Most studies of children's digital engagement provided no explicit theory, definition, or measure of engagement, and only one study provided all three¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Only one study (1.1%) provided a definition, theory, and measure for engagement, while 49 studies (55.7%) made no explicit mention of a theory, definition, or measure for engagement. → J. Harverson 2026

Evidence¶

J. Harverson 2026¶

J. Harverson, C. Zomer, C. Chu, S. Horwood, M. Horwood, M. Nicholas, L. Paatsch. (2026). Children's engagement with digital technology in educational spaces: A scoping review. Computers & Education 240 (2026) 105454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105454

q2 · i? · review · r2

Analysis of the combination of definitional, theoretical and measurement information across the 88 included studies in the scoping review. The review reports "There were 49 (55.7 %) studies that made no explicit mention of a theory, definition, or measure for engagement", and that only Georgiou et al. (2019) provided all three.

"There were 49 (55.7 %) studies that made no explicit mention of a theory, definition, or measure for engagement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Among studies of young children's digital engagement in educational spaces, engagement was explicitly defined in only 18 of 88 studies (19.3%), theorised in 8 (9.1%), and measured in 31 (35.2%) — related
• Explicit theoretical frameworks of engagement were provided in only 14% of the reviewed ECEC studies — a broader claim this one bears on
• Only about one-third of quantitative ECEC engagement studies provide an explicit definition of child engagement or involvement — a broader claim this one bears on
• The field uses 77 unique established engagement measures, yet more than one-third of studies rely on unestablished author-created measures — related