[ad_1]
The struggle to shape online youth experiences is now part of modern parenting. As children and teens spend more and more time online, a significant portion of parents and guardians are now using Internet filtering tools (such as parental controls) to protect their children from online sex material. However, a new study from the Oxford Internet Institute of Oxford University showed that Internet filtering tools are ineffective and, in most cases, were an insignificant factor in the question of whether the youth had seen explicit sexual content.
Although the use of Internet filtering tools is widespread, there has been no conclusive evidence on their effectiveness so far. "It's important to consider the effectiveness of filtering on the internet," says Dr. Victoria Nash, co-author of the study. "Internet filtering tools are expensive to develop and maintain, and can easily" hang "due to the constant development of new ways of content sharing.
In addition, there are concerns about human rights violations.
The research used data from a large-scale study of couples of children and caregivers in Europe, comparing self-reported information about whether children had looked at line of sex. content despite the use of Internet filtering tools in their homes. A second pre-recorded study was then conducted on adolescents in the United Kingdom.
The research results indicate that Internet filtering is inefficient and insignificant in determining whether a youth has viewed sexually explicit content. More than 99.5% of the question of whether a youth has encountered sexual material online relates to factors other than the use of internet filtering technology by his or her health care provider.
"We also wanted to know how many households would use filtering technologies. prevent a teenager from seeing pornography online, "says co-author Andrew Przybylski." The results of our preliminary study indicated that between 17 and 77 households would need to use Internet filtering tools in order to prevent a single young person from accessing sexual content. The results of our follow-up study showed no statistically or practically significant protective effect for filtering. "
" We hope that this will lead to rethinking the efficiency targets of new technologies, before they are deployed in the "Nash" population. From a political point of view, we We need to focus on evidence-based interventions to protect children. While Internet filtering may seem like a good intuitive solution, it is disappointing that the evidence does not confirm it.
Researchers agree that there should be more research to solidify these results. "Further studies need to be done to test Internet filtering in an experimental setting, carried out in accordance with the principles of open science," says Przybylski. "New technologies should always be tested for their effectiveness in a transparent and accessible way."
More information:
Andrew K. Przybylski et al., Internet filtering and exposure of adolescents to online sexual material, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking (2018). DOI: 10.1089 / cyber.2017.0466
The struggle to shape online youth experiences is now part of modern parenting. As children and teens spend more and more time online, a significant portion of parents and guardians are now using Internet filtering tools (such as parental controls) to protect their children from online sex material. However, a new study from the Oxford Internet Institute of Oxford University showed that Internet filtering tools are ineffective and, in most cases, were an insignificant factor in the question of whether the youth had seen explicit sexual content.
Although the use of Internet filtering tools is widespread, there has been no conclusive evidence on their effectiveness so far. "It's important to consider the effectiveness of filtering on the internet," says Dr. Victoria Nash, co-author of the study. "Internet filtering tools are expensive to develop and maintain, and can easily get stuck due to the constant development of new ways of sharing content."
In addition, human rights abuses result in worries. "
The research used data from a large-scale study of child and caregiver couples in Europe, comparing self-reported information about whether children had looked at online sex content despite use of Internet filtering tools in their homes.A second pre-recorded study was then conducted on adolescents in the UK.
The research findings indicate that Internet filtering is ineffective and insignificant about whether a young person has seen sexually explicit content Over 99.5% of the question of whether a young person has encountered sexually explicit material line refers to factors other than the use of Internet filtering technology by his health care provider
"We also wanted to know how many households would use filtering technologies. prevent a teenager from seeing pornography online, "says co-author Andrew Przybylski." The results of our preliminary study indicated that between 17 and 77 households would need to use Internet filtering tools in order to prevent a single young person from accessing sexual content. The results of our follow-up study showed no statistically or practically significant protective effect for filtering. "
" We hope that this will lead to rethinking the efficiency targets of new technologies, before they are deployed in the "Nash" population. From a political point of view, we We need to focus on evidence-based interventions to protect children. Although Internet filtering may seem like a good intuitive solution, it is disappointing that the evidence does not warrant it.
The researchers agree that more research should be done to solidify these results. "Further studies need to be done to test Internet filtering in an experimental setting, carried out in accordance with the principles of open science," says Przybylski. "New technologies should always be tested for their effectiveness in a transparent and accessible way."
More information:
Andrew K. Przybylski et al., Internet filtering and exposure of adolescents to online sexual material, Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking (2018). DOI: 10.1089 / cyber.2017.0466
Source link
