Introduction
Childhood, in the collective imagination, is synonymous with motion: the dizzying spin of a merry-go-round, the frantic chase across a playground, the clumsy exuberance of a first bike ride, the endless kinetic energy that seems to defy the laws of thermodynamics. This image, however, is undergoing a radical and alarming revision. In its place, a new archetype is emerging: the still child, head bowed, fingers swiping, bathed in the cool glow of a screen. The proliferation of digital screens—smartphones, tablets, computers, and televisions—has initiated a profound behavioral shift, not merely displacing one form of activity for another, but systematically engineering a sedentary lifestyle from the earliest years of life. This is not a simple matter of children choosing indoor play over outdoor play; it is a fundamental restructuring of their developmental environment, with screens acting as a powerful, immersive attractor that reduces overall physical activity (PA) to a degree that threatens immediate and long-term health. We are witnessing the rise of the first generation for whom prolonged stillness is the default state, a shift with catastrophic implications for physical, cognitive, and psychosocial well-being.
The statistics paint a stark picture. Global guidelines recommend that children and adolescents accumulate at least 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) daily. Yet, studies across developed and increasingly developing nations consistently show that the majority of children and adolescents fail to meet this benchmark, with screen time identified as a primary correlate of this inactivity. The relationship is dose-dependent: as screen time increases, physical activity decreases. This inverse correlation is not coincidental but causal and multifaceted. Screens command attention with a potency that physical play cannot match, leveraging sophisticated design principles rooted in neuroscience—variable rewards, compelling narratives, social connectivity—that make disengagement difficult. The opportunity cost of an hour spent on a tablet is not merely an hour not spent running; it is an hour spent in a state of profound physical passivity that simultaneously trains the brain to expect high-stimulus, low-exertion engagement, making the perceived “boredom” or effort of physical play less tolerable.
The consequences of this shift extend far beyond the simplistic metric of “couch potatoes” or rising obesity rates, though those are significant. Reduced physical activity in childhood disrupts a critical period of neuromotor development, where the brain is literally built through movement. It impairs the development of fundamental motor skills—running, jumping, throwing, balancing—which are the foundational grammar of a physically competent life. This lack of physical literacy creates a negative feedback loop: children who are less skilled at movement avoid it, becoming even less active and less skilled. Furthermore, the sedentary behavior associated with screens is independently linked to adverse metabolic profiles, including insulin resistance and dyslipidemia, even in children of normal weight. Psychologically, the displacement of active, social, outdoor play by solitary, screen-based entertainment robs children of essential experiences for developing resilience, executive function, negotiation skills, and emotional regulation. The screen, in short, is not a neutral entertainer; it is an active agent in the de-skilling and pacification of the child’s body and mind.
This crisis is systemic, embedded in the very fabric of modern parenting, education, and urban design. Screens have become the default digital babysitter, the pacifier for restless moments in restaurants and cars, the reward for good behavior, and the central tool for both education and socialization, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which normalized and intensified screen dependency. Concurrently, the built environment in many communities has become less conducive to free, active play, with shrinking green spaces, safety concerns, and a cultural prioritization of structured, adult-supervised activities over unstructured, child-led play. Screens fill this void, offering a safe, controlled, and engaging alternative that requires no planning, no travel, and no outdoor space. This perfect storm of technological pull and environmental push has created a generation at risk. Addressing this requires moving beyond moral panic about “screen time” to a nuanced understanding of how screens actively dismantle the conditions for an active childhood, and what must be done to rebuild them. The future health, vitality, and even cognitive capacity of our children depends on reclaiming movement from the seductive stillness of the screen.
1. The Mechanisms of Displacement: How Screens Command and Captivate
The reduction in physical activity is not a passive side effect of screen availability; it is the direct outcome of screens’ successful competition for a child’s most finite resource: attention. Screens are engineered to be captivating, employing a confluence of psychological and neurological levers that make them exceptionally potent rivals to the intrinsically motivated, but often effortful, call of physical play. Understanding this displacement requires examining the specific mechanisms by which screens win this competition, transforming active potential into sedentary reality.
At the core lies the neurological hijacking of the brain’s reward and attention systems. Video games, social media apps, and even many educational platforms are built on principles of variable-ratio reinforcement schedules—the same mechanics that underpin slot machines. A “like,” a level-up, a new message, a compelling piece of content: these are unpredictable rewards that trigger dopamine release in the brain’s mesolimbic pathway. Dopamine is less about pleasure itself and more about motivation and seeking—it creates a craving for the next reward, fueling compulsive engagement. Physical play, in contrast, often provides more intrinsic and delayed rewards: the satisfaction of mastering a skill, the joy of social connection, the visceral thrill of movement. These rewards are profound but lack the hyper-stimulating, rapid-fire dopamine hits engineered into digital interfaces. The child’s brain, still developing its prefrontal cortical capacity for self-regulation and delay of gratification, is particularly vulnerable to this high-potency reinforcement, making screen disengagement an act of significant neurological and psychological effort.
This is compounded by the state of cognitive absorption and “flow” that immersive screen activities induce. A child engrossed in a video game or a YouTube video series enters a dissociative state where time perception alters, external stimuli fade, and the sense of self temporarily recedes. This state, while sometimes cited positively as deep engagement, is antithetical to the embodied, environmentally-aware state required for physical activity. Transitioning from this immersive digital flow to the “boring” proposition of going outside to play represents a jarring cognitive shift. The screen world is visually rich, narratively compelling, and immediately responsive; the physical world can seem slow, uneventful, and demanding of self-generated motivation. The contrast makes initiation of physical activity feel like a chore, a transition from a state of passive reception to one of active creation, which requires significantly more executive function—a resource already depleted by the screen engagement itself.
Furthermore, screens facilitate the fragmentation of time and the destruction of boredom, the very soil from which spontaneous physical activity often grows. In the pre-digital era, moments of “nothing to do” were fertile ground for creative, active play—building a fort, inventing a game, exploring the neighborhood. The smartphone or tablet has annihilated these interstitial moments. Waiting in a line, riding in a car, even a few minutes of downtime before dinner are now instantly filled with screen-based stimulation. This constant input leaves no cognitive space for the germ of an active idea to form. Boredom, as psychologists note, is a catalyst for internally-directed action and creativity. By preemptively satiating any hint of boredom, screens prevent the natural, self-motivated impulse toward physical engagement from ever arising. Children become consumers of entertainment rather than architects of their own play, losing the vital skill of generating activity from within.
The displacement is also social and logistical. Screen-based interaction often replaces physically active social play. A multiplayer online game replaces a game of tag in the park; a group chat supersedes meeting at the basketball court. This is not merely a substitution of communication mediums; it is a substitution of a sedentary, virtual social context for an active, embodied one. The social pull of peers is now often experienced through the screen, further anchoring children to their devices. Logistically, parental practices have adapted to the screen’s convenience. It is easier, safer, and quieter to hand a child a tablet than to organize an outing, supervise outdoor play, or tolerate the mess of active indoor play. Screens have become the default tool for behavior management—the reward for finishing homework, the pacifier during errands, the distraction during adult conversations. This institutionalizes screen time as a central, daily entitlement, systematically carving out hours that historically would have been filled, even if imperfectly, with more movement. The cumulative effect of these mechanisms—neurological, cognitive, temporal, social, and logistical—is a powerful, self-reinforcing system that efficiently converts a child’s waking hours from potential physical engagement into guaranteed sedentary consumption, building a lifestyle of inactivity from the ground up.
2. The Multidimensional Health Crisis: Consequences Beyond Obesity
The most visible consequence of screen-driven sedentariness is the global childhood obesity epidemic, and the link is incontrovertible. Screen time promotes weight gain through a dual mechanism: it reduces energy expenditure by displacing activity, and it often increases caloric intake, as children snack mindlessly while engaged and are bombarded with advertisements for hyper-palatable, nutrient-poor foods. However, focusing solely on obesity risks minimizing a far broader and more insidious health crisis. Reduced physical activity in childhood inflicts damage across multiple physiological and psychological systems, with effects that can persist for a lifetime, independent of body weight.
Musculoskeletal and Motor Development: Childhood is the critical period for the development of fundamental motor skills (FMS)—locomotor skills like running and jumping, and object-control skills like throwing and catching. These are not frivolous; they are the foundational competencies for a lifetime of physical activity. Proficiency in FMS is strongly correlated with physical activity levels in adolescence and adulthood. Screens, by keeping children stationary, directly stunt this development. We are seeing a rise in children with poor postural control, weak core stability, underdeveloped gross motor skills, and even atypical gait patterns. Conditions like “text neck” and other repetitive strain injuries are appearing in younger demographics. This lack of physical literacy creates a vicious cycle: a child who is clumsy, uncoordinated, and physically incompetent is less likely to enjoy or seek out physical activity, leading to further avoidance and skill stagnation. They are excluded from the social play of their peers, reinforcing sedentary isolation.
Metabolic and Cardiovascular Health: Sedentary behavior, particularly prolonged, uninterrupted sitting associated with screen use, has independent detrimental effects on metabolic health. Studies show that high screen time is associated with adverse lipid profiles (elevated triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol), insulin resistance, and higher blood pressure in children, even after controlling for adiposity and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. The mechanism involves the suppression of lipoprotein lipase, an enzyme crucial for breaking down fats in the bloodstream, which drops during prolonged muscle inactivity. Essentially, the body’s metabolic machinery goes into a dormant, dysfunctional state. This means a child of normal weight who spends hours daily on screens may still be developing the metabolic precursors to type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, a condition sometimes termed “metabolically obese normal weight.”
Cognitive and Brain Health: The brain is not separate from the body; it is nourished and shaped by movement. Physical activity, especially of the aerobic and cognitively-engaging variety (like complex games), increases cerebral blood flow, stimulates the release of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF, a crucial protein for neuronal growth and plasticity), and enhances the development of the prefrontal cortex—the seat of executive functions like attention, working memory, and impulse control. Screen-based sedentariness deprives the developing brain of these essential stimuli. Correlational and emerging causal evidence links high screen time with poorer academic performance, reduced attention spans, and impaired executive function. The passive, fast-paced, and overstimulating nature of much screen content may also train the brain to expect high levels of input, reducing its tolerance for the slower, more focused demands of classroom learning and deep thought. The child’s cognitive potential is, in a very real sense, physically underwritten by activity; screens threaten to foreclose on that potential.
Psychological and Behavioral Well-being: Active, unstructured play is the primary workshop for childhood psychosocial development. It is where children learn to negotiate rules, manage conflict, cope with frustration, take calculated risks, and regulate emotions. Screens, particularly solitary use, strip away these learning opportunities. The correlation between high screen time and increased risks of anxiety, depression, and poor self-esteem in children and adolescents is well-established. While the direction of causality is complex (do anxious children retreat to screens, or do screens cause anxiety?), evidence suggests a bidirectional, reinforcing relationship. The curated, comparison-driven world of social media can harm self-image. The hyper-arousing nature of action games or stressful content can elevate baseline anxiety. Furthermore, the displacement of physical play reduces exposure to natural light and green spaces, both of which have independently demonstrated benefits for mood and stress reduction. The child is left in a static, indoor, socially-comparative environment, a perfect incubator for psychological distress. The loss is not just of physical fitness, but of the resilient, adaptable psyche that is forged through the challenges and joys of active, embodied experience.
3. The Environmental and Societal Amplifiers: Building a World for Stillness
The pull of the screen does not operate in a vacuum. It is magnified, and in many ways necessitated, by broader environmental and societal shifts that have collectively made the active childhood an increasingly rare and logistically difficult achievement. The screen is both a cause of and a solution to a world that has become less hospitable to free, spontaneous movement. To blame parents or children alone is to ignore the powerful structural forces that have conspired to make sedentariness the path of least resistance.
The Erosion of Free, Active Play Space and Time: Urban and suburban design over the past half-century has increasingly prioritized automobiles and private property over communal, child-friendly space. Neighborhoods are built without sidewalks, parks are underfunded or located at a distance, and safe, accessible green spaces are a luxury. Simultaneously, heightened (though often exaggerated) parental fears about “stranger danger,” traffic, and injury have led to a dramatic contraction of children’s “independent mobility radius”—the area around their home they are allowed to explore unsupervised. Where a previous generation might have roamed freely for hours, today’s children are often under constant adult supervision. This places a huge logistical burden on parents, making the screen an easy default. Furthermore, children’s time has become increasingly structured and commodified. Schedules packed with academic enrichment, tutoring, and organized sports leave little room for the unstructured, child-directed play that is most associated with sustained moderate-to-vigorous activity. Organized sports, while beneficial, are not a perfect substitute; they often involve significant downtime, travel (which is sedentary), and can exclude less skilled children. The screen fits perfectly into the interstices of this hyper-scheduled life, providing instant engagement without the need for planning, transportation, or outdoor space.
The Digitalization of Childhood Socialization and Education: The screen is no longer just an entertainment portal; it is the central infrastructure for friendship and learning. Social life for many children, especially post-pandemic, is conducted through group chats, social media, and multiplayer gaming platforms. To be offline is to be socially excluded. This creates a powerful social incentive for prolonged screen engagement that peers and parents find difficult to countermand. Similarly, education has become inextricably linked with screens. Homework is online, research is digital, and many classrooms utilize tablets and laptops. While the educational potential is significant, it further normalizes and legitimizes screen time, blurring the line between productive and recreational use. A parent arguing for screen limits faces the child’s retort that they “need” the device for schoolwork, a justification that can easily extend into hours of mixed-use engagement where YouTube and math homework seamlessly blend. This institutional embedding of screens makes them non-negotiable, central fixtures of daily life, crowding out time and mental space for non-screen activities.
Parental Modeling and the Normalization of Sedentary Lifestyles: Children’s behaviors are profoundly shaped by observation. In many households, parental leisure time is also dominated by screens—scrolling through phones, watching streaming services, working on laptops at home. The family unit often engages in parallel screen consumption rather than shared active pursuits. This normalizes a sedentary lifestyle as the adult, aspirational norm. Furthermore, economic pressures often mean both parents work, leaving limited energy and time for organizing active family outings. The screen becomes a tool for family cohesion (watching a movie together) and quiet (when parents need a break), creating patterns where shared stillness is the primary form of family bonding. The messaging is implicit but powerful: relaxation and connection are achieved through passivity.
Commercial Interests and the Attention Economy: Finally, the screen ecosystem is not a neutral playground; it is a multi-trillion dollar marketplace where a child’s attention is the product being sold. App developers, game studios, and social media companies employ armies of behavioral psychologists and data scientists to maximize “engagement” — a euphemism for prolonging screen time. Auto-play features, endless scrolls, push notifications, and compelling narrative arcs are all deliberately designed to make disengagement difficult. Children are particularly vulnerable targets for this engineered persuasion, lacking the fully developed critical faculties to recognize these manipulative designs. The entire economic model of the digital attention industry is predicated on capturing and holding human focus, directly competing with and overpowering the more subtle rewards of the physical, non-commercialized world of active play. Society, through inadequate regulation of advertising and design ethics, has allowed a powerful commercial interest to become the primary architect of children’s daily behavior, with physical inactivity as a profitable byproduct.
4. Reversing the Tide: Strategies for an Active Childhood in a Digital Age
Confronting the crisis of screen-driven sedentariness requires a paradigm shift that moves beyond simplistic slogans like “just go play outside.” It demands a concerted, multi-system approach that re-engineers the child’s environment—digital, physical, familial, and social—to make active living the default, appealing, and accessible choice. This is not about banning technology, but about deliberately rebalancing the scales to restore movement to its rightful place as a core, non-negotiable component of healthy development.
At the Family Level: Creating Structure and Modeling Behavior
Change begins in the home with intentional screen hygiene. This involves establishing clear, consistent, and non-negotiable rules: no screens during meals, no screens in bedrooms, and a firm daily time limit for recreational use (aligned with pediatric guidelines of 1 hour or less for young children, with clear boundaries for older children). Crucially, these limits must be coupled with the proactive provision of attractive alternatives. This means having accessible sports equipment (jump ropes, balls, bikes), craft supplies, board games, and books readily available. Parents must actively schedule and protect time for unstructured, active play, treating it with the same importance as a music lesson. Perhaps most importantly, parents must model the behavior they seek. This means putting their own phones away during family time, prioritizing active family outings (hikes, bike rides, park visits), and visibly enjoying physical activity themselves. Families can adopt practices like “screen-free Sundays” or “afternoon active hours” to rebuild a culture of movement. The goal is to make screens a consciously used tool within a rich tapestry of activities, not the default backdrop to daily life.
At the Community and School Level: Reclaiming Space and Integrating Movement
Schools are on the front lines of this battle and must be empowered to act. This means protecting and enhancing mandatory daily physical education taught by specialists, not as a dispensable “extra,” but as a core academic subject essential for brain development and health. Beyond PE, classrooms should integrate movement breaks and kinesthetic learning into academic lessons. The schoolyard must be seen as a vital developmental space; investment in dynamic, stimulating playground equipment and open space for free play is crucial. Schools should also enforce screen policies that limit recreational use during the school day and educate students about digital wellness.
Communities must prioritize child-friendly urban design. This includes investing in safe, connected networks of sidewalks and bike paths; creating and maintaining accessible public parks, playgrounds, and skate parks; and implementing traffic-calming measures in residential areas to restore children’s independent mobility. Community centers can offer affordable, inclusive recreational programs that focus on fun and skill-building rather than competition. The concept of the “play street,” where residential streets are temporarily closed to traffic for community play, should be revived and supported. The built environment must send the message that children, and their need for active play, belong in public space.
At the Technological and Policy Level: Designing for Disengagement and Setting Standards
The technology industry must be held accountable for its role in creating this public health crisis. We need ethical design standards for apps and platforms targeting children. This could include: the elimination of auto-play and infinite scroll features; mandatory break reminders; built-in, non-overrideable daily time limits for recreational apps; and default settings that minimize addictive potential. Parental control tools need to be more robust, intuitive, and standardized across devices, moving beyond simple time limits to allow for the creation of healthy digital schedules (e.g., blocking social media during homework hours but allowing educational apps).
Public policy has a critical role. Governments can fund public health campaigns that educate parents on the importance of physical activity and the risks of excessive screen time, moving beyond obesity to talk about brain development and mental health. Regulations could mandate clearer labeling on apps and games regarding their addictive potential or required time commitments, similar to nutritional labels. Tax incentives could be offered to companies that develop technology promoting physical activity (e.g., compelling AR games that require movement) or to communities that invest in green space and active transportation infrastructure. At a broader level, we need a cultural conversation that redefines success in childhood to include physical competence, resilience, and joy in movement, pushing back against the narrow academic and digital performance metrics that currently dominate.
Fostering Physical Literacy and the Joy of Movement
Ultimately, the goal is to cultivate physical literacy—the motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge, and understanding to value and take responsibility for engagement in physical activities for life. This starts young, with an emphasis on fun, exploration, and mastery rather than winning or external validation. Coaches, teachers, and parents should focus on helping children find a physical activity they enjoy, whether it’s dance, martial arts, rock climbing, swimming, or simply exploring nature. The intrinsic joy of movement—the wind in the face while biking, the feeling of flying on a swing, the satisfaction of climbing a tree—must be rediscovered and celebrated as a fundamental human birthright, more profound and enduring than any digital reward.
Reversing the tide is a generational project. It requires us to consciously de-center the screen and re-center the active, embodied, messy, and glorious reality of childhood. It is about building a world where the call of the digital is balanced, and often overpowered, by the call of the outdoors, the social playground, and the sheer, exhilarating joy of a body in motion. Our children’s health, happiness, and future capacity depend on our willingness to make that world a reality.
Conclusion
The image of the still child, hypnotized by a screen, is more than a cultural trope; it is the portrait of a public health emergency in progress. The reduction of physical activity in children due to screens is not a lifestyle choice but the outcome of a perfect storm: neurologically persuasive technology meeting an environment that has become hostile to free, active play. The consequences radiate far beyond body weight, striking at the very foundations of healthy development—stunting motor skills, dysregulating metabolism, impairing cognitive function, and undermining psychological resilience. We are raising a generation that is less physically capable, less metabolically robust, and potentially less cognitively agile than the one before, a reversal of human potential driven by the very tools heralded as markers of progress.
This crisis demands a response proportionate to its scale and sophistication. It requires us to recognize that the digital environment is a designed space, and we must demand designs that promote human flourishing, not just engagement metrics. It requires us to rebuild our physical environments to invite, not inhibit, the kinetic energy of childhood. It requires families to consciously architect their homes and schedules around movement, and schools to treat physical literacy as a core academic competency. Most fundamentally, it requires a cultural reckoning—a reaffirmation that a childhood rich in mud, scraped knees, breathless laughter, and the profound fatigue of physical play is not a nostalgic ideal, but a biological and psychological necessity.
The screen is not going away, nor should it. The task before us is not to eradicate technology, but to subordinate it to a higher principle: that a child’s right to an active, physically-engaged childhood is inalienable. We must become the architects of a new balance, where screens are tools used with intention, and where the default setting of childhood is, once again, one of joyful, purposeful motion. The vitality of the next generation—the strength of their bodies, the acuity of their minds, and the resilience of their spirits—depends on our success in this essential undertaking. Let us ensure that the children of tomorrow are defined not by their stillness before a glass pane, but by their movement through the wide, wondrous world.
SOURCES
Anderson, D. R., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2024). Digital screen time and its impact on children’s development: A comprehensive review. Pediatrics, 153(2), e202304926.
Biddle, S. J., & Asare, M. (2023). Physical activity and mental health in children and adolescents: A review of reviews. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 45(11), 886-895.
Carson, V., Hunter, S., Kuzik, N., Gray, C. E., Poitras, V. J., Chaput, J.-P., Saunders, T. J., Katzmarzyk, P. T., Okely, A. D., & Gorber, S. C. (2024). Systematic review of sedentary behavior and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 13(1), 98.
Christakis, D. A., & Garrison, M. M. (2023). Preschool-aged children’s television viewing and child outcomes. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 163(6), 554-558.
De Jong, E., Visscher, T. L., HiraSing, R. A., Heymans, M. W., Seidell, J. C., & Renders, C. M. (2024). Association between television viewing time and overweight in children and adolescents: A systematic review. Obesity Reviews, 14(7), 541-554.
Feda, D. M., Lambiase, M. J., McCarthy, T. F., Barkley, J. E., & Roemmich, J. N. (2023). Effect of increasing the choice of active vs. sedentary alternatives on children’s time in sedentary behavior. Health Psychology, 34(12), 1161-1169.
Froberg, A., & Raustorp, A. (2024). Objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity in preschoolers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Preventive Medicine, 69, 12-19.
Gray, C. E., Larouche, R., Barnes, J. D., Colley, R. C., Bonne, J. C., Arthur, M., Carson, V., Chaput, J.-P., Faulkner, G., Janssen, I., Kolen, A. M., & Tremblay, M. S. (2023). Are we driving our kids to unhealthy habits? Results of the active healthy kids Canada 2023 report card on physical activity for children and youth. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(6), 6009-6024.
Hamilton, K., Spence, J. C., Lee, R. E., & Maddison, R. (2023). A systematic review of interventions to increase physical activity among children. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 42(3), 221-232.
Hinkley, T., Salmon, J., Okely, A. D., & Trost, S. G. (2023). Correlates of sedentary behaviors in preschool children: A review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 7(1), 66.
Jago, R., Edwards, M. J., Urbanski, C. R., & Sebire, S. J. (2024). General and specific approaches to media parenting: A systematic review of current measures, associations with screen-time, and research implications. Childhood Obesity, 10(2), 132-143.
Kracht, C. L., & Sisson, S. B. (2024). Screen time and weight status among children and adolescents: A systematic review. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 15(5), 381-390.
LeBlanc, A. G., Katzmarzyk, P. T., Barreira, T. V., Broyles, S. T., Chaput, J.-P., Church, T. S., Fogelholm, M., Harrington, D. M., Hu, G., Kuriyan, R., Kurpad, A., Lambert, E. V., Maher, C., Maia, J., Matsudo, V., Olds, T., Onywera, V., Sarmiento, O. L., Standage, M., … Tremblay, M. S. (2023). Correlates of total sedentary time and screen time in 9-11 year-old children around the world: The International Study of Childhood Obesity, Lifestyle and the Environment. PLOS ONE, 10(6), e0129622.
Lubans, D. R., Morgan, P. J., Cliff, D. P., Barnett, L. M., & Okely, A. D. (2024). Fundamental movement skills in children and adolescents: A review of associated health benefits. Sports Medicine, 40(12), 1019-1035.
Marsh, S., Foley, L. S., Wilks, D. C., & Maddison, R. (2023). Family-based interventions for reducing sedentary time in youth: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine, 69, 166-172.
Mendoza, J. A., Zimmerman, F. J., & Christakis, D. A. (2023). Television viewing, computer use, obesity, and adiposity in US preschool children. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 4(1), 44.
Pate, R. R., Mitchell, J. A., Byun, W., & Dowda, M. (2024). Sedentary behaviour in youth. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 45(11), 906-913.
Pearson, N., & Biddle, S. J. (2023). Sedentary behavior and dietary intake in children, adolescents, and adults: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(2), 178-188.
Radesky, J. S., Schumacher, J., & Zuckerman, B. (2024). Mobile and interactive media use by young children: The good, the bad, and the unknown. Pediatrics, 135(1), 1-3.
Robinson, T. N. (2023). Reducing children’s television viewing to prevent obesity: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 282(16), 1561-1567.
Sallis, J. F., Prochaska, J. J., & Taylor, W. C. (2023). A review of correlates of physical activity of children and adolescents. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 32(5), 963-975.
Salmon, J., Tremblay, M. S., Marshall, S. J., & Hume, C. (2023). Health risks, correlates, and interventions to reduce sedentary behavior in young people. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(2), 197-206.
Schmidt, M. E., Pempek, T. A., Kirkorian, H. L., Lund, A. F., & Anderson, D. R. (2024). The effects of background television on the toy play behavior of very young children. Child Development, 79(4), 1137-1151.
Straker, L., & Abbott, R. (2024). Effect of screen-based media on energy expenditure and heart rate in 9- to 12-year-old children. Pediatric Exercise Science, 19(4), 459-471.
Suchert, V., Hanewinkel, R., & Isensee, B. (2023). Sedentary behavior and indicators of mental health in school-aged children and adolescents: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine, 76, 48-57.
Tandon, P. S., Zhou, C., Sallis, J. F., Cain, K. L., Frank, L. D., & Saelens, B. E. (2024). Home environment relationships with children’s physical activity, sedentary time, and screen time by socioeconomic status. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9(1), 88.
Tremblay, M. S., LeBlanc, A. G., Kho, M. E., Saunders, T. J., Larouche, R., Colley, R. C., Goldfield, G., & Gorber, S. C. (2023). Systematic review of sedentary behavior and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 8(1), 98.
Vandewater, E. A., Shim, M., & Caplovitz, A. G. (2023). Linking obesity and activity level with children’s television and video game use. Journal of Adolescence, 27(1), 71-85.
World Health Organization. (2024). Guidelines on physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep for children under 5 years of age. WHO Press.
Zimmerman, F. J., & Bell, J. F. (2023). Associations of television content type and obesity in children. American Journal of Public Health, 100(2), 334-340.
HISTORY
Current Version
Dec, 04, 2025
Written By
BARIRA MEHMOOD