Technological Socialization and Digital InclusionUnderstanding Digital Literacy Biographies among Young People in Madrid

  1. Daniel Calderón Gómez 1
  1. 1 Department of Social Anthropology and Social Psychology, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain
Revista:
Social Inclusion

ISSN: 2183-2803

Año de publicación: 2020

Título del ejemplar: Digital Inclusion Across the Globe: What Is Being Done to Tackle Digital Inequities?

Volumen: 8

Número: 2

Páginas: 222-232

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.17645/SI.V8I2.2601 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Social Inclusion

Resumen

The main goal of this article is to analyze young people’s technological socialization experiences to build a comprehensive model of the distinctive digital literacies interwoven with their biographies. Considering that digital accessibility is a necessary but not sufficient condition for inclusion, we identify which types of digital literacies are linked to the acquisition of digital competencies, confidence, and dispositions towards the incorporation of ICTs into daily activities; on the other hand, we also identify digital literacies that might engender motivated processes of self-exclusion from the digital realm, therefore reinforcing subjects’ digital exclusion. Methodologically, this article is based on 30 in-depth biographically-oriented qualitative interviews with young people living in the region of Madrid, Spain. Regarding results, four techno-social dimensions are proposed—motivation, degree of formality, degree of sociality, and type of technological domestication—to construct a typology of four ideal forms of digital literacy: unconscious literacy, self-motivated literacy, professional literacy, and social support. To achieve digital inclusion, self-motivation towards using digital technologies is mandatory, but social practices, academic and professional literacy might work as a secondary socialization process that enhance subjects’ affinity with ICTs. Nevertheless, the effect of social support is ambivalent: It could promote digital inclusion among people already interested in digital technologies, but it could also lead to dynamics of self-exclusion among people who are not confident regarding their digital competencies or disinterested in ICTs.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Alonso, L. E. (1998). La mirada cualitativa en sociología [The qualitative look in sociology]. Madrid: Fundamentos.
  • Antonio, A., & Tuffley, D. (2014). The gender digital divide in developing countries. Future Internet, 6(4), 673–687. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi6040673
  • Bolin, G. (2018). Generational analysis as a methodological approach to study mediatised social change. In S. Taipale, T.-A. Wilska, & C. Gilleard (Eds.), Digital technologies and generational identity: ICT usage across the life course (pp. 23–36). Oxon: Routledge.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1979). La distinction. Critique sociale du jugement [Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste]. Paris: Éditions du minuit.
  • Castaño, C., Martín, J., & Martínez, J. L. (2011). La brechadigital de género en España y Europa: Medicióncon indicadores compuestos [The digital divide inSpain and Europe: Measurement about composed indexes].Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas,136, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.136.127
  • Compaine, B. (2001). The digital divide. Facing a crisis or creating a myth? Boston, MA: MIT Press.
  • Courtois, C., & Verdegem, P. (2016). With a little helpfrom my friends: An analysis of the role of socialsupport in digital inequalities. New Media andSociety, 18(8), 1508–1527. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814562162
  • Dutton, W. H., & Reisdorf, B. C. (2019). Cultural dividesand digital inequalities: Attitudes shaping Internetand social media divides. Information Communicationand Society, 22(1), 18–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1353640
  • Erstad, O. (2011). Citizens navigating in literate worlds: The case of digital literacy. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology, and the new literacies (pp. 99–118). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Ghobadi, S., & Ghobadi, Z. (2015). How access gaps interact and shape digital divide: A cognitive investigation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(4), 330–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2013.833650
  • Haight, M., Quan-Haase, A., & Corbett, B. A. (2014).Revisiting the digital divide in Canada: The impactof demographic factors on access to the Internet,level of online activity, and social networkingsite usage. Information, Communication & Society,17(4), 503–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.891633
  • Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday, 7(4), 1–14.
  • Huang, K.-T., Robinson, L., & Cotten, S. R. (2015). Mind the emotional gap: The impact of emotional costs on students learning outcomes. In L. Robinson, S. R. Cotten, J. Schulz, T. M. Hale, & A. Williams (Eds.), Communication and information technologies annual. Digital distinctions and inequalities (Vol. 10, pp. 121–144). Bingley: Emerald Group.
  • Institute of Museum and Library Services, University of Washington, & International City/County Management Association. (2012). Building digital communities: A framework for action. Washington, DC: Institute of Museum and Library Services. Retrieved from https://www.imls.gov/assets/1/AssetManager/ BuildingDigitalCommunities_Framework.pdf
  • Kvasny, L. (2006). The role of the habitus in shaping discoursesabout the digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00242.x
  • Lasén, A., & Casado, E. (2014). Presentación: Convergencias y controversas en torno a las mediaciones tecnológicas de lo ordinario [Presentation: Convergences and controversies about technological mediation of the ordinary]. In A. Lasén & E. Casado (Eds.), Mediaciones tecnológicas. Cuerpos, afectos y subjetividades (pp. 7–18). Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.
  • Lee, H., Park, N., & Hwang, Y. (2015). A new dimensionof the digital divide: Exploring the relationship betweenbroadband connection, smartphone use andcommunication competence. Telematics and Informatics,31(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.02.001
  • Livingstone, S. (2008). Internet literacy: Young people’s negotiation of new online opportunities. In T. McPherson (Ed.), Digital youth, Innovation and the Unexpected (pp. 101–122). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Lupač, P. (2018). Beyond the digital divide. Contextualizing the information society. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
  • Mariën, I., & Prodnik, J. A. (2014). Digital inclusion anduser (dis)empowerment: A critical perspective. Info,16(6), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/info-07-2014-0030
  • Pearce, K. E., & Rice, R. E. (2013). Digital divides fromaccess to activities: Comparing mobile and personalcomputer internet users. Journal of Communication,63(4), 721–744. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12045
  • Ragnedda, M. (2017). The third digital divide: A Weberian approach to digital inequalities. New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Ragnedda, M., Ruiu, M. L., & Addeo, F. (2019). Measuring digital capital: An empirical investigation. New Media and Society. Advance online publication. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1461444819869604
  • Reisdorf, B. C., & Groselj, D. (2017). Internet (non-)usetypes and motivational access: Implications fordigital inequalities research. New Media and Society,19(8), 1157–1176. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815621539
  • Robinson, L. (2009). A taste for the necessary. Information, Communication & Society, 12(4), 488–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180902857678
  • Rojas, V., Straubhaar, J., Spence, J., Roychowdhury, D., Okur, O., Piñon, J., & Fuentes-Bautista, M. (2012). Communities, cultural capital and digital inclusion. Ten years of tracking techno-dispositions and technocapital. In J. Straubhaar, J. Spence, Z. Tufekci, & R. G. Lentz (Eds.), Inequality in the technopolis: Race, class, gender, and the digital divide in Austin (pp. 223–264). Austin, TX: University of Texas.
  • Sefton-Green, J., Nixon, H., & Erstad, O. (2009). Reviewing approaches and perspectives on “digital literacy.” Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(2), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800902741556
  • Silverstone, R. (1993). Domesticating the revolution: Information and communication technologies and everyday life. Aslib Proceedings, 45(9), 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb051328
  • Straubhaar, J. (2012). Conclusion. In J. Straubhaar, J. Spence, Z. Tufekci, & R. G. Lentz (Eds.), Inequality in the technopolis: Race, class, gender, and the digital divide in Austin (pp. 265–277). Austin, TX: University of Texas.
  • Valles, M. S. (2014). Entrevistas cualitativas [Qualitative interviews]. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.
  • van Deursen, A., Courtois, C., & van Dijk, J. (2014). Internet skills, sources of support, and benefiting from Internet use. International Journal of Human- Computer Interaction, 30(4), 278–290. https://doi. org/10.1080/10447318.2013.858458
  • van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2013). The digitaldivide shifts to differences in usage. New Media& Society, 16(3), 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959
  • van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2014). Digital skills. Unlocking the information society. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2015). Toward a multifacetedmodel of internet access for understandingdigital divides: An empirical investigation. The InformationSociety, 31(5), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2015.1069770
  • Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing: Biographic narrative and semi-structured methods. London: Sage.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet