Digital divide

Draft

Types of digital divides

There are several forms of digital divides. We divide among three types:

(1) Those who have computers and Internet access vs. those who don't

(2) Those who are able to use digital contents vs. those who don't

(3) those who are able to produce digital contents vs. those who don't.

Types of media users

According to several studies (e.g. Nilsen. 2006), large communities follow a 90-9-1 rule (see also knowledge management), i.e.

• 1% contributes a lot
• 9% occasionally contribute
• 90% are so-called lurkers, i.e. just consume

Brandtzaeg & Heim, however found out the in small communities, a 50-30-20 rules can be identified:

• 20% contribute
• 30% occasionally contribute
• 50% don't contribute

According to our anecdotal experience with students, this rule may hold if group size is over 15 or if you happen be be lucky ...

The most challenging divide for education is neither (1) nor (2) but (3). Learners and teachers able to create tangible knowledge, can do so under any conditions. We suspect that some politically motivated initiatives to bridge the technical divide rather may enforce divide of type 3, i.e. we formulate the working hypothesis that access to Internet in some cultures rather will reinforce passive consumption that active production as far as education is concerned and this is a serious threat to the usefulness of OER.

Brandtzaeg (2010) meta-analysis of 22 studies introduced a unified Media-User Typology (MUT) that combines two dimensions: frequency of media use and variety of media use. According to the author “MUT will allow a more nuanced approach when investigating the association between media usage and social implications such as the digital divide.” Below we summarize two tables presented in the study (table 6 and table 3)

User types	Frequency of use	Variety of use	Typical activity	Typical platform	Studies	Other labels
(1) Non-users	No use	No use	No	All	Largest of all user types	Non-Internet users, Off the net, Inactives, Non-users, Non-users, Anxiety,
(2) Sporadics	Low use	Low variety	No particular activity, low interest, newcomers	All	Found in 20 studies	Followers, Sporadics, Laggards, Confused and Adverse, Followers, Indifferents, Indifferent, Media Lite, Average users, Inexperienced experimenters, Risk-averse doubters, Spectators, Connected but hassled, Basic users, Occasional users, Limited users, Approval, e-Laggards, Traditional shoppers, Newcomers, Low media users
(3) Debaters	Medium use	Medium variety	Discussion and information acquisition and exchange. Purposeful action	Blogs and Social Networking sites (SNS)	Only found in 2-3 studies	Debaters, Contributors, (Creators).
(4) Entertainment users	Medium use	Medium variety	Gaming or passively watching videos, but also advanced use, such as UGC, programming, and shopping	New media in general	Found in 10 studies.	Attention seekers, Entertainment usage, Gameboy usage, VidKids, Entertainment users, Entertainment, Social recreation, Moderate users, Experimenters, Screen Entertainment Fans
(5) Socializers	Medium use	Medium variety	Socializing, keeping in touch with friends and family, and connecting with new acquaintances. Active social life, but less organised and purposeful, more spontaneous and flexible.	SNS	Identified in nine studies	Alpha socialisers, Faithfuls Socializers, Socializers, Sociability, The Connectors, Joiners, Communication usage, Minglers
(6) Lurkers	Medium use	Low variety	Lurking, time-killing	SNSs, user-generated sites, shopping, and new media in general	Only identified in five studies	Interactors, On–off shoppers, Lurkers, Lurkers, Tourists
(7) Instrumental users	Medium use	Medium variety	Choose media content for information and civic purposes, utility oriented, often work related, searching for e-Government or public information. Low on entertainment use. When shopping, comparing brands and promotional offers	New media in general, including Internet , and online shopping	Identified in 16 studies.	Functionals, Utility, Productivity Enhancers, Spectators, Utility usage, Devotees, Utility users, Narrow frequent users , Specialized users, Internet transactions, (Restricted), Reserved information seekers, Financial management, Comparison shopper, Broad users, Dual shopper, Information exchange, Utilitarians
(8) Advanced users	High use	High variety	All (gaming, homepage design, shopping, programming, video, e-Government and UGC, etc.)	All	Identified in 20 studies	Actives, Omnivorse, Lacklusters Veterans, Collectors, Reciprocity, Advanced usage, Insiders, Advanced users, Broad frequent users, Intense users, Enthusiasts, Open-minded online shoppers, Confidence, Complex Design, Unconcerned Internet users, Preferences, Information surfer (shopping), Netizens, Specialists, All-round users, Active contributors

On side note: We formulate the following extra working hypothesis:

• succesful academics (in terms of career advancement) are instrumental (but not "advanced") users.
• The younger so-called "digital natives" are prominent in types 4 and 5

Bibliography

• Brandtzæg, P.B., & Heim, J. (2009). Social Network Sites – A Typology of Users. International Journal of Web Based Communities (IJWBC),

• Brandtzæg, P.B. (2010). Towards a unified Media-User Typology (MUT): A meta-analysis and review of the research literature on media-user typologies, Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (5), 940-956. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.008

Links

• Innovation in online communities - Towards community-centric design Slides by Petter Bae Brandtzaeg.

• IBLF's Digital Partnership: a private sector initiative
  • digitaldivide.org: An overview of some of the issues involved and criticism of current private sector initiatives.