The interplay between sensationalism and scientific information framing: Examining the representation of screen time research online and on social media in the United States

Given that social media and the internet are primary sources of information for parents seeking guidance on child development, it is vital to investigate how screen time research is communicated and propagated online. This study examines 136 online articles about screen time published between 2016 and 2021, analyzing how sensationalism and scientific information framing drive their traction on social media platforms. Using metrics such as total social media shares and evergreen scores – which measure sustained engagement beyond initial virality – we found that articles combining sensationalist elements (specifically, alarming “warning” language) with strong scientific information framing – such as discussing study limitations and situating findings within the broader research context – garnered both immediate and long-term attention. Content focusing on younger children, published on established websites, and presenting screen time negatively also received higher shares. Long-term popularity was further associated with longer articles that provided detailed context by discussing multiple studies, with a small number of scientific articles accounting for a disproportionate amount of media attention. Our findings highlight that the interplay between sensationalism and scientific credibility is key to engaging audiences online and on social media. Prior state of knowledge: Parents increasingly rely on the internet and social media as sources for information, particularly concerning screen time. However, the representation of research on screen time varies in quality and tone, highlighting challenges in effectively communicating science to the public. Novel contributions: This study highlights how sensationalist elements combined with strong scientific framing drive engagement in screen time articles. Content focusing on younger children, portraying screen time negatively, and referencing a few highly cited studies gained disproportionate attention online. Practical implications: Balancing sensationalist appeal with scientific framing enhances public engagement without sacrificing accuracy. Researchers should integrate accessible language, acknowledge study limitations, and provide context to build trust while effectively disseminating child development research and supporting informed parental decision-making.