La nueva frontera de la desigualdad digitalla brecha participativa

  1. José M. Robles Morales 1
  2. Mirko Antino 1
  3. Stefano De Marco 1
  4. Josep A. Lobera 2
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

  2. 2 Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01cby8j38

Revista:
REIS: Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas

ISSN: 0210-5233

Año de publicación: 2016

Número: 156

Páginas: 97-116

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5477/CIS/REIS.156.97 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: REIS: Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas

Resumen

En este trabajo estudiamos la relación entre participación digital y brecha participativa. Mientras que la participación digital hace referencia al uso de Internet por parte de los ciudadanos para producir bienes culturales que son posteriormente compartidos a escala global, la brecha participativa se define como el conjunto de desigualdades que genera una distribución irregular de estos usos creativos de Internet. Se examina la brecha participativa desde un enfoque cuantitativo, prestando especial atención al análisis de la brecha participativa política. Concluimos que las desigualdades clásicas que caracterizaban a la brecha digital se trasladan a este nuevo entorno tecnológico. Sin embargo las consecuencias socialmente negativas de la brecha participativa exceden a las de su antecesora.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

Este artículo se ha podido realizar gracias a los Proyectos del Plan Nacional de I+D+I CSO2009-13424 y CSO2012-35688.

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Benkler, Yochai (2006). The Wealth of Notworks: How Social Production Transfors Markets and Freedom. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
  • Benkler, Yochai and Nissenbaum, Helen (2006). “Commons Based Peer Production and Virtue”. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(4): 394- 419.
  • Bennett, W. Lance and Segerberg, Alexandra (2012). The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bimber, Bruce (2000). “Measuring the Gender Gap on the Internet”. Social Science Quarterly, 81: 868-876.
  • Blank, Grant (2013). “Who Creates Content? Stratification and Content Creation on the Internet”. Information, Communication and Society, 16(4): 590-612.
  • Bonfadelli, Heinz (2002). “The Internet and Knowledge Gaps. A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation”. European Journal of Communication, 17(1): 65-84.
  • Borge, Rosa and Cardenal, Ana S. (2011). “Surfing the Net: A Pathway to Participation for the Politically Uninterested?”. Policy and Internet, 3 (1): 1-29.
  • Castells, Manuel (1997). La Era de la Información. Vol. I: La Sociedad Red. Madrid: Alianza Editoria
  • Castells, Manuel (2015). Redes de indignación y esperanza. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
  • Correa, Teresa (2010). “The Participation Divide among “online experts”: Experience, Skills and Psychological Factors as Predictors of College Students’ Web Content Creation”. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 16(1): 71-92.
  • Deursen, Alexander van and Dijk, Jan van (2009). “Improving Digital Skills for the Use of Online Public Information and Services”. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2): 333-340.
  • Dijk, Jan van (2005). The Deepening Divide. Inequality in the Information Society. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
  • Dijk, Jan van (2006). “Digital Divide Research, Achievements and Shortcomings”. Poetics, 34(4): 221-235.
  • Dijk, Jan van (2013). “A Theory of the Digital Divide. The Digital Divide”. In: Ragnedda, M. and Muschert, G. W. (eds.). The Digital Divide: The Internet and Social Inequality in International Perspective. New York: Routledge.
  • DiMaggio, Paul and Hargittai, Eszter (2001). “From the Digital Divide to Digital Inequality. Studying Internet Use as Penetration Increase”. Working Paper 15. Centre for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies.
  • DiMaggio, Paul et al. (2004). “From Unequal Access to Differentiated Use: A Literature Review and Agenda for Research on Digital Inequality”. In: Neckerman, K. M. (ed.). Social Inequality. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Hargittai, Eszter and Walejko, Gina (2008). “The Participation Divide: Content Creation and Sharing in the Digital Age”. Information, Communication and Society, 11(2): 239-256.
  • Hassani, Sara N. (2006). “Locating Digital Divides at Home, Work, and Everywhere Else”. Poetics, 34(4): 250-272.
  • Hoffmann, Christian P.; Lutz, Christoph and Meckel, Miriam (2014). “Content Creation on the Internet a Social Cognitive Perspective on the Participation Divide”. ICA Annual Conference 2014, CAT Panel “Digital Divides“, Seattle, May, 26.
  • Hoffman, Donna L.; Novak, Thomas P. and Scholosser, Ann E. (2001). “The Evolution of Digital Divide: Examining Relationship of Race to Internet Access and Usage over Time”. In: Compaine, B. M. (ed.). The Digital Divide. Facing a Crisis or Creating a Myth? Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
  • Howard, Philip E.; Rainie, Lee and Jones, Steve (2002). “Days and Nights on the Internet”. In: Wellman, B. and Haythornthwaite, C. (eds.). The Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
  • Jenkins, Henry (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.
  • Kreiss, Daniel; Finn, Megan and Turner, Fred (2011). “The Limits of Peer Production: Some Reminders from Max Weber for the Network Society”. New Media and Society, 13(2): 243-259.
  • Laraña, Enrique (1999). La construcción de los movimientos sociales. Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Malhotra, Yogesh and Galletta, Dennis F. (1999). “Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to Account for Social Influence: Theoretical Bases and Empirical Validation”. Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE.
  • Norris, Pippa (2001). Digital Divide? Civic Engagement, Information Poverty and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Olson, Mancur (1978). The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  • Rheingold, Howard (2003). Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus.
  • Rice, Ronald E. and Fuller, Ryan (2013). “Theoretical Perspectives in the Study of Communication and the Internet, 2000-2009”. In: Dutton, W. (ed.). Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Ruiz, M. A.; Pardo A. and San Martín, R. (2010). “Modelos de emociones estructurales”. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1): 34-45.
  • Sampedro, Víctor (2014). El cuarto poder en red. Por un periodismo (de código libre) libre. Madrid: Icaria.
  • Shirky, Clay (2008a). Here Comes Everybody. New York: Penguin Press.
  • Shirky, Clay (2008b). Excedente cognitivo. Creatividad y generosidad en la era conectada. Barcelona: Ediciones Deusto.
  • Schradie, Jen (2011). “The Digital Production Gap: The Digital Divide and Web 2.0 Collide”. Poetics, 39(2): 145-168.
  • Surowiecki, James (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds. New York: Anchor Books.
  • Torres-Albero, Cristóbal; Robles, José Manuel and De Marco, Stefano (2013). “Inequalities in the Information Society: From the Digital Divide to Digital Inequality”. In: López Peláez A. (ed.). The Robotics Divide. A New Frontier in the 21st Century? London, Springer, pp. 173-194.
  • Walsh, Ekaterina O. (2000). The Truth about the Digital Divide. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Forrester.
  • Ward, Stephen and Gibson, Rachel (2009). “European Political Organizations and the Internet: Mobilization, Participation, and Change”. In: Chadwick, A. and Howard, P. N. (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. New York: Routledge.
  • Wring, Dominic and Horrocks, Ivan (2001). “The Transformation of Political Parties”. In: Axford, B. and Huggins, R. (eds.). New Media and Politics. London: Sage.
  • Zabludovsky, Gina (2013). “El concepto de individualización en la sociología clásica y contemporánea”. Política y Cultura, 39: 229-248.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet