No abstract

This study set out to examine the associations of certain information communication technology (ICT) factors in the home environment with academic performance. We employed existing data sets collated by Pearson Clinical Assessment in 2016 which included the WIAT-III A&NZ (Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - Australian and New Zealand Standardised, Third Edition) completed by 714 students aged between 4 and 18 years old, and the home environment questionnaire (HEQ) completed by the parents of those children. Sequential multiple regression models were used to analyze the complex interactions between home ICT factors and measures of student reading, writing, mathematical, and oral ability. The findings of this study indicate that after accounting for the known powerful predictors of household income and parental education: (a) a student’s access to an ICT rich home environment, (b) their aptitude in using home ICT, and (c) their recreational use of home ICT, are largely unrelated to academic performance. We observed some small positive correlations between academic performance and child ICT affinity, but also comparably sized negative associations with use of social media and educational TV viewing. Encouragingly, we propose that these findings suggest that increasing levels of ICT use and access in the home are unlikely to be detrimental to academic progress. These results provide important information for parents and educators given the impact of the Coronavirus global pandemic and the near world-wide adoption of ICT for home-schooling.

No abstract

Purpose The function (i.e., the motivation) of child-to-parent violence (CPV) is an important consideration for intervention but under researched, primarily due to a lack of appropriate measurement tools. The current study aimed to develop and validate a caregiver-report measure of the function of CPV (the Child-to-Parent Violence Functions Scale [CPV-F]). Methods One-hundred-and-twenty-one caregivers (94% female) ranging from 27 to 68 years of age (M = 45.36, SD = 8.35) completed an online survey reporting on experiences of CPV from a young person, who were mostly male (63%) and aged between 5 and 24 years (M = 12.71, SD = 4.77). Results The current study shows that the motivation for CPV varies across three related but distinct functions: Reactive (i.e., in response to perceived or actual threat, transgression, or intrusion), Affective (i.e., driven by internal frustration, fear, or emotional conflict), and Proactive (i.e., instrumental, callous, and planned). The CPV-F demonstrated predictive and concurrent validity, as well as adequate reliability across subscales. Conclusions Future research should consider the function of CPV, as it may impact the relevance of risk factors. Moving forward, the CPV-F could be used for comprehensive investigative profiling, with a focus on parent and dyadic factors, to resolve heterogeneity in the field. Such factors are crucial to intervention yet under explored. As a caregiver-report measure, the CPV-F is well-positioned to aid in these investigations.

Increasing screen time in childhood has raised concerns about potential effects on academic achievement, with speculation that this is due in part to an overall decrease in sleep. However, research does not often distinguish between different types of screen time, such as that dedicated to home or other educational pursuits. Further, family factors such as socioeconomic status are known to predict academic performance but are rarely examined in concert. The current study aimed to examine the association between screen time and academic achievement and to extend the current research by exploring whether the association was moderated by the type of screen time and family socioeconomic status. Participants were 651 children from Australia and New Zealand (M age = 10.09, SD = 3.64). Participants completed an academic achievement test, and parents reported screen time activities. Homework, but not sleep, was associated with better academic achievement. Educational television viewing (TV), but not entertainment TV, was associated with lower academic achievement. Socioeconomic status moderated the association between educational TV and academic achievement (B = −.29, p = .007). The results suggest that while screen time type does appear to be implicated in academic achievement, the mechanism appears to be specific to higher socioeconomic status families.