Traffic for 2007 August 28 (entry 0)

< Back to the Basics
Picky Picky >

[Comments] (13) Big adjustment: Leonard sent us a link to an article that showed that Baby Einstein is actually proven to stunt a child's intellectual development. The study showed that those who watched the DVD's for an hour or more a day lacked a normal vocabulary. I think I've found a solution to the problem.

The Wiggles. They are like Baby Einstein (bright colors to draw in the attention of infants, catchy music, etc), except that the songs have words, which I would think would assist with the vocabulary dilemma.

I used to make fun of Tyler for watching The Wiggles. I really could not watch the show with him. But Maggie seems to like it, so I watch it with her in the mornings. The things you'll do for your own flesh and blood....


Posted by Kristen at Tue Aug 28 2007 11:04

I would like to read the article. There are tons of different Baby Einstein DVD's and a lot of them do have words to the songs like one of Lily's favorites is Baby MacDonald and it has Old MacDonald song. The Baby Mozart and Baby Neptune that are more geared for 3-12 month olds don't have much talking, but like I said the other ones do. I think more than half an hour of tv for any kid under 12 mos is not good. Also, in the study I wonder if they just polled people that are the type of parents to just sit their kids in front of a show anyway and aren't reading with them or doing interactive things like the other group might have done?
In short, Lily watched Baby Einsteins and she speaks just as good if not better than her peers.

Posted by Kristen at Tue Aug 28 2007 11:07

On another note, I relate to you John...I hated Barney and now I think if Lily wants to watch it then fine. I think it is a nice show for kids now.

Posted by Susie at Tue Aug 28 2007 17:46

John only watched the baby mozart one. I saw the others with words at the library, but she didn't even like the Baby Galileo, so I didn't bother with them. She also didn't like Baby Beethoven; just a Mozart fan I guess.
This study said shows where they talk to your baby (like Dora, or Mickey Mouse Club) or where there is a very simple plot are best. And it was talking about kids who watched Baby Einsteins INSTEAD of being read to, obviously we do both. Well, not any more cause it was a library DVD. Anyway, I'll send you the link!

Posted by Joseph Walch at Tue Aug 28 2007 18:54

I've heard of that study as well (the Christalkis study?), and heard him interviewed on the Michael Medved Show a few months back. The theory goes that watching any type of TV is detrimental (especially for boys who are hard-wired to pay attention to movement) because the hard wireing of the brain prevents any kind of soft-wire remodeling (like dendritic reorganization, synaptic reinforcements). There are millions of visual sensory inputs that simply overwhealm the babies brain and preclude development of aural or cognitive thoughts (including thoughts and language). In other words, the visual stimulus takes control of the attentional system and blocks out sound or prefrontal thinking stimulus and strengthens the visual movement--attention link to the detriment of aural and even static visual attention (like reading).

Therefore, the only good TV for children under 5 are VIDEO GAMES!!!!!!!! Yay!!!!

(so, Kristen, that X-Box is really an invaluble investment in little Gunnar's college education and surgical career).

Posted by John at Tue Aug 28 2007 22:08

Joseph: How come only Gunnar gets a college career and surgical career? What about Lily and Maggie?

Posted by Joseph Walch at Wed Aug 29 2007 10:17

Oh, they can get that by playing with dolls (or trucks--whatever) amongst friends, going on errands with mom, and reading colorful books when alone. Girls are probably the least benefited from anything television-oriented. Of course, Girls are also probably less harmed from TV, so Dora the Explorer might be beneficial.

You could try getting an X-Box for Maggie, but I think it would only gather dust.

Posted by Sumana at Wed Aug 29 2007 10:33

John: he's just baiting us, right? :-)

I read in The Atlantic recently that doctors who have played video games for 3 hrs/week at some point in their lives do way better at laparoscopic surgeries than do those who haven't gamed as much. Transferable skills, yay!

And I'm with Susie on the gradations.

Posted by Joseph Walch at Wed Aug 29 2007 15:17

I think I might have gotten myself into deep/hot water.

I'm just interested in the development of children. As for TV; there seems to be differential risks and benefits for the sexes. TV exposure seems to harm Boys more than girls (ADHD, Dyslexia, etc.).

Girls seem to benefit more from social interaction with adults whereas boys would rather have you go out to the backyard and throw a baseball around without too much conversation.

When I play video games with Aaron, Lilly is all over me trying to get me to pay attention to her, but if I play with Atticus, Samuel is glued to the screen and eventually tries joins in. For Lily, playing with Lego's requires me to be present and participating, and it's not quite the same with Samuel.

As for religious or sociopolitical implications of these apparent facts; I'm not interested in discussing them in a blog (takes up too much valuble study time and energy), and hopefully the tone of my comments didn't indicate otherwise.

over and out

Posted by Kristen at Wed Aug 29 2007 23:02

Oh, that is sooo true. Lily will not leave my side during the day. If I do anything, she is there and wanting to know what it is I am doing and wants me to do it with her. She is such a social creature. She really does love attention. It makes sense.

Posted by Kristen at Wed Aug 29 2007 23:04

Also, maggie is still young. Lily didn't like anything besides Baby Mozart and Baby Neptune until she was like 12 months old. She didn't even like tv until I got pregnant with Gunnar and unfortunately was sick on the couch and we watched Dora together. Then she was hooked for life.

Posted by Kristen at Wed Aug 29 2007 23:06

BY the way Susie...your blog does not post my comments and this is the second time on a different occasion...

Posted by Kristen at Thu Aug 30 2007 10:41

Oh, the comment worked it just took time.

Posted by Susie at Thu Aug 30 2007 21:23

Yeah they all do that now.


© 2003-2015 John Chadwick.