Young Children’s Screen Time, Executive Functions, and Language Development: Longitudinal Moderation of Parent/Child Co-Viewing and Media Content

Abstract

There is growing interest in how screen-based media is linked to young children’s regulatory development. However, findings on the relationship between screen time and regulatory abilities remain mixed, highlighting the need to consider additional contextual factors (e.g., Barr, 2019). This study investigated whether screen time at age two predicted hot and cold executive functions (EF) and language outcomes at age four. It also tested whether these associations were moderated by parent-child co-viewing behaviors and the type of media content children commonly consumed (educational vs. violent). Participants included 306 parent-child dyads (62% White, 22% Hispanic/Latino, 9% Black, 2% Asian, 5% mixed/other race), with 12% reporting an annual income below $20,000. Primary caregivers reported children’s screen time at age two (M = 28.13 months, SD = 6.84), and children’s EF and language were assessed at age four (M = 4.07 years, SD = 4.0 months) using standardized assessments (e.g., NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery) and Kochanska’s effortful control/EF tasks (i.e., snack delay/whisper/night-day). Higher screen time at age two was associated with poorer performance on both hot and cold EF tasks and lower receptive vocabulary at age four. Parent-child co-viewing predicted better working memory, and higher exposure to educational content was linked to stronger EF and language outcomes. However, neither co-viewing nor educational content moderated the effects of screen time on developmental outcomes over time. In contrast, higher exposure to violent content moderated children’s attentional shifting performance. Overall, these findings suggest that early screen exposure—particularly to violent content—may negatively impact children’s cognitive/regulatory development.

Children are growing up in a digitally immersive environment and will likely spend a significant portion of their lives engaged with screen media. As such, screen media use has become a normative part of children’s development (Ophir et al., 2021). Yet, the effects of screen media on children’s development remain widely debated (Bhutani et al., 2024). For instance, previous research has shown associations between screen time and delays in children’s cognitive functioning, self-regulation (Best et al., 2009; Corkin, 2021; Stockdale et al., 2022), and language development (Brushe et al., 2024), with some work suggesting that associations between media use and language outcomes may even be mediated by children’s self-regulatory abilities (Ribner et al., 2021).

However, other studies have demonstrated that media content—rather than screen time alone (Barr, 2019; Dore et al., 2020; Lillard et al., 2015)—combined with parent and child engagement during media viewing (Krcmar & Cingel, 2018; Neuman et al., 2019), likely moderates the impact of screen time on children’s development. These somewhat contrasting findings have led researchers to call for a more nuanced approach to examining the effects of children’s screen media use on later developmental outcomes (e.g., Barr, 2019; Vedechkina & Borgonovi, 2021). As such, additional work is needed that moves beyond measures of screen time alone and simultaneously examines the content and context of young children’s screen use in relation to developmental outcomes over time. This study addresses this need by examining longitudinal associations between early media exposure (ages 2 to 4) and children’s emerging executive functioning (EF) and language outcomes, while accounting for the potential moderating effects of media content and parent-child co-viewing behaviors.

Executive Functions

There has been increasing attention to the role of executive function (EF) in children’s development, along with growing interest in understanding the multiple factors that may influence EF, including media exposure (e.g., Barr et al., 2010; Namazi & Sadeghi, 2024; Zelazo, 2020). EF comprises several interrelated cognitive abilities associated with higher-order processing and control that are necessary for goal-directed behavior and social functioning (Novick et al., 2019). These abilities include attention, attention shifting, inhibitory control, planning, and working memory (Miyake & Friedman, 2012).

Research on EF spans multiple disciplines and has long featured diverging constructs and methodologies (e.g., Fiske & Holmboe, 2019; Messer et al., 2018; Miyake & Friedman, 2012; Zelazo, 2020). Despite these differences, there is broad agreement that higher-order processing and goal-directed behavior depend on the activation of integrated frontal brain regions (Karr et al., 2018; Zelazo, 2020). Although these regions are relatively immature in early childhood (Tsujimoto, 2008), their development is typically associated with improvements in EF performance (Fiske & Holmboe, 2019). EF is also closely related to overlapping constructs such as effortful control, emotion regulation, and self-regulation, with some scholars arguing that these constructs may share common neurological pathways (e.g., Zelazo et al., 2008, 2024). For the purposes of the current study, we use the term executive function(s) to refer to cognitive processes involved in higher-order thinking and goal-directed behavior, while acknowledging that individual differences in related traits likely influence EF performance in children.

Some researchers have proposed that executive control processes can be further subdivided into hot and cold EF (Zelazo et al., 2012, 2024). Hot EF involves control and planning in emotionally salient or reward-based contexts, requiring motivation and social perception (e.g., delay of gratification, inhibiting emotionally prepotent responses). In contrast, cold EF refers to cognitive skills used in abstract, decontextualized tasks, such as working memory, attention shifting, and problem-solving (Salehinejad et al., 2021). Both hot and cold EF are important predictors of children’s developmental outcomes: cold EF is more strongly associated with academic performance, while hot EF tends to predict social and emotional functioning (e.g., Poon, 2018). Not surprisingly, delays in both hot and cold EF have been linked to lower academic achievement (Pascual et al., 2019), reduced school readiness (Lin et al., 2019), and poorer social functioning (McKinnon & Blair, 2018).

A few studies suggest that screen time may differentially relate to hot and cold EF in young children (Corkin et al., 2021; Stockdale et al., 2022). For example, Corkin et al. (2021) demonstrated an association between total weekday TV exposure at age two and poorer hot EF when children were 4.5 years of age. They also reported a link between eating meals in front of TV at 4 years and poorer cold executive functioning at 4.5 years, suggesting that media viewing context may differentially be associated with children’s hot and cold EF. However, most prior research has relied on global measures of EF, without distinguishing between these subdomains. The present study aims to address this gap by examining whether early media exposure and viewing context relates to both hot and cold EF outcomes.

Early Screen Time and EF

Given the ubiquitous nature of screens in children’s developmental environments (Barassi, 2020; McDaniel & Coyne, 2016) and their potential to displace other important developmental activities (e.g., Putnick et al., 2023), several organizations have urged parents to limit children’s screen time (AACAP, 2024; AAP, 2023; WHO, 2019). This includes the American Academy of Pediatrics, which recommends limiting screen time for children under the age of two (Guram & Heinz, 2018; Hill et al., 2016). These recommendations are based in part on research showing that young children’s immature symbolic representation, memory, and attentional systems hinder their ability to learn from digital media—particularly when compared to dynamic caregiver interactions that provide opportunities to practice key regulatory skills supporting emerging EFs (Anderson & Pempek, 2005; Guram & Heinz, 2018; Hill et al., 2016). Despite these guidelines, young children are still exposed to substantial amounts of screen-based media (Hish et al., 2021; Stockdale et al., 2022).

Research also suggests that children’s television programming can overstimulate the orienting and attentional systems due to frequent visual and auditory changes (e.g., sound effects, flashes, rapid scene transitions) designed to maintain attention on screens (e.g., Christakis, 2009; Namazi & Sadeghi, 2024). These constant shifts repeatedly engage the orienting system—highly sensitive to novel stimuli—which may compete with the development of higher-order EF attentional networks when activated in rapid succession (e.g., Cooper et al., 2009). Repeated engagement of the orienting system may reinforce neural pathways associated with reactive attention, potentially disrupting the maturation of attentional systems necessary for EF.

Moderating Factors for EF: Media Content and Measurement

Findings on the relationship between screen time and EF remain mixed. While some studies report associations between increased screen time and poorer attention (Lin et al., 2020; Lissak, 2018; Liu et al., 2021), others have failed to replicate these associations (e.g., Corkin et al., 2021). These inconsistencies may stem from differences in study design and measurement approaches. Some scholars argue that media content, rather than screen time alone, may be a more meaningful predictor of children’s EF outcomes (Barr et al., 2010; Linebarger et al., 2014; Namazi & Sadeghi, 2024).

For instance, Barr and colleagues (2010) found that infants who were exposed to more adult-directed television at one year of age demonstrated poorer EF at age four, whereas exposure to age-appropriate programming was not linked to the same deficits. Similarly, in a nationally representative sample, Linebarger et al. (2014) reported that exposure to educational media improved EF in both high- and low-risk school-aged children, while age-inappropriate content had the opposite effect—particularly among children growing up in low resourced families. Other studies have shown that greater exposure to educational (versus entertainment) media is associated with better language outcomes and stronger regulatory skills (Jing et al., 2023; Lillard et al., 2015; Linebarger et al., 2014; Ribner et al., 2021). Prior research has demonstrated that educational television content tends to focus on knowledge creation while modeling positive social interactions and problem-solving behaviors (e.g., Common Sense Media, 2022b). Furthermore, educational media tends to feature slower pacing, more dialogue, and minimal sound and visual effects to allow for greater reflection and increased comprehension (e.g., Lillard & Peterson, 2011). These production features are thought to better support children’s learning while simultaneously advantaging emerging regulatory skills that are believed to support both EF (e.g., sustained attention, memory retention, problem solving) and language learning (e.g., greater word learning and processing; see for example, Huber et al., 2018).

In contrast, exposure to violent media has been linked to increased aggressive behavior and poorer regulation and attention (Christakis et al., 2013; Zimmerman & Christakis, 2007; John & Bates, 2024). Entertainment-based media with violent content tends to portray physical and verbal aggression, bullying, and even antisocial behaviors (e.g., Common Sense Media, 2022b). Stylistically, violent media often includes more action, faster pacing and quick scene changes that are designed to intensify arousal but potentially undercut attention and word learning/processing by again overstimulating the orienting and attentional systems (Namazi & Sadeghi, 2024) that compete with higher-order EF attentional components (e.g., Cooper et al., 2009).

It is also important to consider methodological variability in studies examining media and EF. While longitudinal designs are becoming more common (Cliff et al., 2018; Corkin et al., 2021; McNeill, 2020; Stockdale et al., 2022), most studies still rely on cross-sectional data (e.g., McNeill et al., 2021). There is also considerable variation in how children’s media content is measured, with many depending on parent-report (e.g., McHarg et al., 2020; Nathanson et al., 2014). Parents can offer valuable insights, however, concerns remain about the accuracy and reliability of parent reports, particularly with respect to rating media content (i.e., educational and violent content). Thus, there is a need for additional longitudinal research that examines the relationship between early media exposure and emerging EF in early childhood, that incorporates objective ratings of media content as well as multiple assessments of both hot and cold EF. In the current study, we address this concern by employing expert ratings of media content (Common Sense Media) based on parents’ nominated shows that their children are viewing in the home, as well as inclusion of multiple assessments of children’s hot and cold EF alongside additional parent-reported measures.

Early Screen Time and Language Development

In addition to concerns about the potential negative impact of early screen time on children’s EF, research also suggests that early media exposure may affect children’s language development (Bhutani et al., 2024). Scholars have argued that language learning is generally not effectively gained through screen media (Anderson & Pempek, 2005; Brushe et al., 2024; Sundqvist et al., 2024). Indeed, multiple researchers have argued that higher-levels of screen time might displace opportunities for real world, interpersonal interactions where individuals dynamically respond to one another in co-constructed communicative exchanges that are thought to be important for chidren’s language learning (Gath et al., 2023; Porter et al., 2022; Sundqvist et al., 2025). However, exceptions exist—particularly when screen interactions are live and interactive (e.g., Roseberry et al., 2014). Considering these findings, scholars and public organizations have begun to advocate for media content that supports children’s learning (Common Sense Media, 2022b). For example, Hirsh-Pasek and colleagues (2015) recommend that producers design—and caregivers select—media that fosters active, engaged, and meaningful social learning. Consistent with this perspective, both media developers (e.g., television programs, child-oriented apps) and scholars have argued that some forms of screen media may positively contribute to children’s development. This is supported by some research demonstrating that TV viewing is linked to higher linguistic development (Lee et al., 2017). However, a recent review has reported mixed findings demonstrating both positive, negative and neutral associations between screen time and children’s language outcomes (see Bhutani et al., 2024). Still others have found that caregiver interactions as well as media content may moderate associations between screen time and children’s language (Mendelsohn et al., 2010) and EF outcomes (Yang et al., 2017). Overall, the nature of these associations remains unclear, indicating a need for a nuanced investigation of these complex relations.

In a meta-analysis aimed at addressing this complexity, Madigan et al. (2020) found that overall screen time was negatively associated with children’s language skills, whereas co-viewing and educational media use were positively associated with language outcomes. Similarly, Stockdale and colleagues (2022) reported that different patterns of early media exposure have differential effects on language outcomes. Specifically, children with consistently high television exposure across the first four years of life performed worse on language assessments compared to those with lower exposure trajectories. In a sample of Hispanic/Latino children enrolled in an Early Head Start program, watching more than two hours of television per day was associated with a higher risk of lower communicative scores (Duch et al., 2013a). These findings are consistent with those from a large sample of Korean children, in which children watching more than two hours of television daily were at increased risk for language delays (Byeon & Hong, 2015).

While much of the literature on screen time and language development focuses on television exposure, several studies have expanded the definition of screen use to include mobile devices, video games, and other digital platforms. These studies have also identified negative associations with language development (e.g., Mendelsohn et al., 2010; van den Heuvel et al., 2019). However, other research has reported either positive or negligible associations between overall screen time and language outcomes (Dore et al., 2020; Ferguson & Donnellan, 2013; Ruangdaraganon et al., 2009).

Moderating Factors for Language Development: Media Content and Parent/Child Co-Viewing Behaviors

Importantly, research increasingly supports the notion that specific media content and viewing contexts can foster children’s language development (Linebarger & Walker, 2005; Linebarger et al., 2010). For example, in a small sample of children aged 6 to 30 months, Linebarger and Walker (2005) found that children’s expressive language and vocabulary scores were either positively or negatively associated with television viewing depending on the type of programming. Certain educational programs—such as Dora the Explorer, Blue’s Clues, Arthur, Clifford, and Dragon Tales—were linked to larger vocabularies and stronger expressive language skills. In contrast, programs like Teletubbies, Sesame Street, and Barney & Friends were associated with weaker language outcomes. The researchers proposed that the more effective programs featured stronger narrative structures or storybook-like arcs, whereas the less effective ones relied on variety-style content with less coherent storylines. Strong narratives may better support children’s attention and facilitate language processing.

As discussed earlier, children’s programs often rely on novelty cues (e.g., rapid scene changes, flashes, sound effects) to capture attention. Educational programs, however, tend to deploy these cues more deliberately to highlight meaningful content, such as new vocabulary words. For example, Blue’s Clues uses auditory signals and visual motion (e.g., a ding and object shaking) to emphasize key words on screen. In this context, attention-directing cues may enhance children’s language learning by guiding their focus to salient linguistic or conceptual information (Neuman et al., 2019).

Beyond content type, a growing body of research highlights the importance of co-viewing—that is, when an adult or caregiver watches media with the child. Co-viewing has been associated with stronger language skills in young children (Lee et al., 2017; Mendelsohn et al., 2010). For instance, simple joint activities—such as linking an object seen on screen to a similar object in the child’s immediate environment—can support language learning (Griffith et al., 2021; Strouse & Troseth, 2014). In contrast, other studies have found no significant associations between educational media use and children’s language development (e.g., Alloway et al., 2014; Neuman et al., 2020). Taken together, these mixed findings underscore the need for further research to clarify how content and context interact in relation to children’s language outcomes.

Potential Covariates of Children’s Screen Time

There are several factors shown to increase screen time in young children that are relevant to the current study. First, parents’ education has been linked to less television time, but more computer and tablet time for young children (Duch et al., 2013b; Krogh et al., 2021). Furthermore, parents’ education is also known to be related to young children’s EF (Korucu et al., 2020). Similarly, parents’ depression has been related to increased screen time for young children, as parents experiencing depression are more likely to use media as a substitute for direct interactions with their children (e.g., Korucu et al., 2020; Krogh et al., 2021), although additional research suggests that content choice tends to be more educational vs. adult-directed (e.g., Bank et al, 2012). Thus, we examined the possibility that parents’ education level and symptoms of depression may likewise be associated with children’s screen time and indirectly linked to subsequent outcomes.

Current Study

The current study was designed to examine associations between infants’ media exposure—measured via parent-reported screen time at two years of age—and subsequent in-home assessments of children’s hot and cold executive function (EF) and language development, at four years of age. Based on prior research (e.g., Barr et al., 2010), we hypothesized that higher levels of screen time would predict poorer cold EF performance (i.e., inhibitory control, attentional shifting, and working memory), along with weaker language outcomes (e.g., Stockdale et al., 2022). Given the limited number of studies investigating media exposure in relation to hot EF (i.e., Corkin et al., 2021), we were less certain about the direction of associations but anticipated that greater screen time at age two would be associated with poorer hot EF outcomes at age four. We also controlled for caregivers’ depression and education level because they have been shown to be linked to children’s screen time. We hypothesized that parents’ higher levels of education would be related to less screen time and better developmental outcomes and that parents’ depressive symptoms would be related to increased screen time and poorer outcomes. We then examined whether media content and parent–child interactions during co-viewing moderated the associations between screen time and children’s later EF and language outcomes. We anticipated that higher quality interactions during co-viewing and viewing more educational content might lessen the negative associations between screen time on subsequent EF and langauge outcomes. We further anticipated that more violent media consumption might amplify the negative associations between screen time and outcomes over time.

Methods

Participants were drawn from Project Media Effects on Development from Infancy to Adulthood (M.E.D.I.A.), an ongoing longitudinal study examining child development in a media-saturated environment. Children and their primary caregivers completed annual survey and observational assessments between May and August each year. The current analytic sample included 306 primary caregivers who had at least one child under 1 year of age at the first wave of data collection (Wave 1; M = 5.95 months, SD = 3.61). At Wave 3 (when children were approximately 2 years old), 98.5% of primary caregivers identified as female with 67.5% reporting being married, 16.5% cohabiting with a partner, 14.0% single and never married, and fewer than 3% who were divorced, widowed, or separated.

In terms of racial and ethnic identification, 62.0% of participants identified as White, 22.0% as Hispanic or Latino, 9.0% as Black, 2.0% as Asian, and 5.0% as other or multiracial. Educational attainment varied: 22.0% had a high school education or less, 35.0% had completed some college, 27.0% held a bachelor’s degree, and 16.0% had some postgraduate education.

Household income at Wave 3 was collected using categorical values in $10,000 increments (i.e., 1 = less than $10,000, 2 = $10,000 to 19,999, etc.) with 12.0% of participants reporting an annual income below $20,000; 33.5% below $50,000; 20.0% below $80,000; 9.0% below $100,000; and 19.3% above $100,000. Fewer than 7.0% of participants did not report their household income.

The present study draws on data collected across Waves 3 to 5. At Wave 3, children were approximately 2 years old (child age: M = 28.13 months, SD = 6.84; 44.0% male). At Wave 4, children were approximately 3 years old (M = 3.06 years, SD = 0.72), and at Wave 5, they were approximately 4 years old (M = 4.07 years, SD = 0.25).

Procedures

For a detailed review of the recruitment process and demographics of the participants, please see Porter et al., 2025. At an earlier wave (Wave 2), when the children were under two years old, 250 primary caregiver-infant dyads were semi-randomly selected to participate in our in-home assessments with the constraint being that randomization was stratified based on household income. Details of this stratification process can be found in Porter et al.., 2022.

Retention rates for participants from Wave 1 to Wave 5 were 80.5%. Of the 306 primary caregivers in the study, 218 (71%) completed all study waves and 88 (28%) were missing at least one full wave of data. Sample sizes vary across tests because Mann-Whitney U analyses include only participants with non-missing values on the test variable (e.g., income, education). We examined whether participants who completed all study waves differed from those who were missing at least one wave. For education, results indicated no significant differences between groups (n = 203 and n = 59; U = 5355.50, Z = −1.28, p = .199). For household income, results indicated statistically significant differences between groups. Participants who completed all waves (n = 171) had higher income ranks than those missing a wave (n = 48; U = 3145.00, Z = −2.49, p = .013).

Each year, parent-child dyads completed multiple in-home assessments and parents completed a 2-hour survey battery online (in 30-minute increments) over a two-week period using a secure survey hosting site with custom links for each participant. For participants without computers or Wi-Fi in the home, research assistants loaned iPads and mobile hotspots to participants. Primary caregivers provided informed consent and were compensated with a $150 gift card for participating in the survey and in-home visits and an additional $25 for participating in all in-home tasks for the larger study.

Measures

Screen time (Wave 3).

Child screen time was measured via parents responding to the question, “Thinking about a typical weekend/weekday, how much time does your child spend doing each of the following activities at home?” Screen time activities included time with television or movies, computer, video games, tablets, and smartphones. Parents answered on an 8-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 8 (more than 5 hours/day). Parents responded separately for weekdays versus weekends. Parents’ answers for each media type were summed for a weekday score and a weekend score. Weekday scores were multiplied by five and weekend scores were multiplied by two and both scores were summed together to make an overall estimate of a child’s weekly screen time exposure. Higher scores indicated higher screen time.

Executive Functions and Language Outcomes (Wave 5 – Age 4).

Child EF were assessed using the National Institute of Health (NIH) Toolbox Cognition Battery (Weintraub et al., 2013) and several assessments from the Kochanska battery of effortful control (Boldt et al., 2020; Kim & Kochanska, 2019; Kochanska et al., 2009). The NIH Cognition Battery is a computer adaptive test designed for participants from age three to adulthood that assesses multiple components of cognition including components thought to reflect cold EF, including episodic memory, processing speed, working memory, attention as well as a measure of children’s vocabulary. This computerized, standardized assessment was designed by the NIH to provide a “common currency” among researchers for comparisons across a wide range of ages, studies, and populations. For children ages three to six, three major domains of cold EF are assessed: inhibitory control (Flanker task), attention shifting (Dimensional Card Sorting task), and episodic or working memory (Picture Sequence Memory task), as well as a language processing (Picture Vocabulary assessment). Standardized scores from these assessments were used for all analyses.

Children then completed three tasks from the well-established Kochanska battery of effortful control, to capture additional dimensions of hot and cold EF, including the Snack Delay and Whisper tasks (hot EF) and the Day/Night task (cold EF) (Boldt et al., 2020; Kim & Kochanska, 2019; Kochanska et al., 2009). All tasks were video recorded and later coded by research assistants trained to reliability following protocols reported by Kim and Kochanska (2019).

For the Snack Delay task, the child waited for the experimenter to ring a bell before retrieving an M&M candy from under a cup. The child participated in four trials. Research assistants independently coded children’s behavior. An additional 20% of video segments were randomly selected and coded to test reliability. Interrater reliability (Cronbach’s α = .93) was deemed to be adequate. Scores were then averaged across the trials, with higher scores representing longer delay in gratification.

For the Whisper task, children were shown pictures of 12 popular television characters including Mickey Mouse, Baby Shark, Chase from Paw Patrol, and Connor from PJ Masks (images were updated from the original images used in Kochanska’s tasks using the most common television characters from the parental reports of their children’s favorite media at Wave 4). Children were asked to whisper the name of the character to the research assistant when the research assistant showed the child the character with higher task compliance demonstrating a stronger capacity to inhibit a prepotent response (i.e., loudly saying the name of favorite character).

For the Day/Night task, children were shown a picture of the night sky and the day sky. Children were instructed to point to the opposite picture when the research assistant said day or night. Children completed ten trials with higher compliance indicating a stronger inhibitory control response.

Tasks were scored and summed for “compliant = 1” vs. “non-compliant = 0” responses, with higher scores indicating greater inhibitory control processes. Trials from both the whisper and day/night task were coded independently by trained research assistants, with disagreements resolved through discussion to reach 100% agreement resulting in high interrater reliabilities (kappa = .95 to 1.0).

Moderator: Content of Screen Media (Wave 4 – Age 3).

Parents listed their toddler’s three favorite television programs and three favorite games. These programs were then compared to Common Sense Media expert ratings for educational and violent content. Common Sense Media is a nonprofit organization dedicated to helping parents and children navigate life in a digital world (Common Sense Media, 2022a). Expert ratings were provided from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater presence of both educational and violent content. Educational and violent content were assessed individually by summing the expert ratings across all six of the participating child’s favorite television programs and games provided by parents (Prot et al., 2014). Higher scores were indicative of more exposure to violent or educational media content separately media.

Moderator: Parent-Child Interactions while Engaging with Screen Media (Wave 5 – Age 4).

Parental and child behaviors while watching media with their child was measured by recording children and primary caregivers as they watched a short video clip. The clip was from Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood, a program that encourages social and emotional development, especially when parents discuss media content with children (Rasmussen, et al., 2016). Participants were randomly assigned to watch one of two episodes, either “Daniel Gets Mad” or “Katerina Gets Mad” clips. Both episodes are very similar in terms of plot, characters, and music, and follow one of the characters as they deal with strong emotions following a disappointment (Santomero, 2012). Using multiple clips (i.e., stimulus sampling) is a common practice in studies of the effects of media (e.g., Gentile et al., 2009; Wells & Windschitl, 1999), as it increases ecological validity. Participants were instructed to watch the show as they normally would, including any normal parent-child processes. The research assistant recording the participants was located on the side of the participant rather than directly in front to minimize distraction during the task and to ensure mobility if the child left the frame. Parent-child interactions were also recorded for one minute following the end of the clip.

Parent-child interactions were subjected to a detailed coding process to examine both parent and child reactions during media exposure. The current study utilized codes for the child repeating media (child repeating specific phrases from the program, e.g., singing along to the music), parent talking about media (parent asking their child questions or making observations with the media, e.g., commenting to child “Look! Daniel is going to the beach today!). Coders were trained undergraduate students who took part in an intensive training program over the course of one semester. Each video was coded twice, in 30-second intervals, with 0 = behavior absent, 1 = behavior present, and X = non-codable. Acceptable reliability was achieved for each code using Krippendorf’s alpha (repetition: α =.70, talking about media: α = .78). Codes were based on coding schemes developed by Lauricella et al. (2014) and Fidler et al. (2010).

Potential Covariates: Primary Caregivers’ Depression and Education (Wave 2 – Age 1).

Parent depression was measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Short Depression Scale (CES-10; Levine, 2013). Parents answered statements regarding their own feelings and behaviors in the last week. Participants responded to ten statements on a four-point Likert scale from 1 (Rarely or none of the time [less than 1 day]) to 4 (All of the time (5–7 days). Example items include, “I could not “get going” and “I felt depressed.” Items were summed, with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms. Reliability was adequate (Cronbach’s α = .82). Parents’ education level was measured using our previously reported demographic questionnaire.

Plan of Analysis

The hypotheses of this study were examined in three steps. First, normality and attrition of the data were examined using SPSS 27. Second, the main effects of screetime on the EF and language outcomes, controlling for parents’ depression and education, were examined with a path model (see Table 2, Figure 1) using Mplus 8.3 (Muthén & Muthén, 2017). Third, potential moderation effects were tested separately using interaction terms and the Johnson-Neyman (J-N) technique in Mplus (Lin, 2020) while also controlling for parents’ depression and education level. The J-N approach estimates the conditional effect of the independent variable across the full range of the moderator and plots 95% confidence intervals for these effects. Regions of significance are indicated where the confidence intervals do not include zero, revealing the specific values of the moderator at which the effect becomes statistically significant. Unlike a single p-value for the interaction term, the J-N technique provides a more nuanced understanding of where moderation occurs (Lin, 2020).

Table 2.

Standardized Path Model Results Predicting Executive Functioning and Language Outcomes

Predictor	Flanker	Card Sort	Working Memory	Snack Delay	Whisper	Day/Night	Vocabulary
Screen Time (W3)	−.24**	−.31***	−.18	−.18*	−.15*	−.25***	−.24**
95% CI	[−.41, −.07]	[−.48, −.15]	[−.37, .01]	[−.33, −.03]	[−.30, −.00]	[−.40, −.11]	[−.39, −.08]
Parent Depression (W2)	−.17*	−.09	−.02	−.03	−.10	.02	−.04
Parent Education (W1)	.30***	.09	.18*	.07	.10	.19**	.23**
R 2	.25	.20	.07	.05	.05	.12	.13

Note: Values are standardized coefficients (β).

^†p < .10,

^*p < .05,

^**p < .01,

^***p < .001

Figure 1.

Conceptual Model for Analyses

Note. Only two potential moderators are shown for parsimony.

Transparency and Openness

The recruitment, sample size, and measures in the study have been reported. Journal Article Reporting Standards have been followed. Deidentified data are available at https://osf.io/v8r6s/?view_only=cc395da7f3d54e089005cc548ade509e. The hypotheses and analytic plan were not pre-registered.

Results

Preliminary Analysis

Children were exposed, on average, to less than 2 hours a day of media for each type of media. There was variability in children’s screen time, suggesting some children had a high diet of weekly screen time, while other children had very limited screen time (see Table 1). Means and standard deviations of children’s media content demonstrated variability in children’s exposure to educational and violent content. In general, children were exposed, on average to more educational content than violent content.

Table 1.

Zero-Order Correlations and Means and Standard Deviations for all Variables of Interest

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
1. Depression W2	-
2. Education W2	0.05	-
3. Screen time W3	−0.00	−0.22***	-
4. Child Repetition of Media W3	−0.01	0.11	−0.03	-
5. Parent Verbal Participation W3	0.07	0.10	−0.05	0.45***	-
6. Ed Content W4	−0.05	0.16*	0.10	0.12	0.06	-
7. Violent Content W4	0.06	−0.11	0.33***	0.19*	0.04	0.36***	-
8. NIH Picture Vocabulary W5	−0.03	0.26***	−0.21**	−0.02	−0.01	0.21*	−0.04	-
9. NIH Flanker W5	−0.18*	0.28***	−0.20**	0.04	−0.07	0.08	−0.17*	0.42***	-
10. NIH Card Sort W5	−0.12	0.14	−0.29***	0.14	0.09	−0.07	−0.21**	0.45***	0.50***	-
11. NIH Picture Sequence W5	0.02	0.16*	−0.18***	0.17*	0.23**	0.23**	0.06	0.33***	0.40***	0.28***	-
12. Snack Delay Total W5	0.02	0.08	−0.18**	0.00	0.11	0.19**	−0.06	0.05	0.10	0.00	0.18*	-
13. Whisper Task W5	−0.05	0.09	−0.16**	0.00	0.11	0.09	0.05	0.14*	0.12	0.10	0.11	0.46***	-
14. Day/Night Task W5	−0.01	−0.16**	−0.26***	0.06	0.11	0.14*	−0.06	0.41***	0.33***	0.37***	0.31***	0.38***	0.60***	-
Means (SD)	16.50 (4.82)	3.58 (1.27)	70.03 (24.81)	1.24 (1.38)	4.62 (3.10)	7.28 (4.75)	5.81 (3.17)	97.27 (16.43)	103.25 (13.08)	99.70 (14.40)	101.81 (24.19)	7.76 (7.65)	24.84 (14.88)	17.84 (11.60)

Note: Depression W2 = primary caregiver depression Wave 2; Education W2 = primary caregiver’s education level Wave 2; Ed Content W4 = educational media content at Wave 4; Violent Content W4 = Violent media content at Wave 4; NIH Card Sort W5 = NIH Dimensional Card Sort task at Wave 5

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations among study variables are presented in Table 1. Consistent with prior research, screen time was negatively associated with multiple executive functioning and language outcomes.

Main Path Analysis

The path model, as depicted in Figure 1, was fully saturated with zero degrees of freedom, thus only parameter estimates (rather than model fit indices) are reported hereafter (see Table 2). After controlling for parent depression and education levels, screen time at Wave 3 was negatively associated with several indicators of cold EF at Wave 5. Specifically, higher screen time predicted poorer performance on the NIH Flanker (β = −.24, p = .005, 95% CI [−.41, −.15]), Dimensional Card Sort (β = −.31, p < .001, 95% CI [−.48, −.15]) and Day/Night task (β = −.25, p < .001, 95% CI [−.40, −.11]). Screen time was also negatively associated with hot EF at Wave 5, including Snack Delay (β = −.18, p = .018, 95% CI [−.33, −.03]) and Whisper task performance (β = −.15, p = .048, 95% CI [−.30, −.00]). Finally, greater screen time at Wave 3 was associated with lower receptive vocabulary scores at Wave 5 (β = −.24, p = .004, 95% CI [−.39, −.08]).

Moderation Analyses

Results from the J-N moderation analyses indicated a significant interaction between screen time and violent media content in predicting performance on the Dimensional Card Sort task (ß = −0.69, p < .001, CI: [−1.27, −0.12]). Probing this interaction revealed that the negative association between screen time and attentional shifting was only significant at higher levels of violent content exposure (scores of 4 or greater; see Figure 2). For children viewing lower levels violent content, this association was not statistically significant. Educational content, as well as child and parent behaviors during joint-media engagement did not significantly moderate the relations between screen time at age 2 and all other measures of hot and cold EF or language development at age 4.

Figure 2.

Regions of Significance for the Moderating Effect of Violent Media Content on the Slope of Screen Time and the Dimensional Card Sorting Task

Note. The solid line represents the line of the slope for the effect of screen time on the Dimensional Card Sorting task. Dotted lines represent upper and lower 95% confidence intervals. The shaded area represents areas where the 95% confidence interval includes 0, in which the moderation effect is not significant.

Discussion

Researchers have increasingly called for a more comprehensive understanding of associations between early screen time exposure and young children’s cognitive/regulatory development (Barr, 2019; Vedechkina & Borgonovi, 2021). This study addressed that call by examining relations between screen time exposure at age 2 and children’s executive function (EF) and language outcomes at age 4, with a focus on potential moderating roles of screen-based media content and parent-child interactions during co-viewing.

Screen time and EF

Consistent with prior research, higher early screen-time exposure was associated uniformly with poorer performance across four unique measures of cold EF, including children’s inhibitory control, attentional shifting, and working memory (Hish et al., 2021). These findings support work suggesting that screen time may be associated with several emerging cognitive control processes involved in children’s EF. We suspect that higher levels of media may displace other advantageous developmental opportunities that support the emergence of EF skills such as parent-child interactions where parents provide verbal and physical scaffolding that help to sustain children’s attention and problem solving efforts (e.g., Fay-Stammbach et al., 2014). Recent research supports this notion showing that children’s higher levels of screen time is associated with poorer quality parent-child interactions and feelings of closeness (e.g., Gath et al., 2023). It is also possible that exposure to higher levels of media, especially entertaining and/or violent media, may hijack the reactive attentional systems that interfere with the development of higher-order attentional control systems that promote chidren’s executive functioning (e.g., Barr et al., 2010; Cooper et al., 2009; Namazi & Sadeghi, 2024).

Building on this work, we found evidence that screen time was negatively associated with children’s performance on tasks that involve hot executive functioning (i.e., delay of gratification, impulse control/regulation of approach-avoidance reactions), suggesting broader associations between early media exposure and EF beyond traditionally measured cold EF tasks. Thus, early screen time may not only be linked to cognitive processes related to information processing systems but also interrelated control systems believed to be important in children’s emotional and motivational contexts (e.g., Poon, 2018). The implications of these findings are that early screen exposure may more broadly be linked to several domains of children’s cognitive/emotional/motivational control processes. This, in turn, may disrupt not only children’s general cognitive functioning and later academic performance but also domains that may directly be associated with children’s emotional and social functioning more broadly (e.g., Kochanska et al., 2001).

Main and Interactive Effects of Moderators on EF

Prior research emphasizes the importance of early experiences for EF development, as brain regions responsible for regulatory processes continue to mature during early childhood (Best et al., 2009; Corkin, 2021). As part of this developmental window, screen media may interact with broader content-based and contextual variables (e.g., co-viewing) in shaping regulatory systems. Beyond screen time duration, media characteristics—particularly the presence of fast pacing, violence, or educational messaging—has been found to be related to EF development (Huber et al., 2018; Kronenberger et al., 2005; Lillard & Peterson, 2011; Lillard et al., 2015; Namazi & Sadeghi, 2024). Consistent with prior findings (e.g., Kronenberger et al., 2005; Nikkelen et al., 2014), our results indicated that greater exposure to violent content was associated with poorer EF outcomes. Moreover, violent content moderated the link between overall screen time and attentional shifting, amplifying this negative association. This suggests that frequent exposure to violent content may disrupt the ability to shift attention flexibly between competing stimuli—a key component of cognitive flexibility.

One possible mechanism underlying this effect involves the attentional systems engaged during media viewing. Violent content often includes salient attention-capturing features, such as rapid scene changes, bright lights, or startling sounds (Christakis, 2009; John & Bates, 2024). These may over-engage the orienting attentional system at the expense of higher-order executive attention systems, potentially reducing children’s ability to shift attention voluntarily (see Cooper et al., 2009). Repeated exposure to such input may lead to reliance on bottom-up, stimulus-driven processing rather than more deliberate, top-down control (Zelazo et al., 2008).

Attentional shifting is also implicated in young children’s social-emotional functioning. Prior studies suggest that better attentional shifting abilities are linked to greater social competence, including flexible responses to social cues and more prosocial behaviors (Caporaso et al., 2019; Eisenberg, 2001). Conversely, difficulties with attentional shifting have been associated with higher levels of aggression, peer rejection, and poor emotion regulation (Wilson, 2003). These findings highlight the importance of monitoring not just the quantity but also the specific characteristics of screen content, particularly in early developmental periods.

In contrast to violent content, findings revealed that greater exposure to educational media was associated with stronger working memory, an increased ability to delay gratification (e.g., Snack Delay) and a stronger ability to inhibit prepotent responses (e.g., Day/Night). These results support experimental research indicating that educational programming can promote EF skills, including inhibitory control and delayed gratification (Huber et al., 2018). However, we note that educational content did not moderate the longitudinal association between screen time and EF. While it is possible that educational content may support children’s cognitive functioning directly, it does not appear to counteract the potential detrimental effects associated with earlier exposure to screen media on children’s EF more broadly.

In addition to educational content, we also examined the potential role of joint media engagement or co-viewing of media. Like our findings with educational content, we found that joint media engagement was related to better working memory, suggesting that the ways parents and children jointly engage with media may play a role in enhancing children’s capacity to engage and remember information (Madigan et al., 2020; Troseth et al., 2018). Part of how parents and children engage with media includes conversations about the content being viewed. It could be that these types of conversations work to enhance attention to salient cues, thus helping children retain memorable events from these shared experiences. Over time, repeated experience with higher quality joint media engagement might help to reinforce strategies that help children recall information that then transfer to other contexts where working memory is being deployed. This notion appears supported by experimental research showing that parent-child conversations tend to enhance children’s performance on memory tasks (see Geurten & Léonard, 2023).

Parent-child co-viewing behaviors, however, did not moderate the longitudinal association between early screen time and children’s working memory or other EF outcomes. Thus, while co-viewing media appears to enhance children’s working memory directly, it does not appear to attenuate associations between screen time and working memory or other EF functions.

Screen time and Language Development

We also examined links between early screen-based media use and later language development. Like previous studies, we found evidence that higher levels of screen time were related to poorer language outcomes (Anderson & Pempek, 2005; Karani et al., 2022; Sundqvist et al., 2024), with our study showing a longitudinal effect. Specifically, higher screen time at age two was associated with poorer receptive language performance at age four, suggesting that early screen time may be disruptive to other developmental opportunities that likely support normative patterns of language learning (e.g., Sundqvist et al., 2025)

Main and Interactive Effects of Moderators on Language

Although some studies have found that educational content, parent-child interaction, and child engagement can enhance language learning during media use (Barr, 2019; Lee et al., 2017; Mendelsohn et al., 2010; Wong & Samurda, 2019), our study did not find evidence that content or co-viewing behaviors moderated the longitudinal association between screen time and language outcomes. Several explanations may account for these null findings.

First, much of the literature on content and context has relied on cross-sectional data. In our study, we observed positive associations between educational content and children’s vocabulary scores, but this association did not appear to moderate the negative relations between screen time and language development over time. Although not directly assessed in the current study, it is possible that educational media’s short-term benefits are overshadowed over time by screen time’s displacement of other language enriching experiences, such as face-to-face conversations and shared reading. Recent findings (Putnick et al., 2023), in part, support this notion, showing that screen time displaces children’s social interactions but not children’s reading time. Furthermore, while prior work has often assessed children’s ability to learn novel words from media (e.g., Krcmar & Cingel, 2018), our outcome measure focused on receptive vocabulary, which may be shaped by a broader range of environmental inputs. It is also worth noting that our brief assessment of joint media engagement may not have captured the nuanced, dyadic interaction styles that support language learning, including scaffolding, contingent responses, and elaborative talk. Additionally, media with frequent attention-grabbing features may disrupt the types of sustained joint attention that facilitate language acquisition. While not directly observed, our findings may suggest that excessive early screen exposure competes for time with parent-child interactions that are foundational for language development (Brushe et al., 2024; Hill et al., 2016), regardless of content type or co-viewing behaviors.

Limitations and Future Directions

Although the current study contributes to the growing literature on screen media and early development, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, we relied on parent reports of screen time, which may be subject to recall biases or social desirability effects. Objective measures of screen use, such as digital tracking or passive sensing, may yield more accurate data and should be incorporated in future work.

Second, while EF was assessed using multiple tasks, language was evaluated using a single receptive vocabulary measure. Language is a multidimensional construct that includes expressive and pragmatic components, as well as grammatical and syntactic knowledge. Future studies should use more comprehensive language assessments and examine how different dimensions are linked to media exposure, content, and context.

Third, we did not account for children’s or parents’ familiarity with the video clip from Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood during the co-viewing task. It is possible that some participants prior experience with this content may have affected their behaviors during the task.

Fourth, our sample was not sufficiently diverse to support generalizations to broader populations. Socioeconomic and cultural differences in media access, content preferences, and parenting practices may shape children’s media experiences and outcomes (Mollborn et al., 2022). Expanding research to include underrepresented and international populations is essential for building a more inclusive understanding of media’s developmental impact.

Finally, media content exposure was based on parental reports of their children’s favorite television programs and games. These six items may not capture the full range of media content children experience regularly. Children may be exposed to additional or more frequent content that was not identified as a favorite but still may be associated with developmental outcomes. Future studies should include more comprehensive and granular assessments of media content across all screen-based platforms.

Conclusions

This study responds to the growing call for research on the developmental consequences of screen-based media exposure in early childhood, particularly with respect to media content and parent-child interactions (Barr, 2019). Although earlier research suggested that co-viewing behaviors and educational content might buffer the adverse effects of screen time, our longitudinal analyses did not support this hypothesis. Instead, screen time at age 2 was negatively associated with EF and language outcomes at age 4, regardless of content or context. This suggests that parents should continue to be cautioned against excessive early screen time, although direct relations did show some positive outcomes of co-viewing and educational content. However, we note that the elements that likely led to these positive associations, joint engagement and educational content, can likely be found in activities and sources (e.g., books, outside play, toys) that do not involve screen media.

Importantly, our findings underscore the role of violent content in amplifying the negative associations between screen time and attentional shifting, which may have downstream implications for social behavior. These results suggest that not only the amount but also the specific characteristics of screen content matters for early development.

Given the increasing ubiquity of screens in children’s lives, these findings highlight the importance of guidance from caregivers, educators, pediatricians, and policymakers in finding ways to help caregivers balance the demands of parenting with activities, including screen media, that can serve to support children’s development. Early childhood represents a sensitive window for cognitive and language development and limiting exposure to violent or overstimulating content—while promoting high-quality, educational programming in interactive contexts—remains a prudent approach for supporting children’s development.

Public Significance Statement:

Young children who spend more time using screens at age two tend to show weaker self-regulation and language skills by age four. These effects are especially concerning when children are exposed to violent media content, underscoring the importance of mindful media use early in development.

Data Availability Statement:

Data are available on the Open Science Framework repository: https://osf.io/v8r6s/?view_only=cc395da7f3d54e089005cc548ade509e (Porter, 2025).