IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1907-d500290.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Ban on Smartphone Usage during Recess Increased Children’s Physical Activity

Author

Listed:
  • Charlotte Skau Pawlowski

    (Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark)

  • Jonas Vestergaard Nielsen

    (Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark)

  • Tanja Schmidt

    (Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense M, Denmark)

Abstract

School recess provides a unique opportunity for children to be active. However, many children perceive smartphones as a key barrier for engaging in physical activity during recess. The aim was to investigate if a ban on smartphone usage during recess changed children’s physical activity. During August–October 2020, children from grades 4–7 (10–14 years) at six Danish schools were banned from using their smartphones during recess for a four-week period. Questionnaire and systematic observation (SOPLAY) data were collected from 814 children before intervention (baseline) and 828 during the last week of intervention (follow-up). The mean frequency of physical activity significantly increased from baseline to follow-up (odds ratio = 1.370), as did physical activity on a moderate level (odds ratio = 1.387). Vigorous physical activity significantly decreased (odds ratio = 0.851). The increase in physical activity was found among both schools having outdoor and indoor recess, among both boys and girls, and nearly equally among grades 4–7. This suggests that implementing a ban on smartphone usage during recess would improve the everyday conditions for health among a broad range of schoolchildren. Future studies are needed to further investigate the association between recess physical activity and smartphone usage.

Suggested Citation

  • Charlotte Skau Pawlowski & Jonas Vestergaard Nielsen & Tanja Schmidt, 2021. "A Ban on Smartphone Usage during Recess Increased Children’s Physical Activity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-13, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1907-:d:500290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1907/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1907/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charlotte S. Pawlowski & Jenny Veitch & Henriette B. Andersen & Nicola D. Ridgers, 2019. "Designing Activating Schoolyards: Seen from the Girls’ Viewpoint," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2012. "Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 1-8.
    3. Travis J. Saunders & Jeff K. Vallance, 2017. "Screen Time and Health Indicators Among Children and Youth: Current Evidence, Limitations and Future Directions," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 323-331, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ederer, Florian & Stremitzer, Alexander, 2017. "Promises and expectations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 161-178.
    2. Kazi Iqbal & Asad Islam & John List & Vy Nguyen, 2021. "Myopic Loss Aversion and Investment Decisions: From the Laboratory to the Field," Framed Field Experiments 000730, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    4. Jie, Yun, 2020. "Responding to requests for help: Effects of payoff schemes with small monetary units," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Aksoy, Billur & Chadd, Ian & Koh, Boon Han, 2023. "Sexual identity, gender, and anticipated discrimination in prosocial behavior," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Joanna Baj-Korpak & Marian Jan Stelmach & Kamil Zaworski & Piotr Lichograj & Marek Wochna, 2022. "Assessment of Motor Abilities and Physical Fitness in Youth in the Context of Talent Identification—OSF Test," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Vassilopoulos, Achilleas & Lusk, Jayson L. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., 2015. "Reference dependence, consequentiality and social desirability in value elicitation: A study of fair labor labeling," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202705, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Daniel R Clark & Dan Li & Dean A Shepherd, 2018. "Country familiarity in the initial stage of foreign market selection," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 49(4), pages 442-472, May.
    9. Hermann, Daniel & Musshoff, Oliver & Agethen, Katrin, 2014. "I will never switch sides: an experimental approach to determine drivers for investment decisions of conventional and organic hog farmers," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183084, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Hartmann, Andre J. & Gangl, Katharina & Kasper, Matthias & Kirchler, Erich & Kocher, Martin G. & Mueller, Martin & Sonntag, Axel, 2022. "The economic crisis during the COVID-19 pandemic has a negative effect on tax compliance: Results from a scenario study in Austria," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    11. Ahlin, Christian & Gulesci, Selim & Madestam, Andreas & Stryjan, Miri, 2020. "Loan contract structure and adverse selection: Survey evidence from Uganda," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 180-195.
    12. Bicchieri, Cristina & Dimant, Eugen & Xiao, Erte, 2021. "Deviant or wrong? The effects of norm information on the efficacy of punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 209-235.
    13. Shane Timmons & Terence J. McElvaney & Peter D. Lunn, 2019. "An experiment for regulatory policy on broadband speed advertising," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 3(2), pages 17-24, December.
    14. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Pappa, Valentina, 2016. "Elicitation formats and the WTA/WTP gap: A study of climate neutral foods," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 141-155.
    15. Gee, Laura K. & Schreck, Michael J., 2018. "Do beliefs about peers matter for donation matching? Experiments in the field and laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 282-297.
    16. Müller, Daniel, 2019. "The anatomy of distributional preferences with group identity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 785-807.
    17. Koppel, Hannes & Regner, Tobias, 2019. "What drives motivated agents: The ‘right’ mission or sharing it with the principal?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Xu, Xue, 2018. "Experiments on cooperation, institutions, and social preferences," Other publications TiSEM d3cf4dba-b0f3-4643-a267-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Gionata Castaldi & Grazia Cecere & Mariangela Zoli, 2021. "“Smoke on the beach”: on the use of economic vs behavioral policies to reduce environmental pollution by cigarette littering," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 38(3), pages 1025-1048, October.
    20. Ingela Alger & Jörgen W. Weibull, 2019. "Evolutionary Models of Preference Formation," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 329-354, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1907-:d:500290. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.