This chapter explores the digital media available to children, their activities, and their experiences in the digital environment based on available international data. It also examines the risks they face online, building on former OECD work on the types of risks in the digital environment.
How's Life for Children in the Digital Age?
Abstract
Over the past few decades, technological developments have led to the emergence of a wide range of digital devices that are affordable and easy to transport, such as computers, laptops, tablets and smartphones. As a result, the family home is increasingly equipped with digital tools that children can use for various purposes, from studying and staying informed to playing alone or with others and sharing and creating content. The rapid advancement of AI and immersive technologies is making digital platforms increasingly engaging and appealing to children. However, children’s engagement in digital activities differs across countries and can be patterned by gender and socio-economic status (Helsper, 2020[1]; Muschert and Ragnedda, 2015[2]). Technological developments have brought with them – in digital form – both new and more well-established risks for child well-being, which are commonly categorised as the “4Cs”: content, conduct, contact, and consumer risks.
In 2022, 96% of 15-year-olds in the OECD surveyed by PISA reported having a desktop computer, laptop, or tablet at home. Though the spread of digital tools is relevant to all teenagers, children from low socio-economic backgrounds are much less likely to have digital tools at home than their peers in countries where the overall availability of digital equipment is below average (Figure 3.1, Panel A). In Colombia, for example, fewer than 27% of 15-year-olds from low socio-economic backgrounds have digital devices at home, compared to 96% of their peers from high socio-economic backgrounds.
Most children who use digital devices and connect to the Internet do so through more than one device. Data from the EU Kids Online Survey suggests that children who connect at least weekly sometimes use up to three different devices for this purpose (Stalker, Livingstone and Kardefelt-Winther, 2019[3]). In 2022, most 15-year-olds live in households with at least three digital devices. (Figure 3.1, Panel B). Across the OECD, 96% of 15-year-olds, on average, live in homes with at least three digital devices. Adolescents from lower socio-economic backgrounds more often have fewer digital devices at home, but differences by socio-economic status are substantial in only a few countries. In Colombia, Mexico, Türkiye, Slovak Republic, Israel, Chile, Lithuania, and Greece, the percentage of children from low socio-economic backgrounds who report having access to digital devices at home falls below the OECD average of 91% (Figure 3.1, Panel A).
Note: *The difference between students with high and low socio-economic status is statistically significant at the 5% level.
Panel A: 15-year-old students were asked "How many of the following digital devices are in your home?” for each “Desktop computers", "Laptop computers or notebooks" and "Tablets (e.g. iPad®, BlackBerry® PlayBook™)", and presented with the response options "None", "1-2", "3-5", "More than five" and "I don't know" for each question. Data refer to the percent responding "1-2", "3-5" or "More than five" to at least one of the questions. Responses "I don't know" are coded as missing and observations with missing answers to at least one of the three items are excluded.
Panel B: 15-year-old students were asked "How many digital devices with screens are there in your home? (Count all the devices including televisions, computers, tablets, e-book readers, and smartphones.)" and presented with the response options "There are no digital devices with screens", "One", "Two", "Three", "Four", "Five", "6 to 10" and "More than 10". Data refer to the percent responding "Three" or more.
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
Mobile phones seem to be the most commonly used digital device for Internet access (Smahel et al., 2020[5]). Approximately 70% of fourth-grade students, around age 10, have their own smartphone in OECD countries where there is available PIRLS data (Figure 3.2, Panel A). Nevertheless, this percentage varies widely from country to country. For example, less than half of children in Türkiye and France have a smartphone at this age, whereas almost all children in northern European countries possess one, regardless of their socio-economic status. In several countries, noticeable differences based on socio-economic status persist. Children from low socio-economic groups are at least twice as likely to possess a smartphone than children from high socio-economic groups in Belgium, France, Ireland and Spain. This finding aligns with a few studies suggesting that children of less-educated parents are more likely to receive a smartphone at an earlier age and use it extensively (Gui and Gerosa, 2021[6]; Gerosa, Losi and Gui, 2024[7]). These studies highlight that social disadvantage is now less associated with a lack of access to smartphones and more with a lack of ability to manage – and sometimes limit – their use. However, not much research has been conducted on the motivations behind pre-adolescents acquiring their first smartphone. In general, early smartphone acquisition is linked to growing independence, such as walking home from school alone, and parents wishing for their children not to be left out socially by their peers (Perowne and Gutman, 2023[8]).
Across countries, smartphone ownership is even more widespread among 15-year-olds than among younger children, regardless of socio-economic status. On average, 98% of 15-year-olds own their own smartphone, and disparities by socio-economic status are minimal in most countries. However, major disparities exist along the lines of socio-economic status in Colombia, Türkiye and Mexico (Figure 3.2, Panel B).
Note: *The difference between students with high and low socio-economic status is statistically significant at the 5% level.
**The OECD average includes all countries depicted in the figure except Belgium and the United Kingdom.
Panel A: "Fourth grade" students are asked "Do you have any of these things at your home? ... Your own smartphone" and presented with the response options "Yes" and "No". Data refer to the percent responding "Yes".
Panel B: 15-year-old students were asked "Which of the following are in your home? ... Your own cell phone with Internet access (e.g. smartphone)" and presented with the response options "Yes" and "No". Data refer to the percentage responding "Yes".
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on IEA (2021[9]), Progress in International Reading Literacy Study 2021 (PIRLS 2021), https://pirls2021.org/results for Panel A and on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html for Panel B.
Most 15-year-old adolescents in the OECD spend a substantial amount of time on digital devices. On average, 15-year-olds spend 2 hours per day on digital tools for learning activities at school, combined with 1.5 hours before or after school, and another 1.6 hours per day at the weekend (OECD, 2023[10]). In addition, teenagers use digital devices for leisure, averaging at 1.1 hours per day at school, 2.6 hours before and after school, and 3.9 hours per day at the weekend.
There is considerable heterogeneity in the amount of time spent with digital devices between and within OECD countries. In almost all countries, at least 50% of 15-year-olds spend 30 hours or more a week using digital devices (Figure 3.3). Only in Japan is the proportion significantly lower (31%), with a much higher proportion of teenagers than in other countries spending as little as 10 hours a week. A significant minority of teenagers, from 10% in Japan to 43% in Italy and Latvia, spend 60 hours or more on digital devices.
Distribution of total time spent per week on digital devices for learning and leisure among 15-year-olds
Note: 15-year-old students were asked “This school year, about how many hours a day do you usually use digital resources in the following situations?" with respect to "for learning activities at school", "for learning activities before and after school", "for learning activities on weekends", "for leisure at school", "for leisure before and after school", and "for leisure on weekends". The total amount per week was computed assuming 5 week days and 2 weekend days. Data refer to the percentage of students reporting a given total amount per week.
Source: Adapted from OECD (2023[10]), PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en. Data are available at https://stat.link/pyhr6e.
In Japan, children spend comparatively less time engaging with digital technologies both at school and outside of school. On average, Japanese students use digital tools for learning at school for 1.7 hours per day compared to the OECD average of 2 hours, and only 0.4 hours for leisure activities at school compared to the OECD average of 1.1 hours. Japan also performs poorly on the preparedness index for digital learning, with many schools lacking sufficient teacher preparation time and technical-assistance staff. Outside of school, Japanese 15-year-olds spend just 1 hour per day using digital resources, far below the OECD average of 2.6 hours. This limited use is likely due to their demanding school and extracurricular schedules, which leave little time for digital engagement.1
As access to digital devices becomes more widespread at home, the amount of time spent by teenagers on digital devices increases. For example, the proportion of 15-years-old teenagers spending 40 hours or more outside school with digital devices rose from 8% in 2012 to 21% in 2018.
The World Health Organisation does not provide specific recommendations for screen time exposure for teenagers, in contrast to its guidelines for children under 5. However, several countries have issued their own guidelines, often recommending that recreational screen time be limited to no more than two hours per day (see Chapter 5). Yet, a large number of 15-year-olds across the OECD spend more time with digital resources than this limit sets. Figure 3.4 shows that a majority of the 15-year-olds in the OECD (60%) spend more than two hours per day on weekdays (Panel A). However, this share varies greatly from country to country, from 24 % in Japan to over 80% in Estonia. Children with high socio-economic status are also more likely to use digital tools for more than two hours a day, particularly in countries where the proportion of teenagers with low socio-economic status using digital devices for two hours or more is comparatively low. There are also large differences in the recreational use of digital devices at weekends (Figure 3.4, Panel B). For example, in Colombia, New Zealand, and Türkiye, the proportion of low socio-economic status teenagers using digital devices for leisure on weekends is lower than the OECD average. However, teenagers from wealthier families in these countries are at least 25 percentage points more likely to use digital devices for leisure for two hours or more on weekends. At the opposite end of the spectrum, more than 80% of teenagers in Latvia, Korea, Germany, Poland, Czech Republic, Estonia and Hungary use digital devices for two hours or more, regardless of socio-economic status.
Note: *The difference between students with high and low socio-economic status is statistically significant at the 5% level.
Panel A: 15-year-old students were asked "This school year, about how many hours a day do you usually use digital resources in the following situations?” separately for “For leisure at school" and " For leisure before and after school". Answers from the two questions were combined to calculate the percent of students who use digital resources for leisure for over two hours on a typical school day.
Panel B: 15-year-old students were asked "This school year, about how many hours a day do you usually use digital resources in the following situations? ... For leisure on weekends”. Data refer to the percent of children reporting to use digital resources for leisure for over two hours on a typical weekend day.
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
Adolescents use digital devices for a variety of purposes. Across the OECD, on average, 95% of 15-year-olds browse the Internet for fun, and 96% report browsing social networks (Figure 3.5). Most 15-year-olds also use digital devices for communicating and sharing digital content (88%), seeking practical information (84%), or playing video games (83%). A smaller percentage (69%) engage in creating or editing their own digital content, with notable differences between countries. In Japan, where the amount of time spent on digital devices is comparatively low, adolescents are less likely than the OECD average to use these devices to create content and to search for practical information during a typical week, whereas in countries like Latvia or Greece, where the amount of time spent on digital devices is comparatively high, most adolescents use digital resources for multiple purposes surveyed during a typical week.
Percentage of 15-year-old students who report using digital devices during a typical week by type of leisure activity
Note: 15-year-old students were asked "[H]ow much time do you spend doing the following leisure activities?" for each "Browse social networks (e.g. <Instagram®>, <Facebook®>)", "Browse the Internet (excluding social networks) for fun (e.g. reading news, listening to podcasts and music or watching videos)", "Communicate and share digital content on social networks or any communication platform (e.g. <Facebook®>, <Instagram®>, <Twitter®>, emails, chat)", "Create or edit my own digital content (pictures, videos, music, computer programs)", "Look for practical information online (e.g. find a place, book a train ticket, buy a product)", "Play video games (using my smartphone, a gaming console or an online platform or Apps)" and "Read, listen to or view informational materials to learn how to do something (e.g. tutorial, podcast)". For each activity, students were asked to respond on their use during a typical weekday and during a typical weekend day. Data refer to the percent responding to use digital devices for a given activity on a typical weekday and/or on a typical weekend day.
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
Technological developments have brought with them – in digital form – both new and well-established risks for child well-being. These risks are commonly categorised into four types, known as the "4 C's": content, conduct, contact, and consumer risks (OECD, 2021[11]; Livingstone and Stoilova, 2021[12]).2
Content risks
Content risks can be shortly defined as interactions in digital space that take the form of a one-to-many relationship, where children are exposed to harmful or inappropriate material online such as disinformation, as well as to hateful, harmful, and illegal content (OECD, 2021[11]). There are many risks associated with the content circulating on the Internet, and each type has its own specific features and its own repercussions on child well-being. Examples of online inappropriate (or sometimes illegal) content include “false and misleading content” likely to cause or maintain an eating disorder, pornographic material, child sexual abuse material, violent or gory images, and hate speech or extremist content.
Children and adolescents who lack media literacy are particularly vulnerable to the risk of being exposed to mis- and disinformation without the ability to detect it (OECD, 2024[13]). Misinformation refer to false or misleading information that is shared unknowingly and is not intended to deliberately deceive, manipulate or inflict harm on a person, social group, organisation or country, whereas and dis-information refer to verifiably false or misleading information that is knowingly and intentionally created and shared for economic gain or to deliberately deceive, manipulate or inflict harm on a person, social group, organisation or country (OECD, 2024[14]).
PIRLS data from 2021 suggest that, on average across the OECD, one in four 10-year-old students lack confidence in their ability to determine whether a website is trustworthy. As a result, some of them may be vulnerable to exposure to false and misleading content, with limited ability to recognise it. Cross-checking sources is essential in detecting disinformation, however 28% of 15-year-old do not compare different sources when searching for information online. In nearly all OECD countries, boys (31%) are more inclined than girls (25%) to report not comparing sources. Adolescents from low socio-economic backgrounds (35%) are also more likely not to compare sources of information compared to those from higher socio-economic status families.
Accessing sexually explicit content and pornography is another significant content risk in the digital environment. With digital technologies and the Internet being increasingly present in children and adolescent life, pornography has never been more accessible to children and adolescents: in the United States, a recent report estimated that 93% of 13- to 17-year-old boys and 63% of girls have been exposed to Internet pornography before the age of 18, with the average age of first exposure being 12 years old (Robb and Mann, 2023[15]). As adolescents mature, it is natural that they search for information that they do not know. This includes searching for information about dating and sexual relationships, which may often lead to pornography. However, certain pornography content can be particularly detrimental to children and adolescents.3 Early exposure to pornography appears to be connected to negative developmental outcomes, including a greater acceptance of sexual harassment, risky sexual activity, and acceptance of negative attitudes to women (Bonino et al., 2006[16]; Collins et al., 2017[17]; Binford, 2018[18]; Quadara, El-Murr and Latham, 2016[19]; Paulus et al., 2024[20]; Pathmendra et al., 2023[21]).
Certain content regarding body image, beauty norms, or dietary habits may play a role in the onset or perpetuation of eating disorders like anorexia and bulimia. Social media platforms, where adolescents are highly active, often promote and normalize idealized and stereotypical beauty standards, a trend further reinforced by the use of filters and photo editing software. Being exposed to such imagery can foster a negative self-perception, leading to feelings of dissatisfaction and despair (Stoilova, Rahali and Livingstone, 2023[22]). Findings from the EU Kids Online Survey indicate that, on average, 12% of 12-16 year-olds across 10 European countries have seen online content or discussions on ways to be very thin (Smahel et al., 2020[5]).
Exposure to violent or gory content can be disturbing or traumatising for children and adolescents. It can create conditions that perpetuate dangerous practices, such as self-harm, which is increasingly frequent among teenagers, particularly girls, in many countries (OECD, 2024[23]). Though the evidence is scarce, the available data suggest that viewing online content on self-harm may have both harmful and protective effects (Susi et al., 2023[24]). On one hand, it can enhance the escalation of self-harm, reinforce engagement behaviours (e.g. commenting and sharing images), encourage comparison of own self-harm with others, and may fuel the development of a self-harm “identity”. On the other hand, the exposure to self-harm content can trigger protective effects, encourage social connection and help-giving, and contribute to reducing the repetition of self-harming behaviour (Susi et al., 2023[24]).
Exposure to hate speech or extremist content that promotes violence, discrimination, or extremist ideologies represents another type of content risk. Hate speech is defined as all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote, or justify hatred, discrimination, xenophobia, and other forms of intolerance. (UNESCO, 2023[25]). Online, children are potentially exposed to cyberhate, or online hate, which refers to hate speech expressed on the Internet or via information and communication technologies. Cyberhate exposure occurs when people see or hear hateful content online but do not have to be targeted or feel targeted by it. The EU Kids Online survey conducted in 2018/19 in 10 European countries showed that encountering hateful content online is quite a common experience among children aged 11 to 17, though the prevalence varied across countries, from 21% in France to 59% in the Czech Republic (MacHackova et al., 2020[26]).
National and international data are scarce for documenting in detail the extent to which children and teenagers are exposed to content or behaviour that can upset or harm them. However, PISA 2022 data provides some general information on the frequency of children being upset by harmful content or speech. The data show that over a third of 15-year-olds (36%) report getting upset the last time they encountered age-inappropriate content online. Forty-two percent have been upset because they have received offending messages, and over half (53%) because of discriminatory content (Figure 3.6). In the vast majority of OECD countries, girls report such experiences significantly more frequently than boys.
15-year-old students who report getting upset the last time they…
Note: *The difference between boys and girls is statistically significant at the 5% level. 15-year-old students were asked "How upset were you the last time the following situations occurred?" with respect to "Encountering content online that was inappropriate for my age", "Encountering discriminatory content online (e.g. about race, gender, sexual orientation or physical appearance)", and "Receiving unkind, vulgar or offending messages, comments or videos". The presented response options for each of the statements were "This did not happen to me", "Not at all upset", "A little upset", "Quite upset" and "Very upset". Data refer to the percentage responding "A little upset", "Quite upset" or "Very upset" to a given situation.
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
Contact risks
Interacting in the digital space can come with contact risks, including, for instance, contacts established for the purpose of online sexual coercion and extortion of children, cyberbullying victimisation, sex cyber grooming and contacts made to promote extremism and radicalisation (OECD, 2021[11]; Nienierza et al., 2021[27]).
Child sexual exploitation, or abuse are major online risks that are accelerating in scale,4 severity and complexity (OECD, 2023[28]). Although data on online sexual harm are limited, a study commissioned by the WeProtect Global Alliance in 2021 asked about the experiences of sexual harm in childhood of more than 5 000 individuals aged 18 to 20 worldwide (WeProtect Global Alliance, 2023[29]). One of the main findings of this study is that 54% of respondents (48% of boys and 57% of girls) had experienced online sexual harms before they were 18. Respondents who self-identified as transgender or non-binary, disabled, LGBTQIA+, or as a racial or ethnic minority were more likely to have experienced such harms. First exposure to sexual harm occurs young and is getting earlier: 20-year-old respondents, on average, had their first exposure to sexually explicit content online at 13.4 years old, falling to 12.7 years old for 18-year-old respondents. Two-thirds of respondents who received sexually explicit material online as children received it through a private messaging service, most commonly on their personal mobile device. Moreover, 34% of respondents were asked as children to do something sexually explicit online they were uncomfortable with or did not want to do.
Online sexual coercion and extortion involve predators using the Internet to build relationships with children to exploit or harm them. It usually comprises digital blackmail where sexual information or images are used to extort sexual material (such as photos or videos), or to arrange an offline sexual encounter, or to extort money from the victim in exchange for not sharing the sexual material publicly. According to EU Kids Online surveys, on average in the European countries surveyed, around 22% of children aged 12-16 reported having received sexual messages in the past year. Additionally, 6% reported that they have been the sender of such messages during the same period (Smahel et al., 2020[5]). Although the vast majority of children report not having received unsolicited sexual requests, an average of 13% reported that it had happened to them a few times in the past year, and 4% reported it happening at least once a month.
Cyberbullying is another risk that evidence indicates is on the rise (OECD, 2024[30]). Cyberbullying encompasses harassment, threats, or negative comments online directed at a child from peers or strangers. The literature lacks a consistent definition of cyberbullying, but it generally includes repeated, intentional aggressive behaviour, a power imbalance, and the use of online media (Campbell and Bauman, 2018[31]; Gottschalk, 2022[32]). Unlike traditional bullying, cyberbullying's impact is amplified by the widespread dissemination of harmful content about the victim, which intensifies the phenomenon. Cyberbullying is linked to decreased life satisfaction and various mental health issues, including depression and psychological distress (Hamm et al., 2015[33]; Brailovskaia, Teismann and Margraf, 2018[34]; Giumetti and Kowalski, 2022[35]), and may have a stronger negative impact on mental health than face-to-face bullying (Baier et al., 2018[36]). Research indicates a substantial overlap between cyberbullying and traditional forms of bullying, suggesting that digital devices are not the root cause of these behaviours but amplify the phenomenon (Zych, Ortega-Ruiz and Del Rey, 2015[37]; Gottschalk, 2022[32]).
Reports of cyberbullying have been on the up over the past number of years (Figure 3.7). Data from the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) reveal an increase in the prevalence of cyberbullying from 2017 to 2022 in nearly all OECD countries. Cyberbullying victimisation increased by more than 25% on average across the two waves. On average, one in six children report experiences of cyberbullying, with substantial variation across countries. In many countries, girls (Panel B) and adolescents from single-parent families (Panel C) are more likely to report cyberbullying victimisation. Moreover, cyberbullying can begin as early as primary school age. Five percent of 10-year-olds report cyberbullying in the form of nasty or hurtful messages being sent to them or to others about them. There is a strong socio-economic gradient with 10-year-olds from low socio-economic background twice as likely to report cyberbullying than those from high socio-economic backgrounds (Box 3.1).
11-, 13- and 15-year-old school children who report having been a victim of cyber-bullying at least once in the last couple of months
Note: *The difference between boys and girls, and by groups according to family arrangement is statistically significant at the 5% level.
**The OECD average includes all countries depicted in the figure except Belgium and the United Kingdom.
Children were asked "In the past couple of months how often have you been cyberbullied (e.g., someone sent mean instant messages, email or text messages; wall postings; created a website making fun of you; posted unflattering or inappropriate pictures of you online without permission or shared them with others)?". Response options ranged from "I have not been cyberbullied in the past couple of months" to "Several times a week". Data refer to the percent of children who responded "Once or twice" or more often. One-parent family or other includes: children who reported living with only one person they identify as a parent (either their 'mother' or their 'father'), with or without stepparents, or in some other arrangement (for instance, a foster home or cared for by non-parental family members).
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on WHO (n.d.[38]), Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) World Health Organization Collaborative Cross-National Survey, 2017-18 and 2021-22, https://hbsc.org/about/.
The PIRLS and TIMSS surveys ask children in their fourth year of formal schooling (i.e., around age 10) whether they have experienced cyberbullying in the form of nasty or hurtful messages being sent to them or about them being shared with others. On average, 5% of children report having been victims of such acts in the OECD countries for which data are available, but the proportion is over twice as high in Belgium. In all countries, children from lower socio-economic backgrounds are more likely than others to report having been victims.
"Fourth grade" students who report experiencing any of a specified list of online bullying acts by other students at least once or twice a month
Note: *The difference between students with high and low socio-economic status is statistically significant at the 5% level.
**The OECD average includes all countries depicted in the figure except Belgium and the United Kingdom.
"Fourth grade" students were asked "During this year, how often have other students from your school done any of the following things to you, including through texting or the internet?" with respect to "Sent me nasty or hurtful messages online" and "Shared nasty or hurtful information about me online". For each question, they were presented with the response options "Never", "A few times a year", "Once or twice a month" and "At least once a week". Data refer to the percentage who responded “Once or twice a month” or “At least once a week” to at least one of the two questions.
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on IEA (2021[9]), Progress in International Reading Literacy Study 2021 (PIRLS 2021), https://pirls2021.org/results.
Attempts by individuals or groups to recruit children into extremist and radicalised ideologies or activities is another example of contact-related online risk. In 2017, a UNESCO report found that the evidence linking the Internet, social media and violent radicalisation was very limited and inconclusive (Alava, Frau-Meigs and Hassan, 2017[39]). Based on descriptive evidence, it was hypothesised that chatrooms could act as accelerators of radical transformation, where members are self-selected and positively inclined toward extremist ideologies. However, researchers found no empirical evidence to either support or refute this hypothesis.
Radicalisation doesn’t happen overnight. It is a gradual process, meaning that young people who are affected may not realise what is happening. For this reason, it is extremely difficult to collect data to assess whether children and adolescents have been exposed to interactions that could lead to their radicalisation. Nevertheless, research from the United States shows that individuals (especially youths) who spend more time online and use certain websites (i.e., YouTube, Reddit and Snapchat because of the anonymity/freedom they offer, and in the case of YouTube, recommendations based on prior viewing history) may face an increased likelihood of being exposed to or engaging with hateful or potentially radicalising content (Costello et al., 2021[40]).
Conduct risks
Conduct risks pertain to risks “where children are actors in a peer-to-peer exchange, including when their own conduct can make them vulnerable (for instance, in the case of sexting,5 or cyberbullying)” (OECD, 2021[11]). Under conduct risks, the following risk manifestations are recognised: i) hateful behaviour, ii) harmful behaviour, iii) illegal behaviour, and iv) user-generated problematic behaviour. These risk manifestations not only pose a threat to children who are the targets of such behaviour in the digital environment, but also to those whose actions create the risk. Specifically, a conduct risk occurs when a child engages in behaviour that contributes to risky digital content or interactions.
Conduct risks include behaviours such as engaging in cyberbullying, in illegal activities such as hacking, piracy, or engaging in online challenges that can be dangerous or unlawful, or in activities that can damage children’s reputation (e.g. sexting or posting content that could harm their reputation or future opportunities). Another online risk is contributing to dissemination of false and misleading content. According to PISA 2022 data, this risk is quite high with nearly one in three 15-year-old students – especially boys and teenagers from low socio-economic backgrounds – reporting that they may share made-up information online without indicating its inaccuracy (Figure 3.9).
15-year-old students who agree that they share made-up information on social networks without flagging its inaccuracy
Note: *The difference between boys and girls, high and low socio-economic status, and between groups according to the language spoken at home is statistically significant at the 5% level.
15-year-old students were asked "To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? ... I share made-up information on social networks without flagging its inaccuracy" and presented with the response options "Strongly disagree", "Disagree", "Agree" and "Strongly agree". Data refer to the percent responding "Agree" or "Strongly agree".
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
As mentioned earlier, cyberbullying is also a major issue in the digital world, and combating it is a priority for action within education systems and beyond in many OECD countries (OECD, 2024[13]). As previously mentioned, a significant proportion of children report being victims of cyberbullying. However, a notable minority of adolescents also admit to being perpetrators. According to HBSC data, it is estimated that in 2022, slightly more than one in ten 11- to 15-year-olds will have engaged in actions resembling cyberbullying (Figure 3.10). In Lithuania, over a quarter of teenagers in this age group report having engaged in such actions. Moreover, in most countries, there is a clear increase in the proportion of teenagers involved in cyberbullying between the ages of 11 and 15 (Panel A). Boys (14% on average in the OECD) report participating in cyberbullying more frequently than girls (8%) (Panel B). Additionally, teenagers living with both parents (10%) report engaging in cyberbullying less often than those living with one parent or in other family situation (14%) (Panel C).
There are certainly many reasons for engaging in cyberbullying, but three features of the online world explain why people communicate and interact differently online than offline: anonymity, disembodiment, and disinhibition (OECD, 2024[41]). Anonymity allows people to express opinions and behave without fear of judgment, which can lead to a lack of accountability, enabling impulsive and aggressive behaviours such as cyberbullying and trolling. Disembodiment lets people create virtual identities that they may consider as less vulnerable to aggressive behaviours such as hate speech. Disinhibition involves a lack of restraint in online interactions, often resulting in hostile behaviours like cyberbullying and trolling. Anonymity and reduced visibility in digital environments can exacerbate disinhibition, making people feel less accountable and more likely to act differently than they would face-to-face.
11-, 13- and 15-year-old school children who report having cyber-bullied others in the previous couple of months
Note: *The difference between 11- and 15-year-olds, boys and girls, and groups according to family arrangement is statistically significant at the 5% level.
**The OECD average includes all countries depicted in the figure except Belgium and the United Kingdom.
Children were asked "In the past couple of months how often have you taken part in cyberbullying (e.g., sent mean instant messages, email or text messages; wall postings; created a website making fun of someone; posted unflattering or inappropriate pictures online without permission or shared them with others)?". Response options ranged from "I have not cyberbullied another person in the past couple of months" to "Several times a week". Data refer to the percent of children who respond with "Once or twice" or more often. One-parent family or other includes: children who reported living with only one person they identify as a parent (either their 'mother' or their 'father'), with or without stepparents, or in some other arrangement (for instance, a foster home or cared for by non-parental family members).
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on WHO (n.d.[38]), Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) World Health Organization Collaborative Cross-National Survey 2021-22, https://hbsc.org/about/.
Consumer risks
Children may face consumer risks online in several ways: (i) encountering marketing messages that are inappropriate for their age, such as advertisements for age-restricted products like alcohol; (ii) being exposed to commercial content that is not clearly identified as advertising, such as product placements, or material intended for adults, like promotions for dating services; and (iii) having their vulnerability and inexperience exploited, which can lead to economic risks, such as falling victim to online fraud (OECD, 2021[11]). Potential consumer risks for children include online scams and fraud, where children might be tricked into providing financial information or making payments, in-app purchases, where children may accidentally or intentionally spend money on games or apps without fully understanding the costs, and data privacy issues, where companies collect and misuse children's personal data for targeted advertising or other purposes (OECD, 2021[11]).
Privacy risks
Privacy risks cut across all risk categories and are particularly concerning due to their potential to profoundly affect children’s lives in multiple ways (OECD, 2021[11]). The Global Kids Online Survey covers privacy related risks and privacy-protection strategies, including questions on whether children only use websites or apps they trust, or whether they use complicated, safe passwords (Global Kids Online, 2020[42]). In OECD countries, only around 51% of 15-year-olds state that they can easily change the privacy settings of their digital devices to protect their privacy and personal data (Figure 3.11).
15-year-old students who report that they can easily change the settings of a device or App in order to protect their data and privacy, by socio-economic status
Note: *The difference between high and low socio-economic status is statistically significant at the 5% level.
15-year-old students were asked "To what extent are you able to do the following tasks when using digital resources? ... Change the settings of a device or App in order to protect my data and privacy" and presented with the response options "I cannot do this", "I struggle to do this on my own", "I can do with a bit of effort", "I can easily do this" and "I don't know what this is". Data refer to the percent responding "I can easily do this".
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
The spread of private information and online rumours on digital platforms can also severely harm the reputation of children and teenagers, over which they have very limited control. Although children can manage likes, shares, and comments they post online, their online reputation depends crucially on what others post about them. Even children who do not sign up for social media platforms may have an online reputation shaped by content, data, and information posted by others. Children's online reputation can influence how others perceive and treat them, making it a critical issue for children’s well-being.
Online reputational risks were explored by the EU Kids Online Survey. Seven percent of children reported that their personal information was used in a way they disliked in the past year, ranging from 2% in Croatia to 12% in Romania (Smahel et al., 2020[5]). Additionally, 4% of children experienced someone creating an online page or sharing an image about them that was hostile or hurtful. Issues with family members sharing information without the child's permission were also found to be quite common. Between 8% (in Lithuania and Slovakia) and 36% (in Norway and Flanders) of children aged 12 to 16 reported that their parents or carers published information online without asking them, averaging 20 percent across all children. Nearly 10% of children said they were upset by this, and an even higher proportion (14%) reported asking a parent to remove the content (Smahel et al., 2020[5]).
The recent PISA 2022 data also include information on adolescents being affected by the disclosure of personal information without their approval. Nearly 40% of 15-year-old students reported that they got upset the last time information about them was publicly displayed online without their consent (Figure 3.12). However, this proportion varies significantly between countries, ranging from less than 18% in Japan to over 60% in Korea. Moreover, in many countries, adolescents from migrant backgrounds – indicated by not speaking the national language at home – are more frequently exposed to this risk compared to their peers.
15-year-old students who report getting upset the last time information about them was publicly displayed online without their consent, by language spoken at home
Note: *The difference between groups is statistically significant at the 5% level.
15-year-old students were asked "The following question is about your experience when browsing online content or using social media. How upset were you the last time the following situations occurred? ... Information about me was publicly displayed online without my consent" and presented with the following response options "This did not happen to me", "Not at all upset", "A little upset", "Quite upset" and "Very upset". Data refer to the percent responding "A little upset", "Quite upset" or "Very upset".
Source: OECD Secretariat calculations based on OECD (2022[4]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
Private content can be shared not only by strangers but also by close friends or family members, including parents. "Sharenting" refers to the popular practice where parents share content involving their children online, gaining gratification from posting stories, images, and videos of their children (OECD, 2021[11]). However, sharenting raises several concerns for children's privacy. It can undermine a child's right to privacy, as parents may disclose personal information without their child’s consent. Sharenting can also expose children to risks like online grooming, paedophiles, and identity theft.
To conclude, digital media and the digital environment amplify and complicate the risks associated with typical childhood and adolescent behaviours by providing new avenues for both positive and negative experiences. Activities such as exploring identity, seeking peer validation, and testing boundaries –common during these developmental stages – can be intensified in the digital sphere, where content is easily shared, permanent, and accessible to wide audiences. Risks like exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, grooming, and peer pressure are heightened online, while the use of algorithms and tailored content can reinforce harmful behaviours, such as pursuing unrealistic beauty standards or dangerous challenges. Additionally, the anonymity and reach of digital platforms can escalate normal experimentation into problematic or risky behaviours, such as oversharing, engaging with harmful communities. This interconnectedness of digital and offline behaviours complicates parenting, supervision, and the mitigation of these risks.
References
[39] Alava, S., D. Frau-Meigs and G. Hassan (2017), Youth and violent extremism on social media: mapping the research, https://doi.org/10.54675/STTN2091.
[36] Baier, D. et al. (2018), “Consequences of Bullying on Adolescents’ Mental Health in Germany: Comparing Face-to-Face Bullying and Cyberbullying”, Journal of Child and Family Studies, Vol. 28/9, pp. 2347-2357, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1181-6.
[18] Binford, W. (2018), “Viewing pornography through a children’s rights lens”, Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, Vol. 25/4, pp. 415-444, https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2019.1578311.
[16] Bonino, S. et al. (2006), “Use of pornography and self-reported engagement in sexual violence among adolescents”, European Journal of Developmental Psychology, Vol. 3/3, pp. 265-288, https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620600562359.
[34] Brailovskaia, J., T. Teismann and J. Margraf (2018), “Cyberbullying, positive mental health and suicide ideation/behavior”, Psychiatry Research, Vol. 267, pp. 240-242, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.05.074.
[31] Campbell, M. and S. Bauman (2018), “Cyberbullying: Definition, consequences, prevalence”, Reducing Cyberbullying in Schools: International Evidence-Based Best Practices, pp. 3-16, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811423-0.00001-8.
[17] Collins, R. et al. (2017), “Sexual Media and Childhood Well-being and Health”, Pediatrics, Vol. 140/Supplement 2, pp. S162-S166, https://doi.org/10.1542/PEDS.2016-1758X.
[40] Costello, M. et al. (2021), Radicalization on the Internet: Virtual Extremism in the U.S. from 2012-2017, Office of Justice Programs, https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/radicalization-internet-virtual-extremism-us-2012-2017 (accessed on 24 May 2024).
[7] Gerosa, T., L. Losi and M. Gui (2024), “The Age of the Smartphone: An Analysis of Social Predictors of Children’s Age of Access and Potential Consequences Over Time”, Youth and Society, Vol. 56/6, pp. 1117-1143, https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X231223218/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/10.1177_0044118X231223218-FIG1.JPEG.
[35] Giumetti, G. and R. Kowalski (2022), “Cyberbullying via social media and well-being”, Current Opinion in Psychology, Vol. 45, p. 101314, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101314.
[42] Global Kids Online (2020), Global Kids Online Questionnaire, http://globalkidsonline.net/tools/survey/ (accessed on 9 September 2024).
[32] Gottschalk, F. (2022), “Cyberbullying: An overview of research and policy in OECD countries”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 270, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f60b492b-en.
[6] Gui, M. and T. Gerosa (2021), “Smartphone pervasiveness in youth daily life as a new form of digital inequality”, in Handbook of Digital Inequality, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788116572.00016.
[33] Hamm, M. et al. (2015), “Prevalence and Effect of Cyberbullying on Children and Young People”, JAMA Pediatrics, Vol. 169/8, p. 770, https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.0944.
[1] Helsper, E. (2020), “Digital inequalities amongst digital natives”, The Routledge Companion to Digital Media and Children, pp. 435-448, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351004107-41/DIGITAL-INEQUALITIES-AMONGST-DIGITAL-NATIVES-ELLEN-HELSPER.
[9] IEA (2021), Progress in International Reading Literacy Study 2021 (PIRLS 2021), International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievements, https://pirls2021.org/results.
[12] Livingstone, S. and M. Stoilova (2021), “The 4Cs: Classifying Online Risk to Children”, CO:RE Short Report Series on Key Topics, https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.71817.
[26] MacHackova, H. et al. (2020), Children’s experiences with cyberhate, EU Kids Online, https://doi.org/10.21953/LSE.ZENKG9XW6PUA.
[2] Muschert, G. and M. Ragnedda (2015), The Digital Divide: The Internet and Social Inequality in International Perspective, https://www.routledge.com/The-Digital-Divide-The-Internet-and-Social-Inequality-in-International/Ragnedda-Muschert/p/book/9781138960268 (accessed on 23 June 2022).
[27] Nienierza, A. et al. (2021), “Too dark to see? Explaining adolescents’ contact with online extremism and their ability to recognize it”, Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 24/9, pp. 1229-1246, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1697339.
[23] OECD (2024), Children and young people engaging in self-harm, OECD Child Well-Being Data Portal, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-child-well-being-data-portal.html.
[30] OECD (2024), “Mental health and digital environments”, in OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2024 (Volume 1): Embracing the Technology Frontier, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/596e067d-en.
[41] OECD (2024), OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2024 (Volume 1): Embracing the Technology Frontier, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a1689dc5-en.
[14] OECD (2024), “The OECD Truth Quest Survey: Methodology and findings”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 369, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/92a94c0f-en.
[13] OECD (2024), What Does Child Empowerment Mean Today? Implications for Education and Well-Being, OECD, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8f80ce38-en.
[43] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I and II) - Country Notes: Japan, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_ed6fbcc5-en/japan_f7d7daad-en.html.
[10] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en.
[28] OECD (2023), “Transparency reporting on child sexual exploitation and abuse online”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 357, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/554ad91f-en.
[4] OECD (2022), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
[11] OECD (2021), “Children in the digital environment: Revised typology of risks”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 302, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9b8f222e-en.
[21] Pathmendra, P. et al. (2023), “Exposure to Pornography and Adolescent Sexual Behavior: Systematic Review”, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol. 25, https://doi.org/10.2196/43116.
[20] Paulus, F. et al. (2024), “The impact of Internet pornography on children and adolescents: A systematic review”, L’Encéphale, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENCEP.2023.12.004.
[8] Perowne, R. and L. Gutman (2023), “Parents’ perspectives on smartphone acquisition amongst 9- to 12-year-old children in the UK – a behaviour change approach”, Journal of Family Studies, Vol. 30/1, pp. 63-81, https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2023.2207563.
[19] Quadara, A., A. El-Murr and J. Latham (2016), “Online pornography: Effects on children & young people”, https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/online_pornography-effects_on_children_young_people_snapshot_0.pdf (accessed on 23 May 2024).
[15] Robb, M. and S. Mann (2023), 2022 Teens and Pornography, Common Sense Media, San Francisco, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/research/teens-and-pornography (accessed on 23 May 2024).
[5] Smahel, D. et al. (2020), EU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries, EU Kids Online, https://doi.org/10.21953/lse.47fdeqj01ofo.
[3] Stalker, P., S. Livingstone and D. Kardefelt-Winther (2019), Growing up in a connected world, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Office of Research – Innocenti, https://www.unicef.org/innocenti/media/7006/file/GKO-Summary-Report-2019.pdf.
[22] Stoilova, M., M. Rahali and S. Livingstone (2023), Good practice guide: Classyfying and responding to online risk to children, Insafe helplines and the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), https://www.lse.ac.uk/business/consulting/assets/documents/Classifying-and-responding-to-online-risk-to-children-Good-practice-guide.pdf (accessed on 24 May 2024).
[24] Susi, K. et al. (2023), “Research Review: Viewing self‐harm images on the internet and social media platforms: systematic review of the impact and associated psychological mechanisms”, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 64/8, pp. 1115-1139, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13754.
[25] UNESCO (2023), “Addressing hate speech through education: a guide for policy-makers”, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000384872 (accessed on 4 December 2024).
[29] WeProtect Global Alliance (2023), Estimates of childhood exposure to online sexual harms and their risk factors, https://www.weprotect.org/wp-content/uploads/Estimates-of-childhood-exposure-to-online-sexual-harms-and-their-risk-factors-.pdf (accessed on 9 November 2023).
[38] WHO (n.d.), Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) cross-national survey, World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, https://hbsc.org/about/.
[37] Zych, I., R. Ortega-Ruiz and R. Del Rey (2015), “Scientific research on bullying and cyberbullying: Where have we been and where are we going”, Aggression and Violent Behavior, Vol. 24, pp. 188-198, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AVB.2015.05.015.
Notes
← 1. In Japan, secondary school pupils spend on average 25.9 hours per week in regular school lessons, which is significantly higher than the OECD average of 23.7 hours. Nearly 87% of Japanese students spend 25 hours or more in class each week (OECD, 2023[43]). After school, about half of lower secondary students in Japan spend up to 12 hours a week in private tutoring schools, or juku, to prepare for exams and reinforce classroom concepts, often including Saturdays.
← 2. The OECD's "Children in the digital environment: Revised typology of risks" (OECD, 2021[11]) identifies four primary categories of risks that children may face online, including Content Risks (Exposure to inappropriate or harmful material), Conduct Risks (Risks arising from children's own behaviour online), Contact Risks (Dangers associated with interactions with others in the digital space), and Consumer Risks (Threats related to commercial practices targeting children as consumers). Additionally, the typology identifies cross-cutting risks that span these categories, including privacy risks, advanced technology risks, and health and well-being risks. These risks have evolved with technological advancements, necessitating updated strategies to safeguard children in the digital environment.
← 3. Children may not be emotionally prepared to process explicit material, leading to confusion, distress, or fear. They may not fully understand what they are seeing and may develop unhealthy or unrealistic perceptions of sexuality. Moreover, repeated exposure to explicit content can desensitize children, potentially affecting their future relationships and attitudes toward intimacy and consent. For some children, exposure to pornography can create feelings of guilt, shame, or anxiety, particularly if they believe they are engaging in something inappropriate or wrong. In addition, pornography often depicts distorted or unrealistic portrayals of sex and relationships, which can affect children’s understanding of healthy sexual behaviour and consent. They may form unhealthy attitudes toward their own bodies and those of others.
← 4. For example, OECD (2023[28]) reports that in 2022, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) – which operates the United States’ CyberTipline and collaborates with law enforcement agencies worldwide – received over 31.8 million reports of suspected child sexual exploitation, up from 29.3 million in 2021 and 21.7 million in 2020. Similarly, the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), a UK-based child protection organization leveraging technology to identify and remove child sexual abuse material online, investigated 375 230 reports in 2022, marking a 20% increase since 2020. INTERPOL has also reported that child sexual exploitation and abuse continues to rise, noting that 2021 was the worst year on record.
← 5. Sexting refers to the “sending or receiving of sexually explicit materials (messages, images or videos) through digital means” (Gottschalk, 2022[32]).