iPhone for data collection: distraction in low-technology home

Abstract

PurposeThis paper describes the unintended and unanticipated ways an iPhone as a data collection tool created distractions during observations of five-year-old twins' digital literacy practices while in their home.Design/methodology/approachSituated in sociocultural theories of learning and development and new literacy studies, the 12-month-long case study examined young children's digital literacy practices in their homes before and during their transition into kindergarten. The article focuses on the data collection of five-year-old twins in their home with their parents, a family the author called the Skywalkers. Data sources included semistructured interviews, participant observations and informal conversations.FindingsThe mother was a low-technology user and preferred her children to engage in nondigital activities. The children were permitted 10 min every other day of “digital time.” The iPhone as a data collection tool provided them with digital access they would otherwise not have. The mother knew the focus of the study was digital engagement and that the iPhone was used for data collection (i.e. photographs and videos). Although the iPhone was intended to be used in establishing rapport and taking photographs, the children frequently asked to video record their play and therefore the iPhone became a distraction.Originality/valueGiven the prevalence of smartphones in Western society, the recruitment of a family with such low-technology use was unforeseen. As digital data collection increases in qualitative research, researchers should not assume that a smartphone is always appropriate for gathering photographic data. This is particularly important when investigating digital literacy practices of families in their homes.

The impact of parent mediation on young children's home digital literacy practices and learning: A narrative review

“…However, only five of the 31 (16.12%) reviewed articles reported negative effects of using digital technologies in the home, such as those adversely affecting children's physical (e.g., obesity and brain damage) or psychological health (e.g., distraction and false self‐confidence). While the negative effects of digital technologies have been reported by several researchers (García‐Jiménez et al, 2018; Herodotou, 2018; Stevens & Muslow, 2006; Teichert, 2020a, 2020b; Teichert et al, 2021; Tristán‐López & Ylizaliturri‐Salcedo, 2014), insufficient research evidence is available to conclude that the negative effects of digital technologies outweigh its positive effects.…”

“…Indeed, although few scholars examined both the negative and positive effects of digital technologies, there is broad agreement that not using digital technologies can lead to greater barriers and disadvantages for the children's learning (Dong et al, 2021; López‐Escribano et al, 2021; Marsh et al, 2015; Rogers & Moffatt, 2010). Teichert (2020b) stressed that digital technologies could be more distracting for children who do not normally have any access to digital technologies at home and maintained that the literature showed that the positive effects of digital technology outweighed its negative effects. Similarly, Daniels et al (2019) foregrounded the role of using digital technologies in the home context to promote phonics and letter writing skills of young children.…”

“…While the negative effects of digital technologies have been reported by several researchers (García-Jiménez et al, 2018;Herodotou, 2018;Stevens & Muslow, 2006;Teichert, 2020aTeichert, , 2020bTeichert et al, 2021;Tristán-L opez & Ylizaliturri-Salcedo, 2014), insufficient research evidence is available to conclude that the negative effects of digital technologies outweigh its positive effects. Indeed, although few scholars examined both the negative and positive effects of digital technologies, there is broad agreement that F I G U R E 1 0 Age ranges of children reported in the reviewed studies.…”

“…Throughout the world, children and their families use a variety of digital technologies such as televisions, computers, tablets, smartphones, gaming consoles, DVD players, electronic toys, and digital cameras in their home on a daily basis. For example, Finnish and Canadian children used tablets, televisions, smartphones, and laptops in their home context (Harrison & McTavish, 2016; Teichert, 2020b). In another study that examined three European countries (i.e., Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom), children used different types of digital technologies in their homes ranging from televisions (Sweden), televisions and tablets (Spain), and televisions, tablets, computers, and electronic toys (U.K) (Poveda et al, 2020).…”

A living journals approach for the remote study of young children’s digital practices in Azerbaijan

“…In addition to digital cameras, smartphones have been used in various studies to generate data (Clark, 2005; García et al, 2016; Poveda et al, 2012; Rönkä et al, 2017; Teichert 2020; Yamada-Rice, 2017). For example, Mobile Phone Visual Ethnography (MpVE) has been used to study research participants’ everyday lives and mobility within marketplaces (DeBerry-Spence et al, 2019), or the Mobile Instant Messaging Interview (MIMI) to study research participants’ everyday use of media (Kaufmann and Peil, 2020).…”