Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 916–927 | Cite as

Who Uses Online Parenting Support? A Cross-Sectional Survey Exploring Australian Parents’ Internet Use for Parenting

  • Sabine Baker
  • Matthew R. Sanders
  • Alina Morawska
Original Paper


The need for better access to evidence-based parenting interventions is widely recognized, as few families actually participate in parenting programs. A public health approach that includes the delivery of parenting information via the Internet could increase the reach of such interventions dramatically. However, there are concerns that web-based information is not accessible by families that face the greatest barriers to accessing “traditional” face-to-face parenting support, and therefore could benefit most from online approaches. This study used a cross-sectional survey of 459 Australian parents of 2–12 year olds to investigate parents’ use of the Internet to access parenting information, and the extent to which this information is useful for parents from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. Results indicate that the majority of parents use parenting websites (65 %) and social media (45 %) for parenting information. Users of parenting websites tended to be parents of younger children. Younger age of the child was also associated with using social media, as was younger parental age, being female, not working and spending more hours online. Parents rated a range of modalities as useful for receiving parenting information, particularly seminars and individually tailored programs. Self-directed web-based programs were endorsed by 61 % of respondents. Higher-risk parents were as likely or more likely to endorse web-based information sources as lower-risk parents. As there was almost equal access to online parenting information among families from different backgrounds, we conclude that the Internet provides an exciting opportunity for delivering evidence-based parenting support to a broad range of parents, including higher-risk families.


Parenting Internet Social media Digital divide At-risk parents 



We gratefully acknowledge the funding of this trial by the Australian Research Council (DP120101404).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The Triple P – Positive Parenting Program is owned by The University of Queensland. The University through its main technology transfer company, UniQuest Pty Ltd, has licensed Triple P International (TPI) Pty Ltd to publish and disseminate the program worldwide. Royalties stemming from published Triple P resources are distributed to the Parenting and Family Support Centre; School of Psychology; Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences; and contributory authors. Matthew Sanders and Alina Morawska are authors on various Triple P resources. TPI is a private company and no author has any share or ownership in it. TPI engages the services of Professor Matthew Sanders as a consultant to ensure program integrity is maintained. Sabine Baker is a PhD candidate and researcher at the Parenting and Family Support Centre.


  1. Allen, K., & Rainie, L. (2002). Parents online. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
  2. Appleyard, K., Egeland, B., van Dulmen, M. H., & Sroufe, L. A. (2005). When more is not better: The role of cumulative risk in child behavior outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 46(3), 235–245. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00351.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012). Australian social trends. Catalogue number 4102.0. Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
  4. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012–13). Household use of information technology, Australia.Google Scholar
  5. Australian Communications and Media Authority (2015). Communications report 2013–14 series: Report 1-Australians’ digital lives.Google Scholar
  6. Berkule-Silberman, S. B., Dreyer, B. P., Huberman, H. S., Klass, P. E., & Mendelsohn, A. L. (2010). Sources of parenting information in low SES mothers. Clinical Pediatrics, 49(6), 560–568. doi: 10.1177/0009922809351092.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernhardt, J. M., & Felter, E. M. (2004). Online pediatric information seeking among mothers of young children: Results from a qualitative study using focus groups. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 6(1). doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.1.e7.
  8. Bidmon, S., & Terlutter, R. (2015). Gender differences in searching for health information on the internet and the virtual patient-physician relationship in Germany: Exploratory results on how men and women differ and why. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 17(6). doi: 10.2196/jmir.4127.
  9. Bonfadelli, H. (2002). The internet and knowledge gaps: A theoretical and empirical investigation. European Journal of Communication, 17(1), 65–84. doi: 10.1177/0267323102017001607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371–399. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Breitenstein, S. M., Gross, D., & Christophersen, R. (2014). Digital delivery methods of parenting training interventions: A systematic review. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11(3), 168–176. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12040.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Carey, J. C., Wade, S. L., & Wolfe, C. R. (2008). Lessons learned: The effect of prior technology use on Web-based interventions. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(2), 188–195. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carter, B. (2007). Parenting: A glut of information. Journal of Child Health Care, 11(2), 82–84. doi: 10.1177/1367493507079621.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Child Trends (2002). Charting parenthood: A statistical portrait of fathers and mothers in America. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  15. Cunningham, C. E., Boyle, M., Offord, D., Racine, Y., Hundert, J., Secord, M., & McDonald, J. (2000). Tri-ministry study: Correlates of school-based parenting course utilization. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(5), 928–933. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.68.5.928.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. van Deursen, A., van Dijk, J., & ten Klooster, P. (2015). Increasing inequalities in what we do online: A longitudinal cross sectional analysis of Internet activities among the Dutch population (2010 to 2013) over gender, age, education, and income. Telematics and Informatics, 32(2), 259–272. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2014.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Devolin, M., Phelps, D., Duhaney, T., Benzies, K., Hildebrandt, C., Rikhy, S., & Churchill, J. (2013). Information and support needs among parents of young children in a region of Canada: A cross-sectional survey. Public Health Nursing, 30(3), 193–201. doi: 10.1111/phn.12002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Doty, J. L., Dworkin, J., & Connell, J. H. (2012). Examining digital differences: Parents’ online activities. Family Science Review, 17(2), 18–39.Google Scholar
  19. Duggan, M., Lenhart, A., Lampe, C., & Ellison, N. B. (2015). Parents and social media. Pew Research Center, July 2015.
  20. Dworkin, J., Connell, J., & Doty, J. (2013). A literature review of parents’ online behavior. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 7(2). doi:  10.5817/CP2013-2-2.
  21. Epstein, R. A., Fonnesbeck, C., Potter, S., Rizzone, K. H., & McPheeters, M. (2015). Psychosocial interventions for child disruptive behaviors: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 136(5), 947–960. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-2577.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Evans, G. W., Li, D., & Whipple, S. S. (2013). Cumulative risk and child development. Psychol Bull, 139(6), 1342–1396. doi: 10.1037/a0031808.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Eysenbach, G., Powell, J., Englesakis, M., Rizo, C., & Stern, A. (2004). Health related virtual communities and electronic support groups: Systematic review of the effects of online peer to peer interactions. BMJ, 328(7449), 1166. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1166.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Eysenbach, G., Powell, J., Kuss, O., & Sa, E. R. (2002). Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: A systematic review. JAMA, 287(20), 2691–2700. Scholar
  25. Garbutt, J. M., Leege, E., Sterkel, R., Gentry, S., Wallendorf, M., & Strunk, R. C. (2012). What are parents worried about? Health problems and health concerns for children. Clinical Pediatrics, 51(9), 840–847. doi: 10.1177/0009922812455093.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Hall, C. M., & Bierman, K. L. (2015). Technology-assisted interventions for parents of young children: Emerging practices, current research, and future directions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 33, 21–32. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.05.003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heinrichs, N., Bertram, H., Kuschel, A., & Hahlweg, K. (2005). Parent recruitment and retention in a universal prevention program for child behavior and emotional problems: Barriers to research and program participation. Prevention Science, 6(4), 275–286. doi: 10.1007/s11121-005-0006-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Dalgarno, B., & Waycott, J. (2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: Exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 332–343. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00371.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koerting, J., Smith, E., Knowles, M. M., Latter, S., Elsey, H., McCann, D. C., & Sonuga-Barke, E. J. (2013). Barriers to, and facilitators of, parenting programmes for childhood behaviour problems: A qualitative synthesis of studies of parents’ and professionals’ perceptions. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 22(11), 653–670. doi: 10.1007/s00787-013-0401-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Love, S. M., Sanders, M. R., Metzler, C. W., Prinz, R. J., & Kast, E. Z. (2013). Enhancing accessibility and engagement in evidence-based parenting programs to reduce maltreatment: Conversations with vulnerable parents. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 7(1), 20–38. doi: 10.1080/15548732.2012.701837.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Love, S. M., Sanders, M. R., Turner, K. M. T., Maurange, M., Knott, T., & Prinz, R., et al. (2016). Social media and gamification: Engaging vulnerable parents in an online evidence-based parenting program. Child Abuse & Neglect. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.10.031.Google Scholar
  33. Martin, S. P., & Robinson, J. P. (2007). The income digital divide: Trends and predictions for levels of internet use. Social Problems, 54(1), 1–22. doi: 10.1525/sp.2007.54.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Metzler, C. W., Sanders, M. R., Rusby, J. C., & Crowley, R. N. (2012). Using consumer preference information to increase the reach and impact of media-based parenting interventions in a public health approach to parenting support. Behavior Therapy, 43(2), 257–270. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2011.05.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Morawska, A., Sanders, M. R., Haslam, D. M., Filus, A., & Fletcher, R. (2014). Child adjustment and parent efficacy scale: Development and initial validation of a parent report measure. Australian Psychologist, 49(4), 241–252. doi: 10.1111/ap.12057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Connor, H., & Madge, C. (2004). My mum’s thirty years out of date. Community, Work & Family, 7(3), 351–369. doi: 10.1080/1366880042000295754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pandolfini, C., Impicciatore, P., & Bonati, M. (2000). Parents on the web: Risks for quality management of cough in children. Pediatrics, 105, e1.Google Scholar
  38. Pantea, S., & Martens, B. (2014). Has the digital divide been reversed? – Evidence from five EU countries. Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research, 11(1), 13–42. doi: 10.13085/eIJTUR.11.1.13-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Park, E., Kim, H., & Steinhoff, A. (2016). Health-related internet use by informal caregivers of children and adolescents: An integrative literature review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(3). doi: 10.2196/jmir.4124.
  40. Plantin, L., & Daneback, K. (2009). Parenthood, information and support on the internet. A literature review of research on parents and professionals online. BMC Family Practice, 10. 34. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-10-34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Prinz, R. J., & Sanders, M. R. (2007). Adopting a population-level approach to parenting and family support interventions. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(6), 739–749. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2007.01.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Radey, M., & Randolph, K. A. (2009). Parenting sources: How do parents differ in their efforts to learn about parenting? Family Relations, 58(5), 536–548. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2009.00573.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rothbaum, F., Martland, N., & Jannsen, J. B. (2008). Parents’ reliance on the web to find information about children and families: Socio-economic differences in use, skills and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(2), 118–128. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2007.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children’s responses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent, & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention in psychopathology: Social competence in children (Vol. 8, pp. 49–74). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  45. Sanders, M. R., & Morawska, A. (2010). Family background questionnaire. Brisbane: Parenting and Family Support Centre.Google Scholar
  46. Sarkadi, A., & Bremberg, S. (2005). Socially unbiased parenting support on the Internet: A cross-sectional study of users of a large Swedish parenting website. Child: Care, Health and Development, 31(1), 43–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2005.00475.x.Google Scholar
  47. Spoth, R., & Redmond, C. (2000). Research on family engagement in preventive interventions: Toward improved use of scientific findings in primary prevention practice. Journal of Primary Prevention,21(2), 267–284.Google Scholar
  48. Stern, M. J., Cotten, S. R., & Drentea, P. (2011). The separate spheres of online health: Gender, parenting, and online health information searching in the information age. Journal of Family Issues, 33(10), 1324–1350. doi: 10.1177/0192513x11425459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Thorslund, K., Hanse, J. J., & Axberg, U. (2014). Universal parental support—how to reach out: A cross-sectional random sample of Swedish parents. BMC Public Health, 14(1), 1064. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1064.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Trentacosta, C. J., Hyde, L. W., Shaw, D. S., Dishion, T. J., Gardner, F., & Wilson, M. (2008). The relations among cumulative risk, parenting, and behavior problems during early childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 49(11), 1211–1219. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01941.x.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Walker, S. K., Dworkin, J., & Connell, J. (2011). Variation in parent use of information and communications technology: Does quantity matter? Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 40(2), 106–119. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-3934.2011.02098.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Willis, S., & Tranter, B. (2006). Beyond the ‘digital divide’—Internet diffusion and inequality in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 42(1), 43–59. doi: 10.1177/1440783306061352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. World Health Organization. (2009). Preventing violence through the development of safe, stable and nurturing relationships between children and their parents and caregivers. Series of briefings on violence prevention: The evidence. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  54. Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012). Digital differences.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabine Baker
    • 1
  • Matthew R. Sanders
    • 1
  • Alina Morawska
    • 1
  1. 1.Parenting and Family Support Centre, School of PsychologyThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations