Measuring users' internet skills: A review of past assessments and a look toward the future

New Media and Society

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 612-630

  Litt, Eden ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; competence; digital; internet; literacy; measurement; review; skill; social media

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878169101     PISSN: 14614448     EISSN: 14617315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1461444813475424     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Anderson REThe Handbook of Research on New Literacies. Coiro JKnobel MLankshear C, ed. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC; 2008:67-102.
2. Bandura A.Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.Psychological Review. 1977;84 (2): 191-215.
3. Bennett S,Maton K,Kervin L.The 'digital natives' debate: A critical review of the evidence.British Journal of Educational Technology. 2008;39 (5): 775-786.
4. Bonfadelli H.The internet and knowledge gaps: A theoretical and empirical investigation.European Journal of Communication. 2002;17:65-84.
5. boyddHargittaiE (2010) Facebook privacy settings: Who cares?First Monday15(8). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3086/2589 (accessed 4 September 2012).
6. Bradlow ET,Hoch SJ,Hutchinson JW.An assessment of basic computer proficiency among active internet users: Test construction, calibration, antecedents, and consequences.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2002;27 (3): 237-253.
7. Bubas G,Radosevic D,Hutinski Z.Assessment of computer mediated communication competence: Theory and application in an online environment.Journal of Information and Organizational Sciences. 2003;27 (2): 53-118.
8. BullenMMorganTQayyumA (2011) Digital learners in higher education: Generation is not the issue. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology37(1). Available at: http://cjlt.csj.ualberta.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/550 (accessed 4 September 2012).
9. Bunz U.The computer-email-web (CEW) fluency scale - development and validation.International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2004;17 (4): 477-504.
10. Bunz U.A generational comparison of gender, computer anxiety, and computer-email-web fluency.Studies in Media and Information Literacy Education. 2009;9 (2): 54-69.
11. Calvani A,Fini A,Ranieri M, et al.Are young generations in secondary school digitally competent? A study on Italian teenagers.Computers & Education. 2012;58 (2): 797-807.
12. Coiro J,Knobel M,Lankshear C, et alHandbook of Research on New Literacies. New York: Taylor & Francis Group; 2008:.
13. Correa T.The participation divide among 'online experts': Experience, skills and psychological factors as predictors of college students' web content creation.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2010;16 (1): 71-92.
14. DiMaggio P,Bonikowski B.Make money surfing the web? The impact of internet use on the earnings of U.S. workers.American Sociological Review. 2008;73 (2): 227-250.
15. DiMaggio P,Hargittai E,Celeste C, et alSocial Inequality. Neckerman K, ed. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2004:355-400.
16. Dodge AM,Husain N,Duke NK.Connected kids? K-2 children's use and understanding of the internet.Language Arts. 2011;89 (2): 86-98.
17. Eachus P,Cassid S.Development of the Web Users Self-Efficacy Scale (WUSE).Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology. 2006;3:199-209.
18. EastinMSLaRoseR (2000) Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication6(1). Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2000.tb00110.x/full (accessed 4 September 2012).
19. Eshet-Alkalai Y.Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era.Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 2004;13 (1): 93-106.
20. Eshet-Alkalai Y,Amichai-Hamburger Y.Experiments in digital literacy.CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2004;7 (4): 421-429.
21. General Social Survey (2004) General Social Survey 2004 (GSS) Questionnaire. 6th ed. Available at: http://publicdata.norc.org/GSS/DOCUMENTS/QUEX/2004/2004%20GSS%20V6.pdf (accessed 4 September 2012).
22. Gui M,Argentin G.Digital skills of internet natives: Different forms of internet literacy in a random sample of northern Italian high school students.New Media & Society. 2011;13 (6): 963-980.
23. Hargittai E.Beyond logs and surveys: In-depth measures of people's web use skills.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2002a;23 (14): 1239-1244.
24. HargittaiE (2002b) Second-level digital divide: Differences in people's online skills. First Monday4(7). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/942/864 (accessed 4 September 2012).
25. Hargittai E.Survey measures of web-oriented digital literacy.Social Science Computer Review. 2005;23 (3): 371-379.
26. Hargittai E.An update on survey measures of web-oriented digital literacy.Social Science Computer Review. 2009;27 (1): 130-137.
27. Hargittai E.Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the 'Net Generation'.Sociological Inquiry. 2010;80 (1): 92-113.
28. Hargittai E,Hinnant A.Digital inequality: Differences in young adults' use of the internet.Communication Research. 2008;35 (5): 602-621.
29. Hargittai E,Hsieh YP.Succinct survey measures of web-use skills.Social Science Computer Review. 2012;30 (1): 95-107.
30. Hargittai E,Litt E.The tweet smell of celebrity success: Explaining variation in Twitter adoption among a diverse group of young adults.New Media & Society. 2011;13 (5): 824-842.
31. Hargittai E,Shafer S.Differences in actual and perceived online skills: The role of gender.Social Science Quarterly. 2006;87 (2): 432-448.
32. Hargittai E,Walejko G.The participation divide: Content creation and sharing in the digital age.Information, Communication & Society. 2008;11 (2): 239-256.
33. Hassani SN.Locating digital divides at home, work, and everywhere else.Poetics. 2006;34 (4-5): 250-272.
34. Haythornthwaite C.Social facilitators and inhibitors to online fluency. In:. Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii international conference on system science; 2007Waikoloa, HI; 2007.
35. Helsper E.Internet use and opinion formation in countries with different ICT contexts.Observatorio (OBS*). 2008;2 (3): 121-149.
36. Helsper E,Eynon R.Digital natives: Where is the evidence?.British Educational Research Journal. 2010;36 (3): 503-520.
37. Holloway SL,Valentine G.'It's only as stupid as you are': Children's and adults' negotiation of ICT competence at home and at school.Social & Cultural Geography. 2001;2 (1): 25-42.
38. International Telecommunication Union (2011) Individuals using the internet per 100 inhabitants, 2001-2011. Available at: www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/statistics/material/excel/20112/ictwebsite/Internet_users_01-11.xls (accessed 4 September 2012).
39. Ito M,Baumer S,Bittanti M, et alHanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2009:.
40. Jenkins H,Purushatma R,Weigel M, et alConfronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2009:.
41. Jones C,Ramanau R,Cross S, et al.Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university?.Computers & Education. 2010;54 (3): 722-732.
42. Junco R,Cotten SR.No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance.Computers & Education. 2012;59 (2): 505-514.
43. Knobel M,Lankshear CDigital Literacies, Concepts, Policies and Practices. Lankshear CKnobel M, ed. New York: Peter Lang; 2008:249-278.
44. Leander KMHandbook of Research on New Literacies. Coiro JKnobel MLankshear C, ed. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC; 2008:33-65.
45. Leander KM,McKim KK.Tracing the everyday 'sitings' of adolescents on the internet: A strategic adaptation of ethnography across online and offline spaces.Education, Communication & Information. 2003;3 (2): 211-240.
46. Leu DJ,Kinzer CK,Coiro J, et alTheoretical Models and Processes of Reading. 2004) Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. In: RudellRBUnrauN (eds) Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. 5th ed.Newark, DE: International Reading Association, pp.1568-1611.Rudell RBUnrau N, ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association; 2004:1568-1611.
47. Leung L,Lee PSN.Impact of internet literacy, internet addiction symptoms, and internet activities on academic performance.Social Science Computer Review. 2012;30 (4): 403-418.
48. Litt E.Knock, knock. Who's there? The imagined audience.Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 2012;56 (3): 330-345.
49. Livingstone S.What is media literacy?.InterMedia. 2004;32 (3): 18-20.
50. Livingstone S,Helsper E.Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people, and the digital divide.New Media & Society. 2007;9 (4): 671-696.
51. Livingstone S,Helsper E.Balancing opportunities and risks in teenagers' use of the internet: The role of online skills and internet self-efficacy.New Media & Society. 2010;12 (2): 309-329.
52. Livingstone S,Van Couvering E,Thumim NHandbook of Research on New Literacies. Coiro JKnobel MLankshear C, ed. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC; 2008:103-132.
53. Odendaal W,Malcolm C,Savahl S, et al.Adolescents, their parents, and information and communication technologies: Exploring adolescents' perceptions on how these technologies present in parent-adolescent relationships.Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology. 2006;6 (1): 1-8.
54. Page K,Uncles M.Consumer knowledge of the World Wide Web: Conceptualization and measurement.Psychology & Marketing. 2004;21 (8): 573-591.
55. Palfrey J,Gasser UBorn Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. Philadelphia, PA: Basic Books; 2010:.
56. Pask JM,Saunders ES.Differentiating information skills and computer skills: A factor analytic approach.Libraries and the Academy. 2004;4 (1): 61-73.
57. Potosky D.The internet knowledge (iKnow) measure.Computers in Human Behavior. 2007;23 (6): 337-348.
58. Prensky M.Digital natives, digital immigrants.On the Horizon. 2001;9:1-6.
59. RadovanovicD (2011) Digital divide and social media: Connectivity doesn't end the digital divide, skills do. Available at: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/12/14/digital-divide-and-social-media-connectivity-doesnt-end-the-digital-divide-skills-do/ (accessed 4 September 2012).
60. Smith SD,Borreson Caruso JThe ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2010 (ECAR Research Study). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research; 2010:.
61. SonckNLivingstoneSKuiperE. (2011) Digital literacy and safety skills. EU Kids Online, EU Kids Online Network, London, UK. Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/33733/ (accessed 4 September 2012).
62. Spitzberg BH.Preliminary development of a model and measure of computer-mediated communication (CMC) competence.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2006;11 (2): 629-666.
63. Tapscott DGrowing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1998:.
64. Tripp LM.'The computer is not for you to be looking around, it is for schoolwork': Challenges for digital inclusion as Latino immigrant families negotiate children's access to the internet.New Media & Society. 2011;13 (4): 552-567.
65. Van Deursen A.Internet skill-related problems in accessing online health information.International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2012;81 (1): 61-72.
66. Van Deursen A,Van Dijk J.Improving digital skills for the use of online public information and services.Government Information Quarterly. 2009;26 (2): 333-340.
67. Van Deursen A,Van Dijk J.Internet skills and the digital divide.New Media & Society. 2010;13 (6): 893-911.
68. Van Deursen A,Van Dijk J,Peters O.Proposing a survey instrument for measuring operational, formal, information and strategic internet skills.International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2012;28 (12): 827-837.
69. Warschauer MTechnology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2003:.
70. Yardi S,Bruckman A.Social and technical challenges in parenting teens' social media use. ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI'11); 2011Vancouver, BC, Canada; 2011.
71. Zimic S.Not so 'techno-savvy': Challenging the stereotypical images of the 'Net generation'.Digital Culture & Education. 2009;1 (2): 129-144.