Behaviour of Children and Adolescents and the Use of Mobile Phones in Primary Schools in the Czech Republic

Abstract

Today's young people spend most of their time in contact with mobile devices. Their excessive use carries many risks, such as addiction, cyberbullying and social disruption. Based on this, this study analysed the mobile phone use of young Czechs between 7 and 17 years old (n = 27.177) and assessed the differences in their behaviour according to the mobile device use policies of their schools. The results show that the use of mobile phones was linked to the one of the social networks, YouTube and videogames for the most part. Similarly, those young people who had them at school preferred to use them, instead of practicing sports or social activities. On the other hand, in the centres in which the use of mobile phones was prohibited, they felt bored and without activities to do. Therefore, it will be necessary for schools to implement educational policies that encourage activities and areas of social interaction in the school, especially during recess. However, at the same time, it is recommended not to prohibit the use of technological devices in the educational centre, since this fact encourages students to use them secretly and increases their desire to use them. To this end, its use in the classroom is advocated from an educational perspective, thus promoting collaborative learning and increasing student motivation.

Full text

International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Article
Behaviour of Children and Adolescents and the Use of Mobile
Phones in Primary Schools in the Czech Republic
Kamil Kopecký1, Francisco-Domingo Fernández-Martín2, RenéSzotkowski 1, Gerardo Gómez-García3, *
and Klára Mikulcová1


Citation: Kopecký, K.;
Fernández-Martín, F.-D.; Szotkowski,
R.; Gómez-García, G.; Mikulcová, K.
Behaviour of Children and
Adolescents and the Use of Mobile
Phones in Primary Schools in the
Czech Republic. Int. J. Environ. Res.
Public Health 2021,18, 8352. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168352
Academic Editors: Gergely Fehér and
Cheng-Fang Yen
Received: 9 May 2021
Accepted: 30 July 2021
Published: 6 August 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
1Centre for Prevention of Risky Virtual Communication, Faculty of Education, PalackýUniversity,
CZ-779 00 Olomouc, Czech Republic; kamil.kopecky@upol.cz (K.K.); rene.szotkowski@upol.cz (R.S.);
klara.mikulcova1@gmail.com (K.M.)
2Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, Campus de Cartuja s.n., 18071 Granada, Spain;
fdfernan@ugr.es
3Department of Didactics, School Organization, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain
*Correspondence: gomezgarcia@ugr.es; Tel.: +34-958-248-397
Abstract:
Today’s young people spend most of their time in contact with mobile devices. Their
excessive use carries many risks, such as addiction, cyberbullying and social disruption. Based
on this, this study analysed the mobile phone use of young Czechs between 7 and 17 years old
(
n= 27.177
) and assessed the differences in their behaviour according to the mobile device use
policies of their schools. The results show that the use of mobile phones was linked to the one of the
social networks, YouTube and videogames for the most part. Similarly, those young people who had
them at school preferred to use them, instead of practicing sports or social activities. On the other
hand, in the centres in which the use of mobile phones was prohibited, they felt bored and without
activities to do. Therefore, it will be necessary for schools to implement educational policies that
encourage activities and areas of social interaction in the school, especially during recess. However,
at the same time, it is recommended not to prohibit the use of technological devices in the educational
centre, since this fact encourages students to use them secretly and increases their desire to use them.
To this end, its use in the classroom is advocated from an educational perspective, thus promoting
collaborative learning and increasing student motivation.
Keywords: mobile phone; children; behaviour; schools; internet threats
1. Introduction
Since the end of the 20th century, the intensification and scope of the use of new
electronic media by children and young people has been growing systematically. However,
this mainly relates to the entertainment and communication functions offered by these
types of devices [
1
]. Today, the mobile phone has become an indispensable element in the
lives of children and adolescents [
2
]. Specifically, as the International Data on Youth and
Media reports for 2019 indicated, there has been a dizzying increase on the use of mobile
phone, especially at younger ages [
3
,
4
], which places the start of the interaction with this
device from the age of 7 [
5
]. This is due to the changes in lifestyles being experienced by
young people as a result of the advent of the information society [6].
Thus, there has been an enormous increase in children’s and adolescents’ use of
mobile phones by in the early stages. This increase is associated with two variants of its
use, the communicative skill that focuses on calls, messages and, mostly, use of social
networks [
7
] and, on the other hand, the recreational one, which has to do with the viewing
of multimedia material and the practice of several mobile games [
8
]. Similarly, the arrival
of events such as the YouTuber phenomenon, which turns young people into not only
receivers but also creators of their own content, has led to an increase in the consumption
rates of mobile devices in recent years [9,10].
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168352 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 2 of 15
Children and adolescents seek to discover, explore and investigate the potential of
these devices, this being, in most cases, in an autonomous way. This can lead them to expe-
rience age-inappropriate situations. Lack of maturity and skills to manage inappropriate
content have even led some of them to experience psychological, physical discomfort or
specific behaviours, such as phubbing or nomophobia [11–15].
There is a debate about the permissiveness of mobile phone use in schools. There
are several experts who advocate the advantages of mobile devices in schools, arguing
their novelty, the attraction they produce on students and the wide range of educational
offerings with which they provide the teacher, by providing new teaching/learning strate-
gies [
16
]. Based on these ideas, multiple studies have incorporated these devices into their
educational practice, obtaining a successful response from students [17–20].
On the other hand, among those who advocate the disadvantages of mobile phone
use in the educational field, they distinguish several identified risks associated with mobile
phone use in the youth sector. Among these, the threat that generates the highest fear
is its enormous addictive potential [
21
,
22
]. This refers to the notion that digital devices
physically and psychologically stimulate the human brain. This is where receiving a “Like”
on Facebook or Instagram becomes a priority to be achieved by today’s youth [
23
,
24
].
Several experts have analysed the potential use of these devices throughout the day in
children and adolescents [
25
], concluding that it is necessary to know the attitudes of
use of young people in each context in order to promote preventive attitudes that would
encourage a responsible use of these devices.
Thus, there is also a vision in which the popularity of mobile phones is not synony-
mous with making good use of them. In relation to this idea, there is research that shows
the relationship between the use of mobile phones on school premises and lack of concen-
tration, of reflection and criticism, or poor school performance by students, which seriously
affects their school performance as a whole [
26
–
29
]. Likewise, the literature also provides
the possible relation between the use of these devices in the school and the increase of cases
of school bullying and cyberbullying [
30
–
32
]. This has led to a ban on the use of mobile
phones in schools in several countries. However, there are several experts who claim that
banning the use of mobile devices in schools is not the solution to eradicate the events of
addiction that are being observed in society [33].
Therefore, there is a clear need to identify which are the attitudes towards mobile
phone use in each context, in order to provide relevant information that leads to the develop-
ment and subsequent implementation of measures to solve and prevent
this phenomenon
.
As a result of this idea, this research aims at understanding attitudes towards mobile
phone use by children and adolescents, specifically in the Czech Republic, in order to
provide a general framework of information on the child–mobile phone relationship both
in their everyday life and in the school setting. This objective can be stratified into the
following specific subobjectives:
-
Which activities are the most frequented by young people when interacting with the
mobile device.
- Which activities are carried out by young people during school breaks.
-
Which activities are most frequented by young people in the centres where the use of
mobile devices is forbidden.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Research Identification
The research Czech Children in the Cyberworld was carried out by the Centre for
the Prevention of Virtual Risk Communication at the Faculty of Education of Palacký
University in Olomouc, in cooperation with O2 Czech Republic. It is based on the research
projects on risk behaviour of kids and adults in the on-line sphere, completed by the very
same team in 2015–2018 and, in particular, on the following studies: The risks of Internet
communication IV (2014) and Sexting and risk behaviour of Czech Kids in Cyberspace
(2017), complementing them with new findings, something unique in the Czech Republic.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 3 of 15
The analysis of the dataset and the interpretation of the results were carried out in collab-
oration with the AREA research group (HUM-672), Department of Didactics and School
Organization of the University of Granada (Spain).
The study was funded by O2 Czech Republic within the framework of the so-called
contract research. No public or EU funding was obtained.
The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki
and ap-proved by the Ethics Committee of Palacky University of Olomouc (REF:8012/2020),
2 December 2020.
2.2. Procedure
We selected an anonymous online survey as the core research tool. It was distributed
to primary/ first years of secondary schools in all regions of the Czech Republic, where
data were collected. The data were collected from 1 February 2019 to 1 May 2019. The
evaluation and interpretation of the part results was completed in the following weeks.
Prior authorisation was sought from each of the students so that they could participate
in the research. The Cronbatch alpha coefficient was valid (
α
= 0.879). The survey was
distributed through the Google Forms software.
The questions asked in the survey aimed at exploring which habits they had in their
daily school life and in their free time, as well as during class periods. The questions mainly
focused on how they used their cell phones and how often they did so (chatting on their
cell phones, using social networks, etc.). As for data analysis, the relevant statistics were
processed and performed using the Statistica software.
2.3. Participants
A total of 27,177 respondents aged 7–17 from all Czech regions participated in the
research and boys constituted 49.83% of the sample. The average age of all respondents was
13.04 years (median 13, modus 12, variance 4.34). The sample configuration was carried
out through simple random sampling, in which different schools were randomly selected
from the different Czech regions to participate in the completion of the questionnaire.
Subsequently, those pupils whose parents gave their consent to participate formed the
research sample. Responses came mainly from schools in Moravskoslezský, Olomoucký
and Stˇredoˇceský(Czech Republic), with a response rate of 75.3% of their total schools.
3. Results
3.1. A. Children and Mobile Phones
In our research, we focused on active usage of mobile phones by children. We wanted
to know whether a child had a mobile phone with Internet access without the need of Wi-Fi
connection (e.g., through 3G, 4G, LTE, etc.). Over half of the children (59.1%) confirmed
that they had permanent Internet access on their mobile phone and, therefore, did not have
to rely on Wi-Fi (Table 1).
The most frequent activity reported by children was making/receiving phone calls
(72%), followed by typing and sending messages on on-line services (Facebook Messenger,
WhatsApp, etc.) (66%). The following place was taken by watching videos on YouTube
and typing SMS messages.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 4 of 15
Table 1. Most frequent activities on a mobile phone.
Activity Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%)
Making/receiving phone calls 19.701 72.49
Typing and sending messages on on-line services
(Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, etc.) 18.044 66.39
Watching videos on YouTube 17.778 65.42
Typing and sending SMS/MMS messages 14.735 54.22
Taking photos 14.039 51.66
Playing games 13.457 49.52
Listening to music or spoken audio (e.g., on Spotify,
Apple Music, etc.) 12.801 47.10
Searching for information (e.g., on Google) 10.400 38.27
Watching favourite YouTubers 9091 33.45
Browsing social networks (passive, reading posts) 8811 32.42
Rating content on social networks (liking, rating by
emoticons—such as Hearts on TikTok or Instagram). 8608 31.67
Sharing photos and videos on social networks 7005 25.78
Watching videos on TikTok 5319 19.57
Making videos 4702 17.30
Using a mobile phone for educational purposes
(educational apps/videos/content) 4580 16.85
Reading texts on a mobile phone (e.g., text documents,
books, PDF files, etc.) 3969 14.60
Managing a social network account (managing own
wall, managing photo albums and video albums,
creating campaigns)
3900 14.35
Watching videos on Twitch 3588 13.20
Streaming videos (e.g., through Twitch or Facebook) 1818 6.69
3.1.1. Mobile Phones in Schools
A question that echoes strongly in the Czech Republic, as well as in other European
countries, is how to regulate the children’s use of mobile phones in schools—whether to
ban mobile phones during lessons and breaks or to limit the ban only to lessons and not
breaks (see the opinion of the Czech School Inspectorate). Therefore, we asked children
about their experience with mobile phone restrictions and how this issue was dealt with in
the school they attended (Table 2).
Table 2. Using mobile phones in school (from the children’s perspective).
Breaks Lessons Relative Frequency (%)
Allowed Prohibited 53.30%
Prohibited Prohibited 41.20%
Allowed Allowed 2.48%
Prohibited Allowed 1.09%
Not stated Not stated 1.92%
The majority of children (53.3%, 14,486 children) were permitted to use mobile phones
during recess at school and this was not permitted during classes. However, at the teacher’s
instruction, they were also allowed to use their mobile phones during lessons—the mobile

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 5 of 15
phone becomes a learning aid/tool. However, a significant number of children (41.20%,
i.e., 11,198 children) could not use the mobile phone at school at all, not even during recess.
In relation to the use of mobile phones in school, we wanted to know the way children
spent their break time, so we asked what pupils did during break time. Looking at the
overall summary of most frequent break time activities, we found out that communication
with peers dominated (85.24%). However, we do not know how the actual communication
goes, i.e., what pupils actually talk about. However, a clear difference in the way of spend-
ing break time was visible between schools with and without mobile phone restrictions
(Tables 3and 4).
Methodology comment: We divided the sample into two groups, to be compared to
each other. Both groups included approximately the same number of respondents and
when calculating percentage differences, we worked with relative frequencies. Respondents
were allowed to give multiple answers at the same time, i.e., the child was, for instance,
allowed to use a mobile phone when walking on the school premises. The following results
show an overview of the most frequent break time activities.
In the research, we also differentiated between activities of children in the primary
tier and first years of the secondary tier. The results are presented in the following charts
(Tables 5and 6). The application of the chi-squared confirmed that the statistical differences
between the responses obtained in the two types of centres are significant (pvalue < 0.001).
Table 3. The most frequent break time activities—schools where mobile phones are allowed during
break time.
Activities Total Frequency (n) Relative Frequency (%)
Playing games on my mobile phone 6216 41.00
Browsing social networks on my
mobile phone 5898 38.90
Sitting on my chair, feeling bored 5110 33.70
Walking around the school premises 5018 33.10
Writing to someone on my mobile phone 4246 28.00
Listening to music on my mobile phone 4190 27.63
Watching my peers playing games/watching
videos, etc., on their mobile phones 3364 22.19
Browsing websites on my mobile phone 2422 15.97
Watching YouTube videos on my
mobile phone 2014 13.28
Reading a book 1690 11.15
Watching TikTok videos on my mobile phone
1270 8.38
Playing table tennis, table football, etc., with
my peers 691 4.56
Making videos on my mobile phone 635 4.19
Playing card games with my peers 564 3.72
Reading a magazine 431 2.84
Playing board games with my peers 295 1.95

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 6 of 15
Table 4.
The most frequent break time activities—schools where mobile phones are not allowed
during break time.
Activities Total Frequency (n) Relative Frequency (%)
Walking around the school premises 4329 38.66
Sitting on my chair, feeling bored 3892 34.75
Reading a book 1667 14.89
Playing table tennis, table football etc. with
my peers 857 7.65
Playing card games with my peers 835 7.46
Reading a magazine 748 6.68
Watching my peers playing
games/watching videos, etc., on their
mobile phones
627 5.60
Playing games on my mobile phone 611 5.46
Browsing social networks on my
mobile phone 595 5.31
Playing board games with my peers 536 4.79
Writing to someone on my mobile phone 488 4.36
Listening to music on my mobile phone 451 4.03
Browsing websites on my mobile phone 246 2.20
Watching YouTube videos on my
mobile phone 196 1.75
Watching TikTok videos on my
mobile phone 162 1.45
Making videos on my mobile phone 130 1.16
Table 5. What do primary tier (7–11-year-old) children do during break times.
Mobile Phones during Break
Time ALLOWED
Mobile Phones during Break
Time DISALLOWED
Activity Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%)
Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%) χ2pValue
Chatting with other pupils 1959 80.55 4146 87.88 167.94 ***
Playing games on my
mobile phone 930 38.24 92 1.95 146.37 ***
Walking around the
school premises 758 31.17 1557 33.00 141.94 ***
Watching my peers
playing games/watching
videos, etc., on their
mobile phones
686 28.21 164 3.48 124.56 ***
Sitting on my chair,
feeling bored 670 27.55 1330 28.19 120.97 ***
Listening to music on my
mobile phone 364 14.97 56 1.19 76.64 ***
Browsing social networks
on my mobile phone 337 13.86 36 0.76 70.84 ***

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 7 of 15
Table 5. Cont.
Mobile Phones during Break
Time ALLOWED
Mobile Phones during Break
Time DISALLOWED
Activity Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%)
Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%) χ2pValue
Reading a book 300 12.34 879 18.63 67.76 ***
Watching TikTok videos on
my mobile phone 279 11.47 60 1.27 55.94 ***
Watching YouTube videos
on my mobile phone 217 8.92 46 0.97 41.64 ***
Writing to someone on my
mobile phone 214 8.80 30 0.64 46.64 ***
Playing table tennis, table
football, etc., with
my peers
152 6.25 378 8.01 37.94 ***
Reading a magazine 134 5.51 418 8.86 23.64 ***
Browsing websites on my
mobile phone 117 4.81 25 0.53 19.97 ***
Playing card games with
my peers 111 4.56 453 9.60 17.16 ***
Playing board games with
my peers 102 4.19 365 7.74 15.64 ***
Making videos on my
mobile phone 92 3.78 22 0.47 9.67 ***
Watching YouTubers on
my mobile phone 0 0.00 0 0.00 0
Not stated 2432 4718
Note: *** = pvalue < 0.001.
Table 6. What do first years of the secondary tier (12–15-year-old) children do during break times.
Mobile Phones during Break
Time ALLOWED
Mobile Phones during Break
Time DISALLOWED
Activity Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%)
Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%) χ2pValue
Chatting with other pupils 7864 85.44 5785 88.15 345.27 ***
Playing games on my
mobile phone 3958 43.00 536 8.17 278.69 ***
Browsing social networks
on my mobile phone 3430 37.27 553 8.43 245.64 ***
Sitting on my chair,
feeling bored 3105 33.74 2546 38.79 237.95 ***
Walking around the
school premises 3247 35.28 2816 42.91 244.81 ***
Writing to someone on my
mobile phone 2316 25.16 446 6.80 246.97 ***

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 8 of 15
Table 6. Cont.
Mobile Phones during Break
Time ALLOWED
Mobile Phones during Break
Time DISALLOWED
Activity Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%)
Total
Frequency (n)
Relative
Frequency (%) χ2pValue
Listening to music on my
mobile phone 2573 27.96 408 6.22 256.94 ***
Watching my peers
playing games/watching
videos, etc., on their
mobile phones
2194 23.84 492 7.50 234.64 ***
Browsing websites on my
mobile phone 1272 13.82 224 3.41 202.64 ***
Watching YouTube videos
on my mobile phone 1188 12.91 155 2.36 197.82 ***
Reading a book 960 10.43 805 12.27 185.64 ***
Watching TikTok videos on
my mobile phone 820 8.91 120 1.83 164.21 ***
Playing table tennis, table
football, etc., with
my peers
442 4.80 495 7.54 101.64 ***
Making videos on my
mobile phone 418 4.54 106 1.62 97.64 ***
Playing card games with
my peers 339 3.68 393 5.99 81.64 ***
Reading a magazine 230 2.50 358 5.45 59.64 ***
Playing board games with
my peers 135 1.47 187 2.85 27.46 ***
Watching YouTubers on
my mobile phone 0 0.00 0 0.00 0
Not stated 9204 6563
Note: *** = pvalue < 0.001.
The difference is obvious—where mobile phones during break time were allowed,
activities related to mobile phones clearly dominated (Figure 1). The top activity was
playing games, preferred by over 40% children in schools where mobile phones were
allowed during break time. The second place was taken by the use of social networks
(almost 39%). In addition, a significant number of children passively watched their peer’s
games or videos—22% more in schools where mobile phones were allowed, compared to
schools that prohibited mobile phones.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 9 of 15
Figure 1. Activities carried out during break times depending on the availability of the mobile phone.
Interestingly, approximately one third (33%) of children felt bored during break times
(33%), regardless of mobile phones during break time being allowed or not. As for moving
around the school premises, this was not influenced by mobile phones being allowed or
restricted. In schools with a total mobile phone ban, approximately 6% more children
walked around, compared to schools with mobile phones allowed.
Obviously, a mobile phone ban also affects the frequency of activities that are not
directly related to mobile phones—reading, sport, non-virtual entertainment. In schools
where mobile phones were banned during break time, the number of children reading
magazines during break time was almost 60% higher than in schools where mobile phones
were allowed. An increase was also obvious in reading books (+13.54% on schools with the
ban), playing board games (+65%), playing card games (+43%) and sport activities (+29%).
Banning mobile phones during break time has, therefore, a real impact on the development
of such activities.
It has to be said that, although mobile phones during break time might be banned
by a school, some children do not comply. For instance, 5% children played games on
their mobile phones although gaming was not allowed, 5% also used social networks
regardless of the ban in place, 4% chatted with other people although it was not allowed,
etc. However, a significant decrease was present in all observed activities, in comparison
with schools where mobile phones were allowed.
3.1.2. Taking Photos/Videos by Peers without Their Consent
In relation to mobile phone restrictions in school, it is often pointed out that a mobile
phone in school might be misused, for instance to picturing peers without their consent.
Therefore, we wanted to know how many children had experienced, in school, that someone
made photos/videos of them without consent—during break time, lesson, or a school event.
A total of 35.71% children (9706 children in our sample) confirmed that they had
been photographed by a peer without consent and 22.5% children (6115 children in our
sample) confirmed that they had been videoed by a peer without consent. It is clearly not a
marginal issue.
4. Discussion
Nowadays, the use of mobile phones among young people in the Czech Republic
has increased considerably. This has given rise to the concern of different education
professionals to study the use of mobile phones inside and outside the school environment
and the risks that exist as a result of this phenomenon.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 10 of 15
Based on this idea, the present research aims to measure the behaviour of Czech chil-
dren and adolescents with regard to the use of mobile phones. Thus, the results presented
show a clear attitude of boredom in which young people do not find entertainment unless
they have the technological tool at their disposal.
More than half of the children confirmed that they had permanent access to the
Internet on their mobile phone, without having to rely on Wi-Fi (e.g., at school or in a
library). They used their mobile phones most frequently to make/receive calls, write/send
messages, watch YouTube videos, take photos, play games or listen to music. In this sense,
a line is established that coincides with studies such as [
9
] or [
10
] with regard to how
these activities are becoming increasingly important in the daily chores of children and
young people, especially the use of social networks or the massive use of platforms such as
YouTube [21,22].
Furthermore, there are also concerns about the possible risks of techno-addiction
that this may cause in young Czechs [
21
,
22
]. Similarly, the large percentages expressed
in the results of this study could have a possible impact on the lack of concentration and
dispersion, which are directly related to school performance [
26
]. In this sense, the lines
established coincide with other previous studies [28].
In turn, we focused on break time and explored the impact of the prohibition/permission
of mobile phones on their activities. Most children were allowed to use mobile phones
during recess at school and were not allowed to use them during lessons. Where mobile
phones were allowed, the dominant activity was playing with them, using social media
and being bored in the chair.
Interestingly, we found roughly the same number of bored children in schools where
mobile phones were banned during recess. In schools where mobile phones were banned
during recess, the dominant activity was walking around the school grounds, sitting on
a chair, feeling bored and reading books, followed by sports activities and card games.
The application of the chi-squared test confirmed the existence of significant differences
between the two groups. This undoubtedly creates a debate around the current motivations
surrounding young people’s entertainment. We find ourselves in a context in which
the Internet and the use of mobile devices occupy a large percentage of young people’s
overall entertainment throughout the day. Given this evidence, it is necessary for parents
and educators to establish a debate about the motivations of young people and how to
encourage healthy leisure and free time habits, as well as reducing the use of mobile
devices [10].
In this respect, when comparing the two samples, in schools where mobile phones
were banned during recess, the number of children reading magazines during recess was
almost 60% higher than in schools where mobile phones were allowed. An increase in
book reading, board games, card games and sports activities was also observed. Therefore,
it could be indicated, in line with previous studies, that mobile phone use is useful and
can have a functional use within the school, as stated in recent research [
16
]. However,
it is necessary to regulate their use within the school, with the aim of promoting leisure,
socialisation, sport or reading activities, which undoubtedly promote greater benefits for
children and adolescents.
As a result of all these ideas, the aim is to share some ideas with educators and
professionals in this field, providing a series of myths related to the use of mobile phones
at school, as well as expressing the need to promote their proper use and regulate their use.
A. Myths related to mobile phones in school
There is a wide range of myths on mobile phones in the school environment, often
shared by non-professionals, such as parents, who often do not understand how mobile
phone restrictions work and to whom the bans actually apply. We will focus on the most
widespread ones.
Myth no. 1—A mobile phone ban in school means that phones are also banned
during lessons.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 11 of 15
One of the most frequent arguments in discussing mobile phones in school is based
on the premise that a phone is a tool that can be effectively used in education (as a method
of delivery, source of information, etc.) and a mobile phone ban will deprive us of such
benefits. This is obviously misunderstood—mobile phone restrictions in school apply to
pupils’ activities outside the approval and instruction from their teacher! It does not apply
to situations when a teacher asks pupils to take out their phones and use them actively for
a learning task. At this point, a mobile phone becomes a learning tool and we should not
worry about children using it in lessons. A mobile phone ban, in fact, does not restrict the
teacher’s work, or the activities organised by the teacher. Smartphones can be therefore
freely used for any meaningful activity organised by the teacher.
Myth no. 2—The use of the phone as a safety measure for emergency situations.
Myths presented mainly by parents include the belief that a phone can ensure their
child’s safety in an emergency. Therefore, their child should always have a mobile phone
ready to call for help while in school. First, it has to be said that safety and protection
of children during school time is the responsibility of their school. It is the school that
provides safety (and this must be ensured by the school management or governing body).
If a pupil gets injured in school, it must be reported to a teacher/deputy/principal instead
of phoning home. The incident is dealt with by the school, that must inform parents.
Teachers could even go to prison if a child is harmed as a result of a teacher‘s negligence!
For emergency situations, schools have crisis management policies in place, describing
what to do with every specific problem (incident). Moreover, using a mobile phone in
emergency without the teacher‘s knowledge is not desirable—it can raise panic among the
parents contacted by the child, although nothing serious actually happened and it is only
the child wanting to share their emotions with their parents. Similarly, a child can initiate
an intervention by rescue services although the incident could have been sorted easily on
the spot.
Myth no. 3—A mobile phone in school is necessary for parents keeping their child
permanently under control.
This myth is closely related to the previous one. It has to be noted, again, that parents
should NOT control their children during school time. This is the responsibility (and the
related liability for any problems) of the school. If parents need to send an urgent message
to their child, they can always contact the school office or the specific teacher. The contrasts
in this discussion are interesting—parents want freedom for their children, but, at the same
time, they want to control them strictly, even while the children are in someone else’s care.
Myth no. 4—During break times, children should enjoy the freedom they do not
have during lessons. By restricting mobile phones, we suppress their freedom.
This argument is often used by those who do not realise that even break times between
lessons have a purpose. These are not the child‘s “free time” but they constitute a part of
the educational process. Break times are in place particularly for a short rest (both mind and
body), preparation for the upcoming lesson, time for physiological needs and interpersonal
communication necessary for the child‘s participation in a social group (simply “chit-
chat and gossip”). A school is actually one of few places (except afterschool clubs and
classes) where a child can socialise through direct contact, which cannot be replaced by
online chatting and sharing. It helps to develop non-verbal communication skills (facial
expression, gestures), conflict resolution and coping skills, mutual respect, but also physical
characteristics (smell, physical ability), etc. These cannot be simulated through technology.
Children get their free time after the last lesson or lunch every day. From that moment,
they can use their mobile phones freely, within any limits set by parents. They can contact
their parents while staying in an afterschool club (although regulation is desirable here
as well).
Myth no. 5—Banning mobile phones in school will result in the prohibition effect—
phones will be used secretly.
This has not been confirmed by schools that have been keeping strict limits for some
time. A wisely managed school introduces a mobile phone ban along with new opportuni-

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 12 of 15
ties. To introduce a mobile phone ban on the premises, the school must have a sufficient
range of relax and sport zones available (a place for ball games, table football, table tennis,
board games, construction toys, chairs, books, chill-out zones, art and musical equipment,
an open-air space for a walk, etc.).
The above-mentioned prohibition effect only accompanies the first stage of “going
non-mobile“ (this stage, according to reports, lasts for about a month), similar to an addict’s
withdrawal symptoms—pupils must suddenly entertain themselves, put some effort in
establishing communication with others, make concessions, resolve conflicts and practice
other social skills. Moreover, this can be difficult for someone who interacts mostly with
electronics. The prohibition effect emerges almost exclusively in schools that do not have
a sufficient offer of inspiring activities in place. Therefore, it is considered suboptimal to
promote the prohibition of cell phones in Czech schools. In the same vein, it follows the
same line of [
33
], in which the prohibition of mobile phones in the classroom is considered
to be ineffective.
B. Regulating the use of mobile phones in school
Limiting the use of mobile phones during break times does not harm children at
all—on the contrary, it has a significantly positive effect on them. It offers something that
cannot be provided by family and technology—in particular, a chance to socialise directly
(and the related set of skills to resolve conflicts, establish and maintain real friendship,
manage their emotions, control their own behaviour, try out new opportunities, break rules
and accept responsibility for it, succeed in arguments, etc.). However, it is always necessary
for the school to provide space for meaningful free-time activities—chillout zones, sport
zones, etc.
Regulating the use of mobile phones is desirable and meaningful, particularly in
preschools and primary schools (up to 12 years of age). Later, the restrictions can be
gradually eased out.
C. Positive ways of using phones for learning
Smartphones, tablets and other touchscreen mobile devices present a wide range of
technologies that can be easily exploited in both school lessons and for homework. In
addition, they are part of so-called BYOD (bring your own device) concept, where children
actively use devices brought from home. Smartphones can be used for learning in several
ways. The simplest method is presenting text, audio/video footages, animations, visuali-
sations, school projects, digital learning programmes, etc., on the screens. Smartphones
and tablets can be linked to interactive whiteboards and the learning content can be easily
presented to the entire class.
Another option is to use touchscreen devices for electronic textbooks (ebooks). These
allow, apart from simply presenting the learning topics, interaction with active elements
(hypertext links, interactive tasks, etc.). In fact, many publishers now provide their classic
paper textbooks along with an electronic version, extended by features, such as automatic
evaluation of exercises and tasks or multimedia content that cannot be presented in a paper
textbook. With modern electronic textbooks, teachers can simulate a range of processes
and phenomena that are no longer demonstrated in schools today, such as autopsy of an
animal, dangerous chemical reactions, insight into complex mechanisms, etc.
A smartphone or tablet can be also used for collaborative learning. There is a wide
range of applications available, allowing users to share a whiteboard, create shared mental
or terminology maps, or shared message boards, communicate with each other, vote in
polls, test and internalise their knowledge through many test programmes, etc.
A smartphone or tablet can be naturally used as a gateway to the Internet and online
services. Pupils can use it to search for and verify information, download content, watch
videos, plan routes, communicate, vote, test their knowledge, etc. A smartphone can
also be used as an augmented reality or mixed reality tool. Augmented reality allows
inserting virtual elements (text, videos, 3D objects) into “real“ reality through a mobile
touchscreen device.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 13 of 15
Thanks to their mobility and battery life, mobile phones and tablets are great for
research/discovery forms of learning. Watching and time-lapsing wildlife, determining
fauna and flora species, tracking location (longitude/latitude, elevation), discovering the
laws of nature, etc., can be all done with a smartphone. In this sense, this coincides with
studies carried out in other countries that support the integration of these technological
resources in the classroom, as well as their standardization within the school [17,18].
5. Conclusions
Czech youth find themselves in a situation where a large part of their leisure time at
school is spent in contact with mobile phones. In cases where the use of these devices is
prohibited on school grounds, it was reported that many of them were bored and did not
know what to do.
From this work, we identified this pattern of behaviour among young Czechs, which
is undoubtedly a concern for their personal and educational future. We find ourselves in a
context in which technologies dominate most of young people’s time, leaving aside healthy
lifestyle habits, such as sports. As a consequence, the rates of addiction to mobile phones
and the Internet may increase, which are present and future threats in young people’s
society. The aim of this work is to establish the facts around the question of the behaviour
of Czech children and adolescents.
Furthermore, the primary education stage should serve as a preventive measure to
promote responsible habits in children with regard to possible attitudes in adolescence [
34
]
with respect to the use of mobile phones and the threats that exist on the Internet.
Therefore, we advocate the need to promote educational policies in educational centres,
which, through a coordinated exercise with families, should promote the implementation of
activities of various kinds to stimulate children to reduce the use of mobile phones. It is also
considered that prohibiting their use in educational centres may not be the most effective
option for achieving favourable results. Therefore, the integration of mobile phones in
the classroom in a responsible way by educational centres could be a way to normalize
their use in the classroom and prevent students from feeling the desire to use these devices
in secret.
One of the limitations of this study is that it was not possible to find out more indepen-
dent variables in the study sample, which would have provided some additional statistical
input, as well as the relationships between the dependent and independent variables.
Likewise, as a future line of research, it would be relevant to continue studying mobile
phone use behaviour in other countries and to establish comparative studies between
territories. Likewise, it would be interesting to focus on topics such as Internet or mobile
phone addiction in order to provide more empirical evidence in this field of knowledge.
In conclusion, while technology has brought many benefits to society, its use in the
context of youth needs to be regulated. Encouraging social and sporting practices by
schools, in collaboration with families, will promote a healthier and less disease-prone
environment. Moreover, encouraging responsible use of mobile phones will help this social
group to take advantage of all the benefits offered by the Internet and its devices and to
distance themselves from the threats that also reside in them.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, K.K. and R.S.; methodology, G.G.-G.; software, K.M.;
formal analysis, R.S.; investigation, K.K.; resources, F.-D.F.-M.; data curation, K.M.; writing—original
draft preparation, K.K. and G.G.-G.; writing—review and editing, K.K., G.G.-G. and K.M.; visualiza-
tion, K.K. and F.-D.F.-M.; supervision, F.-D.F.-M. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement:
The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the
Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of Palacky University of Olomouc
(REF:8012/2020), 2 December 2020.
Informed Consent Statement:
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 14 of 15
Acknowledgments:
The authors would like to thank the Centre for the Prevention of Virtual Risk
Communication at the Faculty of Education of PalackýUniversity in Olomouc, in cooperation with
O2 Czech Republic and the AREA research group (HUM-672) from the University of Granada.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
Tomczyk, Ł.; Kopecký, K. Children and youth safety on the Internet: Experiences from Czech Republic and Poland. Telemat.
Inform. 2016,33, 822–833. [CrossRef]
2.
Ruiz, J.; Sánchez, J.; Trujillo, J. Utilización de Internet y dependencia a teléfonos móviles en adolescentes. Rev. Latinoam. De Cienc.
Soc. Niñez Y Juv. 2016,14, 1357–1369. [CrossRef]
3.
Besolí, G.; Palomas, N.; Chamarro, A. Uso del móvil en padres, niños y adolescentes: Creencias acerca de sus riesgos y beneficios.
Aloma Rev. Psicol. Ciències L’educacióI L’esport 2018,36, 29–39. [CrossRef]
4.
Bringué, X.; Sábada, C. Niños y Adolescentes ante las Pantallas. In La Generación Interactiva en Madrid; Colección Generaciones
Interactivas-Fundación Telefónica; Foro Generaciones Interactivas: Madrid, Spain, 2011. Available online: http://dadun.unav.
edu/bitstream/10171/20593/1/GGIIMadrid-final.pdf (accessed on 5 March 2021).
5. Lange, R.; Osiecki, J. Nastolatki Wobec Internetu/Teens and Internet; Pedagogium: Warszawa, Poland, 2014.
6.
Cornish, L. ‘Mum, can I play on the internet?’ Parents’ understanding, perception and responses to online advertising designed
for children. Int. J. Advert. 2014,33, 437–473. [CrossRef]
7. Dans, I. Posibilidades Educativas de las Redes Sociales. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad de la Coruña, A Coruña, Spain, April 2014.
8.
Ruvalcaba, M.M.; Arámbula, R.E.; Castillo, S.G. Impacto del uso de la tecnología móvil en el comportamiento de los niños en las
relaciones interpersonales. Educateconciencia 2015,5, 67–80.
9.
Kopecký, K.; Hinojo-Lucena, F.J.; Szotkowski, R.; Gómez-García, G. Behaviour of young Czechs on the digital network with a
special focus on YouTube. An analytical study. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2020,116, 105191. [CrossRef]
10.
Aznar, I.; Trujillo, J.M.; Romero, J.M.; Campos, M.N. Generación Niños YouTubers: Análisis de los canales YouTube de los nuevos
fenómenos infantiles. Píxel Bit Rev. Medios Educ. 2019,56, 113–128. [CrossRef]
11.
Rodríguez-García, A.M.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.J.; López Belmonte, J. Nomophobia: An Individual’s Growing Fear of Being
without a Smartphone—A Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020,17, 580. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12.
Ma, T.; Song, L.; Ning, S.; Wang, H.; Zhang, G.; Wu, Z. Relationship between the incidence of de Quervain’s disease among
teenagers and mobile gaming. Int. Orthop. 2019,43, 2587–2592. [CrossRef]
13.
Barrios-Borjas, D.A.; Bejar-Ramos, V.A.; Cauchos-Mora, V.S. Uso excesivo de Smartphones/teléfonos celulares: Phubbing y
Nomofobia. Rev. Chil. Neuro Psiquiatr. 2017,55, 205–206. [CrossRef]
14.
Tamura, H.; Nishida, T.; Tsuji, A.; Sakakibara, H. Association between excessive use of mobile phone and insomnia and depression
among Japanese adolescents. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017,14, 701. [CrossRef]
15.
Jun, S. The reciprocal longitudinal relationships between mobile phone addiction and depressive symptoms among Korean
adolescents. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016,58, 179–186. [CrossRef]
16.
Crompton, H.; Burke, D. The use of mobile learning in higher education: A systematic review. Comput. Educ.
2018
,123, 53–64.
[CrossRef]
17.
Soria, S.; Gutiérrez-Colón, M.; Frumuselu, A.D. Feedback and Mobile Instant Messaging: Using WhatsApp as a Feedback Tool in
EFL. Int. J. Instr. 2020,13, 797–812. [CrossRef]
18.
Cetinkaya, L. The impact of WhatsApp use on success in education process. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn.
2017
,18. [CrossRef]
19.
Traxler, J.M. Learning with mobiles in developing countries: Technology, language, and literacy. Int. J. Mob. Blended Learn. (IJMBL)
2017,9, 1–15. [CrossRef]
20.
Porter, G.; Hampshire, K.; Milner, J.; Munthali, A.; Robson, E.; De Lannoy, A.; Bango, A.; Gunguluza, N.; Mashiri, M.; Tanle,
A.; et al. Mobile Phones and education in Sub-Saharan Africa: From youth practice to public policy. J. Int. Dev.
2016
,28, 22–39.
[CrossRef]
21.
Liu, Q.Q.; Zhou, Z.K.; Yang, X.J.; Kong, F.C.; Niu, G.F.; Fan, C.Y. Mobile phone addiction and sleep quality among Chinese
adolescents: A moderated mediation model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017,72, 108–114. [CrossRef]
22.
Muñoz-Miralles, R.; Ortega-González, R.; López-Morón, M.R.; Batalla-Martínez, C.; Manresa, J.M.; Montellà-Jordana, N.;
Chamarro, A.; Carbonell, X.; Torán-Monserrat, P. The problematic use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in
adolescents by the cross sectional JOITIC study. BMC Pediatr. 2016,16, 140. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23.
Moreno-Guerrero, A.J.; Gómez-García, G.; López-Belmonte, J.; Rodríguez-Jiménez, C. Internet Addiction in the Web of Science
Database: A Review of the Literature with Scientific Mapping. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020,17, 2753. [CrossRef]
24.
Rodríguez, J.M.R.; Soto, N.C.; Gómez-García, G. Follow me y dame like: Hábitos de uso de Instagram de los futuros maestros.
Rev. Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2019,94, 83–96. [CrossRef]
25.
Fernández, Á.D.B.; Fernández, I.R. Hábitos de uso del WhatsApp por parte de los adolescentes. Revista INFAD de Psicología. Int.
J. Dev. Educ. Psychol. 2017,2, 23–30. [CrossRef]
26.
Felisoni, D.D.; Godoi, A.S. Cell phone usage and academic performance: An experiment. Comput. Educ.
2018
,117, 175–187.
[CrossRef]

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 8352 15 of 15
27.
Oliva, H. El uso de teléfonos móviles en el sistema educativo público de El Salvador: Recurso didáctico o distractor pedagógico?
Real. Reflexión2016,40, 59–76. [CrossRef]
28.
Rosen, L.D.; Carrier, L.M.; Cheever, N.A. Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying.
Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013,29, 948–958. [CrossRef]
29. Wood, E.; Zivcakova, L.; Gentile, P.; Archer, K.; De Pasquale, D.; Nosko, A. Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with
technology on real-time classroom learning. Comput. Educ. 2012,58, 365–374. [CrossRef]
30.
Kopecký, K.; Szotkowski, R. Specifics of Cyberbullying of Teachers in Czech Schools-A National Research. Inform. Educ.
2017
,
16, 103. [CrossRef]
31.
Tsimtsiou, Z.; Haidich, A.B.; Drontsos, A.; Dantsi, F.; Sekeri, Z.; Drosos, E.; Trikilis, N.; Dardavesis, T.; Nanos, P.; Arvanitidou, M.
Pathological Internet use, cyberbullying and mobile phone use in adolescence: A school-based study in Greece. Int. J. Adolesc.
Med. Health 2017,30, 20160115. [CrossRef]
32.
You, S.; Lim, S.A. Longitudinal predictors of cyberbullying perpetration: Evidence from Korean middle school students. Personal.
Individ. Differ. 2016,89, 172–176. [CrossRef]
33.
Selwyn, N.; Aagaard, J. Banning mobile phones from classrooms—An opportunity to advance understandings of technology
addiction, distraction and cyberbullying. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2020. [CrossRef]
34. Tóth, G.; Kapus, K.; Hesszenberger, D.; Pohl, M.; Kósa, G.; Kiss, J.; Pusch, G.; Fejes, É.; Tibold, A.; Feher, G. Prevalence and Risk
Factors of Internet Addiction among Hungarian High School Teachers. Life 2021,11, 194. [CrossRef] [PubMed]