Interplay of paternal caregiving and screen use habits on early childhood development and children’s tantrums

Table 5 Relationship between “appropriate child reactions when not allowed to use screen” and some general characteristics, binary logistic regression analysis, n = 464

	AOR	95% CI		p*
		Lower	Upper
Child screen time				0.052
Don’t known vs. ≥ 2 h	1.66	0.85	3.26	0.139
< 1 h vs. ≥ 2 h	2.65	1.22	5.78	0.014
≥ 1, < 2 h vs. ≥ 2 h	1.32	0.84	2.06	0.229
Child’s screen usage while eating
No vs. Yes	1.48	1.00	2.18	0.051
Father’s reading habit				0.088
A time ago vs. no	0.77	0.51	1.17	0.229
Yes vs. no	1.70	0.83	3.51	0.147
Dad screen time				0.060
< 2 h vs. ≥ 4 h	2.01	1.11	3.62	0.021
≥ 2, < 4 h vs. ≥ 4 h	1.36	0.89	2.07	0.158
Having 3 or more books
Yes vs. no	1.70	1.05	2.77	0.032
Child care
Adequate vs. inadequate	2.15	1.03	4.48	0.042
ECDI literacy-numeracy, on-track
Yes vs. no	1.70	1.15	2.52	0.008
Constant	1.97			0.200

* Multiple logistic regression METHOD = BSTEP(COND) analysed parameters (p < 0.2 in univariate analysis) child daily screen time (< 1 h vs. ≥ 1, <2 h vs. ≥ 2 h vs. don’t know), child’s screen usage while eating (no vs. yes), family type (nuclear vs. extended), father’s reading habit (no vs. a time ago vs. yes), dad screen time (< 2 h vs. ≥ 2, <4 h vs. ≥ 4 h), screen usage as reward for child (yes vs. no), knowledge of smart signs (yes vs. no vs. some part), having 3 or more books (yes vs. no), care of child (adequate vs. inadequate), participating in at least 4 activities that promote learning (yes vs. no), ECDI literacy-numeracy-on-track (yes vs. no), ECDI approaches to learning-on track (yes ve no), and ECDI social-emotional-on track (yes vs. no)

ISSN: 1824-7288