6 Things "Toy Story 5" Gets Right About Kids and Technology 38%

By Andrew Fishman LCSW0%

7/6/2026, 8:09:27 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 17.9% saturation with 195 hits. Analysis detected 1,922 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,091 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 44.3% and a BS Rank of 38% (13,145 of 21,197 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 62.00% of the article peer group.

The new Pixar film "Toy Story 5" is a nuanced exploration of the impact of technology on children. 
In the movie, eight-year-old Bonnie is struggling to make friends. 
All the kids in her neighborhood use screens to connect and insist that playing with toys is for babies. 
Her parents, nervous about her difficulty making friends, acquiesce, cross their fingers, and give her a Lilypad-brand tablet. 
She quickly uses this technology to connect with girls from her dance class. 
These “friends” use this group chat to bully her for her interest in toys. 
Bonnie’s toys, the film’s protagonists, spend most of the movie trying to find her a real friend. 
They end up learning that, while tablets can facilitate social harm, they can also help us find and connect with supportive people. 
The film’s writers seem to have done careful research on children, developmental psychology, and screens. 
Here’s what I noticed as a therapist who specializes in the impact of screens on mental health. 
1. 
Everyone’s using screens. 
Throughout the movie, the toys are horrified to learn that technology has invaded every other home in the neighborhood. 
The camera pans across windows, revealing every face bathed in the blue light of a screen. 
This is exaggerated for effect, but isn’t far off. 
In many countries today, the average person spends a lot of time on screens, starting almost from birth. 
One study found that children under two years old spent more than an hour on screens every day. 
By age 5-8, children were spending an average of 3.5 hours per day on screens. 
The average British two-year-old watches more than two hours of TV or videos per day. 
This is highly correlated with parental education level—the more educated the parent, the less time the child spent on screens. 
This level of screen time access seemed to significantly impact language acquisition. 
Screen time climbs steadily to nearly 7 hours per day by adulthood. 
2. 
Not all kids are ready for screens at the same time. 
In the film, Bonnie appears to be a little developmentally behind her peers. 
She's shy and doesn’t understand the in-group’s social expectations, and the bullies pounce on this difference. 
There’s nothing wrong with Bonnie; she’s just at a slightly different social developmental stage and has different interests from her peers. 
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) points out that your specific child has unique strengths and challenges and these need to be considered carefully when deciding how and whether to incorporate technology into their lives. 
Bonnie may be ready for a tablet, but clearly needs more support navigating a group chat and how to use the software in ways that support her social and emotional development. 
3. 
Technology isn’t good or bad, it’s how you use it. 
We see several examples of technology used positively throughout the film. 
One of the characters is a fancy digital potty training tool. 
A family uses the GPS on a parent’s phone to find their campsite. 
A toy camera shows off photos of the family’s trip to Disney. 
The AAP expands upon this, emphasizing that not all screen time is equal. 
As I write in my book *Parenting a Gamer*, watching a documentary, video chatting with Grandma, and following along with an instructional yoga video all use screens, but are obviously different from a series of ten-second, AI-generated clips on YouTube Shorts. 
This is one reason why it’s so important to be aware of what your kids are doing on screens, rather than treating it as a monolith. 
4. 
Imaginative play is important. 
Throughout the film, Bonnie’s toy Jessie argues that imaginative play is crucial for children. 
She’s right. 
Play is how we first explore the world around us. 
It provides us a chance to safely connect with others, practice social situations, develop hand-eye coordination, and explore identity. 
Child therapists often use play therapeutically to help children understand themselves and their emotions. 
Children often replay frightening events through play as a way to process those stressors. 
5. 
Screens can facilitate bullying. 
I regularly see clients in my practice that need support navigating social situations online. 
Many of my adolescent clients come in week after week to describe dizzying webs of screenshotted insults, being removed from or excluded from group texts, who’s allowed to see private posts, who’s been tagged in what posts, the subtleties of posting something on Snapchat vs. 
Instagram, etc. 
School bullies aren’t limited to the playground anymore. 
They live in your pocket on the same device you use to call your parents for a ride. 
Even apps like Instagram that promise to protect children and teens are ineffective at stopping harm. 
One research group found that Meta routinely allowed obviously harmful messages through their filtering system, even on teen accounts. 
Social media and other forms of digital communication can clearly facilitate social harm. 
However… 
6. 
Screens can help you find your people. 
I work with a lot of young people who have trouble fitting in. 
Like Bonnie, the kids at school have different interests and don’t understand them. 
Many of my clients are autistic* and follow different social conventions. 
The social rules they’re expected to follow at school aren’t intuitive and my clients often struggle to keep up. 
However, when they’re around similar people, usually those who are also neurodivergent, they usually fit right in. 
In other words, autistic people don’t have poor social skills; they have autistic social skills. 
This is called the double empathy problem; neurotypical people have trouble communicating with neurodivergent people and vice versa. 
Neither communication style is better than the other—the mismatch is what causes problems. 
Similarly, if Bonnie’s peers don’t “get” her, she will probably need help understanding and navigating their social expectations so that she can survive school. 
She may also need help and guidance in finding people who will accept her for who she is and people she can trust to be her whole, authentic self around. 
At the end of the movie, Bonnie connects through technology with a friendly, outgoing girl who shares her interests and quirky communication style. 
When used this way, screen time can be a useful tool to help find friends. 
*Although many refer to autistic people as *people with autism* or *people with autism spectrum disorder*, almost *90 percent of autistic adults prefer *autistic person*. 
This language is used here to respect that preference. 
Read more in *Parenting a Gamer: Help Your Child Build Healthy Habits, Make Positive Choices, and Find Balance in Virtual Worlds*. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.2%Psychology Today: 3.7%Confirmation Bias2.8%This article: 1.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.3%Psychology Today: 0.4%Anchoring Bias1.1%This article: 5.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 4.2%Psychology Today: 2.7%Availability Heuristic5.1%This article: 4.4%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.1%Psychology Today: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic4.4%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 15.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 3.8%Psychology Today: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias15.1%This article: 6.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 2.4%Psychology Today: 2.7%Framing Effect6.8%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.9%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.2%Psychology Today: 4.4%Optimism Bias4.9%This article: 3.7%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.9%Psychology Today: 1.0%Pessimism Bias3.7%This article: 13.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 3.3%Psychology Today: 3.9%Negativity Bias13.1%This article: 6.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.7%Psychology Today: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias6.8%This article: 3.2%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.8%Psychology Today: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error3.2%This article: 1.2%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.3%Psychology Today: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias1.2%This article: 3.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.8%Psychology Today: 0.7%In-Group Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.4%Psychology Today: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.7%Psychology Today: 1.1%Halo Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.4%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.3%Psychology Today: 1.0%Recency Bias1.4%This article: 0.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.1%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 12.6%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 6.9%Psychology Today: 5.3%Appeal to Authority12.6%This article: 6.6%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.9%Psychology Today: 2.6%False Dilemma6.6%This article: 1.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.3%Psychology Today: 0.6%Slippery Slope1.1%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.4%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.9%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 6.0%Psychology Today: 9.3%Hasty Generalization11.9%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.3%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.1%Psychology Today: 0.5%Bandwagon0.3%This article: 4.1%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.0%Psychology Today: 2.3%Appeal to Emotion4.1%This article: 2.4%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.6%Psychology Today: 0.9%Begging the Question2.4%This article: 8.3%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 3.1%Psychology Today: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.3%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 1.6%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.4%Psychology Today: 0.5%Appeal to Nature1.6%This article: 2.9%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.7%Psychology Today: 0.7%Composition/Division2.9%This article: 17.9%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 10.5%Psychology Today: 3.4%Anecdotal17.9%This article: 1.4%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.3%Psychology Today: 0.1%No True Scotsman1.4%This article: 4.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 1.2%Psychology Today: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.8%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.2%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.3%Psychology Today: 0.2%Middle Ground1.2%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 2.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.7%Psychology Today: 0.1%Special Pleading2.8%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 1.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.9%Psychology Today: 3.7%Biased Writer Voice1.8%This article: 8.8%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 4.4%Psychology Today: 6.2%Indoctrination8.8%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 0.0%Psychology Today: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 7.3%Andrew Fishman LCSW: 6.1%Psychology Today: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.3%

1091 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker4.4%attributed speech1,043writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageAmerican Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAmerican Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
48 attributed words100% of attributed speech87% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Indoctrination-9.2 ptsWriter: 9.2%American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP): 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -7.7 ptsWriter: 7.7%American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP): 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-1.9 ptsWriter: 1.9%American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP): 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.