Ofer Malamud would tell you that while growing up in a middle-class neighborhood in Hong Kong, he spent long hours playing rudimentary games on his 1980s Apple computer.

Yet Malamud, 35, now an assistant professor at the University of Chicago's Harris School of Public Policy, also would tell you that prior to a recent study he co-wrote, he believed that poor kids used their computer time far more fruitfully — say, for educational pursuits.

In fact, many of us wax idealistically when it comes to poor students and computers. That's why we appreciate initiatives such as those by the international nonprofit One Laptop Per Child, which attempts to bridge the digital divide by distributing laptops to children in developing countries. The thinking is that giving a poor child a computer can go a long way toward improving his life by leveling the academic playing field.

Well, hold on a second.

Malamud's research examines how low-income children fared academically after their families received vouchers to buy computers. Turns out the students didn't fare well at all. Poor students apparently squander their computer time playing games as much as kids of means.

"I have to say I was quite surprised," said Malamud, who co-wrote the study with Cristian Pop-Eleches, an associate professor of economics at Columbia University. "Our main finding was that the introduction of home computers actually lowered academic achievement. In fact, there were no positive effects on academics at all."

The study was conducted in Romania in 2009. It looked at low-income students, ages 6 to 18, whose families qualified for a government voucher program designed to encourage the educational use of computers.

But the study found that the children received significantly lower school grades in math, English and Romanian. In a draft of the professors' paper, which will be published early next year in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, they write: "There is also some suggestive evidence that winning a computer voucher reduced the time spent doing homework, watching TV and reading."

The children, by the way, didn't have Internet access, so we only can imagine how that might have affected their grades.

Two positive findings that emerged from the study were that adolescents performed well on tests that assessed their ability to manipulate three-dimensional objects and, not surprisingly, became more proficient at using the computer.

"The reason we did the study is that we hope there are some lessons we can get from the experience in Romania and other developing countries that are applicable to disadvantaged populations in Chicago and other places around the country," Malamud said.

One lesson is that students tended to do better academically if parents supervised computer use and enforced rules regarding homework. That makes sense, right?

Malamud said that although he was surprised by the findings, he noticed that his colleagues, primarily those with teenagers, were not. They knew that when their own children spent long, unsupervised hours on the computer, the youngsters were likely playing games, connecting with friends on Facebook or trolling the Internet.

Income levels aside, sometimes kids just don't use their time wisely.

I asked Malamud, who has a 1-year-old daughter, if he could extrapolate from his research for his own household. He said he would like to be the kind of parent who exercises control over how his daughter occupies her time, whether in front of the computer or that other ubiquitous time-waster, the television.

"I would hope to steer her toward more valuable activities," he said. "But our research doesn't say what's more valuable. Maybe I can do more research in that regard and complete it before she reaches the age in which she's spending time on the computer."

Considering how early children are mastering technology these days, he already may be running low on time.

dtrice@tribune.com