I write software for a living. My kids, who are 7 and 5, barely use technology. I go back and forth on whether that's the right call.
Part of me wants them outside, building things, and figuring out how to get along with the kid next to them. Another part knows they're growing up in a world run on screens, and I'd like them to be capable with technology, not scared of it or swallowed by it. So I did what I usually do when I can't decide: I read the research. Here's what I found. Your kid isn't my kid, so take it as notes, not advice.
The short version
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has two policy statements, split by age.
The AAP has a free Family Media Plan tool. I found it more useful than arguing about a number.
A study of about 2,400 Canadian children found that more screen time at ages 2 and 3 predicted lower scores on a developmental screening test a year or two later (Madigan et al., 2019). The effects were small, the screen time was reported by parents, and these were toddlers, not school-age kids. But the direction was clear, and the screens came first.
The same lead researcher later pooled 42 studies of almost 19,000 children on screens and language skills (Madigan et al., 2020). More screen time was linked to weaker language, and background TV even more so. But two things went the other way:
All the effects were small, and the data can't prove cause and effect. Still, that's the single most useful finding I came across: how much matters, and so do what and with whom.
Research on teenagers backs up the "small" part. Across huge datasets, the link between technology use and teen well-being was negative but tiny (Orben & Przybylski, 2019). That made me less anxious about the occasional screen. It didn't make me think screens are harmless.
Researchers have a name for parents and kids using media together, talking about it, and connecting it to real life: joint media engagement. A report from the Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop argues that much of the learning happens there (Takeuchi & Stevens, 2011).
One experiment showed what that can look like. Parents who paused a video to ask their 3-year-old questions saw their kids understand more and learn more words than parents who just watched along (Strouse, O'Doherty & Troseth, 2013). That study was on video, not games. But "ask them about it" is easy advice to follow.
The AAP's report on play makes a related point. Play with parents and other kids builds language, self-control and social skills. It warns about screens taking the place of that play (Yogman et al., 2018). I take that seriously. A game on a tablet isn't a substitute for building a fort.
This is where I got frustrated. A study of 135 popular apps for kids 5 and under found advertising in 95% of them, including apps labeled "educational." That included video ads that interrupt play and ads disguised as part of the game (Meyer et al., 2019). Another study found that the apps young kids used most often were full of design tricks to keep them playing or get them to buy things. Examples include characters who pressure the child, lures that dangle rewards, and timers (Radesky et al., 2022).
Researchers have also offered a checklist for whether an app is actually educational. It should get kids actively thinking rather than tapping, keep them focused rather than distracted, connect to something meaningful, and ideally involve other people (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2015). I've found it useful for judging apps, including mine.
I wanted to find research showing that early exposure to technology makes kids better with it later. I couldn't find strong evidence for that in general. What I did find was narrower: specific, well-designed activities teach specific skills. For example, kindergartners learned early programming ideas like sequencing and debugging from a hands-on robotics curriculum (Bers et al., 2014).
So I've stopped thinking of "tech skills" as something kids absorb from screen hours. It looks more like any other skill: something you do on purpose, with some guidance, for a while, and then put down.
Those are the rules I tried to build Super Trivia Kids around. There are no ads, no chat, no leaderboards and no online play. Kids take turns on one device with whoever's sitting next to them, the way I used to pass a controller back and forth on the couch. Nothing punishes a kid for skipping a day, and nothing nags them to come back. I can't tell you it's the right amount of screen time for your family. That part is yours to decide.
For ages 2 to 5, the American Academy of Pediatrics advises about one hour a day of high-quality programming, ideally watched with a parent, and no screens during meals or the hour before bed. A kindergartner sits right at the edge of that guidance.
The AAP sets no single hour limit for ages 6 and up. It recommends consistent limits and a family media plan, so screens don't crowd out sleep, physical activity or face-to-face time. The AAP's free Family Media Plan tool helps families set their own rules.
The evidence leans that way. A review of 42 studies linked more screen time overall to weaker language skills, but educational programs and watching together to stronger ones. The effects were small. Design matters too: most popular kids' apps contain ads, including ones labeled educational.
I couldn't find research saying kids need lots of screen time. Tech skills seem to come from specific, well-designed activities, like a robotics curriculum, rather than hours on a device. Less screen time, chosen well and shared when you can, fits what the research says.
About this article. I'm a parent and a software engineer, not a researcher, teacher or doctor. I wrote this from the published studies listed below, each linked to the original paper so you can check my reading of it. Where a study was small, or done with a different age group, I've said so.
40 Christmas and winter trivia questions for kids, with answers. An easier round for K–2 and a harder one for 3–5, plus tips that help it stick.
What research says about quizzing, flash cards and spaced practice for grade school kids: what holds up, what's thinner than it sounds.
Is earlier better? Does a second language make kids smarter? Can an app teach it? A parent reads the studies, including ones that cut against the hype.