www.ijcrsee.com
1
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
Original scientific paper
Received: January 27, 2026.
Revised: April 25, 2026.
Accepted: May 01, 2026.
DC:
373.3.093.2:535
373.3.091.3::53
10.23947/2334-8496-2026-14-1-023-036
© 2026 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
*
Corresponding author: belousovaak@gmail.com
Abstract: The study is relevant in the context of the early digitalization of childhood and the key role of parents in medi-
ating children’s digital activity. The purpose of the work is to study the peculiarities of the attitude of parents to the use of digital
technologies by their preschool and primary school age children. A survey of 220 parents was conducted using statistical analysis
(Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U-test). The results revealed significant differences: parents of younger students allow more freedom
in using gadgets and the Internet, while parents of preschoolers control access and time more strictly. The trend towards the
“rejuvenation” of digitalization has been confirmed, with modern preschoolers gaining access to technology earlier. The concepts
of risks (eye-sight, emotional sphere) and opportunities (learning, development) coincide in both groups. The prospects of the
study are related to the study of parental attitudes in adolescence and the influence of cognitive factors on digital socialization.
Keywords: parents, digital technologies, preschoolers, primary school students, parental mediation
Alla K. Belousova
1*
, Yulya A. Tushnova
1
, Natalia S. Maslyaeva
1
, Nelly N. Khachaturyan
1
, Elena A. Suroedova
1
1
Faculty “Psychology, Pedagogy and Defectology”, Department of educational psychology and organizational psychology,
Don State Technical University, Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation, e-mail: belousovaak@gmail.com; trubulya@yandex.ru,
natashamaslaiva@mail.ru, Nellja-nik@mail.ru, suroedova@mail.ru
The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their
Preschool and Primary School Age Children
Introduction
In the modern world, the process of digitalization is part of everyday life. It is no longer just the
benefits or harms of digital technology for a modern child. Currently, starting from the initial stage of edu-
cation, the child adapts to the digital environment, which becomes more complicated at each stage of so-
cialization. Nowadays, due to the development of artificial intelligence technologies, the spread of neural
networks in education, business, advertising and other areas of public life, the problem of the ontogenesis
of the use of digital technologies in attempts to understand how to create conditions for successful ad-
aptation of a child in the digital world is particularly acute. It seems to us that a child’s adaptation to the
digital world involves, first of all, the development of digital technology skills, starting with the use of vari-
ous gadgets and interaction with the Internet. At the same time, one of the most important aspects of this
problem is the issue of psychological safety for children using digital technologies in terms of adequacy
for the child’s age. All this presupposes the understanding that, firstly, digital technologies are new psy-
chological tools (Babaeva, Voiskunsky, 1998; Rubtsova, 2019) contribute to the mental and psychological
development of the child, suggesting the strengthening of the role of an adult as a guide of the child in the
area of their immediate development (Vygotsky), and secondly, it is necessary to minimize developmental
disorders of the cognitive, emotional, personal and interpersonal spheres of the child.
According to a representative survey of the Russian population aged 14 and older (HSE ISSEK,
2022), one in three children (30% of children aged 3-6) has their own smartphone at preschool age,
almost one in eight at the same age has a tablet (13%), one in twenty parents purchase a laptop, “smart
watches /fitness bracelets (5% each) or even a desktop computer (4%). The study by Soldatova and
Rasskazova (2021) shows that the early digitalization of childhood creates new challenges for the devel-
opment of self-regulation and voluntary attention.
The actualization of this problem occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, when distance learning
www.ijcrsee.com
2
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
technologies became an integral part of everyday life, even for preschool children. There remains a theoretical
debate in scientific discourse regarding the “risks-opportunities” dichotomy of childhood digitalization, where
empirical evidence demonstrates statistically significant contradictions in assessing the cognitive effects of
digital technologies (Marciano L. et al., 2021). The authors point out that users’ subjective assessments of
the negative impact of smartphones on cognitive functions often do not correlate with objective indicators;
conclude that there is no consensus on whether cognitive impairments are the cause or consequence of
problematic smartphone use; describe contradictory effects of multitasking, where frequent switching between
applications in individuals with an impulsive type of use leads to decreased productivity and vice versa (Mar
-
ciano L. et al., 2021). In a longitudinal study Twenge and Campbell (2018) established the non-linear nature of
the relationship between the time spent using digital devices and the psychological well-being of adolescents.
Research on digital behavior places different emphasis on understanding the psychological aspects of
using digital technologies. The most common are studies of the basic mechanisms of digital addiction forma
-
tion. Tonacci et al. (2019) have developed a conceptual model of nomophobia (irrational fear of being left with-
out a mobile phone or without communication), namely, loss of connectivity, refusal to communicate, inability
to receive information, and discomfort from lack of access to a gadget. Tonacci et al. (2019) empirically proved
that nomophobia demonstrates stable correlations with anxiety disorders and sleep disorders. A study by
Moreno et al. (2020) showed a link between a phobia of missed benefits and problematic use of social media.
The cognitive aspect of digital behavior is revealed in the work of Hadar et al. (2017), which demon-
strates the negative impact of multitasking when using smartphones on cognitive control. The authors found
that frequent switching between applications leads to a decrease in the ability to concentrate and the amount of
working memory, which indicates the neurocognitive consequences of digitalization. Wilmer et al. (2017) found
that heavy smartphone use can lead to limitations in solving tasks that require intense attention. While a review
by Pablo E. Torres et al. (2023) shows that new interactive gaming technologies can have a positive impact on
children’s behavior related to self-control, cooperation, decision-making, and problem solving appropriate to their
development. Interactive digital tools also support user creativity, according to Marte Hoff Hagen et al. (2023).
The socio-psychological context of the problematic use of digital technologies is investigated by
Hong et al. (2019). The work revealed the mediating role of self-control in regulating stress and compul-
sive use of gadgets. Low self-control increases the likelihood of using digital technologies in stressful
situations, thereby establishing a mechanism for the formation of addictive behavior. Ryan et al. (2016),
investigating the satisfaction of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and connected-
ness, revealed a link between the use of social networks and psychological well-being.
The age-related aspect of the problem is analyzed in a meta-study by Lissak (2018), which estab-
lished a statistical relationship between gadget use time and symptoms of ADHD, cognitive impairment,
and emotional dysregulation in children. The work highlights the special vulnerability of the developing psy
-
che to digital influences. Spasskaya and Slyusar (2022) revealed that parents of preschool children tend
to underestimate the cognitive risks of digital technologies, focusing mainly on threats to physical health.
The social consequences of the intensive development of digital technologies and their active
implementation in everyday life are revealed in a study by Kowalski et al. (2019). The authors studied
gender differences in experiencing the consequences of cyberbullying. It was found that girls show a
higher vulnerability to depressive symptoms and social anxiety than boys. Odgers and Jensen (2020) in a
systematic review emphasize that the majority of adolescents do not experience serious negative conse-
quences from the use of digital technologies, but vulnerable groups require special attention.
Ellis et al. (2019) proposed a fundamentally new approach to measuring digital addiction through
the analysis of objective behavioral patterns of phone use, which makes it possible to overcome the limi-
tations of subjective assessment in the traditional survey method for this research subject. Livingstone
et al. (2017) have developed a comprehensive model of parental mediation that takes into account both
restrictive and proactive strategies for regulating children’s digital activity.
Thus, the logic of the study of psychological determinants in digital behavior and the use of digital
technologies unfolds from the study of the basic mechanisms of formation of dependent behavior through
the analysis of cognitive and socio-psychological consequences to the development of improved diagnos-
tic methods, which reflects the evolution of scientific understanding of the problem as a whole.
W. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) can constitute the meth-
odological basis of the research, receiving a modern sound in the context of the digital transformation of
childhood. According to this theory, the digital environment manifests itself as a new element that has a direct
www.ijcrsee.com
3
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
impact on the child’s development processes through a change in the nature of interaction in the child-parent-
technology system (Johnson and Puplampu, 2008). At the same time, digital technologies create a specific
chronotope that transforms the temporal and spatial parameters of the developing environment (Neumann,
2023). An important aspect of the application of the ecological approach is the analysis of the interaction
between different levels of the ecological system – from the immediate digital microenvironment to the macro-
level of the digital culture of society (Livingstone et al., 2017). This allows us to consider digital socialization as
a multi-level process mediated by both the individual characteristics of the child and broader social contexts.
Thus, the logic of the study of psychological determinants in digital behavior and the use of digital
technologies unfolds from the study of the basic mechanisms of formation of dependent behavior through
the analysis of cognitive and socio-psychological consequences to the development of improved diagnos-
tic methods, which reflects the evolution of scientific understanding of the problem as a whole.
The methodological basis of the research can be constituted by W. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological
theory of development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), which receives a modern sound in the context of the digi-
tal transformation of childhood. According to this theory, the digital environment manifests itself as a new
element that has a direct impact on the child’s development processes through a change in the nature
of interaction in the child-parent-technology system (Johnson and Puplampu, 2008). At the same time,
digital technologies create a specific chronotope that transforms the temporal and spatial parameters of
the developing environment (Neumann, 2023). An important aspect of the application of the ecological
approach is the analysis of the interaction between different levels of the ecological system – from the
immediate digital microenvironment to the macro-level of the digital culture of society (Livingstone et al.,
2017). This allows us to consider digital socialization as a multi-level process mediated by both the indi-
vidual characteristics of the child and broader social contexts.
An additional theoretical framework is the model of parental mediation by S. Livingstone (Living-
stone et al., 2017), which offers a systematization of strategies for parental regulation of children’s digital
activity. We can talk about restrictive mediation (Livingstone et al., 2017), active mediation (Nikken and
de Haan, 2015), mediation through sharing (Soldatova and Rasskazova, 2021), mediation with the sup-
port of school and parent cooperation (Duygu Gür, Yalın Kılıç Turel, 2022), the characteristics of parental
mediation can make various contributions to the psychological well-being of children (Rudnova N.A. et al.,
2023). Denisenkova N.S. and Taruntaev P.I. (2022) argue that all forms of parental mediation can reduce
the negative effects of media and protect against unwanted content, while emphasizing that the problem
of the impact of digital devices on a child must be considered comprehensively, taking into account adults
as organizers and intermediaries of the child’s interaction with various media content.
At the same time, the effectiveness of various mediation strategies is context-dependent and is
determined by the age characteristics of the child, the digital competence of the parents and socio-cultural
factors (Slyusar and Chichinina, 2020).
The works of Mascheroni and Siibak (2021) revealed the paradox of the “digital divide”, which
manifests itself in the fact that technological accessibility does not neutralize, but rather exacerbates
differences in the quality of digital socialization. The authors demonstrate that despite the increasing
availability of digital devices, significant differences remain in digital skills and the ability to critically com-
prehend digital content among children from different social groups (Mascheroni and Siibak, 2021). The
socio-economic situation may be related to the behavior of digital technology users through the active
participation of parents and support for their child’s device use, which seems to provide opportunities that
enhance digital maturity (Teresa Koch et al., 2024). The authors argue that in addition to environmental
influences through parents, there are individual differences within also relating to the ability of young peo-
ple to use devices in a useful way. These findings are consistent with earlier studies of digital inequality,
which emphasized the importance of not only physical access to technology, but also the development of
digital competencies (Hargittai, 2002; Van Dijk, 2005).
The research of Soldatova and Shlyapnikov (2020) focuses on the problem of asynchronous de-
velopment of technological infrastructure and parental digital competence. Parents often demonstrate an
insufficient level of digital literacy necessary for effective mediation of children’s digital activity (Soldatova
and Shlyapnikov, 2020). This problem is particularly acute in the context of the rapid digitalization of edu-
cation, when parents do not have time to adapt to new technological challenges (Livingstone et al., 2021).
Modern research emphasizes that effective digital socialization requires an integrated approach
that takes into account both technological aspects and psychological and pedagogical factors (Zillien
www.ijcrsee.com
4
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
and Hargittai, 2009). At the same time, the development of digital resilience – the ability to withstand
digital risks and effectively use the opportunities of the digital environment - is of particular importance
(Soldatova and Rasskazova, 2021), as well as children’s awareness of their digital data and online privacy
issues (Andria Agesilaou, et al., 2022).
The conducted analysis allows us to state that the digital socialization of modern children is a
complex multilevel process characterized by significant contradictions and requiring a comprehensive
scientific understanding. The study of parental ideas about the use of digital technologies by children of
preschool and primary school age is particularly relevant, since during this particular period the founda-
tions of digital behavior are laid.
Early involvement of children in the digital environment raises the issue of finding a balance be-
tween using the educational potential of technology and minimizing their negative impact on cognitive and
emotional development. The ecological approach allows us to consider parental mediation strategies as
a key factor mediating the child’s interaction with technology. The relevance of the study of this aspect is
also conditioned by the fact that parental attitudes form the “digital biography” of a child and determine the
trajectory of his digital socialization (Livingstone et al., 2017).
Materials and methods
220 parents (10.5% men) participated in the study, of which 37.3% were parents of preschool-age
children (7.4% men), 32.7% were parents of primary school-age children (16.7% men).
The age characteristics of the parents who participated in the study were as follows (Table 1).
Table 1. Age characteristics of the sample population (in %)
Parents’ age Group 1 Group 2
Under 30 years of age 15.5 4.2
30-40 years of 71.6 69.4
Over 40 years of age 12.8 26.4
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children
It is also important to describe the age and gender characteristics of the children whose parents
participated in the study (Table 2).
Table 2. Age and gender characteristics of children (in %)
Indicators Group 1 Group 2
Male 50% 59.7%
Female 50% 40.3%
Average age 4.6 (3 years – 22.3%, 4 years – 31.8%,
5 years – 19.6%, 6 years – 18.9%, 7 years – 7.4%)
8.8 (7 years – 9.7%, 8 years – 34.7%,
9 years – 25%, 10 years – 23.6%, 11 years old – 6.9%)
Note: Group 1 – children of preschool age; Group 2 – children of primary school age
The main research method is a questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed by the author’s
team. The questionnaire consists of 24 questions with a simple alternative answer. 4 questions collect
socio-demographic data, 20 questions are devoted to collecting information about the availability of a
gadget / the Internet access for a child, the age of its receipt /access, and forms of parental control over
the use of the gadget/the Internet, the forms of a child’s interaction with a gadget/the Internet, ideas about
the benefits and harms of digital technologies for the child.
The questionnaire, aimed at studying parental perceptions in the field of childhood digitalization,
is based on a comprehensive analysis of modern domestic and foreign research. The theoretical basis
for the block on parental control and mediation strategies was classical and modern works defining the
structure and types of mediation practices. A study by Livingstone and Helsper (2008) describes a well-
established typology in international science (active mediation, restrictive mediation, monitoring), and the
work of Slyusar and Chichinina (2020) adapts this concept to the Russian socio-cultural context, which
makes it possible to accurately characterize the forms of parental control used in the questionnaire.
The block, which explores children’s digital practices, the age at which they started using gadgets
and Internet access, was formed taking into account data from major international and Russian studies.
The works of Mascheroni and Olafsson (2016), Soldatova and Shlyapnikov (2020) describe current data
on age norms, types of online activity, and features of children’s access to digital technologies, which al-
lowed them to formulate relevant questionnaire questions.
www.ijcrsee.com
5
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
The substantive validity of the block on parents’ ideas about the benefits and harms of digital tech-
nologies is based on the research of Spasskaya and Slyusar (2022). The authors focus on categorizing
parental anxieties and the recognized benefits of using gadgets and providing Internet access for children.
The results of the Duygu Gür and Yalın Kılıç Türel study (2022) confirm that even with a positive attitude
towards the use of gadgets by children, especially for educational purposes, parents are concerned about
the possible risks and security threats their children may face in a virtual environment. According to research
conducted by Patricia Gomez et al. (2017), only parental control can reduce risky online experiences of ado
-
lescents with frequent Internet use. The Odgers and Jensen review (2020) helped to take into account the
health and emotional risks in the questionnaire when providing children with access to digital technologies.
In addition, when developing the questionnaire, the factor of parents’ own digital competence and
activity was taken into account, the relationship of which with educational practices is convincingly shown
in the studies of Nikken and de Haan (2015), Soldatova and Rasskazova (2021). Nur W. Rahayu et al.
(2021) argue that mothers play a greater role in raising children and They use digital technologies more
often, acting as an informal teacher.
Thus, the questionnaire is methodologically sound and relies on relevant and valid sources, which
ensures the high quality of the empirical data collected.
The survey procedure was conducted face-to-face, in the same conditions for all the respondents
(audience, 1.5 m between the survey participants, identical forms and writing materials). The form of the
survey is group, blank. The questionnaire offered to read the questions and choose the most appropri-
ate answer, the procedure was anonymous. Informed voluntary consent was obtained from each of the
participants included in the study.
The purpose of the research is to study the peculiarities of the attitude of parents to the use of
digital technologies by their preschool and primary school age children.
Research objectives: to analyze current research on parents’ attitudes towards digital technologies;
to describe statistically significant differences in the attitudes of parents of preschool and primary school
age children towards the use of digital technologies by children; to describe parents’ views on the positive
and negative effects of digital technologies on children; to identify differences in the attitudes of parents
of preschool and primary school age children towards the use of gadgets and the Internet; to study the
awareness of parents of preschool and primary school age children about the standards of safe use of
digital technologies; to identify differences in the regulation of children’s access to digital technologies
among parents with different digital activities.
Statistical procedures were used: descriptive statistics, Chi-square test to compare two empirical
distributions, Mann-Whitney U Test.
The assumptions that were tested were as follows: 1) the attitude of parents to the use of digital
technologies by their preschool and primary school age children can be different in a number of parameters:
availability, age of access, purpose, independence of use, time characteristics of use (hypothesis 1); 2) con
-
siderations of parents of preschool and primary school age children about the positive and negative impact of
digital technologies on children can differ (hypothesis 2); 3) the attitude of parents of preschool and primary
school age children to gadget use and Internet access may be excellent (hypothesis 3); 4) parents who are
informed about the standards of safe use of digital technologies by children of different ages regulate the use
of digital technologies by children more strictly (hypothesis 4); 5) parents who actively use digital technolo
-
gies in their lives, they less strictly regulate the use of digital technologies by children (hypothesis 5).
It is necessary to pay attention to the limitations of the study. The study is based on a sample with
a predominance of women (89.5%) and respondents aged 30-40 years, which limits the possibility of ex
-
trapolating conclusions to the entire general population of parents. The results mostly reflect the position of
mothers in this age group. Using questionnaires as the main method of data collection carries risks related
to the social desirability of responses. Parents could give socially acceptable answers, underestimating, for
example, the time of their own use of gadgets or the degree of uncontrollability on the part of the child. The
study was conducted on a local sample, which does not fully take into account regional and socio-cultural
differences in access to digital technologies and parental mediation practices on a large scale. The focus
on quantitative parameters of technology use and general ideas about risks and benefits could leave out
the deep motives, values, and specific family parenting practices that influence digital socialization.
www.ijcrsee.com
6
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
Results
To test the assumption that the attitude of parents of preschool and primary school age children to
the use of digital technologies by their children can differ in a number of parameters: availability, age of ac-
cess, purpose, independence of use, time characteristics of use (hypothesis 1), we used the Chi-square
test to compare two empirical distributions and Mann-Whitney U Test (tables 3, 4, 5).
Table 3. The attitude of parents of preschool and primary school age children to the use of gadgets (computer,
tablet, smartphone) by their children
Parameters Group 1 Group 2 Statistics
The child has own gadget yes 43.2% 87.5% Chi-square test = 38.887,
р=0.001
no 56.8% 12.5%
Age of getting your own gadget 4.3 (σ=1.6) 5.9 (σ=2.8) Mann-Whitney U Test
=1332, р=0.001
The age of the planned purchase of your
own gadget
6.8 (σ=2.5) 7.9 (σ=2) Mann-Whitney U Test
=3289, р=0.008
The purpose of the gadget is not needed 12.8% 2.8% Chi-square test = 7.841,
р=0.049
Entertainment 7.4% 13.9%
Education 63.5% 62.5%
is used when parents are busy 16.2% 20.8%
Independence of gadget use do not use independently 15.5% 1.4% Chi-square test = 27.455,
р=0.001
uses only in the presence of
parents
30.4% 11.1%
uses with a parent and
independently
45.3% 63.9%
uses independently 8.8% 23.6%
Regularity of free access to the gadget no free access 18.9% 4.2% Chi-square test = 14.258,
р=0.003
on weekends 16.2% 15.3%
1-2 times during the working week 20.3% 12.5%
daily access 44.6% 68.1%
The time a child spends in the gadget up to 30 minutes 45.3% 18.1% Chi-square test = 22.848,
р=0.001
From 30 min. to 1 h 22.3% 45.8%
More than 1.5 hours 17.6% 27.8%
Unlimited 14.9% 8.3%
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children
It was found that parents of preschool and primary school age children have different attitudes
towards the child’s own gadget, the actual and planned age of receiving the gadget by the child, the tasks
of using the gadget by the child, independent use of the gadget by the child, control of free access to the
gadget and the time the child spends in the gadget. At the same time, parents of primary school children
allow more freedom in the use of the gadget by the child.
We shall take a closer look at the considerations of parents of preschoolers and younger school-
children about the purposes of using digital technologies by children (Table 4).
Table 4. Perceptions of parents of preschoolers and primary school students about the goals of using digital
technologies by children (in%)
Parameters Group 1 Group 2 Statistics
For entertainment (cartoons, music, games, etc.) 80.4 72.2 Chi-square test =1.874 р=0.171
For cognitive purposes (educational and developmental programs, searching
for the necessary scientific information, performing teacher assignments)
38.8 69.4 Chi-square test =18.192 р=0.001
Creating your own media product: shooting videos, changing photos,
creating drawings, etc.
8.8 23.6 Chi-square test =8.915, р=0.003
Communication with relatives 40.4 47.2 Chi-square test =0.915, р=0.339
Communication with peers 2.7 45.8 Chi-square test =63.977, р=0.001
I have no control over this 4.1 0
Calculation has not been performed,
the expected frequency is less than 5
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children
We see that parents of preschoolers and elementary school students allow the use of digital tech-
nologies for entertainment and communication with relatives. Parents of primary school-age children are
significantly more likely to assume the use of digital technologies for the purposes of education, creating
their own media products and communicating with peers. It is also interesting that not a single parent of a
www.ijcrsee.com
7
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
primary school student choses the answer “I have no control over this.”.
Next, we shall look at the attitude of parents towards children’s access to the Internet (Table 5).
Table 5. The attitude of parents of preschool and primary school age children to their children’s access to the Internet
Parameters
Group 1 Group 2 Statistics
The child has access to
the Internet
yes 41.9% 88.9%
Chi-square test = 43.718,
р=0.001
no 58.1% 11.1%
Age of Internet access
4.3 (σ=1.5) 7.4 (σ=1.9)
Mann-Whitney U Test
=428.5, р=0.001
Age of planned Internet
access
7.3 (σ=2.8) 7.8 (σ=3.4)
Mann-Whitney U Test =4556,
р=0.076
Ways to control a
child’s online presence
Parental control programs 59.5% 50% Chi-square test = 17.832,
р=0.001
Monitoring the history of website visits 6.8% 26.4%
Using the Internet only in the presence of a parent
28.4% 16.7%
I will not/do not control Internet usage 5.4% 6.9%
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children
It has been established that parents of preschool and primary school age children have different at-
titudes towards the child’s free access to the Internet, as well as the age of providing the child with access
to the Internet and the methods of parental control of the child’s online presence. Interestingly, parents of
both preschoolers and elementary school students who did not provide Internet access to their children
at the time of the survey agree in their assessment of the age at which they started using the Internet.
To test the assumption that parents of preschool and primary school age children may have dif-
ferent ideas about the positive and negative effects of digital technologies on children (hypothesis 2), we
used the Chi-square test to compare two empirical distributions (Tables 6, 7).
Table 6. The views of parents of preschool and primary school age children about the negative impact of digital
technologies on children (in %)
Parameters Group1 Group2 Statistics
Health disorders: eye - sight, posture 80.4 75 Chi-square test =0.842, р=0.359
Decreased motor activity 27 23.6 Chi-square test =0.294, р=0.587
Emotional disorders: irritability, overexcitation, inability to cope with
emotions
67.3 63.9 Chi-square test =0.258, р=0.611
Decreased cognitive activity in activities without gadgets 19.9 14.1 Chi-square test =1.082, р=0.298
Impaired communication with peers 13.1 16.7 Chi-square test =0.499, р=0.480
Exposure to inappropriate content in childhood 41.5 30.6 Chi-square test =2.458, р=0.117
The influence of strangers on child development 19 22.2 Chi-square test =0.303, р=0.582
Addiction to games and entertainment content 39.9 41.7 Chi-square test =0.065, р=0.798
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children
It has been established that the opinions of parents of preschoolers and younger schoolchildren
about the harmful effects of digital technologies on children do not differ. Parents call the health and
emotional disorders the most harmful effects of gadgets on children, and just under half of parent’s point
to such threats of digital technologies for children as exposure to inappropriate content for children and
addiction to games and watching entertainment content.
Table 7. The views of parents of preschool and primary school age children about the positive impact of digital
technologies on children (in %)
Parameters Group 1 Group2 Statistics
Distance learning and homework preparation 54.7 68.1
Chi-square test =3.558, р=0.059
Broadening horizons, cultural development 55.4 54.2
Chi-square test =0.030, р=0.862
Additional education: master classes, courses, practical skills training (cooking, dancing, etc.)
55.4 56.9
Chi-square test =0.047, р=0.829
Online communication with relatives and friends 41.2 45.8
Chi-square test =0.422, р=0.516
Development of attention, memory, logic 21.6 15.3
Chi-square test =1.240, р=0.266
Development of the ability to select information 14.9 11.3
Chi-square test =0.525, р=0.469
Feeling competent, “up-dated” 11.5 12.5
Chi-square test =0.048, р=0.827
Statistical analysis has shown that there are no differences in the views of parents of preschool and
primary school age children about the positive impact of digital technologies on children. Parents consider
the most useful opportunities of digital technologies for children to be the possibility of distance learning,
expanding horizons and cultural development, and the opportunity to receive additional education remote-
www.ijcrsee.com
8
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
ly. Also important for parents is the opportunity to communicate with relatives using digital technologies.
To test the assumption that parents of preschool and primary school age children may have dif-
ferent attitudes towards gadget use and Internet access (hypothesis 3), we used the Chi-square test to
compare two empirical distributions and the Mann-Whitney U test (Table 8).
The Chi-square test results showed that 81.1% of parents who allow their child to have their own
gadget provide them with Internet access. Whereas only 24.7% of parents who do not allow their child to
have their own gadget provide their child with Internet access (Chi-square test =69.715, p=0.001). At the
same time, additional calculations for groups of parents of preschool-age children and primary school-age
children showed similar results, and therefore, we consider it inappropriate to provide additional calcula-
tions for groups, and we limit ourselves to presenting statistical analysis for the entire sample.
Furthermore, we analyzed the specifics of the differences in the attitudes of parents of preschoolers
and younger schoolchildren towards the age of access to gadgets and the Internet. To do this, we divided
the respondents into those who have already provided a personal gadget to a child, and those who forbid
a personal gadget to a child.
Table 8. The attitude of parents of preschool and primary school age children to gadget use and Internet access
Parameters Group 1 Group 2 Statistics
Parents who provided their child with a personal gadget
Age of Internet access 4.4 (σ=1.5) 7.4 (σ=1.9) Mann-Whitney U Test =330.5, р=0.001
Age of getting your own gadget 4.5 (σ=1.6) 7.3 (σ=1.8) Mann-Whitney U Test =620.5, р=0.001
Parents who forbid a child to have a personal gadget
Age of planned Internet access 7.3 (σ=2.1) 10.6 (σ=0.7) Mann-Whitney U Test =1496.5, р=0.011
The age of the planned purchase of your own gadget 7.8 (σ=2.6) 10.6 (σ=5) Mann-Whitney U Test =656.5, р=0.001
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children
In the group of parents who provided the child with a personal gadget, differences were found be-
tween parents of preschool and primary school age children in the age of providing the gadget and Internet
access. Parents of preschoolers used to allow a child to access both a personal gadget and the Internet.
Differences were also found in the group of parents who forbid a child to have their own personal gadget.
Firstly, the age of a child’s planned access to digital technologies in this group is higher than in the group of parents
who provided a personal gadget to a child. Secondly, we are seeing the same trend. Parents of preschoolers plan to
provide their child with access to a personal gadget and the Internet earlier than parents of younger schoolchildren.
Table 9. Attitude towards digital technologies of parents of preschool and primary school age children who are
informed about the standards of safe use of digital technologies (in %)
Parameters GroupA GroupB GroupC Statistics
Group1
Positive impact of digital technologies: distance learning
and homework preparation
31.1 18 50.8 Chi-square test =8.744,
р=0.013
Positive impact of digital technologies: development of
attention, memory, logic
28.1 15.6 56.3 Chi-square test =6.568,
р=0.037
Positive impact of digital technologies: development of
the ability to select information
13.6 27.3 59.1 Chi-square test =7.05,
р=0.029
Group 2
The purpose of the
gadget
Entertainment 12.5 25 11.1 Chi-square test =12.833,
р=0.046
Learning 62.5 50 66.7
Used when parents are busy 25 8.3 22.2
The time a child spends
in the gadget
up to 30 minutes 8.3 8.3 27.8 Chi-square test =14.28,
р=0.027
From 30 minutes to 1 hour 45.8 41.7 47.2
More than 1.5 hour 45.8 25 16.7
Unlimited 0 25 8.3
Negative impact of digital technologies: impaired com-
munication with peers
8.3 8.3 83.3 Chi-square test =6.5,
р=0.039
Positive impact of digital technologies: Distance learning
and homework preparation
38.8 22.4 38.8 Chi-square test =8.305,
р=0.016
Positive impact of digital technologies:
Feeling of being competent, “up-dated”
77.8 11.1 11.1 Chi-square test =9.397,
р=0.009
Note: Group 1 – parents of preschool children; Group 2 – parents of primary school children, Group A – parents who are informed about
the standards for the safe use of digital technologies, Group B – parents who are not informed about the standards for the safe use of
digital technologies, Group C – parents who have an approximate understanding of the standards for the safe use of digital technologies
www.ijcrsee.com
9
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
To test the assumption that parents who are informed about the standards of safe use of digital
technologies by children of different ages more strictly regulate the use of digital technologies by children
(hypothesis 4), we used the Chi-square test to compare two empirical distributions (Table 9). In the group
of parents of preschool children, 36.5% are informed about the standards of safe use of digital technolo-
gies, 26.4% are not informed, 37.2% of parents have a rough idea. In the group of parents of primary
school children, 33.3% are informed about the standards for the safe use of digital technologies, 16.7%
are not informed, and 50% of parents have a rough idea.
The data was compared on the following issues: whether a child has a personal gadget, the purpose of
the gadget, the degree of independence of the child’s use of the gadget, the time of access to the gadget, the
permissible time spent by the child with the gadget, access to the Internet, ways to control Internet use, the
negative consequences of using digital technologies, the positive consequences of using digital technologies.
Table 8 shows only those scales for which significant differences or a tendency to differences were found.
It has been established that in the group of parents of preschool children with varying degrees of
awareness about the standards of safe use of digital technologies, only considerations about the positive
impact of digital technologies on children differ.
The group of parents of primary school-age children has different considerations about the purpose
of the gadget, the time the child spends in the gadget, the disruption of communication with peers, as well
as the benefits of digital technologies in learning and feeling competent, “up-dated”.
To test the assumption that parents who actively use digital technologies in their lives less strictly
regulate their children’s use of digital technologies (hypothesis 5), we used the Chi-square test to com-
pare two empirical distributions (Table 10).
Table 10. The attitude of parents with varying levels of digital technology use towards the use of gadgets
(computer, tablet, smartphone) and the Internet by children (in %)
Parameters Group A Group B Group C Statistics
The child has his own
gadget
Yes 42.9 59.4 63.9 Chi-square test
=5.052, р=0.080
No 57.1 40.6 36.1
Independence of gadget use Does not use independently 16.7 9.4 9.7 Chi-square test
= 8.115, р=0.230
Uses only in the presence of parents 33.3 24.5 18.1
Uses with a parent and independently 40.5 54.7 52.8
Uses independently 9.5 11.3 19.4
Regularity of free access to
the gadget
No free access 23.8 13.2 9.7 Chi-square
test = 9.006,
р=0.173
On weekends 16.7 17.9 12.5
1-2 times during the working week 16.7 13.2 25
Daily access 42.9 55.7 52.8
The time a child spends in
the gadget is
up to 30 minutes 50 35.8 29.2 Chi-square
test = 8.308,
р=0.216
From 30 minutes to 1 hour 33.3 27.4 31.9
More than 1.5 hour 9.5 23.6 23.6
Unlimited 7.1 13.2 15.3
The child has access to the
Internet
Yes 42.9 56.6 66.7
Chi-square test
= 6.182, р=0.045
No 57.1 43.4 33.3
Methods of monitoring a
child’s online presence
Parental control programs 52.4 54.7 61.1 Chi-square
test = 6.537,
р=0.366
Monitoring the history of site visits 7.1 16 12.5
Using the Internet only in the presence of a parent
33.3 25.5 18.1
I will not/do not control the use of the Internet 7.1 3.8 8.3
Note: Group A – parents who use the gadget for non–professional purposes for less than 1 hour; Group B – parents who use the gadget
for non-professional purposes for 1-2 hours; Group C - parents who use the gadget for non-professional purposes for more than 3 hours
To test this hypothesis, we considered it inappropriate to separate parents of preschoolers and par-
ents of younger schoolchildren and the analysis was performed for the group as a whole. It was revealed
that 19.1% of parents use the gadget for non–professional purposes for less than 1 hour, 48.2% for 1-2
hours, and 32.7% for more than 3 hours.
53.2% of parents use the gadget for entertainment, 57.3% of parents use the gadget to view edu-
cational content, 15.5% of parents use the gadget to create their own Internet product, 72.3% of parents
use the gadget to communicate with relatives and friends.
It has been established that the attitude of parents with different digital activities to the use of digital
technologies by children differs only in terms of the child’s access to the Internet. Parents who use gadg-
ets for less than an hour are less likely to provide Internet access to their child, while with an increase in
www.ijcrsee.com
10
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
the time of digital activity for non-professional purposes of parents, there is an increase in the percentage
of providing Internet access to the child.
Thus, the statistical analysis of the data allows us to conclude that hypothesis 1 was confirmed, hypothesis 2
was not confirmed, hypotheses 3,4 and 5 were partially confirmed. Next, we proceed to discuss the results obtained.
Discussions
A study of parents’ attitudes towards the use of digital technologies has shown that parents of
preschool and primary school age children differ in their views on this issue. Parents of primary school-
age children allow more freedom in the use of the gadget by the child. Thus, 87.5% of parents of primary
school children and only 43.2% of parents of preschoolers admit having their own gadget. However, the
age of actual or planned receipt of the gadget is higher for parents of primary school–age children (actual
– 5.9 years, planned - 7.9 years). That is, according to parents of preschool–age children, the age limits
are lower (the actual age is 4.3 years, the planned age is 6.8 years), and modern preschoolers will have
access to a personal gadget and digital technology earlier than modern younger schoolchildren. We can
say that in this way, we are witnessing the process of rejuvenation of the digitalization of society. This
downward trend in the age of first access to digital devices is also described in foreign studies, which note
that children begin to actively interact with screens as early as the age of 2, which forms a new digital
reality of early childhood (Livingstone et al., 2019), and is confirmed by Russian researchers who state the
onset of “digital childhood” with its characteristic early start (Soldatova and Shlyapnikov, 2020).
There is a fairly large body of work that examines changes in personality, cognitive processes,
emotional characteristics, patterns of behavior that are the result of group correctional work.
The ideas of parents of preschoolers and younger schoolchildren about the purpose of using a
gadget by children tend to show differences. And, if education, as a means of legalizing a gadget in the
hands of a child, is indicated by both groups of parents, then parents of preschoolers are more likely to
respond that the gadget is not needed by the child, while parents of schoolchildren indicate significant
reasons for using the gadget by the child for entertainment and performing the function of “babysitter”
when parents are busy. Interestingly, in connection with the above, parents of preschool children limit
the independence of using the gadget by the child and the regularity of the child’s access to the gadget
more than parents of schoolchildren. Parents of preschoolers consider the time that a child spends with a
gadget to be acceptable, up to 30 minutes, parents of younger schoolchildren – up to 1-1.5 hours.
Parents of preschool and primary school age children have different attitudes towards the child’s
free access to the Internet. 41.9% of parents of preschoolers provide their child with Internet access and
88.9% – parents of primary school students. The age at which Internet access began also differs among
the study groups. Here we are also witnessing the process of rejuvenation of the digitalization of society.
If the parents of schoolchildren provided access to the Internet for the first time to a child at the age of 7.4,
then the parents of preschoolers at the age of 4.3. However, parents of both preschoolers and younger
schoolchildren who did not provide Internet access to their children at the time of the survey agree in their
assessment of the age at which they started using the Internet (7.5 years old).
The ways to monitor a child’s online presence also vary. Parents of preschool children are signifi-
cantly more likely to choose parental control programs and personal presence. Parents of younger stu-
dents are more likely to choose parental control programs and monitoring their browsing history. Slinkina
O.V. et.al (2020) note that younger children use mobile devices under greater parental control, their con-
nection is stronger than in adolescence, and their digital practices are in the process of formation. The ef-
fectiveness of parental educational influences, such as sharing and discussing content, at a younger age
is confirmed by the research of Nikken and de Haan (2015). Scientists conclude that such parenting strat-
egies in children’s interaction with digital technologies reduce risks and contribute to the development of
a child’s digital literacy. A study by Slyusar and Chichinina (2020) indicated that parents are characterized
by a combination of restrictive and technical control strategies, while active mediation is less developed.
An analysis of the differences in parents’ attitudes towards gadgets and the Internet suggests that
parents who allow a child to have a personal gadget also provide them with Internet access. And only
24.7% of parents who do not allow their child to have their own gadget provide their child with Internet
access. It has also been established that parents of preschoolers allow their children to access both a
personal gadget and the Internet earlier.
www.ijcrsee.com
11
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
Parents’ ideas about the goals of using digital technologies by children have both similarities and
differences. Thus, entertainment is an acceptable goal for a child to use digital technologies for both
groups of parents (parents of preschoolers – 80.4%, parents of younger schoolchildren – 72.2%). By
entertainment, parents mean watching cartoons and movies, and playing online games. The frequencies
for the purpose of using a gadget, such as communicating with relatives, are also equally distributed (par-
ents of preschoolers – 40.4%, parents of younger schoolchildren – 47.2%). In other categories, the views
of parents of preschoolers and schoolchildren will differ. Spasskaya E.B. et.al (2023), exploring parental
mediation strategies in the use of mobile technologies, noted that children equally use digital technolo-
gies, both for learning activities and for distraction from it. The authors name three main dimensions of
parents’ ideas about the forms of mobile device use by their children, including addition, distraction and
substitution of educational activities (Spasskaya et.al ., 2022). A similar dual role of digital technologies,
acting as a tool and as a distraction, is also presented in a study by Mascheroni and Olafsson (2016), who
concluded that despite the recognition of educational value, the main parental anxiety remains the risk of
excessive involvement in entertainment content to the detriment of other activities.
The use of digital technologies for cognitive purposes is statistically more often noted by parents
of younger schoolchildren (69.4%) than preschoolers (38.8%). The use of digital training programs, the
search for educational information and the fulfillment of teacher assignments are important here.
Communication with peers is also a more significant reason for a child’s use of digital technologies
for parents of primary school children (45.8%) than for parents of preschoolers (2.7%). This indicates that
parents of schoolchildren understand that their child is approaching puberty, where intimate and personal
communication will be the main activity, and the use of flexibility in parenting strategies. This transition
reflects a general pattern. While technology is primarily used for entertainment at preschool age under
parental control, social functions come to the fore at school age, which requires parents to change strate-
gies from restrictive to more mentoring and support-oriented (Livingstone and Helsper, 2008). Soldatova
and Rasskazova (2021) also note that parents are often not prepared for the new risks associated with
children’s social activity online during adolescence.
We find it interesting that 0% of parents of primary school-age children in a survey about the pur-
pose of using digital technologies for children chose the category “I don’t control it.” 4.1% of parents of
preschoolers chose this answer option. This may indicate that this category of parents may not yet fully
realize the extent of the presence of digital technologies in a child’s life and treat this problem carelessly.
The views of parents of preschool and primary school age children about the positive and negative
effects of digital technologies on children do not differ statistically. Parents call the health and emotional
disorders the most harmful effects of gadgets on children, and just under half of parents point to such
threats of digital technologies for children as exposure to inappropriate content for children and depend-
ence on games and watching entertainment content. Concerns about the impact on physical health,
especially on eye-sight and sleep, as well as on psychological well-being are common among parents,
according to research on parental anxiety in the digital age (Odgers and Jensen, 2020; Spasskaya and
Slyusar, 2022). It is indicated that parents are more inclined to identify risks than they have specific knowl-
edge about the mechanisms of their minimization (Spasskaya, Slyusar, 2022). Parents consider the most
useful opportunities of digital technologies for children to be the possibility of distance learning, expand-
ing horizons and cultural development, and the opportunity to receive additional education remotely. Also
important for parents is the opportunity to communicate with relatives using digital technologies.
Parents of primary school-age children are more informed about the standards of safe use of digital
technologies. Thus, it was found that in the group of parents of preschool children, 36.5% are informed about
the standards of safe use of digital technologies, 26.4% are not informed, 37.2% of parents have a rough
idea. In the group of parents of primary school children, 33.3% are informed about the standards for the safe
use of digital technologies, 16.7% are not informed, and 50% of parents have a rough idea. This suggests
that parents of preschoolers are more careless about the safe use of digital technologies, since due to the
age restrictions of children, the problem of security in the digital sphere is not perceived by them as acute.
The low level of digital literacy and risk awareness among parents of young children is a vulnerability factor,
which is confirmed by the findings of a study by Livingstone et al. (2017), linking parental mediation with
the level of their own digital competencies. Soldatova and Rasskazova (2021) explicitly point to the lack of
digital competence of parents as a key barrier to effectively accompanying a child in a digital environment.
Parents of preschool-age children who have an approximate understanding of the norms of safe
www.ijcrsee.com
12
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
use of digital technologies are more confident in the positive impact of digital technologies on a child’s
learning, development of attention, memory, logic and the ability to select information.
Describing the purpose of the gadget, parents of primary school children with varying degrees of
awareness of the standards for the safe use of digital technologies consider education to be the highest
priority, however, informed parents are more likely to use the gadget to distract the child when they are
busy, and uninformed parents prioritize the use of the gadget by the child for entertainment. Parents of
younger students who are informed about the standards for the safe use of digital technologies are more
likely to choose time intervals of up to 1 hour and 1.5 hours, while uninformed parents also allow a child
to use a gadget without restrictions.
Parents of younger students who have a rough understanding of the standards for the safe use of
digital technologies are significantly more likely to choose the answer that digital technologies negatively
affect communication with peers. Informed parents are more likely to note the benefits of digital technol-
ogy, which consists in feeling competent and modern. Informed parents and parents with a rough under-
standing are more likely to note the benefits of digital technologies in their child’s education.
In the study, we also studied the digital activity of the parents themselves. It was revealed that 19.1%
of parents use the gadget for non–professional purposes for less than 1 hour, 48.2% for 1-2 hours, and
32.7% for more than 3 hours. However, given the subject of the survey, we assume that the results are some
-
what distorted due to the desire of the parents who participated in the survey to underestimate the data on the
time they spend using digital technologies for non-professional purposes. But even the results obtained indi
-
cate an intense digital activity of parents. Parents’ own behavior is a significant model for children. Research
shows that high digital activity of parents, especially in the form of “fabbing” (distraction to gadgets while
communicating with a child), correlates with more frequent and prolonged use of gadgets by children and can
negatively affect child-parent relations (McDaniel and Radesky, 2018). A review of research conducted by
Katrin Braune-Krickau et al. (2021) demonstrates that smartphone use by parents in the presence of children
under 5 years of age may be associated with a decrease in parental sensitivity and responsiveness.
It has been established that the ideas of parents with different digital activities about the use of
digital technologies by a child do not differ and correspond to the picture described above. The tendency
to show differences is observed only in the child’s ideas about having access to the Internet. Parents who
use gadgets for less than an hour are less likely to provide Internet access to their child, while with an
increase in the time of digital activity for non-professional purposes of parents, there is an increase in the
percentage of providing Internet access to the child.
Conclusions
The study of the attitude of parents of preschool and primary school age children to the use of
digital technologies allows us to draw conclusions.
1. Parents of preschool and primary school age children have different attitudes towards the use of
digital technologies by children. Parents of primary school-age children allow more freedom in the
use of the gadget by the child.
2. The process of rejuvenation of childhood digitalization appears to be acute. Modern preschoolers get
access to a personal gadget and digital technology earlier than modern younger schoolchildren, as
well as access to the Internet earlier, including without the presence of a parent. However, parents of
primary school-age children still allow more freedom in the use of gadgets and the Internet by the child.
3. Parents of primary school children are more likely to choose remote ways to monitor their child’s online
presence. While parents of preschoolers still maintain a personal presence as a form of child control.
4. Parents’ ideas about the purposes of using digital technologies by children have both similarities and
differences. Entertainment and communication with relatives through digital technologies are com-
mon for parents of preschoolers and younger schoolchildren. Parents of younger students more of-
ten consider it advisable to use digital technologies in teaching and communicating with their peers.
5. The ideas about the negative and positive impact of digital technologies on the children of parents of
preschoolers and primary school students coincide. Parents call the health and emotional disorders
the most harmful effects of gadgets on children. Parents consider the most useful opportunities of
digital technologies for children to be the possibility of distance learning, expanding horizons and
www.ijcrsee.com
13
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
cultural development, and the opportunity to receive additional education remotely.
6. Parents of primary school children are more informed about the standards of safe use of digital
technologies. Parents of preschoolers are more careless about the safe use of digital technologies.
7. The ideas of parents with different digital activities about the use of digital technologies by a child do
not differ, only the attitude to Internet access varies. The more time a parent spends online, the more
willing they are to allow the child to do so, including on their own.
The prospects for the development of this problem are to study the ideas of parents of younger and
older adolescents about the safe use of digital technologies, the positive and negative impact of digital tech
-
nologies on the child. Also, the study of cognitive and behavioral factors influencing parents’ ideas about the
use of digital technologies by children will serve as a continuation of the study of the stated problem.
These studies can be used by the psychological service of educational institutions when conduct-
ing educational and counseling work with parents.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial,
or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, A.B., Y.T. and N.K. methodology, A.B., Y.T., N.M. and N.K.; formal analysis, Y.T.
and E.S.; writing—review and editing, A.B., Y.T., N.K. and E.S. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
References
Agesilaou A., Kyza E. A. (2022). Whose data are they? Elementary school students’ conceptualization of data ownership
and privacy of personal digital data. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction. 33, 100462. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2022.100462
Andrews S, Ellis DA, Shaw H, Piwek L (2015) Beyond Self-Report: Tools to Compare Estimated and Real-World Smartphone
Use. PLoS ONE 10(10): e0139004. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139004
Babaeva, Yu.D., Voiskunsky, A.E. (1998). Psychological Consequences of Informatization. Psychological Journal, 19(1), 89–100
Braune-Krickau K, Schneebeli L, Pehlke-Milde J, Gemperle M, Koch R, von Wyl A. (2021). Smartphones in the nursery: Paren-
tal smartphone use and parental sensitivity and responsiveness within parent-child interaction in early childhood (0-5
years): A scoping review. Infant Ment Health J., 42(2),161-175. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.21908
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
Denisenkova, N.S., Taruntaev, P.I. (2022). The Role of an Adult in a Child’s Use of Digital Devices. Modern Foreign Psychology,
11(2), 59–67. https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2022110205
Duygu Gür, Yalın Kılıç Türel, (2022). Parenting in the digital age: Attitudes, controls and limitations regarding children’s use of
ICT, Computers & Education, 183, 104504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104504
Gómez P., Harris S.K., Barreiro C., Isorna M., Rial A. (2017). Proles of Internet use and parental involvement, and rates of
online risks and problematic Internet use among Spanish adolescents, Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 826-833.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.027
Hadar, A., et al. (2017). The smartphone and the cognitive control of its user. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 372-383.
Hagen M.H., Cruzes D.S., Jaccheri L., Fails J.A. (2023). Evaluating digital creativity support for children: A systematic literature
review, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 38, 100603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2023.100603
Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday, 7(4).
Hong, W., et al. (2019). The role of self-control in the relationship between stress and smartphone addiction. Computers in
Human Behavior, 99, 22-28.
Johnson, G.M., & Puplampu, K.P. (2008). Internet use during childhood and the ecological techno-subsystem. Canadian Jour-
nal of Learning and Technology, 34(1), 19-28.
Koch T., Laaber F., Florack A. (2024). Socioeconomic status and young people’s digital maturity: The role of parental mediation,
Computers in Human Behavior, 154, 108157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108157
Kowalski, R.M., et al. (2019). Bullying and cyberbullying in adulthood and the workplace. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 110-118.
Lissak, G. (2018). Adverse physiological and psychological effects of screen time on children and adolescents. Computers in
Human Behavior, 86, 140-147.
Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E.J. (2008). Parental mediation of children’s internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media, 52(4), 581-599.
www.ijcrsee.com
14
Belousova, A. K. et al. (2026). The Attitude of Parents to The Use of Digital Technologies by Their Preschool and Primary School
Age Children, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education(IJCRSEE), 14(1), 23-36.
Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., & Staksrud, E. (2019). European research on children’s internet use: Assessing the past and
anticipating the future. New Media & Society, 21(3), 657-674.
Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., & Staksrud, E. (2021). European research on children’s internet use: Assessing the past and
anticipating the future. New Media & Society, 23(9), 2609-2626.
Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., Helsper, E.J., Lupiáñez-Villanueva, F., Veltri, G.A., & Folkvord, F. (2017). Maximizing opportu-
nities and minimizing risks for children online: The role of digital skills in emerging strategies of parental mediation.
Journal of Communication, 67(1), 82-105.
Marciano, L., Schulz, P.J., & Camerini, A.L. (2021). How smartphone use becomes problematic: Application of the ALT-SR
model to study the predicting role of personality traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106731.
Mascheroni, G., & Ólafsson, K. (2016). The mobile Internet: Access, use, opportunities and divides among European children.
New Media & Society, 18(8), 1657-1679.
Mascheroni, G., & Siibak, A. (2021). Dataed childhoods: Contexts and consequences of datacation through family life. New
Media & Society, 23(8), 14614448211017260.
McDaniel, B.T., & Radesky, J.S. (2018). Technoference: Parent distraction with technology and associations with child behavior
problems. Child Development, 89(1), 100-109.
Moreno, M.A., et al. (2020). The Facebook inuence on perceived social support and mental health. Current Opinion in Psy-
chology, 36, 71-76.
Neumann, M.M. (2023). Parent-child interactions with digital devices: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 104664.
Nikken, P., & de Haan, J. (2015). Guiding young children’s internet use at home: Problems that parents experience in their
parental mediation and the need for parenting support. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cy-
berspace, 9(1), article 3.
Odgers, C.L., & Jensen, M.R. (2020). Annual Research Review: Adolescent mental health in the digital age: facts, fears, and
future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61(3), 336-348.
Rahayu, N.W.; Haningsih, S. (2021). Digital parenting competence of mother as informal educator is not inline with internet
access, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 29,100291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100291
Representative survey of the Russian population aged 14 years and older in the framework of Monitoring the Digital Transfor-
mation of the Economy and Society, HSE ISSEK, 2022 issek.hse.ru
Rudnova, N.A., Kornienko, D.S., Volkova, E.N., Isaeva, O.M. (2023). Digital parental mediation and its relationship with
indicators of psychological well-being in school-age children. Science of Television. 19 (1), 175–198. https://doi.
org/10.30628/1994-9529-2023-19.1-175-198. EDN: RBDUZ
Rubtsova, O.V. (2019). Digital Technologies as a New Means of Mediation (Part One). Cultural and Historical Psychology. 15.
(3). 117–124. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2019150312
Rubtsova, O.V. (2019). Digital Technologies as a New Means of Mediation (Second Article). Cultural and Historical Psychol-
ogy. 2019. 15. (4), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2019150410
Ryan, T., et al. (2016). The uses and abuses of Facebook: A review of Facebook addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions,
5(3), 433-446.
Slinkina O.V., Myagotin A.E. (2020) Analysis of the time spent on the Internet by users aged 16-64 years. In: Russian Regions
in the focus of Change. Collection of reports of the XIV International Conference. Yekaterinburg: Publishing house of
UMTS UPI. pp. 317-322. EDN: GLNFVN
Slyusar, E.B., & Chichinina, E.A. (2020). Parental control in the digital environment: strategies and practices. Psychological
science and education, 25(2), 28-41.
Soldatova, G.U., & Rasskazova, E.I. (2021). Digital socialization of adolescents in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic:
Risks and opportunities. National Psychological Journal, 15(2), 12-22.
Soldatova, G.U., & Shlyapnikov, V.N. (2020). Digital socialization of children and adolescents: risks and opportunities. National
Psychological Journal, (2), 3-14.
Spasskaya, E.B., Proekt, Yu.L., Ivanushkina, N.O. (2023) What parents think about the importance of mobile devices in their
children’s education: the role of attitudes and parental mediation. Human Psychology in Education, 5, (4), pp. 536–555.
https://www.doi.org/10.33910/2686-9527-2023-5-4-536-555. EDN DFVSHX
Spasskaya, E.B., & Slyusar, E.B. (2022). Parents’ views on the risks and opportunities of using digital devices by preschool and
primary school age children. Consultative Psychology and Psychotherapy, 30(4), 70-89.
Torres, P. E., Ulrich, P. I. N., Cucuiat, V., Cukurova, M., Fercovic De la Presa, M. C., Luckin, R., Carr, A., Dylan, T., Durrant, A., Vines,
J., & Lawson, S. (2021). A systematic review of physical–digital play technology and developmentally relevant child behav-
iour. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 30, 1-33. Article 100323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100323
Tonacci, A., et al. (2019). NoMobilePhobia: Development and validation of a new questionnaire to measure nomophobia. Com-
puters in Human Behavior, 99, 1-9.Nikolaeva, A.V. (2023). Syntactical expressive means in a scientic text. Humanities
and social sciences, 96 (1), 113–118. https://doi.org/10.18522/2070-1403-2023-96-1-113-118
Twenge, J.M., & Campbell, W.K. (2018). Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children
and adolescents. Preventive Medicine Reports, 12, 271-283.
Van Dijk, J.A.G.M. (2005). The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society. Sage Publications.
Wilmer, H.H., et al. (2017). Smartphones and cognition: A review of research exploring the links between mobile technology
habits and cognitive functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 605.
Zillien, N., & Hargittai, E. (2009). Digital distinction: Status-specic types of internet usage. Social Science Quarterly, 90(2), 274-291.
