Children are sharing personal information with adults they have never met online because they don't consider them a threat, a national study has shown.
This gives them a false sense of security that represents the greatest online danger facing young people today, the study, conducted by Dr Roberta Attard, Dr Maris Catania and Graziella Vella shows.
In an interview with The Malta Independent on Sunday, Attard, psychologist and deputy dean of the Faculty for Social Wellbeing, said that even when children understand online risk, they still construct relationships that quickly feel familiar and trustworthy, even when those relationships are built with unknown adults. It is precisely this feeling of safety and familiarity, she warned, that places children most at risk.
Attard explained that many children do not perceive themselves as speaking to strangers online, even when they know the person on the other side is an adult they have never met. Through repeated conversations, shared interests and time spent chatting or playing games together, children develop a sense of familiarity that overrides abstract warnings about danger. This leads them to disclose personal information such as their name, age, school and home address. When children are asked why they share such details, many explain that they didn't see the person as a threat because they felt they "knew" them.
This, Attard said, lies at the heart of why traditional online safety education is not having the expected results. Children are repeatedly told not to speak to strangers online, yet this message does not resonate when the interaction feels friendly and familiar. In the child's mind, danger is associated with obvious threat, not with someone who chats nicely, listens to them and spends time with them. As a result, the very thing that makes children feel safe online is what exposes them to the greatest harm.
The research, supported by the Office of the Commissioner for Children and the Ministry for Social Policy and Children's Rights, is the first nationally representative study in Malta to examine children's real online experiences in depth. It surveyed children aged seven to 15 and explored how much time they spend online, what they do during that time, who they interact with, what content they are exposed to and how these patterns differ by age and gender. Dr Attard said the findings challenge adult assumptions about children's digital lives and reveal a reality that is often very different from what parents believe is happening.
One of the clearest findings is that younger children are particularly vulnerable to online targeting by adults. This reflects patterns seen internationally and is linked to both developmental factors and platform design. Attard explained that many younger children are still in the concrete operational stage of cognitive development, meaning they tend to interpret what they see and hear as literal and real. They struggle to understand that an online persona may be fabricated.
As a result, when children are warned that communicating with adults online is dangerous, that warning may not apply in their minds if the adult feels kind or familiar. If the person does not match the child's image of danger, they are excluded from that category altogether. Older children, by contrast, tend to develop more abstract thinking and a greater ability to recognise that online interactions may not be what they appear.
Online gaming environments play a significant role in enabling this false sense of safety. Games that are popular with younger children, such as Roblox, allow open chat functions that make it easy for adults to initiate conversations or pose as children. Attard stressed that the issue is not the game itself, but the unrestricted chat systems embedded within it. While some age-verification measures exist, she noted that these are increasingly ineffective, particularly with the rise of artificial intelligence and deepfake technology.
Another major concern highlighted by the study is the lack of adult supervision during children's online activity. Nearly one in three children aged seven to 10 reported that no one is nearby when they are online. This is also the age group most likely to use gaming consoles, which many parents perceive as safer than smartphones or social media. That perception often leads to reduced supervision.
Attard noted that consoles are frequently placed in children's bedrooms rather than shared family spaces, leaving children physically isolated while gaming. This makes it difficult for parents to supervise online activity, overhear conversations, recognise inappropriate interactions or intervene when something goes wrong. She said that technological tools cannot replace human presence, stating that there is no application capable of guaranteeing safety without an engaged adult nearby.
The study also revealed a striking gap between what parents believe they are doing and what children report experiencing. In more than a third of households, children said there were no rules governing internet use, regardless of age. Dr Attard said this reflects a broader trend seen in research internationally, where parents often overestimate the extent of their supervision.
Reliance on parental controls and child-lock features can further contribute to this disconnect. While such tools may offer some protection, Attard warned that children are often able to bypass them and that they do little to address the social dynamics of online interaction, including online cruelty, bullying and ostracisation, which are associated with severe mental health issues in children. True protection, she said, requires parents to understand the platforms their children use, the games they play, the content they encounter, and who they are communicating with. Just like a parent would never leave their child alone at home with the front door wide open for just anyone to walk in, neither should it be acceptable for them to leave their child alone with a device through which anyone in the world may gain access into their child's bedroom.
An emerging risk identified in the research is in-game gifting, particularly within so-called gacha games. In these settings, adults may offer children virtual currency or digital items to demonstrate friendship and build trust. Over time, this can create emotional dependence and a sense of obligation. Dr Attard described this behaviour as a form of grooming, noting that there is little difference between real-life grooming for sexual exploitation and online grooming through gifts and favours.
Children, she explained, are socialised from a young age to comply with adults and avoid saying no so as not to incur negative consequences. While they are often told not to talk to strangers, they are rarely taught how to recognise inappropriate requests from someone they feel comfortable with, or what to do after they refuse. This leaves them particularly vulnerable when the interaction feels safe rather than threatening.
The research also revealed worrying levels of exposure to violent and sexual content, especially among younger children. Nearly half of children aged seven to 10 reported regularly seeing violent material online, while significant numbers had encountered nudity, sexual activity or content involving self-harm. Attard warned that repeated exposure can lead to desensitisation, where children become emotionally numb to harmful content and are more likely to look away than respond or ask for help. This would also possibly render them less capable of taking decisive and remedial action should they themselves experience such violence in future.
Excessive online interaction also seems to be affecting children's social development. Many children report feeling more confident communicating through messages than speaking face to face, a trend that intensified during the Covid-19 pandemic. Attard noted that some young people avoid phone calls altogether, relying almost exclusively on text-based communication, raising concerns about spoken language skills and real-world social confidence.
While parental involvement is essential, Attard stressed that responsibility for children's online safety cannot rest solely with families. She called for far greater accountability from technology companies and stronger collaboration between policymakers and online platforms. If physical toys must meet safety standards before being sold to children, she argued, digital products used by millions of young users should be held to similar expectations.
She pointed to games that restrict communication to pre-set phrases as an example of a practical and effective safety measure that could significantly reduce risk for younger users. Such measures would not eliminate all dangers, she said, but they would address known vulnerabilities and reduce the likelihood of children feeling falsely safe with unknown adults.
Attard also called for a fundamental rethink of digital literacy education. Current programmes, she said, are designed by adults for children, rather than developed in collaboration with children themselves. In a rapidly evolving digital environment, she argued, it is impossible to teach a fixed list of risks. Instead, children need to develop critical thinking skills and learn how to manage uncertainty, privacy and online relationships.
Ultimately, Attard said, online safety cannot be separated from wider social and economic realities. Long working hours, parental exhaustion and a lack of accessible community spaces all contribute to children spending more time alone online. She rejected the idea that limited "quality time" can compensate for a lack of parental presence, describing it as a damaging myth.
The research, she concluded, shows that many of the risks children face online are already well understood, and that solutions are available. The challenge lies in listening to children's experiences, recognising that feeling safe online does not always mean being safe, and acting early to prevent harm rather than responding after it occurs.