Harmonising extended measures of parental childcare in the time-diary surveys of four countries – Proximity versus responsibility

Measures of childcare drawn from time-diary data are commonly based on the specific childcare activities a parent engages in throughout the day. This emphasis on activities has been criticised as it ignores the large quantity of time parents spend supervising their children. In order to provide more accurate estimates of childcare that incorporate supervisory childcare, researchers have turned to extended measures of care based on being i) in proximity to children or ii) responsible for children. There has been debate about the extent to which these approaches each measure the same aspect of childcare. In addition, it is thought they may be sensitive to the way surveys have been designed, which can affect the extent to which they can be compared crossnationally. We argue that measures of proximity and responsibility are conceptually interchangeable, and demonstrate that they can be harmonised and compared cross-nationally. Finally, we suggest ways in which these extended measures of childcare can be made increasingly comparable cross-nationally.Time-diary data, measurement of parental childcare, cross-national harmonisation of measures of childcare, time geography

Changing times together? A time diary analysis of family time in the digital age in the UK

Objective This study examines the impact of digital mobile devices on different aspects of family time in the United Kingdom. Background Recent years have witnessed increasing concerns surrounding the consequences of the widespread diffusion of Internet-enabled mobile devices such as smartphones for family wellbeing. However, research examining the extent to which mobile devices have influenced family time remains limited. Method Using nationally-representative time diary data spanning a period of unprecedented technological change (United Kingdom 2000 and 2015 Time Use Surveys), the authors construct a set of novel family time measures that capture varying degrees of family togetherness and examine changes in these measures over time. Novel diary data are also analyzed to explore the occurrence of mobile device use during different aspects of family time in 2015. Results Children and parents spent more time at the same location in 2015, and there was no change in the time they spent doing activities together. However, there was a marked increase of alone-together time, when children were at the same location as their parents but did not report they were co-present with them. Results show that children and parents used mobile devices during all aspects of family time in 2015, but device use was notably concentrated during alone-together time. Conclusion This study provides an empirical basis for documenting the impact of mobile device use on family time

Have mobile devices changed working patterns in the 21st Century? A time-diary analysis of work extension in the UK

It is commonly claimed that ubiquitous connectivity erodes the boundaries that once separated work from other aspects of life. Mobile devices in particular enable people to perform work-related activities anytime anywhere. Surprisingly, however, we know little about how people nationwide organise their daily working time over a period that has witnessed rapid technological change. Using the United Kingdom Time Use Surveys 2000 and 2015, covering this period of technological change, we studied work extension practices, and the links between work extension, total work hours and subjective time pressure. We found a significant, though small, increase in work extension, and evidence that it was significantly associated with time pressure in 2015, but not in 2000. Additionally, work extension increased total work hours, which was concentrated entirely in time working with a mobile device. We discuss our results in light of some taken-for-granted narratives about mobile devices allowing work to colonise life

Alone together: how mobile devices have changed family time

There is now widespread concern about the amount of time children spend staring at screens – with many people worried about the negative impacts mobile devices might have on health and well-being

A safe and supportive environment for children: Key components and links to child outcomes

Families are the mainstay of safety and support for children. While most children live in safe and supportive environments, governments are aware that too many children are becoming known to child protection services. This has led to a shift in thinking away from solely concentrating on responding to ‘risk of harm’ reports towards a broader public health approach to protecting all of Australia’s children, reducing the likelihood of children coming to the attention of statutory authorities. Using data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children, this report aims to understand more about the prevalence of different types of family environments in society and to explore the influence of these environments on different child outcomes. The family environment (as measured in this report) was most strongly associated with children’s social and emotional wellbeing

Harmonizing extended measures of parental childcare in the time-diaries of four countries: Proximity versus responsibility

Measures of childcare drawn from time-diary data are commonly based on the specific childcare activities a parent engages in throughout the day. This emphasis on activities has been criticised as it ignores the large quantity of time parents spend supervising their children. In order to provide more accurate estimates of childcare that incorporate supervisory childcare, researchers have turned to extended measures of care based on being i) in proximity to children or ii) responsible for children. There has been debate about the extent to which these approaches each measure the same aspect of childcare. In addition, it is thought they may be sensitive to the way surveys have been designed, which can affect the extent to which they can be compared crossnationally. We argue that measures of proximity and responsibility are conceptually interchangeable, and demonstrate that they can be harmonised and compared cross-nationally. Finally, we suggest ways in which these extended measures of childcare can be made increasingly comparable cross-nationally