Responsible Innovation in Technology for Children
Digital technology, play and child well-being
Publication series:
Innocenti Research Report
Download the report
(PDF, 6.89 MB)(PDF, 6.39 MB)
Related Project(s):
Abstract
Digital experiences can have significant negative impact on children, exposing them to risks or failing to nurture them adequately. Nevertheless, digital experiences also potentially yield enormous benefits for children, enabling them to learn, to create, to develop friendships, and to build worlds. While global efforts to deepen our understanding of the prevalence and impact of digital risks of harm are burgeoning – a development that is both welcome and necessary – less attention has been paid to understanding and optimizing the benefits that digital technology can provide in supporting children’s rights and their well-being.
Benefits here refer not only to the absence of harm, but also to creating additional positive value. How should we recognize the opportunities and benefits of digital technology for children’s well-being? What is the relationship between the design of digital experiences – in particular, play-centred design – and the well-being of children? What guidance and measures can we use to strengthen the design of digital environments to promote positive outcomes for children? And how can we make sure that children’s insights and needs form the foundation of our work in this space? These questions matter for all those who design and promote digital experiences, to keep children safe and happy, and enable positive development and learning. These questions are particularly relevant as the world shifts its attention to emerging digital technologies and experiences, from artificial intelligence (AI) to the metaverse, and seeks to understand their impact on people and society.
To begin to tackle these questions, UNICEF and the LEGO Group initiated the Responsible Innovation in Technology for Children (RITEC) project in partnership with the Young and Resilient Research Centre at Western Sydney University; the CREATE Lab at New York University; the Graduate Center, City University of New York; the University of Sheffield; the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child; and the Joan Ganz Cooney Center. The research is funded by the LEGO Foundation. The partnership is an international, multi-stakeholder and cross-sectoral collaboration between organizations that believe the design and development of digital technology should support the rights and well-being of children as a primary objective – and that children should have a prominent voice in making this a reality. This project’s primary objective is to develop, with children from around the world, a framework that maps how the design of children’s digital experiences affects their well-being, and to provide guidance as to how informed design choices can promote positive well-being outcomes.
Available in:
English
More in this series: Innocenti Research Report
Publication
Evidence-based intervention design for behaviour change during a health emergency
As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel.
Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations.
The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.
Publication
Predictors of mask wearing to prevent the community spread of SARS-COV-2
As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel.
Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations.
The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.
Publication
Predictors of protective behaviours to prevent the community spread of SARS-COV-2
As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel.
Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations.
The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.
Publication
Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, delay and refusal
As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel.
Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations.
The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.