Apart from technology: Understanding people's non-use of information and communication technologies in everyday life

Technology in Society

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 99-116

  Selwyn, Neil ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Agency; Choice; Digital device; Information and communications technology; Non use; Resistance

Indexed keywords

DIGITAL INSTRUMENTS; INFORMATION ANALYSIS; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

SOCIAL REALITIES;

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS;

COMMUNICATION; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0037281461     PISSN: 0160791X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0160-791X(02)00062-3     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Wills M. Bridging the digital divide. Adults Learning 1999; Dec:10-11.
2. Markey E. (1994) cited in Krieg R. Information technology and low-income, inner city communities. J Urban Technol, 1995; 3(1):1-17.
3. US Department of Commerce. Falling through the net: a survey of the "have nots" in rural and urban America. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce; 1995.
4. Howland J. The 'digital divide': are we becoming a world of technological 'haves' and 'have-nots'? Electronic Library 1998;16(5):287-9.
5. Wilson A. The information rich and the information poor. ASLIB Proc. 1987;39(1):1-6.
6. Black K. The information poor. RQ 1986;25(4):517-8.
7. Doctor R. Information technologies and social equity-confronting the revolution. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. 1991;42(3):216-28.
8. Tichenor P, Donohue G, Olien C. Mass media and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opin Q 1970;34:158-70.
9. Colby D. Conceptualising the 'digital divide': closing the 'gap' by creating a post-modern network that distributes the productive power of speech. Commun. Law Policy 2001;6:123-73.
10. Webster F. Theories of the information society. London: Routledge, 1995.
11. Murdock G. Tackling the digital divide: evidence and intervention. Paper given to The Digital Divide Day Seminar; 2002 Feb 19. Coventry: British Educational Communications and Technology Agency; 2002.
12. Toulouse C. Introduction. In: Toulouse C, Luke T, editors. The politics of cyberspace. London: Routledge; 1997.
13. Selwyn N. Defining the digital divide: developing a theoretical understanding of inequalities in the information age. Occasional paper 49, Cardiff University School of Social Sciences; 2002.
14. Wilson E. Closing the digital divide: an initial review. Washington, DC: Internet Policy Institute; 2000.
15. Kanter RM. World class: thriving locally in the global economy. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.
16. Neice D. Measures of participation in the digital techno-structure: internet access. ACTS/FAIR working paper no. 44, Science Policy Research Unit, Brighton; 1998.
17. Bauer M. Resistance to new technology and its effects on nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology. In: Bauer M, editor. Resistance to new technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
18. Haywood T. Global networks and the myth of equality. In: Loader B, editor. Cyberspace divide: equality agency and policy in the information society. London: Routledge; 1998.
19. Murdock G, Hartmann P, Gray P. Conceptualising home computing: resources and practices. In: Heap N, Thomas R, Einon G, editors. Information technology and society. Mason, R and Mackay, H. London: Sage; 1996.
20. O'Leary J. Computer at home provides advantage at school. The Times 1998; Jul 6:8.
21. Kling R. Can the "next-generation internet" effectively support "ordinary citizens"? The Information Society 1999;15:57-63.
22. Bucy E. Social access to the internet. Harvard Int. J. Press-Politics 2000;5(1):50-61.
23. Krieg R. Information technology and low-income, inner city communities. J. Urban Technol. 1995;3(1):1-17.
24. Kay R. Predicting student teacher commitment to the use of computers. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 1990;6:299-309.
25. Todman J, Lawrenson H. Computer anxiety in primary school children and university students. Br. Educ. Res. J. 1992;18:63-72.
26. Loyd B, Loyd D, Gressard C. Gender and computer experience as factors in the computer attitudes of middle school students. J. Early Adolesc. 1987;7(1):13-9.
27. Durndell A, Macleod H, Siann G. A survey of attitudes to, knowledge about and experience of computers. Comput. Educ. 1987;11(3):167-75.
28. Schumacher P, Morahan-Martin J, Olinsky A. Computer experiences, attitudes, computer and mathematical anxiety, and grades of MBA students. Collegiate Microcomput. 1993;11(3):183-93.
29. Todman J, Monaghan E. Qualitative differences in computer experience, computer anxiety, and students' use of computers: a path model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 1994;10(4):529-39.
30. Miller D. The effects of a short LOGO course on primary children's attitudes to computers. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 1994;25(1):61-3.
31. Morris M, Venkatesh V. Age differences in technology adoption decisions: implications for a changing work force. Personnel Psychol. 2000;53(2):375-403.
32. Ellen P, Bearden W, Sharma S. Resistance to technological innovations: an examination of the role of self-efficacy and performance satisfaction. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 1991;19(4):297-307.
33. Ajzen I. Attitudes, personality and behaviour. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1988.
34. Miller F, Varman N. The effects of psychosocial factors on Indian children's attitudes toward computers. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 1994;10(3):223-38.
35. Shashaani L. Gender differences in mathematics experience and attitude and their relation to computer attitude. Educ. Technol. 1995;35(3):32-9.
36. Offir B, Golub M, Cohen-Fridel S. Attitudes toward courseware as a function of high school students' creativity level. IFIP Trans. A 1993;A-34:211-6.
37. Katz Y. Self-image, locus of control and computer-related attitudes. IFIP Trans. A 1994;A-46:105-9.
38. Shashaani L. Gender-based differences in attitudes toward computers. Comput. Educ. 1993;20(2):169-81.
39. Colley A, Gale M, Harris T. Effects of gender role identity and experience on computer attitude components. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 1994;10(2):129-37.
40. Turkle S. Computational reticence: why women fear the intimate machine. In: Kramarae C, editor. Technology and women's voices. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1988.
41. Brosnan M, Davidson M. Computerphobia-is it a particularly female phenomenon? The Psychologist 1994; Feb:73-8.
42. Kennewell S. Computing for the terrified. Computers and Education 1992;18(1-3):195-200.
43. Van Dijk J. The network society: social aspects of new media. trans. Spoorenberg L London: Sage, 1999.
44. Turkle S. The second self: computers and the human spirit. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1984.
45. Turkle S. Life on the screen. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.
46. Besser H. From internet to information superhighway. In: Brook J, Boal IA, editors. Resisting the virtual life: the culture and politics of information. San Francisco: City Lights; 1995.
47. Miller H. The social psychology of objects. Paper presented at the Understanding the Social World Conference, University of Huddersfield; 1996. Available from: www.ntu.ac.uk/soc/psych/miller/objects.htm.
48. Norman D. Things that make us smart. New York: Addison-Wesley, 1993.
49. Rogers E. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.
50. Rogers E. The critical mass in the diffusion of information technologies. In: Carnivale M, Lucertini M, Nicosia S, editors. Modelling the innovation: communications, automation and information systems. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers; 1990.
51. Grantham C, Vaske J. Predicting the usage of an advanced communication technology. Behav. Inform. Technol. 1985;4(4):327-35.
52. Mendoza M. The global digital divide: exploring the relation between core national computing and national capacity and progress in human development over the last decade' Unpublished PhD dissertation, Tulane University, New Orleans; 2001.
53. Rogers E. The digital divide. Convergence 2001;7(4):96-111.
54. Higgins S, Shanklin W. Seeking mass market acceptance for high technology consumer products. J. Consumer Market. 1992;9(1):5-14.
55. Wei R. From luxury to utility: a longitudinal analysis of cell phone laggards. Journalism Mass Commun. Q. 2001;78(4):702-19.
56. Kingsley P, Anderson T. Facing life without the internet. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 1998;8(4):303-12.
57. Oliver P, Marwell G, Teixeira R. A theory of critical mass: interdependence, group heterogeneity, and the production of collective action. Am. J. Sociol. 1985;91(3):552-6.
58. Markus ML. Toward a "critical mass" theory of interactive media: universal access, interdependence and diffusion. Commun. Res. 1987;14(5):491-511.
59. Lievrouw L. Our own devices: heterotopic communication, discourse, and culture in the information society. Inform. Soc. 1998;14(2):83-96.
60. Bauer M. Towards a functional definition of resistance. In: Bauer M, editor. Resistance to new technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
61. Bauer M. Technophobia: a misleading conception of resistance to new technology. In: Bauer M, editor. Resistance to new technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
62. Bruland K. Patterns of resistance to new technologies in Scandinavia: an historical perspective. In: Bauer M, editor. Resistance to new technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
63. Chatman E. The impoverished life-world of outsiders. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. 1996;47(3):193-206.
64. Orlikowski W. The duality of technology: rethinking the concept of technology in organisations. Organ. Sci. 1992;3(3):398-427.
65. Silverstone R. Future imperfect: information and communication technologies in everyday life. In: Dutton W, editor. Information and communications technologies: visions and realities. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996.
66. Rogers E, Shoemaker F. Communication of innovations. Free Press: New York, 1971.
67. Wilson P. Situational relevance. Inform. Storage Retrieval 1973;9:457-71.
68. Balnaves M, Caputi P. Technological wealth and the evaluation of information poverty. Media Int. Aust. 1997;83:92-102.
69. Berman Y, Phillips D. Information and social quality. Aslib Proc. 2001;53(5):179-81.
70. O'Neil D. Assessing community informatics: a review of methodological approaches for evaluating community networks and community technology centres. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 2002;12(1):76-102.
71. Haddon L. Social exclusion and information and communication technologies: lessons from studies of single parents and the young elderly. New Media Soc. 2000;2(4):387-408.
72. Silverstone R, Hirsch E, Morley D. The moral economy of the household. In: Silverstone R, Hirsh E, editors. Consuming technologies: media and information in domestic spaces. London: Routledge; 1992.
73. Heller F. The technological imperative and the quality of employment. New Technol. Work Employment 1987;2(1):19-26.
74. Rolfe H. In the name of progress? Skill and attitude toward technological change. New Technol. Work Employment 1990;5(2):107-21.
75. Facer K, Furlong R. Beyond the myth of the 'cyberkid': young people at the margins of the information revolution. J. Youth Stud. 2001;4(4):451-69.
76. Giddens A. The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity, 1984.
77. Woolgar S. The turn to technology in social studies of science. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 1991;16:20-50.
78. Pinch TJ, Bijker WE. The social construction of facts and artefacts: or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Soc. Stud. Sci. 1984;14:399-442.
79. Woolgar S. Technologies as cultural artefacts. In: Dutton W, editor. Information and communication technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996.
80. Grint K, Woolgar S. The machine at work: technology, work and organisation. Cambridge: Polity, 1997.
81. Powell W. Explaining technological change. Am. J. Sociol. 1987;93(1):185-97.
82. De Certeau M. The practice of everyday life. [trans. Rendall S] Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.
83. Doctor R. Seeking equity in the national information infrastructure. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 1994;4(3):9-22.
84. Krieg R. Information technology and low-income, inner city communities. J. Urban Technol. 1995;3(1):1-17.
85. Frissen V. ICTs in the rush hour of life. Inform. Soc. 2000;16:65-75. Neil Selwyn is a lecturer at Cardiff University School of Social Sciences in the UK where his research focuses on the permeation of new technologies in social settings. He is currently funded by the Economic and Social Research Council to study adults' use and non-use of technology for learning.