Beyond Screen Time Quantity: Quality Content,Shared Viewing,and Good Design as Drivers of Children's Second Language Learning

Abstract

Children's increasing screen time has sparked attention on its effects on language development, predominantly for first languages. Understanding how screen use relates to second language (L2) development in bilingual children remains limited. This paper synthesizes findings on the quantity and quality of screen use and their roles in children's L2 learning. Moderate screen exposure is positively associated with L2 receptive skills, while excessive use may displace social interaction and hinder development. Productive skills see inconsistent findings, reflecting the limitations and transferability of passive input for active language outcomes. Quality tells a clearer story: Educational content, age-appropriate design, and adult co-viewing or peer collaboration are more consistently associated with positive L2 outcomes. These findings carry directs policy implications. Existing guidelines primarily focused on time limits fail to capture how screen use could support language learning. A more effective approach would retain time thresholds while adding guidance on content quality, media design, and socially embedded screen use. Implications for parents, educators, and policymakers are discussed alongside priorities for future research.

Keywords

screen time second language development child bilingualism media quality co-uses

Social Media

Screen time isn't the enemy — poor-quality screen time is. For children learning a second language, what they watch and who they watch it with matters as much as how long they spend on screens. Both quantity and quality count.

Key Points

Moderate screen use can support second language receptive skills. For children with limited daily exposure to their target language, screen media offers an accessible additional source of language input.

Educational content outperforms entertainment content for language learning, as it provides linguistically rich, age-appropriate input and purposeful design that entertainment media may not offer.

Well-designed interactive elements such as animated storytelling, gamification, and on-screen pedagogical agents have been shown to deepen engagement and support vocabulary and grammar development.

Co-viewing with an adult or peer may transform passive screen exposure into an active language experience through conversation, questioning, and shared meaning-making.

Future guidelines should retain time thresholds while adding quality-based guidance that helps families select beneficial media, promote co-use, and ensure equitable access to high-quality digital learning tools.

With rapid technical advances, digital devices have invaded children's everyday lives, increasing concerns about screen use harming child development. Screen use encompasses any interaction with electronic devices featuring static or mobile displays, including mobile phones, tablets, desktop computers, game consoles, and televisions (Canadian Pediatric Society, 2017). These concerns intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic, which accelerated society's reliance on digital tools for traditionally in-person activities. Among children aged five and under, daily screen time rose from 1.91 h to 2.65 h at the height of the pandemic (Choi et al., 2023). The issue is particularly pressing, given that exposure now begins early: Infants as young as six months old regularly encounter screens, often because parents use them as soothing tools (Lewis & Yap, 2022). Elevated screen use persisted even as COVID-19 restrictions eased (Hedderson et al., 2023; Sun et al., 2022, 2023), suggesting that these behavioral shifts may be long-lasting.

Such changes naturally invite concern, as increased screen use has been linked to adverse outcomes across cognitive (Santos et al., 2022) and socioemotional domains (Vasconcellos et al., 2025). Language development is no exception, with a systematic review finding that prolonged screen time is associated with negative outcomes in language acquisition and communication skills in young children (Massaroni et al., 2024). However, much of this research has focused mainly on monolingual children and on the sheer quantity of screen exposure, overlooking the potential role of screen media quality and its effects on other populations. Bilingual and second language (L2) learners, in particular, are underexplored. Unlike monolingual children, who typically develop their language in immersive, input-rich environments, bilingual children often face input asymmetries between their two languages. The first language (L1) refers to the language of earliest acquisition, while the second language (L2) refers to a subsequently acquired language that typically receives less cumulative input — whether confined largely to the classroom or, in the case of heritage speakers, present in the home but in decline (Paradis, 2023). These imbalances produce substantial disparities in dual-language development (Hoff & Core, 2013). Digital media, spanning educational applications, eBooks, and children's television, may help bridge this gap by offering accessible and varied L2 input that everyday environments often cannot provide (Sun & Yin, 2020). Investigating bilingual children will highlight the importance of going beyond sheer screentime hours to quality of experience, as L2 media offers a differential impact by supplementing input-poor language environments.

Against this backdrop, this paper takes a comprehensive view of screen use, examining its potential impact on children's L2 learning across two key dimensions: quantity and quality. Quantity refers to children's time or frequency engaged with screen media (Madigan et al., 2020), while quality concerns the content and the manner of children's interaction with it (Sun et al., 2022). Prior research has disproportionately addressed quantity, addressing how much screen time is appropriate. Yet, findings in this area remain inconsistent, particularly in relation to L2 learning. A growing body of evidence also suggests that quantity alone does not capture the full picture (Madigan et al., 2020). A recent systematic review of 22 studies found that the amount of screen exposure yielded mixed, domain-specific effects: Moderate use potentially supports L2 development and excessive use proved detrimental while quality of screen media showed a more consistently positive association with L2 outcomes (Thye, 2025). Building on this review, the present paper foregrounds quality as an equally, if not more, important dimension of screen use in understanding its role in child L2 learning and development.

Screen-Use Quantity and Children's L2 Learning

Research on the quantity of screen use and children's L2 development presents a notably inconsistent picture, with studies reporting positive, non-significant, and negative associations across different language domains. The overall pattern, however, points to a non-linear relationship: Moderate screen exposure can support L2 learning but excessive use may prove counterproductive. This finding carries a direct message for parents, educators, and policymakers: The question is not simply how much screen time children have, but whether that exposure remains within a range that is genuinely beneficial.

Across L2 skills, the most consistent evidence for benefits emerges in receptive rather than productive abilities. Several studies report positive associations between screen quantity and children's L2 receptive vocabulary, though effects vary by device type and language context (Li et al., 2025a; Sigurjónsdóttir & Nowenstein, 2021; Song & Luo, 2025). This is theoretically intuitive: Screen media provides an additional and accessible source of language input. For L2 learners who encounter limited exposure to their target language in daily life, this additional exposure can meaningfully support receptive language performance (Sun & Yin, 2020). This is especially relevant for children in communities where the L2 has limited presence outside the classroom.

However, the benefits of screen exposure are not unlimited. A longitudinal study conducted with 90 Chinese-English dual-language-learner preschoolers in the United States found that English media activities predicted English receptive vocabulary concurrently but not at a later follow-up (Song & Luo, 2025). This suggests that rather than benefits simply accumulating over time, the quality of home media exposure may not match children's growth in proficiency as their language skills develop. Similarly, in a cross-sectional study of 148 Chinese-Canadian children in kindergarten and Grade 1, across 52 schools in British Columbia, Canada (Li, Zhen & Gunderson, 2025b), digital device usage predicted English receptive vocabulary in kindergarten but not in Grade 1, suggesting that the influence of home screen exposure on L2 vocabulary may diminish as children enter formal schooling and gain greater language input through school. Together, these results caution against treating increased screen use as a straightforward solution: While screen exposure can support early receptive language development, its benefits appear to be contingent on the match between the media content and children's current proficiency level and may vary across developmental stages.

In contrast, the picture for productive skills is less consistent than for receptive skills. Some studies report positive associations between screen quantity and L2 speaking abilities (Kuppens, 2010), while others find non-significant associations (Farangi & Naami, 2024). For instance, a lack of associations was found in a study involving 200 Iranian preschoolers from four ethnic and linguistic groups (Persian, Arab, Turk, and Kurd) who learned Persian at school and English as a third language at English language institutes (Farangi & Naami, 2024). Self-report active screen engagement with national and local television in general did not significantly predict English oral production across any ethnic group. For minority-language children (i.e., non-Persian), direct television exposure similarly showed no significant relationship with mother tongue oral production. Socioeconomic status, rather than screen exposure, emerged as the key predictor, suggesting that passive television viewing alone is insufficient to drive oral language gains in a L2 context.

A key explanation lies in the passive nature of most screen activities: watching television provides language input but does not require children to produce language, making it more likely that receptive skills develop without corresponding gains in expressive ability. Compounding this, Time Displacement Theory (Neuman, 1988) suggests that increasing screen time reduces opportunities for the face-to-face interaction that oral language development fundamentally requires. This concern is reinforced by evidence that children learn phonemes, words, and grammar far more robustly through contingent and responsive human interaction than through passive screen exposure (Lytle & Kuhl, 2018).

That said, not all screen activities are equally passive. Watching subtitled English television was significantly associated with stronger performance on both translation directions among Flemish primary school children with no formal English instruction, while computer games showed no significant independent effect (Kuppens, 2010). Together, these findings suggest that the type of screen activity, particularly whether it involves comprehensive language input, matters alongside the amount of exposure.

These findings carry policy implications: The benefits of screen exposure do not scale indefinitely with time. Positive effects appear to diminish beyond a moderate threshold or developmental stage, and the language domains that benefit less, namely the productive skills, are precisely those requiring active processing and real-world interaction rather than passive input. For parents and policymakers, this suggests that time-based guidelines for screen use, while necessary, are insufficient on their own. The more pressing question is not simply how long children spend on screens, but what they are doing there, a shift in focus from sheer quantity to quality.

Screen Use Quality and Children's L2 Learning

Although studying the quantity of screen use offers an inconsistent account of how screens affect children's L2 development, the quality of screen use tells a clearer and more encouraging story. Unlike quantity, which asks how much time children spend on screens, quality focuses on what children encounter and how they engage with it. Following Sun et al. (2022), quality can be examined across three dimensions: content, design, and usage. Across studies, high-quality screen use shows a more consistently positive relationship with L2 development than quantity alone, particularly for listening and speaking abilities.

Content

The nature and purpose of screen content is one of the most consequential determinants of whether screen use supports language learning. Educational content designed with language development in mind provides comprehensible and linguistically rich input that drives acquisition (Krashen, 1985; Madigan et al., 2020). Studies show that high-quality screen use of educational content enhances vocabulary acquisition, listening comprehension, and phonological awareness (Bang et al., 2020; Macaruso & Rodman, 2011). For instance, in a study involving 66 kindergartners from Texas, United States of primarily Hispanic backgrounds learning English aimed to investigate the effectiveness of computer-assisted learning programs from Lexia Early Systems. Adding phonological awareness training improved phonological awareness and word recognition (Macaruso & Rodman, 2011). Meanwhile, some games in mobile applications (e.g., ABCMouse ELL) provide interaction and production opportunities in learning English as a foreign language. For 113 children aged five to six from Hangzhou, China who had little to no prior knowledge of the language, those randomly assigned to use the tool improved significantly more than the control group. Measures included general proficiency, vocabulary, and speaking skills (Bang et al., 2020).

Pure entertainment content, by contrast, tends to lack this linguistic intentionality, offering fewer structured opportunities for language growth. For parents and educators selecting screen media for children, this distinction has immediate practical relevance: Not all screen use is created equal, and content designed with learning in mind may yield meaningfully different outcomes from content designed purely for entertainment.

Design

How screen media is structured, in its alignment with children's cognitive development and socioemotional background, plays an equally important role in determining learning outcomes (Sun et al., 2022). Interactive and multimodal features, such as animation and gamification, can deepen children's engagement and support language acquisition. Mayer's (2005) multimedia principle in the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning provides a clear theoretical explanation: Learning is most effective when information is delivered coherently through both visual and auditory channels in ways that support cognitive processing without overwhelming working memory. Research bears this out: Games incorporating both oral and written English input were positively associated with English L2 vocabulary outcomes for 107 Danish children newly introduced to English lessons for slightly more than one school year (Jensen, 2017). Similar results were found for both the early-starters groups (i.e., first graders aged eight) and later starters group (i.e., third graders aged 10). The use of animation also shows promise, with animated stories outperforming static ones in promoting productive vocabulary and story comprehension in Mandarin, as evidenced by a study of 102 English-Chinese bilingual preschoolers aged four to five in Singapore (Sun et al., 2019). Furthermore, interactive screen media featuring pedagogical agents (i.e., on-screen characters that guide the learning process) significantly outperformed non-agent conditions in supporting vocabulary development of 60 English as Foreign Language students from China (Chen et al., 2025). These findings suggest that well-designed screen media can do more than deliver content: It can actively scaffold children's L2 learning.

The mere presence of interactive or multimedia features, however, does not guarantee benefit and can even be counterproductive. Decorative animations, sound effects, or hotspots added purely for entertainment risk diverting children's attention and imposing unnecessary cognitive load, thereby undermining rather than supporting learning (Bus et al., 2015; Sun et al., 2025). Children's individual characteristics such as their proficiency level may also affect their receptivity to the inclusion of additional design features. Effective design is therefore not about the quantity of features included, but about whether those features make language input more comprehensible, engaging, and appropriately challenging. This distinction has clear implications for the design and regulation of children's educational media: Interactive features should be evaluated not just for their appeal, but for their pedagogical function.

Usage

Perhaps one of the most powerful levers for improving the quality of children's screen experience lies not in the screen itself, but in how children engage with it and who is present during these activities. Screen use, by default, can be a passive activity: Children receive language input but do not necessarily have opportunities to produce language or receive feedback. The presence of adults or peers fundamentally changes this dynamic. A study conducted in Wales with 57 children aged four to five who had English as their L1 found that co-viewing with adults can significantly promote children's Welsh L2 receptive vocabulary growth over children viewing television alone, even surpassing learning gains from a storytelling session (Williams & Thomas, 2017). Peer collaboration appeared to provide similar positive effects for 46 Grade 5 students learning Mandarin Chinese in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Discussion and negotiation in group work to create digital comics in class was shown to improve vocabulary and writing skills as compared to engaging in the activity alone (Wilujeng & Lan, 2015). Through conversation, questioning, and co-construction of meaning, adults and peers help children connect language input from screens to active language use, transforming a one-way viewing experience into a genuine communicative interaction. This aligns with Vygotsky's (1978) foundational insight that language development is fundamentally social: Interaction is not supplementary to learning but central to it.

This has direct implications for how screen use is structured at home and in educational settings. Recommending that children use educational media independently may capture only a fraction of its potential benefit. Policies and guidelines that actively encourage co-viewing, adult mediation, and peer-based screen activities, rather than focusing solely on limiting screen use, are likely to yield far greater returns for children's L2 development.

From Evidence to Action: Policy and Practice Implications

The evidence reviewed here converges on two findings that are both robust and actionable. First, the effects of screen use on children's L2 development are domain-specific: Receptive skills benefit most, while productive skills that depend more greatly on interaction may show weaker and less consistent gains. Second, quality of screens as characterized by educational content, age-appropriate design, and interactive usage are generally associated with positive L2 outcomes across studies, suggesting that what children do on screens, and with whom, deserves as much attention as how much time they spend on them. These findings point to a clear but largely unmet need: Guidelines and practices should move beyond time-based restrictions to address the quality and context of screen use.

Rethinking Screen Use Guidelines

Current guidelines, which focus primarily on the quantity of screen time, have significant limitations. The World Health Organization (2019), for instance, recommends no screen time for children aged one and under, and no more than one hour daily for those aged two to four. While such thresholds are easy to communicate, they sometimes fail to account for content type or usage context. A review of international screen-time guidelines (Lewis & Yap, 2022) argues that time-limit-based recommendations are too simplistic and makes this critique explicitly. Such limitations of the guidelines are particularly consequential for families raising bilingual children or supporting L2 development in resource-limited environments, where access to high-quality digital input may represent one of the few available avenues for meaningful language exposure. Blanket restrictions carry a hidden cost: By implicitly framing all screen use as harmful, they risk discouraging families and educators from adopting genuinely beneficial digital tools.

Policymakers should retain simple limits as a floor to prevent excessive use and the displacement of social interaction, while adding clear, accessible guidance about content quality and usage context. The message to families should not be “less screen time” but “better screen time within recommended hours": moderate, purposeful, and socially embedded. The Ministry of Health Singapore's (2025) updated guidelines offer a constructive model, recommending no more than one hour of screen time daily for children aged 18 months to six years, alongside explicit guidance that screen use should be educational, age-appropriate, and shared with parents.

Supporting Caregivers in Selecting High-Quality Media

Well-meaning caregivers face an overwhelming and largely unregulated marketplace of children's digital media. Apps and programs routinely claim educational benefits for young language learners without credible supporting evidence, and the pace at which new content is developed makes informed selection genuinely difficult. Two policy responses are needed here. First, trusted portals curated by educational and developmental experts should be developed and regularly updated to provide clear recommendations of screen media that is educational, linguistically rich, and well-designed for children's cognitive development.

Second, simple, publicly communicated heuristics should help caregivers evaluate unfamiliar tools. For example, does the content require the child to actively respond? Does it use language at an appropriate level of challenge? Does it minimize decorative features that distract without supporting learning? Providing caregivers with these decision-making tools is as important as providing them with specific recommendations.

Promoting Co-Use and Social Scaffolding

For caregivers facing struggles with time and energy, it is crucial to caution against the use of screens to replace valuable interactions with children. A powerful lever identified in the literature is the presence of an engaged adult or peer during screen use. Co-viewing transforms passive input into an interactive language experience, supporting both comprehension and production that screen use alone may not reliably develop. For educators, this means actively integrating high-quality digital tools, such as interactive storybooks, voice-assisted applications, and collaborative digital tasks, into classroom instruction, using them as the basis for structured discussion and peer interaction rather than as independent activities. Teachers should also collaborate with parents to establish consistent approaches that bridge home and school screen use. For parents, the implication is equally clear: watching or engaging with educational media together, and talking about it, is likely to yield far greater benefits than carefully monitoring screen minutes alone. Where time and energy are constrained, co-use need not always be adult directed. Allowing children to lead while remaining present and responsive can itself provide meaningful scaffolding. Policy guidance should therefore go beyond time limits to promote co-use as good practice, and where appropriate, equip families with simple scaffolding strategies, such as asking open questions about content, elaborating on new vocabulary, or encouraging children to retell what they have watched.

Addressing Inequity in Access

The potential of high-quality screen media to support children's L2 development is not equally available to all families. Access to tablets, smartphones, and reliable internet connectivity, the infrastructure through which most high-quality children's digital media is delivered, remains unequal across socioeconomic groups. For bilingual children from lower-income families, who may already face fewer L2 learning opportunities in their everyday environments, this digital divide compounds existing disadvantage. Equity must therefore be a central consideration in any policy response. This means expanding subsidized access to devices and connectivity for underserved families, ensuring that publicly recommended educational media is freely available rather than locked behind subscription paywalls, and investing in the development of high-quality, freely accessible L2 learning tools that can be used in low-resource settings.

Research Priorities: What the Field Needs to Answer

The evidence reviewed here is promising, but it rests on foundations that remain incomplete in several ways. The following priorities represent the directions needed to support confident, evidence-based guidance on children's screen use and L2 development.

Developing Better Measures of Screen Use Quality

Perhaps the most pressing gap in the current literature is the absence of a shared, validated framework for measuring what quality screen use means in practice. Studies operationalize quality in widely varying ways: Some focus on content type, others on design features, and others on usage context, making it difficult to compare findings across studies or to build cumulative knowledge. Without consistent, validated measures of screen quality, research will continue to produce findings that are difficult to synthesize and even more difficult to translate into specific policy recommendations. Developing and standardizing a quality assessment framework for children's screen media should be a priority for both researchers and funding bodies.

Moving Toward Causal Designs

Many existing studies are correlational, meaning they can identify associations between screen use and language outcomes but cannot establish whether screen use causes those outcomes. This matters enormously for policy: A correlation between high-quality screen use and stronger L2 vocabulary tells us that these things tend to go together, but not whether improving screen quality will actually produce language gains. Randomized controlled trials and well-designed longitudinal studies with active comparison conditions are needed to establish causal effects with the confidence that policy decisions require. Funders should priorities experimental and longitudinal designs that can speak directly to the question of what happens when screen quality is deliberately improved.

Accounting for Child Characteristics

More research needs to examine how the effects of screen use vary as a function of individual child characteristics. Age is a particularly important moderator: The limited evidence available already suggests that what benefits preschool children may not benefit children in early primary school, and vice versa (Li et al., 2025b). Baseline language proficiency is equally important; a child with limited L2 exposure may respond very differently to the same screen content than a child with stronger foundational skills (Sun et al., 2019). Future research should routinely examine these moderating variables, and policy guidance should be responsive to them, recognizing that a single set of recommendations may not serve all children equally well.

Distinguishing Content Language

Most existing studies do not systematically distinguish between screen content delivered in the child's L1 and content delivered in the target L2, nor do they examine the potential role of bilingual or code-switching media. This is a significant gap, given that many children learning L2 live in environments where their L1 is dominant and their L2 exposure is largely screen-mediated. Understanding how the language of screen content interacts with the child's existing language profile, and whether L1-language media competes with or complements L2 learning, is essential for developing recommendations that are meaningful for bilingual and heritage language communities specifically.

Understanding Real-World Co-Use Patterns

The evidence on social mediation, including both co-viewing and peer collaboration, is consistent and policy relevant. Yet little is known about how co-use unfolds in naturalistic home and classroom settings: how frequently it occurs, what form it takes, how it varies across families of different socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds, and what specific adult behaviors during co-use are most beneficial for children's L2 development. This question is made more complex by the emergence of AI-powered tools such as chatbots and voice robots, which may function as additional interaction partners and change the dyadic dynamics of co-use in ways not yet well studied. Observational and ethnographic research on real-world co-use patterns is urgently needed to ground policy recommendations in ecological reality rather than laboratory conditions. Without this, guidance encouraging adult co-use risks being aspirational rather than actionable, particularly for families with limited resources and time.

Conclusion

Prior research has largely reported mixed associations between screen use and children's language development (Jing et al., 2023; Massaroni et al., 2024). The present paper reveals a more nuanced story: Across the studies examined, the effects of screen use on L2 development are mostly non-significant or positive, a pattern that stands in notable contrast to findings from L1 research. This discrepancy is not difficult to explain. Children's L1 development unfolds in natural, immersive social environments where rich linguistic input is readily available through everyday communication. In such contexts, screen exposure is largely redundant and risks displacing the face-to-face interaction on which L1 acquisition depends. The situation for L2 learners is fundamentally different. Many children learning L2 live in environments characterized by insufficient target language input and limited opportunities for authentic communication (Hoff & Core, 2013). For these children, screen use can serve a genuinely compensatory function, supplementing and extending the natural language exposure that their everyday environments cannot provide (Sun & Yin, 2020).

Yet input alone does not constitute language learning. The ability to respond, interact, and produce language is equally essential, and this is where the distinction between quantity and quality of screen use becomes most consequential. Quantity of screen use can extend the input available to L2 learners, and in doing so primarily supports receptive skills, the domains most directly served by additional exposure. However, passive screen use, regardless of frequency, provides input but may offer limited opportunities for language output. Productive skills, which depend on active interaction, may not be consistently supported by screen exposure alone. This likely explains why findings on quantity and L2 learning remain inconsistent across studies.

Quality, by contrast, shows more consistently positive effects because it shapes whether input is comprehensible, engaging, and socially embedded. When adult co-viewing or peer collaboration accompanies screen use, children can connect what they hear and see to active language production, through conversation, questioning, and the co-construction of meaning. This is the mechanism that Vygotsky's (1978) Sociocultural Theory identifies as fundamental to language development: learning as a socially mediated process in which interaction transforms input into genuine linguistic growth.

The central message of this paper is therefore both simple and consequential: Screens are neither a threat nor a solution in themselves. For children learning L2, they are a tool whose value depends almost entirely on how thoughtfully they are used. Moving policy and practice from a focus on how much screen time children have toward a focus on what kind of screen experiences they are having is not merely an academic recommendation. It is the shift that the evidence demands, and one that holds real promise for the millions of children worldwide who are growing up multilingually.

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

He Sun

Justina Tan

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Ministry of Education - Singapore, (grant number MOE SoL 12/24 SH).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Bang

H. J.

Olander

Lenihan

(2020). Testing a research-based digital learning tool: Chinese EFL children’s linguistic development. CALICO Journal, 37(3), 277–308. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.40544

Bus

A. G.

Takacs

Z. K.

Kegel

C. A. T.

(2015). Affordances and limitations of electronic storybooks for young children's emergent literacy. Developmental Review, 35, 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2014.12.004

Canadian Paediatric Society (2017). Screen time and young children: Promoting health and development in a digital world. Paediatrics & Child Health, 23(1), 83–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/pxx123

Chen

Jamiat

Rabu

S. N. A.

(2025). Effects of augmented reality with pedagogical agent on EFL primary students’ vocabulary acquisition, motivation, and technology perceptions. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2443534

Choi

E. J.

King

G. K. C.

Duerden

E. G.

(2023). Screen time in children and youth during the pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Global Pediatrics, 6, 100080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gpeds.2023.100080

Farangi

M. R.

Naami

(2024). A study of early multilingualism in Iran: The effects of mother tongue literacy, socio-economic status and foreground TV exposure. Acta Psychologica, 243, 104167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104167

Hedderson

M. M.

Bekelman

T. A.

Knapp

E. A.

Palmore

Dong

Elliott

A. J.

Friedman

Galarce

Gilbert-Diamond

Glueck

Hockett

C. W.

Lucchini

McDonald

Sauder

Zhu

Karagas

M. R.

Dabelea

Ferrara

(2023). Trends in screen time use among children during the COVID-19 pandemic, July 2019 through August 2021. JAMA Network Open, 6(2), e2256157. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.56157

Hoff

Core

(2013). Input and language development in bilingually developing children. Seminars in Speech and Language, 34(04), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1353448

Jensen

S. H.

(2017). Gaming as an English language learning resource among young children in Denmark. CALICO Journal, 34(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.29519

10.

Jing

Kirkorian

H. L.

Mares

M.-L.

(2023). Screen media exposure and young children’s vocabulary learning and development: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 94(5), 1398–1418. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13927

11.

Krashen

S. D.

(1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.

12.

Kuppens

A. H.

(2010). Incidental foreign language acquisition from media exposure. Learning, Media and Technology, 35(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880903561876

13.

Lewis

Yap

C. H. J.

(2022). Evidence review of screen use in childhood. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore.

14.

Zhen

Gunderson

(2025b). The role of home biliteracy environment in Chinese-Canadian children’s early bilingual receptive vocabulary development. Applied Linguistics Review, 16(6), 2463–2496. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2024-0162

15.

Zhen

Mei

(2025a). Digital devices use and Chinese-Canadian first graders’ early English literacy development: A mixed-methods study. Education Sciences, 15(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010048

16.

Lytle

Kuhl

(2018). Social interaction and language acquisition: Toward a neurobiological view. In Fernandez

E. M.

Cairns

H. S.

(Eds.), The handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 615–634). Wiley-Blackwell.

17.

Macaruso

Rodman

(2011). Benefits of computer-assisted instruction to support reading acquisition in English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 34(3), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2011.622829

18.

Madigan

McArthur

B. A.

Anhorn

Eirich

Christakis

D. A.

(2020). Associations between screen use and child language skills. JAMA Pediatrics, 174(7), 665. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.0327

19.

Massaroni

Delle Donne

Marra

Arcangeli

Chieffo

D. P. R.

(2024). The relationship between language and technology: How screen time affects language development in early life—A systematic review. Brain Sciences, 14(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci14010027

20.

Mayer

R. E.

(2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In Mayer

R. E.

(Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.004

21.

Ministry of Health Singapore. (2025, January 21). Guidance on screen use in children. https://www.moh.gov.sg/others/resources-and-statistics/guidance-on-screen-use/

22.

Neuman

S. B.

(1988). The displacement effect: Assessing the relation between television viewing and reading performance. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(4), 414. https://doi.org/10.2307/747641

23.

Paradis

(2023). Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals. Journal of Child Language, 50(4), 793–817. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000922000708

24.

Santos

R. M. S.

Mendes

C. G.

Marques Miranda

Romano-Silva

M. A.

(2022). The association between screen time and attention in children: A systematic review. Developmental Neuropsychology, 47(4), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2022.2064863

25.

Sigurjónsdóttir

Nowenstein

(2021). Language acquisition in the digital age: L2 English input effects on children’s L1 Icelandic. Second Language Research, 37(4), 697–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583211005505

26.

Song

Luo

(2025). Language, literacy, and media experiences at home and Chinese dual language development. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 98, 101789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2025.101789

27.

Sun

Lim

Low

Kee

(2022). The development of a parental questionnaire (QQ-MediaSEED) on bilingual children’s quantity and quality of digital media use at home. Acta Psychologica, 229, 103668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103668

28.

Sun

Loh

J. Y.

Roberts

A. C.

(2019). Motion and sound in animated storybooks for preschooler’s total fixation time and mandarin language learning: An eye-tracking study with Singaporean bilingual children. AERA Open, 5(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419848431

29.

Sun

Roberts

Tan

Loh

Moh

Y. C. Y.

(2025). Language proficiency over sound effects in children's eBook vocabulary learning. Language Learning & Technology, 29(3), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.64152/10125/73650

30.

Sun

Tan

Chen

W. L.

(2023). COVID-19 and bilingual children’s oral and multimedia input at home. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1115108

31.

Sun

Yin

(2020). Multimedia input and bilingual children’s language learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02023

32.

Thye

Y. X.

(2025). Screen time and children's second language development: A systematic review [Bachelor's thesis. Nanyang Technological University, National Institute of Education].

33.

Vasconcellos

R. P.

Sanders

Lonsdale

Parker

Conigrave

Tang

del Pozo Cruz

Biddle

S. J. H.

Taylor

Innes-Hughes

Salmela-Aro

Vasconcellos

Wilhite

Tremaine

Booker

Noetel

(2025). Electronic screen use and children’s socioemotional problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 151(5), 513–543. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000468

34.

Vygotsky

(1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

35.

Williams

Thomas

E. M.

(2017). Exploring minority language input sources as means of supporting the early development of second language vocabulary and grammar. Applied Psycholinguistics, 38(4), 855–880. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716416000473

36.

Wilujeng

N. C. S.

Lan

Y.-J.

(2015). Online comic in Mandarin Chinese’s vocabulary learning: A case study of Budi Utama Multilingual School in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. IAFOR Journal of Education, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.3.2.02

37.

World Health Organization. (2019, April 24). To grow up healthy, children need to sit less and play more. https://www.who.int/news/item/24-04-2019-to-grow-up-healthy-children-need-to-sit-less-and-play-more