Causes of Parent–Child Conflict over Adolescents’ Use of Electronic Devices and Multi-Actor Collaborative Countermeasures
Main Article Content
Keywords
adolescents, electronic devices, parent–child conflict, intergenerational power interaction, family system synergy, digital parenting, de-problematization
Abstract
Electronic devices are now central to adolescents' learning, social life, and leisure, and disputes over their use have become a leading source of parent–child conflict, with consequences for both family harmony and adolescent mental health. This review moves beyond the usual “problem-correction” framing and re-examines such conflict through two lenses: intergenerational power interaction and family-system synergy. Drawing on adolescent developmental-stage theory, family systems theory, and the strengths perspective, and on 29 sources published between 2014 and 2024, the paper analyses how these conflicts arise and what sustains them. It argues that conflict is better read as a signal of shifting family power boundaries than as a simple self-control failure, and outlines differentiated, multi-actor directions for response—spanning family negotiation, school digital-literacy education, platform accountability, and policy support—rather than one fixed protocol. The aim is to shift the conversation from controlling the device to rebuilding the relationship.
References
- [1] Central Committee of the Communist Youth League of China (Youth Rights and Interests Department) & China Internet Network Information Center. (2022). Research report on internet use of minors in China in 2021 [Report].
- [2] China Youth Research Center. (2022). Survey report on internet use of minors in China [Report].
- [3] China Youth Research Center. (2023). Comparative study report on parent–child relationships in the internet era among China, the US, Japan and South Korea [Report].
- [4] Laursen, B., Coy, K. C., & Collins, W. A. (1998). Reconsidering changes in parent-child conflict across adolescence: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 69, 817–832.
- [5] Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2008). Parental mediation of children’s Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52, 581–599.
- [6] He, X., & Wang, W. (2021). Effect of multi-family group intervention on adolescents’ mobile phone dependence and parent–child relationship. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 35, 756–761.
- [7] Zhao, L., & Sun, Q. (2022a). A comparative study of parent–child conflict over electronic device use among adolescents from different family types. Psychological Development and Education, 38, 875–882.
- [8] Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
- [9] Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11, 56–95.
- [10] Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- [11] Research Group on Platform Economy and Healthy Development of Youth. (2023). The influence mechanism and intervention strategies of platform algorithms on adolescents’ internet addiction. China Youth Study, (3), 45–53.
- [12] Huang, S., & Zhang, S. (2021). The relationship between family communication patterns and adolescents’ mobile phone dependence: The moderating role of parent–child conflict. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 29, 1023–1027.
- [13] Li, S., & Wang, S. (2021). Intergenerational digital divide and parent–child relationship: An analysis based on family systems theory. Youth Studies, (4), 56–65.
- [14] Liu, S., & Chen, S. (2022). The effect of parenting style on parent–child conflict over adolescents’ electronic device use: The mediating role of intergenerational communication. Educational Research, 43, 123–132.
- [15] Zhao, S., & Sun, S. (2022b). Research on the influence of parents’ digital parenting ability on parent–child relationship. Educational Science Research, (11), 78–85.
- [16] Zhou, S., & Wu, S. (2021). Formulation and implementation of family media use agreements: An effective path to promoting parent–child harmony. Family Education Research, (6), 23–30.
- [17] Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
- [18] Smetana, J. G., & Asquith, P. (1994). Adolescents’ and parents’ conceptions of parental authority and personal autonomy. Child Development, 65, 1147–1162.
- [19] Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 446–458.
- [20] Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New York: Jason Aronson.
- [21] Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- [22] Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 1–6.
- [23] Research Group on the Collaborative Education Mechanism of School, Family and Society. (2022). Practical models and path innovation of home–school collaborative education. Educational Research, 43, 89–98.
- [24] State Council. (2023). Regulations on the protection of minors in cyberspace.
- [25] Ministry of Education of China. (2022). Curriculum standards for information technology in compulsory education (2022 edition). Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.
- [26] Rosenberg, M. B. (2009). Nonviolent communication: A language of life. Beijing: Huaxia Publishing House.
- [27] Internet Society of China. (2022). Self-regulation convention on minors’ protection of internet platforms. Retrieved from http://www.isc.org.cn
- [28] Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. (2021). Family Education Promotion Law of the People’s Republic of China.
- [29] Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. (2020). Law of the People’s Republic of China on the protection of minors.
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.