, this may seem counterintuitive, as rules are generally expected to reduce usage. However, parents who completely restrict digital media access may have not considered this a “rule,” since their children simply have no access, making time‐limiting tools unnecessary. Thus, these parents likely answered “no” to the question about rules. Supporting this, analyses restricted to children who did use digital media showed the opposite pattern: parental rules and restrictions were linked to lower usage. All parents, independent of whether they allowed their child to use digital media or not, were asked about their approach to mediation, from strict to permissive. The most common response was quite strict (mode = 7 on a 0–100 scale), despite an overall sample average of about 40. Interestingly, among children who used digital media, greater parental permissiveness was weakly but significantly linked to less screen time, contrary to expectations. This may reflect misinterpretation of the strictness question or that parents imposed stricter rules when usage was already high. Further research is needed to clarify these findings.

The findings further suggest that parents commonly used mediation strategies that involved their presence during their child's digital media use. Most parents reported joining their child for about half of their screen time, consistent with findings from children under three in the U.K. (Winter et al. 2025). Similar to U.S. data (Mann et al. 2025), co‐viewing was more common than co‐engagement. This may reflect the perception of video viewing as a low‐effort bonding activity. In contrast, digital games for very young children may hold less appeal for parents due to their simplicity or lack of engaging features, which may help explain the lower rates of co‐engagement. Notably, a small group of children always used digital media without a parent (at least the parent answering the survey) present. Given evidence that active, joint engagement with digital content supports young children's development (Swider‐Cios et al. 2023; Mathers et al. 2025), parents should be encouraged to take a more active role in interactive digital experiences with their children. In our study, parents' joint engagement was associated with less screen time, contrary to Fitzpatrick et al. (2023), who found that co‐viewing predicted more use. This discrepancy may stem from differences in age groups studied or cultural expectations; our younger sample and context may reflect a more intentional, limited use of digital media when parents are directly involved. These findings warrant further research to better understand how joint engagement relates to media use across different cultural and developmental contexts.

When asked about the type of digital content, parents of children who used digital media favored media that support early learning activities (e.g., Arabic alphabet, numbers) and Arabic‐language videos. The preference for Arabic content reflects parental efforts to promote Arabic language exposure, aligning with broader public concerns about language loss in a context where most of the population is non‐Arabic speaking and local Arabic varieties are at risk (Jlassi and Harrathi 2025). However, parents face limited options: Arabic educational apps have significantly fewer downloads than popular foreign apps (Adway 2022), and much of the Arabic video content consists of translated foreign material, which, despite cultural adaptations, lacks the cultural grounding and benefits of locally produced media (Steemers and Sakr 2017). Content focused on everyday life or social‐emotional development was mentioned less frequently by parents. This aligns with research from Europe and North America, where parents often see digital media as less supportive of children's social‐emotional growth than other domains (e.g., Livingstone et al. 2018). Likely reflecting the young age of the children in our sample, communication tools and social media were rarely mentioned, unsurprising given that most platforms are designed for older users and have a minimum age of 13. These results are in line with Mann et al. (2025), which found video chatting to represent only 4% of 0–8 year olds' typical screen time.

4.1. Practical Implications

The present study offers several implications for policy, digital media development, and parental mediation. International guidelines, such as those by the WHO (2019), recommend no screen time for children under age two. Our finding that a majority of children in the sample did not use digital media suggests that many Arab parents in the UAE adhere to these recommendations. However, one third of children did use digital media, and usage time varied widely, with a notable proportion exceeding 1 h per day. Interestingly, and contrary to previous research, higher‐income and more highly educated Arab parents were more likely to permit longer digital media use. This may reflect more positive beliefs about the developmental or educational value of digital media (supported by post‐hoc Mann‐Whitney U tests), and/or a reliance on digital media as a practical tool in managing caregiving demands, particularly in dual‐income households. These findings highlight the need to move beyond screen‐time limits and toward more tailored public health messaging that accounts for diverse family contexts and values. Understanding the motivations, needs, and beliefs of different groups of parents, particularly those who actively choose to integrate digital media into their children's daily routines, will be essential for developing more responsive and effective public health strategies. Parental guidance should also emphasize not only how much but how digital media is used. This includes promoting high‐quality, age‐appropriate, and culturally relevant content; encouraging active parent‐child engagement; and integrating media‐use guidance into pediatric and early childhood services (Nardone 2025). There is also a pressing need to expand locally produced Arabic‐language digital media that supports early learning and reflects regional cultural values, rather than relying primarily on translated or imported content (Steemers and Sakr 2017). Ultimately, supporting Arab parents with nuanced, context‐sensitive strategies will be key to promoting their children's healthy and meaningful engagement with digital media, a finding that one could expect to extend to other non‐Western cultural contexts as well.

4.2. Future Directions/Limitations

The present study has several limitations that indicate directions for future research. First, our findings rely on parent reports, which may be imprecise, especially for activities like digital media use that often occur in short, fragmented segments throughout the day (Christensen et al. 2020). Parental reports may be augmented with time‐use diaries, which take account of time of day, contextualizing digital media use within the daily activities of the child and family (Barr et al. 2020). Future studies could incorporate objective tracking methods, such as device‐based software, to provide more accurate and detailed estimates of both usage time and content. Also, while we examined key child, parent, and family characteristics previously shown to influence children's digital media use, these factors were largely identified in Western contexts and may not fully account for patterns in other cultural settings. Our findings, which diverged from earlier studies, suggest that additional factors specific to Arab populations may also shape digital media practices, such as household composition (e.g., extended family living arrangements), the role of domestic help, language preferences, and cultural values around education and screen use. Future research should explore these culturally specific influences to build a more comprehensive understanding of children's digital media use across diverse contexts.

Population‐level demographic data specific to families with young children in Abu Dhabi are not available, limiting direct comparisons between the sample and the target population. Although the demographic profile of the present sample likely reflects the broader population in terms of education and income (Statistics Centre Abu Dhabi, SCAD 2008, 2024), the possibility of sampling bias cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, the sample remains highly relevant for the study's aims, as it captures diversity among parents from the Arab region in the UAE with a child under the age of three.

Perhaps most critically, this study was cross‐sectional and did not examine child outcomes, limiting our ability to draw conclusions about the effects of digital media use on development. Longitudinal research is needed to assess how different aspects, such as passive versus active engagement, content type, and co‐use with parents versus solo use, affect outcomes like language and social‐emotional development over time. It will also be important to examine how parental mediation strategies evolve as children grow and as digital technologies change. With the rapid emergence of AI‐integrated devices for young children, future studies must also address how these innovations influence children's experiences and learning in unprecedented ways (Bansod et al. 2023).

5. Conclusions

This study is among the first to examine Arab children's digital media use, focusing on parents' content preferences and mediation strategies for children under age three. While most children in the sample did not use digital media, usage among those who did varied considerably. Parents preferred educational and Arabic‐language content and commonly imposed time limits and access restrictions. Mediation strategies involving parents' presence, especially co‐viewing, were widespread, whereas more interactive co‐engagement was less common. These findings support the parental mediation theory for the digital age, which outlines a range of strategies from restrictive to participatory. Notably, participatory learning strategies, those most beneficial for young children's development, appear to be underutilized in early childhood. Practically, the findings call for more tailored public health messaging that goes beyond screen‐time limits to consider the diverse needs, beliefs, and caregiving realities of Arab families. Promoting culturally relevant, high‐quality digital content and encouraging more active, joint parent‐child engagement can help ensure that early digital experiences are developmentally beneficial. Methodologically, this study underscores the importance of expanding research beyond Western contexts to capture culturally specific influences on digital media use. Future research, especially longitudinal studies, should examine how digital media use and its developmental impact evolve over time and across diverse sociocultural settings.

Author Contributions

Charles Raffaele: methodology, formal analysis, data curation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, visualization. Antje von Suchodoletz: conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition. Bruce D. Homer: conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, supervision, funding acquisition. Jessica Castelyn: conceptualization, methodology, writing – review and editing. Peter J. Johnson: formal analysis, data curation, writing – review and editing, visualization. Jan L. Plass: conceptualization, methodology, writing – review and editing, supervision, funding acquisition.

Ethics Statement

The study was approved by the New York University Abu Dhabi Institutional Review Board prior to data collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The content and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors. They may not reflect the positions or policies of the Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority.

Supporting information

Supporting Information S1

INFA-31-0-s001.docx (4.4MB, docx)

Acknowledgments

This report is based on research funded by the Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority (under the reference number: ECA/2023/091). The funder reviewed the study design and made recommendations, in particular with regard to the cultural and contextual appropriateness of the survey items. The funder had no role in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication.

The authors utilized artificial intelligence (AI) tools to assist in the preparation of this manuscript. Specifically, ChatGPT‐4 by OpenAI was employed for language refinement. All AI‐generated content was thoroughly reviewed and edited by the authors to ensure accuracy and coherence. The authors bear full responsibility for the integrity and originality of the manuscript's content.

Manuscript editing assisted by proofreader Assia Nait Kassi.

Raffaele, Charles , von Suchodoletz Antje, Homer Bruce D., Castelyn Jessica, Johnson Peter J., and Plass Jan L.. 2026. “Parents' Decisions Regarding Digital Media Use by Their Children Under Three Years Old in the United Arab Emirates,” Infancy: e70073. 10.1111/infa.70073.

Handling Editor: Roberta Michnick Golinkoff

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in OSF at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RJ9UB.

References

  1. Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority . 2024. Our First Five Years. https://www.eca.gov.ae/‐/media/ECA/homepage/documents/OurFirstFiveYears_Feb5DUAL‐LANGUAGE‐ENGLISH‐SPREADS1.pdf.
  2. Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority . 2025. Government and Private Organizations Come Together to Enhance Children’s Digital Wellbeing. https://www.eca.gov.ae/en/announcements/2025/02/government‐and‐private‐organizations‐come‐together‐to‐enhance‐childrens‐digital‐wellbeing.
  3. Ackermann, L. , Lo C. H., Mani N., and Mayor J.. 2020. “Word Learning From a Tablet App: Toddlers Perform Better in a Passive Context.” PLoS One 15, no. 12: e0240519. 10.1371/journal.pone.0240519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Adway, A. M. 2022. “تطبيقات الأطفال العربية على (الأندرويد): دراسة تحليلية لتوجهات الاستخدام [The children's Arabic applications on Android: An analytical study].” Journal of Al‐Quds Open University for Humanities & Social Research 4, no. 61: 104–117. 10.33977/0507-000-061-008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Alhajji, R. , Mansoori A. A., Konca A. S., and Simsar A.. 2025. “Patterns of Youtube Interaction Among Emirati Children: A Study of Media Engagement and Influence.” Educational Process: International Journal 14: e2025079. 10.22521/edupij.2025.14.79. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Alroqi, H. , Serratrice L., and Cameron‐Faulkner T.. 2021. “The Home Literacy and Media Environment of Saudi Toddlers.” Journal of Children and Media 16, no. 1: 95–106. 10.1080/17482798.2021.1921819. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. American Academy of Pediatrics . 2025. The 5Cs of Media Use. https://www.aap.org/en/patient‐care/media‐and‐children/center‐of‐excellence‐on‐social‐media‐and‐youth‐mental‐health/5cs‐of‐media‐use/.
  8. Badri, M. , Alkhaili M., Aldhaheri H., Yang G., Albahar M., and Alrashdi A.. 2023. “The Happiness in a Digital World–the Associations of Health, Family Life, and Digitalization Perceived Challenges‐Path Model for Abu Dhabi.” Journal of Social Sciences 4, no. 1: 167–183. 10.46799/jss.v4i1.480. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Badri, M. , Alnuaimi A., Al Rashedi A., Yang G., and Temsah K.. 2017. “School Children’s Use of Digital Devices, Social Media and Parental Knowledge and Involvement–the Case of Abu Dhabi.” Education and Information Technologies 22, no. 5: 2645–2664. 10.1007/s10639-016-9557-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bansod, S. , Ranade P., and Verma I. K.. 2023. “AI‐integrated Smart Toy for Enhancing Cognitive, Emotional, and Motor Skills in Toddlers.” In International Conference on Communication and Intelligent Systems, Singapore, 265–275. Springer Nature. [Google Scholar]
  11. Barr, R. , Kirkorian H., Radesky J., et al. 2020. “Beyond Screen Time: A Synergistic Approach to a More Comprehensive Assessment of Family Media Exposure During Early Childhood.” Frontiers in Psychology 11: 1283. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Brushe, M. E. , Lynch J. W., Melhuish E., Reilly S., Mittinty M. N., and Brinkman S. A.. 2023. “Objectively Measured Infant and Toddler Screen Time: Findings From a Prospective Study.” SSM‐Population Health 22: 101395. 10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101395. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Chang, H. Y. , Park E. J., Yoo H. J., won Lee J., and Shin Y.. 2018. “Electronic Media Exposure and Use Among Toddlers.” Psychiatry Investigation 15, no. 6: 568–573. 10.30773/pi.2017.11.30.2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Children and Screens . 2024. “Are Some Types of Screen Time Better Than Others?” Institute of Digital Media and Child Development, (February). https://www.childrenandscreens.org/learn‐explore/research/are‐some‐types‐of‐screen‐time‐better‐than‐others/. [Google Scholar]
  15. Christensen, C. , Silander M., Grindal T., et al. 2020. “Comparing Parent Report and Telemetry Measures of Child Media Use.” In Proceedings of the 2020 Connected Learning Summit, edited by Kalir J. H. and Filipiak D., 29–35. ETC Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Clark, L. S. 2011. “Parental Mediation Theory for the Digital Age.” Communication Theory 21, no. 4: 323–343. 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2011.01391.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Dean, N. , and Raftery A. E.. 2010. “Latent Class Analysis Variable Selection.” Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 62, no. 1: 11–35. 10.1007/s10463-009-0258-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Delacre, M. , Lakens D., and Leys C.. 2017. “Why Psychologists Should by Default Use Welch’s t‐Test Instead of Student’s t‐Test.” International Review of Social Psychology 30, no. 1: 92–101. 10.5334/irsp.82. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Dillon, A. M. , Gallagher K., Saqr S., Habak C., and AlRamamneh Y.. 2024. “The Joy of Reading–Emirati Fathers’ Insights Into Shared Reading With Young Children in a Multilingual Context.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 46, no. 6: 1–14. 10.1080/01434632.2024.2413149. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Edelman Intelligence . 2018. Norton’s My First Device Report. Edelman Intelligence. [Google Scholar]
  21. Eichen, L. , Hackl‐Wimmer S., Eglmaier M. T. W., et al. 2021. “Families' Digital Media Use: Intentions, Rules and Activities.” British Journal of Educational Technology 52, no. 6: 2162–2177. 10.1111/bjet.13161. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Fitzpatrick, C. , Cristini E., Bernard J. Y., and Garon‐Carrier G.. 2023. “Meeting Preschool Screen Time Recommendations: Which Parental Strategies Matter?” Frontiers in Psychology 14: 1287396. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1287396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gago‐Galvagno, L. G. , Perez M. L., Justo M. M., et al. 2023. “Contributions of Screen Use on Early Language and Development Milestones in Argentinean Toddlers From Different Socioeconomic Contexts.” Trends in Psychology 33, no. 2: 594–611. 10.1007/s43076-023-00292-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Gallagher, K. , Dillon A. M., Saqr S., Habak C., and Alramamneh Y.. 2025. “‘Come Back Home Early and Read for Us!’ Enabling Father‐Child Shared Reading in Policy and Practice.” Frontiers in Education 10: 1529382. 10.3389/feduc.2025.1529382. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Gruen, B. , and Leisch F.. 2025. Flexmix: Flexible Mixture Modeling. Version 2.3‐20. [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R‐project.org/package=flexmix.
  26. Grün, B. , and Leisch F.. 2008. “Flexmix Version 2: Finite Mixtures With Concomitant Variables and Varying and Constant Parameters.” Journal of Statistical Software 28, no. 4: 1–35. 10.18637/jss.v028.i04.27774042 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. International Telecommunication Union: Development Sector . 2024. Measuring Digital Development: The ICT Development Index 2024. ITU Publications. https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu‐d/opb/ind/D‐IND‐ICT_MDD‐2024‐3‐PDF‐E.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  28. Jago, R. , Thompson J. L., Sebire S. J., et al. 2014. “Cross‐Sectional Associations Between the Screen‐Time of Parents and Young Children: Differences by Parent and Child Gender and Day of the Week.” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 11, no. 1: 1–8. 10.1186/1479-5868-11-54. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Jlassi, M. , and Harrathi H.. 2025. “Language Erosion: Multilingual Challenges and Endangered Languages in Oman and the UAE.” European Journal of Language Policy 17, no. 1: 5–25. 10.3828/ejlp.2025.2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kang, I. 2023. “Rethinking Language in a Tech World: Exploring Socioeconomic Status, Sleep, & Screen Time in Infant Language Development.” (B.A. honors thesis). https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/.
  31. Knief, U. , and Forstmeier W.. 2021. “Violating the Normality Assumption May Be the Lesser of Two Evils.” Behavior Research Methods 53, no. 6: 2576–2590. 10.3758/s13428-021-01587-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Leonhardt, M. , and Overå S.. 2021. “Are There Differences in Video Gaming and Use of Social Media Among Boys and girls?—A Mixed Methods Approach.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 11: 6085. 10.3390/ijerph18116085. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Liu, A. , Li W., and Li M.. 2025. “Emerging Digital Inequality in Early Life: Parenting and Differential Usage of Digital Devices Among Urban Preschoolers in China.” Journal of Marriage and Family 87, no. 1: 30–52. 10.1111/jomf.12997. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Livingstone, S. , Blum‐Ross A., Pavlick J., and Ólafsson K.. 2018. “In the Digital Home, How Do Parents Support Their Children and Who Supports Them?” Parenting for a Digital Future: Survey Report 1. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/87952/1/Livingstone_Parenting%20Digital%20Survey%20Report%201_Published.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  35. Livingstone, S. , Mascheroni G., Dreier M., Chaudron S., and Lagae K.. 2015. How Parents of Young Children Manage Digital Devices at Home: The Role of Income, Education and Parental Style. EU Kids Online, LSE. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/63378. [Google Scholar]
  36. Madigan, S. , McArthur B. A., Anhorn C., Eirich R., and Christakis D. A.. 2020. “Associations Between Screen Use and Child Language Skills: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis.” JAMA Pediatrics 174, no. 7: 665–675. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.0327. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Mann, S. , Calvin A., Lenhart A., and Robb M. B.. 2025. The Common Sense Census: Media Use by Kids Zero to Eight, 2025. Common Sense Media. https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/research/report/2025‐common‐sense‐census‐web‐2.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  38. Mathers, S. J. , Kolancali P., Jelley F., et al. 2025. “Features of Digital Media Which Influence Social Interactions Between Adults and Children Aged 2–7 Years During Joint Media Engagement: A Multi‐Level Meta‐Analysis.” Educational Research Review 46: 100665. 10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100665. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Moriguchi, Y. 2022. “Beyond Bias to Western Participants, Authors, and Editors in Developmental Science.” Infant and Child Development 31, no. 1: e2256. 10.1002/icd.2256. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Nardone, R. 2025. “Digital Media in 0–6: Educational Design Between Services and Families.” Media Education 16, no. 1: 25–33. 10.36253/me-17097. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Nevski, E. , and Siibak A.. 2016. “The Role of Parents and Parental Mediation on 0–3‐Year‐Olds Digital Play With Smart Devices: Estonian Parents’ Attitudes and Practices.” Early Years 36, no. 3: 227–241. 10.1080/09575146.2016.1161601. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Paulus, F. W. , Joas J., Friedmann A., Fuschlberger T., Möhler E., and Mall V.. 2024. “Familial Context Influences Media Usage in 0‐to 4‐Year Old Children.” Frontiers in Public Health 11: 1256287. 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1256287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. R Core Team . 2025. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R‐project.org/. [Google Scholar]
  44. Raffaele, C. , Homer B. D., Suchodoletz A. v., Chapelier C., Castelyn J., and Plass J. L.. 2024. “International Comparison of Guidelines for Children’s Digital Media Use [White paper].” Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yGN3970kMPS6AaXG7butiuQ14X_u8Hsk/view. [Google Scholar]
  45. Rodideal, A. A. 2020. “A Systematic Literature Review Searching for a Comprehensive Dynamic Model of Parental Digital Mediation Strategies.” Revista de Stiinte Politice 65: 157–174. [Google Scholar]
  46. Sanders, W. , Parent J., Forehand R., and Breslend N. L.. 2016. “The Roles of General and technology‐related Parenting in Managing Youth Screen Time.” Journal of Family Psychology 30, no. 5: 641–646. 10.1037/fam0000175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Schmid, J. , Unternaehrer E., Benecchi E., et al. 2025. “Digital Media Use in 0–5 Year‐Old Children in Switzerland.” Swiss Psychology Open 5, no. 1: 4. 10.5334/spo.89. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Sigmundová, D. , Sigmund E., Badura P., Vokáčová J., Trhlíková L., and Bucksch J.. 2016. “Weekday‐Weekend Patterns of Physical Activity and Screen Time in Parents and Their Pre‐Schoolers.” BMC Public Health 16, no. 1: 1–9. 10.1186/s12889-016-3586-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Şimşek, A. S. 2023. “The Power and Type I Error of Wilcoxon‐Mann‐Whitney, Welch's T, and Student's T Tests for Likert‐type Data.” International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education 10, no. 1: 114–128. 10.21449/ijate.1183622. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Statistics Centre Abu Dhabi, SCAD . 2008. Household Income. https://scad.gov.ae/documents/20122/2363089/household%20income%20EN.xlsx/8c6b36aa‐77de‐8a54‐c698‐c83ea385bb9b?t=1684164450398.
  51. Statistics Centre Abu Dhabi, SCAD . 2024. Key Statistical Indicators: Education. https://scad.gov.ae/web/guest/key‐statistical‐indicators?p_r_p_categoryId=213.
  52. Steemers, J. , and Sakr N.. 2017. “Children’s Screen Content in the Arab World.” In Children's TV and Digital Media in the Arab World: Childhood, Screen Culture and Education, edited by Sakr N. and Steemers J., 1–19. I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd. [Google Scholar]
  53. Suchodoletz, A. v. , Chapelier C., Raffaele C., Castelyn J., Homer B. D., and Plass J. L.. 2025. Children’s Digital Wellbeing in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi: Findings From the Digital Use Survey. Report Commissioned by the Abu Dhabi Early Childhood Authority. [Google Scholar]
  54. Swider‐Cios, E. , Vermeij A., and Sitskoorn M. M.. 2023. “Young Children and Screen‐Based Media: The Impact on Cognitive and Socioemotional Development and the Importance of Parental Mediation.” Cognitive Development 66: 101319. 10.1016/j.cogdev.2023.101319. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. UAE Council for Digital Wellbeing . 2024. Digital Wellbeing. https://u.ae/en/information‐and‐services/social‐affairs/digital‐wellbeing.
  56. UAE Government . 2024. Sponsorship Requirements. https://u.ae/en/information‐and‐services/visa‐and‐emirates‐id/residence‐visas/residence‐visa‐for‐family‐members/sponsorship‐requirements.
  57. UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs . n.d. Facts and Figures. https://www.mofa.gov.ae/en/the‐uae/facts‐and‐figures.
  58. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs . 2020. International Migration 2020: Highlights. https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/undesa_pd_2020_international_migration_highlights.pdf.
  59. Vacková, P. , Cermakova A., and Kucirkova N.. 2023. Children’s Digital Books: Development, Testing and Dissemination of Quality Criteria. University of Stavanger. [Google Scholar]
  60. Valkenburg, P. M. , Krcmar M., Peeters A. L., and Marseille N. M.. 1999. “Developing a Scale to Assess Three Styles of Television Mediation: ‘Instructive Mediation,’ ‘Restrictive Mediation,’ and ‘Social Coviewing’.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 43, no. 1: 52–66. 10.1080/08838159909364474. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Veraksa, N. , Veraksa A., Gavrilova M., Bukhalenkova D., Oshchepkova E., and Chursina A.. 2021. “Short‐ and Long‐Term Effects of Passive and Active Screen Time on Young Children’s Phonological Memory.” Frontiers in Education 6: 600687. 10.3389/feduc.2021.600687. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. WHO . 2019. Guidelines on Physical Activity, Sedentary Behaviour and Sleep for Children Under 5 Years of Age. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550536. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Winter, K. , Flewitt R., El Gemayel S., et al. 2025. “The Rights of Very Young Children in the Digital Environment of the Family Home: Findings From a UK Survey of Children 0–36 Months and Their Parents.” Children & Society. [Google Scholar]
  64. World Bank Group: Data . n.d. Data for United Arab Emirates, Low Income, Middle Income, High Income. https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=AE‐XM‐XP‐XD.
  65. Xiao, Y. , Emmers D., Li S., Zhang H., Rule A., and Rozelle S.. 2025. “Screen Exposure and Early Childhood Development in Resource‐Limited Regions: Findings From a Population‐Based Survey Study.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 27: e68009. 10.2196/68009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Citations

  1. Gruen, B. , and Leisch F.. 2025. Flexmix: Flexible Mixture Modeling. Version 2.3‐20. [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R‐project.org/package=flexmix.

Supplementary Materials

Supporting Information S1

INFA-31-0-s001.docx (4.4MB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in OSF at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RJ9UB.

Articles from Infancy are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES