A study by a graduate student and a psychology professor at the
University of Virginia examined cognitive function in
four-year-olds after they had watched nine minutes of “a very
popular fantastical cartoon about an animated sponge that lives
under the sea,” i.e., SpongeBob SquarePants. They then compared
these findings to those derived from examining the cognitive
function of four-year-olds after watching nine minutes of a slower
paced cartoon.
The results? After viewing the show about the absorbent and
yellow and porous creature, children performed worse on various
tests. The conclusions proved consistent with the authors’
postulate that “fast-paced shows seem particularly likely to have a
negative impact on attention.”
The study characterizes the show that they compare favorably
with SpongeBob SquarePants as “a realistic Public Broadcasting
Service cartoon about a typical US preschool-aged boy.” Their
bizarre description tells us more about the authors than it does
about Caillou, a moralistic Canadian show about a whiny, bald,
infantilized four-year-old whose main interaction with the world
comes through condescending grandparents and slo-mo parents who
have mistaken Prozac for one of the four foods groups. A few
viewings of Caillou may prompt otherwise normal adults to ponder
the wisdom of repealing laws against child battery, at least as
they pertain to animated minors.
Though lacking an advanced degree, I have been conducting my own
scientific experiment on the effects of television on children for
several years now. My sample group of two is smaller than the
University of Virginia’s sample group of sixty. But I have observed
my lab rats longer and more intensely. In the name of science, I
even allow them to live with me and share my last name.
My conclusions, reached long before the researchers began their
study at the University of Virginia, are that Caillou should never
air in my home — it’s banned — but SpongeBob SquarePants is not
only permitted but practically obligatory. It is the lone cartoon
that I watch with my kids, eh, test subjects. Children may not
learn much from television. But, as human Xerox machines, they do
imitate it. If you want a baby-talking brat who complains about his
bread still having the crusts, allow your child to watch Caillou.
If you want a congenitally happy four-year-old, turn on SpongeBob
SquarePants.
My older child speaks the raspberry interspersed diction popular
in Rock Bottom. He announces “Living like Larry” prior to embarking
upon daring couch stunts. And he periodically refers to diverse
edibles as “crabby patties.” If all of this misses you, then you’re
missing out. The adventures of happy-go-lucky SpongeBob,
professional mope Squidward, the avaricious Mr. Crabs, and the
other colorful denizens of Bikini Bottom remains the top-rated
children’s show more than a decade after its launch for good
reason. And for good reason Caillou has been mercifully
cancelled.
I don’t question the Pediatrics study’s conclusion. I question
their question. A scientific study asking which cartoons are best
for your brain is like a debate about which grape soda is
healthiest for your body. If you turn on an animated program with
the idea of producing a child as smart as Sandy, then you may be
surprised to soon encounter the mind of Patrick. Cartoons are
entertainment. SpongeBob makes no pretense about this. Could it be
that children’s shows that tout educational benefits do so because
they fail as entertainment?
A television isn’t a classroom and a classroom isn’t a
television. The related movements to make education more
entertaining and entertainment more educational dilute the
strengths of both.
My scientific experiment found that the television makes a good
reward or punishment but a bad babysitter. Prolonged exposure
inhibits focus and engenders misbehavior. The Pediatrics article
suggests switching from SpongeBob to Caillou but it doesn’t
consider the possibility of switching off entirely, which is what
my family did from February to August and before that from 2006 to
2008. Children become more animated without all the animation.
Parents parent instead of outsource their responsibilities to
Nickelodeon, PBS, or more unfit guardians. When televisions go dark
families light up.
But some still look for intelligence from the idiot box. An
editorial introducing the Pediatrics study touts the “educational
benefits of high-quality preschool programming.” Even someone who
lives in a pineapple under the sea wouldn’t fall for such
nonsense.
