Jul 12, 2018 08:41 PM
(This post was last modified: Jul 12, 2018 08:42 PM by C C.)
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...114610.htm
EXCERPT: . . . Results of the research indicate that Internet filtering is ineffective and insignificant to whether a young person has viewed sexually explicit content. More than 99.5 percent of whether a young person encountered online sexual material had to do with factors beside their caregiver's use of Internet filtering technology.
"We were also interested to find out how many households would need to use filtering technologies in order to stop one adolescent from seeing online pornography," says co-author Professor Andrew Przybylski. "The findings from our preliminary study indicated that somewhere between 17 and 77 households would need to use Internet filtering tools in order to prevent a single young person from accessing sexual content. Results from our follow-up study showed no statistically or practically significant protective effects for filtering."
"We hope this leads to a re-think in effectiveness targets for new technologies, before they are rolled out to the population," says Nash. "From a policy perspective, we need to focus on evidence-based interventions to protect children. While Internet filtering may seem to be an intuitively good solution, it's disappointing that the evidence does not back that up."
MORE: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...114610.htm
EXCERPT: . . . Results of the research indicate that Internet filtering is ineffective and insignificant to whether a young person has viewed sexually explicit content. More than 99.5 percent of whether a young person encountered online sexual material had to do with factors beside their caregiver's use of Internet filtering technology.
"We were also interested to find out how many households would need to use filtering technologies in order to stop one adolescent from seeing online pornography," says co-author Professor Andrew Przybylski. "The findings from our preliminary study indicated that somewhere between 17 and 77 households would need to use Internet filtering tools in order to prevent a single young person from accessing sexual content. Results from our follow-up study showed no statistically or practically significant protective effects for filtering."
"We hope this leads to a re-think in effectiveness targets for new technologies, before they are rolled out to the population," says Nash. "From a policy perspective, we need to focus on evidence-based interventions to protect children. While Internet filtering may seem to be an intuitively good solution, it's disappointing that the evidence does not back that up."
MORE: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...114610.htm