Screens and children: what we know, what we don’t, and what to do at home

Why we wrote this#

This site exists to help choose movies for children by age. It would be odd to do that without first saying what paediatricians say: that the best thing, especially in the early years, is to delay screens as long as possible.

We don’t want to scare anyone or lecture. Almost every home has screens, and almost no family follows the recommendations to the letter. An analysis of 63 studies with nearly 90,000 children estimated that only one in four under-2s and one in three 2-to-5-year-olds are within the guidelines (McArthur et al., 2022). The authors don’t conclude that parents are doing it wrong: they conclude that families need more support. This article tries to be part of that support.

What the experts recommend#

We compared the guidelines of nine organisations. They don’t split ages the same way or use the same words, but the message is very similar:

Source: WHO (2019); AEP, Family Digital Plan; and the guidelines cited below.

Spanish paediatricians, in the AEP Family Digital Plan updated in December 2024, are the clearest: from 0 to 6, zero screens, because at those ages “there is no safe amount of time”. The exception is brief contact with an adult present, such as singing a song with the grandparents over a video call. From 7 to 12, less than an hour a day, counting time used at school and for homework.

The World Health Organization recommends no screen time in the first year or at 12 months, and from 2 to 4, an hour a day at most: “less is better”.

Outside Spain the idea repeats. France advises against screens before 3 and, from 3 to 6, accepts them only occasionally, with educational content and an adult. Sweden asks for an hour at most from 2 to 5 and one or two hours from 6 to 12, switched off between half an hour and an hour before sleep. US paediatricians (AAP, 2026) have taken an interesting step: they ask families to look beyond the stopwatch and to have their own plan, with screen-free times such as dinner or the car, and with parents setting the example.

What has been studied, and what was found#

The recommendations don’t come out of nowhere. These are the findings that come up most often.

Young children learn from people

In a now-classic experiment, 9-month-old babies learned to tell apart Mandarin Chinese sounds when a person spoke to them in front of them. With exactly the same content on video or audio, they learned nothing (Kuhl et al., 2003). It is a small study measuring something very specific, but what it shows is easy to grasp: at that age, learning happens through a relationship with someone.

More screen time, weaker language and development

A Canadian study followed more than 2,400 children from age 2 to 5. Those who spent more time with screens at 2 and 3 later did worse in the developmental screening their doctor runs, and not the other way round (Madigan et al., 2019). In Japan, with more than 7,000 children, those who at one year old spent four or more hours a day in front of a screen were considerably more likely to have communication delays at 2 and 4 (Takahashi et al., 2023).

Pooling 42 studies with almost 19,000 children reached the same conclusion: more hours of screen time, and the TV left on in the background, are linked to less developed language (Madigan et al., 2020).

Screens steal sleep

Sleep reviews agree: more screen time is linked to sleeping less and worse, both in the youngest (Janssen et al., 2020) and at school age, where 9 in 10 studies find it (Hale and Guan, 2015). The link is clearest when screens are used in the evening. Hence the advice to switch them off well before bed.

What they watch, and with whom, matters

The same analysis of 42 studies found the other side of the coin. Three things were linked to better language: educational programmes, watching with an adult and starting screens later (Madigan et al., 2020). It is the best argument for this site’s idea: delay, accompany and choose well.

There is an important nuance. A 2026 study found that watching together and choosing educational content help, but don’t make up for lots of screen time at age 2 (Porter et al., 2026). Watching together adds, but it doesn’t replace limiting time.

What about fast-paced cartoons?

You may have heard that fast cartoons are bad. A famous 2011 experiment found that 9 minutes of a very frantic show immediately worsened 4-year-olds’ attention and self-control (Lillard and Peterson, 2011). But reviewing all later studies, pace on its own shows no clear effect. What does have a small effect is highly fantastical content, full of impossible things (Hinten et al., 2025). So we won’t tell you that slow pacing works miracles. We’ll tell you something simpler: calm content suited to their age is better.

And if one day it’s film time#

Real life isn’t a manual. There will be rainy days, long journeys and sofa afternoons. When the screen goes on, make it a good time:

1. At the right age. Being “a cartoon” isn’t enough. Many family films have scenes that genuinely frighten a 4-year-old: a parent’s death, a villain who transforms, a long chase. On our pages each movie has an age based on its content and the reason in one sentence.
2. Well chosen. A story worth watching, with no ads and without the next one starting on its own.
3. Together. On the sofa, side by side, ready to pause if something worries them.
4. Now and then. Make it a special plan, not every afternoon’s routine.

It isn’t about doing it perfectly. It’s about making sure that, when there is a screen, it is for a good movie, at the right age and with someone beside them.