Mobile device use has become increasingly prevalent, yet its impact on infant development remains largely unknown. When parents use mobile devices in front of infants, the parent is physically present but most likely distracted and unresponsive. Research using the classic Still Face Paradigm (SFP) suggests that parental withdrawal and unresponsiveness may have negative consequences for children's social-emotional development. In the present study, 50 infants aged 7.20 to 23.60 months (M = 15.40, SD = 4.74) and their mothers completed a modified SFP. The SFP consisted of three phases: free play (FP; parent and infant play and interact), still face (SF; parent withdraws attention and becomes unresponsive), and reunion (RU; parent resumes normal interaction). The modified SFP incorporated mobile device use in the SF phase. Parents reported on their typical mobile device use and infant temperament. Consistent with the standard SFP, infants showed more negative affect and less positive affect during SF versus FP. Infants also showed more toy engagement and more engagement with mother during FP versus SF and RU. Infants showed the most social bids during SF and more room exploration in SF than RU. More frequent reported mobile device use was associated with less room exploration and positive affect during SF, and less recovery (i.e., engagement with mother, room exploration positive affect) during RU, even when controlling for individual differences in temperament. Findings suggest that the SFP represents a promising theoretical framework for understanding the impact of parent's mobile device use on infant social-emotional functioning and parent-infant interactions.

Stress and anxiety during pregnancy are associated with a range of adverse health outcomes, thus there is an unmet need for low-barrier treatments that target stress and anxiety. One such treatment approach, attention bias modification training (ABMT), reduces the anxiety-related attentional threat bias, which is also associated with disrupted neural processing of threat. It remains unclear, however, whether reducing treatment barriers via mobile delivery of ABMT is effective and whether ABMT efficacy varies depending on individual differences in neural processing of threat. The present study tested whether mobile, gamified ABMT reduced prenatal threat bias, anxiety and stress, and whether ABMT efficacy varied with individual differences in neural responses to threat. Participants were 29 women in their 19th – 29th week of pregnancy, randomized to four weeks of ABMT versus placebo training (PT) versions of the mobile app using a double-blind design. Self-report of anxiety, depression, and stress were obtained, and salivary cortisol was collected at home and in lab in response to stressors to index biological stress reactivity. Threat bias was measured using a computerized attention assay during which EEG was recorded to generate event-related potentials (ERPs) to threat cues. Results showed lower levels of threat bias (1-tailed) and lab cortisol following ABMT versus PT. Although the main effect of ABMT on subjective anxiety was not significant, the magnitude of cortisol reduction was correlated with lower levels of subjective anxiety and threat bias. Those receiving ABMT also reported less anxiety when showing smaller ERPs to threat (P1, P2) prior to training, but, conversely reported more anxiety when showing larger ERPs to threat. Use of gamified, mobile ABMT reduced biobehavioral indices of prenatal stress and anxiety, but effects on anxiety varied with individual differences in cortisol response and neurocognitive indices of early attention to threat.