Old thread, so you probably won't see this reply, but just to close the loop.
You're completely right -- most of the stuff you say is 100% on spot. The only thing I'd object to here is that you say "A related study is that ...". Ignore the study! If it seems plausible to you, then that's your intuition, and it's probably solid! I feel the same way, and I've put effort into this as well.
Same with the zombie kids and the screen usage. I do feel like I'm fighting a useless battle because I have been unable to significantly affect my own screen usage, but I try to model good behavior and to try to force myself to follow the same advice I give my kids ("accept being bored sometimes").
> Again, maybe it's rubbish, but my sample size is very small.
Yes! And this is because you are not taking a "scientific" approach to child raising, which is exactly what I would encourage. Don't put a fig leaf on it and try to cite studies about why it is true or what benefits it provides. Just do it and if people ask say that it seems to make sense to you.
You're completely right -- most of the stuff you say is 100% on spot. The only thing I'd object to here is that you say "A related study is that ...". Ignore the study! If it seems plausible to you, then that's your intuition, and it's probably solid! I feel the same way, and I've put effort into this as well.
Same with the zombie kids and the screen usage. I do feel like I'm fighting a useless battle because I have been unable to significantly affect my own screen usage, but I try to model good behavior and to try to force myself to follow the same advice I give my kids ("accept being bored sometimes").
> Again, maybe it's rubbish, but my sample size is very small.
Yes! And this is because you are not taking a "scientific" approach to child raising, which is exactly what I would encourage. Don't put a fig leaf on it and try to cite studies about why it is true or what benefits it provides. Just do it and if people ask say that it seems to make sense to you.