ARTICLE 1149_0_11309-2.pdf

    International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,  5  (3),  1-­‐‑…..       International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences   www.iojes.net   ISSN:  1309-­‐‑2707   The  Digital  User  of  Social  Networks:  A  Comparative,  Transcultural  and   Intergenerational  Study   Jon  Altuna,  Hasan  Aydin,  Burhan  Ozfidan,  Nere  Amenabav     University  of  the  Basque  Country,  Spain;  Yildiz  Technical  University,  Turkey;  Ohio  University,  USA;  University  of  the  Basque  Country,  Spain.         A R T I C L E   I N F O   Article  History:   Received  07.12.2013   Received  in  revised  form   19.09.2013   Accepted  21.10.2013   Available  online  Tarih   girmek  için  burayı   tıklatın.   A B S T R A C T       This  article  presents  the  results  of  a  research  study  carried  out  in  2010  and  2011  on  the  evolution  of   the  digital  divide  in  two  different  cultural  contexts:  Europe  and  the  United  States  of  America.  Using   an   Internet-­‐‑based   questionnaire   parents   and   teenagers   were   surveyed   regarding   some   variables   related  to  their  digital  skills  and  their  participation  in  social  networks.  Their  answers  were  analyzed   taking   into   account   a   range   of   factors   such   as   age,   gender   and   place   of   residence.   The   results   highlight   that   there   are   significant   differences   between   the   United   States   of   America   and   Europe   regarding  the  presence  of  parents  and  teens  on  social  networks,  even  though  the  generational  digital   divide  decreases  between  minors  and  parents  in  both  cultural  contexts   ©  2014  IOJES.  All  rights  reserved   1   Keywords:   Digital   divide,   Digital   Gap,   Internet,   Social   Network,   Information   and   communication   technology   (ICT),  Digital  User,  Cross-­‐‑cultural  Study,  and  Intergenerational  Study       Introduction   The  Internet  has  ushered  in  a  new  era  and  culture  based  on  the  access  of  information,  the  participation   of   users   generating   opinions,   and   the   creation   of   social   networks.   It   has   constructed   a   new   digital   environment  of  relationships,  profiles,  and  information,  becoming  a  tool  of  communication  and  a  space  for   leisure.  Twenty-­‐‑first-­‐‑century  children  are  digital  natives  who  have  learnt  to  multitask  through  the  Internet   and   to   manage   multiple   screens   through   information   and   communication   technologies   (ICTs)   (Gurpegui,   2010).  The  parents,  as  digital  immigrants,  have  opened  a  digital  divide  with  respect  to  their  children  in  the   knowledge  of  computer  applications  and  the  use  of  ICTs.  Internet,  videogames,  mobile  phones,  iPods,  and   cameras,  among  other  digital  tools,  are  commonly  used  by  the  children  and  perceived  as  inaccessible  by  the   parents  (UNESCO,  2010).     Teenagers   voluntarily   relinquish   their   personal   information   in   order   to   join   social   networks   on   the   Internet.   Subsequently,   they   are   surprised   when   their   parents   read   their   online   comments.   Also,   communities  and  educational  institutions  are  astonished  by  the  personal  information  posted  online  by  teens   and   their   online   activities   outside   of   school.   Beniger   (1986)   argues   that   the   publication   of   personal   information   by   teenagers   and   students   have   consequences.   Beniger   also   states   that   mass   media   have   gradually   replaced   interpersonal   communication   as   a   socializing   force.   In   addition,   social   networks   have   become  popular  sites  for  youth  culture  to  explore  relations  and  share  cultural  events.     The   idea   that   a   new   generation   of   students   is   entering   the   educacional   system   has   attracted   recent   attention  from  educators  and  government  officials.  The  name  'ʹdigital  natives'ʹ  or  'ʹnet  generation'ʹ,  attributed   to   these   young   people   means   that   they   have   been   immersed   in   technology   all   their   lives,   acquiring                                                                                                                              Corresponding  author’s  address  :  Department  of  Curriculum  and  Instruction,  Ohio  University,  USA   Telephone:  +1  775-­‐‑  971-­‐‑8370   e-­‐‑mail:  [email protected]     1 International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …       sophisticated  technical  skills  and  learning  preferences  in  which  traditional  education  is  unprepared  to  cope.   Some  studies,  however,  question  the  stereotypical  characterization  of  terms  such  as  "ʺdigital  natives."ʺ  Thus,   Bennett,   Kevin,   and   Maton   (2008)   propose   a   debate   on   these   terms   not   from   empirical   and   theoretical   approaches,  but  from  academic  and  moral  perspectives.         Digital  divide  in  families   The   new   generations   are   capable   of   altering   the   natural   order   in   the   transmission   of   knowledge   by   teaching   adults   the   use   of   specific   technologies,   to   the   surprise   of   their   elders.   The   use   of   Windows’   interfaces   is   as   easy   for   the   children   as   the   mouse´s   double-­‐‑click   are   difficult   for   the   adults.   Multiple,   labyrinthine  screens  with  global  information  are  quickly  understood  by  children  while  adults  long  for  more   logical,  organized,  lineal,  and  sequential  information  (Balaguer,  2006).     Various  studies  and  research  conducted  in  recent  years  show  that  there  has  been  an  increase  in  the  gap   of  Internet  usage  and  knowledge  between  parents  and  their  children.  Albero´s  (2002)  exploratory  study  on   Internet  use  by  Barcelona  teens’  (from  12  to  17  years  old)  shows  that  their  parents  have  not  integrated  the   use   of   the   Internet   into   their   daily   routine.   The   majority   of   parents   are   not   curious   or   interested   in   this   technology.   Contrary   to   their   children,   for   many   parents,   the   use   of   the   Internet   is   work   related.   It   is   not   related  to  their  hobbies  or  associated  with  leisure.  Few  parents  have  taught  their  children  how  to  navigate   the  Internet.  The  lack  of  time  is  one  of  the  reasons  for  the  parents’  poor  knowledge  of  the  use  of  the  Internet.   However,   there   is   other   research   that   qualifies   the   digital   divide   between   generations.   Hasebrink,   Livingstone  and  Haddon  (2008)  in  a  comparative  study  between  2005  and  2008  on  Internet  use  in  parents   and  children,  point  out  that  in  most  European  countries,  parents  use  the  Internet  more  than  their  children.   According  to  this  study,  in  most  countries,  the  proportion  of  parents  online  is  higher  than  the  proportion  of   children.   The   overall   result   seems   to   contradict   the   expectation   that   children   are   more   likely   to   be   online   users  than  their  parents’  generation.  This  contradiction  can  be  solved  by  looking  at  the  age  of  the  children:   The  higher  likelihood  for  parents  to  use  the  internet  is  only  based  on  parents  with  younger  children.     The  current  generation  of  children  and  adolescents  is  the  first  one  that  has  been  educated  in  the  digital   society  (Tapscott,  1998).  A  report  (Feixa,  González,  Martínezy,  &  Porzio,  2002)  sponsored  by  the  Observatori   de   la   Infancia   i   les   Familias   of   Barcelona,   which   combines   statistical   data   and   focus   groups,   concludes   that   teens  and  youngsters  use  new  technologies  to  a  greater  extent  than  adults.  During  2000,  between  23%  and   32%  of  Spanish  youths  (from  14  to  22  years  old)  used  the  Internet.  Within  this  group,  the  largest  percentage   of   users   was   among   boys   from   17   to   22   years   old,   and   the   smallest   percentage   of   users   was   among   girls   between   14   and   16   years   old.   Adults’   use   of   the   Internet   was   much   lower,   particularly   among   women.   Adult  mothers  between  35  and  55  years  old  only  used  the  Internet  in  7%  of  the  cases,  while  the  percentage   for  men  was  about  16%.  Men  and  boys  used  the  Internet  more  and  did  so  more  often.  For  boys  as  well  as   girls  between  14  and  22  years  old,  there  was  a  progressive  increase  in  the  percentage  of  Internet  users  and   the  frequency  of  its  use.  The  location  from  where  they  access  the  Internet  also  varied:  Up  to  19  years  old,   teens  accessed  the  Internet  from  home;  from  20  to  22  years  old,  the  main  access  is  the  university;  and  adults   accessed  it  from  home  as  well  as  work.     Nearly  all  Spanish  teens  have  connected  to  the  Internet  at  some  point,  while  a  great  majority  of  them  do   so  regularly.  Similarly,  most  of  them  learnt  to  use  the  Internet  in  informal  contexts  (i.e.,  not  related  to  formal   education)   while   connecting   to   it   from   home,   a   location   without   any   type   of   usage   restriction.   Within   this   context,  the  Internet  is  essentially  leisure  space  for  Spanish  youngsters.  Moreover,  girls  are  more  proactive  in   exploring   and   using   the   Internet’s   technical   features,   tools,   and   applications.   Regarding   the   use   of   online   social  networks,  one-­‐‑third  of  the  Spanish  youngsters  did  not  use  any  social  network,  blog,  or  photoblog  (e.g.,   Fotolog).  Among  those  who  used  them  in  Spain  as  a  whole,  the  tools  and  services  most  used  are,  by  order  of   importance,  Tuenti  and  Fotolog.  In  Catalonia,  however,  the  most  used  services  are,  by  order  of  importance,   Fotolog  and  Facebook.  In  addition,  girls  are  shown  to  be  more  proactive  in  the  use  of  social  networks  and   photoblogs  (Aranda,  Sánchez-­‐‑Navarro,  &  Tabernero,  2009).     3     However,  there  is  a  great  difference  between  what  parents  believe  regarding  the  quantity  of  time  that   their  children  spend  online  and  the  real  time  indicated  by  their  children.  According  to  the  data  shown  by   the   Norton   Online   Family   Report   (Foresight,   2010),   which   examines   9,800   Internet   users   (adults,   and   children  between  8  and  17  years  old)  in  11  countries—Australia,  Brazil,  Canada,  China,  France,  Germany,   India,   Italy,   Sweden,   the   United   Kingdom,   and   United   States—in   the   US,   6   out   of   10   adults   think   that   parents  should  have  total  control  over  what  children  do  online.  In  Italy,  on  the  contrary,  parents  think  that   they  must  authorize  their  children  to  make  the  correct  decisions  by  themselves.  One  of  the  main  conclusions   of   the   report   is   the   parents’   lack   of   knowledge   regarding   the   impact   of   the   negative   online   incidents   experienced  by  their  children.  Nearly  two-­‐‑thirds  of  the  children  had  had  negative  online  experiences,  while   only  45%  of  the  parents  have  been  aware  of  it.     In  a  similar  study  on  minors’  experiences  and  practices  and  their  use,  risky  or  not,  of  the  Internet  and   new  online  technologies  in  Europe,  Garmendia,  Garitaonandia,  Martínez,  and  Casado  (2011)  state  that  59%   of  Spanish  minors,  between  9  and  16  years  old,  use  online  social  networks.  Taking  into  account  that  in  Spain   the  legal  age  to  register  for  online  social  networks  is  14,  nearly  40%  of  minors  between  9  and  13  years  old   have   a   profile   on   a   social   network.   Regarding   the   information   that   minors   post   on   their   social   network   profiles,   they   are   cautious   about   adding   private   information   such   as   their   address   or   phone   number.   In   Europe,  14%  of  minors  post  that  content,  while  in  Spain  only  9%  do.  Sixty-­‐‑seven  percent  of  Spanish  minors   who  use  social  networks  have  a  private  profile,  so  only  their  friends  can  see  them.  This  percentage  is  higher   than   the   European   average   (43%),   which   tells   us   about   how   conscientious   Spanish   minors   are   regarding   online   privacy.   Only   14%   of   Spanish   minors   affirm   having   a   public   profile   in   comparison   to   26%   of   European   minors.   Regarding   the   risks   of   contacting   unknown   people   through   social   networks,   19%   of   Spanish  minors  (25%  of  European  minors)  state  that  they  keep  in  contact  with  people  that  they  met  online.     Livingstone,   Haddon,   Görzig,   and   Ólafsson’s   (2010)   study   shows   that   in   Italy   the   average   age   of   accessing  the  Internet  for  the  first  time  is  10  years  old,  while  in  the  northern  European  countries,  the  age  is   between  7  and  8  years  old.  Children  from  some  of  the  Baltic  countries  (25%  in  Estonia  and  24%  in  Lithuania),   followed   by   the   UK,   Ireland,   and   Portugal   (5%   each),   Italy   (4%),   and   Turkey   (3%),   are   most   likely   to   have   met  in  person  somebody  who  they  initially  met  on  the  Internet.  The  majority  of  Spanish  minors  (67%)  state   that  the  people  that  they  met  in  person  after  meeting  them  online  were  part  of  their  social  circle—a  friend  or   family   member   of   someone   they   knew   in   person.   Nevertheless,   41%   of   Spanish   minors   say   that   they   have   met  somebody  in  person  that  they  met  for  the  first  time  on  the  Internet.  Initial  studies  conducted  in  the  US   indicate  that  adults,  particularly  parents,  are  not  accepted  as  friends  on  social  networks.  In  general,  parents   are   not   welcome.   The   reasons   for   that   are   related   to   shame,   social   norms,   and   concerns   about   parents.   Underlying   these   reasons   are   different   notions   of   private   and   public.   Students   do   not   seem   to   be   able   to   discern  between  the  two  different  spheres:  the  “public”  and  the  one  that  shows  the  social  individual  in  the   private  sphere  (West,  Lewis  &  Currie,  2009).     More   than   half   (55%)   of   North   American   youngsters   (from   12   to   17   years   old)   use   social   networks   (Lenhart   &   Madden,   2008),   particularly   girls.   For   girls,   social   networks   are   the   main   spaces   to   strengthen   already   established   friendships.   For   boys,   the   networks   offer   opportunities   to   flirt   and   make   new   friends.   Eighty-­‐‑one  percent  of  North  American  parents  and  79%  of  teens  connected  to  social  networks  indicate  that   teens   are   not   careful   enough   about   giving   away   their   personal   information   on   the   Internet.   However,   the   parents   of   the   youngest   teens   are   most   likely   to   pay   attention   to   the   disclosure   of   personal   data   (Lenhart,   2005).     Following  the  aforementioned  research,  we  intend  to  learn  to  what  degree  social  networks  are  changing   the   relationship   between   parents   and   their   children,   We   have   observed   how   an   increasing   number   of   children   start   using   the   Internet   and   social   networks   at   a   younger   age,   and   might   be   exposed   to   new   problems   regarding   the   incorrect   use   of   those   online   tools.   Holloway,   Green   and     Livingstone   (2013)   empathize  that    "ʺthe  one  thing  we  know  for  sure  about  0-­‐‑8  year  olds’  internet  use  is  that  children  in  this  age  group  are   increasingly  going  online”  (p.25).     International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …         Therefore,  many  parents  did  not  know  what  to  do  in  these  situations.  In  these  cases  it  could  be  worst;  it   is   when   their   sons   and   daughters   thought   that   they   could   handle   the   Internet   resources   better   than   their   parents.  So,  sometimes  the  family  cannot  manage  to  resolve  the  problems,  and  they  are  forced  to  ask  for  help   or  leave  the  problem  without  any  solution.  Duerager  and  Livingstone  (2012)  state  as  follows;       Nearly  half  of  European  children  go  online  in  their  bedroom,  and  one  third  go  online  on  a  mobile  phone   or   handheld   device.   Given   the   rise   of   privatized   and   mobile   access,   it   is   difficult   for   parents   to   closely   regulate  their  children’s  safety  (p.1).       In   addition,   teachers   and   educators   are   worried   about   how   solve   some   problems   like   cyber-­‐‑bullying,   sexting,  grooming  and  other  risk  of  bad  Internet  uses  by  teenagers.       The  specific  objectives  in  this  study  are:   1. To  verify  the  intergenerational  and  gender  digital  divides  in  the  studied  contexts.   2. To  understand  the  use  and  presence  of  social  networks  between  parents  and  their  children  in  relation   to  their  cultural  background.   3. To  learn  the  similarities  and  differences  among  the  different  ages  groups  and  cultural  contexts  of  teen   users  of  social  networks  and  their  parents.   4. To  compare  the  results  of  the  previous  studies  on  digital  social  networks  users  for  the  past  two  years.   5. To  detect  the  existence  of  possible  differences  in  use  between  people  of  different  genders.       Method   This   research   is   an   ex   post   facto,   descriptive-­‐‑correlational,   and   cross-­‐‑cultural   study.   It   analyzes   some   indicators  of  the  profiles  of  social  networks  users  in  a  cross-­‐‑cultural  sample  of  teens  between  12  and  17  years   old.       Participants   The  total  sample  is  432  individuals  distributed  in  two  different  cultural  contexts:  within  the  European   context   (N=204),   the   Spanish   State   (N=167;   the   Basque   Country   and   Catalonia),   and   Italy   (N=37   Urbino-­‐‑ Ravena);  and  the  USA  (Reno,  Nevada  and  Elko,  Nevada,  N=228).  The  percentage  of  gender  is  balanced  in  all   cities:   196   men   and   236   women.   In   both   contexts,   the   Western   USA   (Nevada)   and   in   Southern   Europe   (Basque  Country,  Catalonia  in  Spain  and  Urbino-­‐‑Ravena  in  Italy),  the  percentages  of  men  are  45%  and  46%,   respectively.  For  women,  the  percentages  are  55%  and  54%,  respectively.     The  sample  was  obtained  by  convenience  and  takes  into  account  the  following  criteria:  age,  course,  and   type   of   educational   center.   The   students   were   recruited   from   the   first   year   of   middle   school   to   the   second   year   of   high   school.   The   study   was   carried   out   in   two   or   more   centers—public   and/or   private   or   with   different  socio-­‐‑economic  levels,  without  being  on  opposite  extremes—for  each  sub-­‐‑sample.  The  nine  schools   from   which   data   have   been   collected   are   located   in   the   Basque   Country   (3   public   and   2   private   in   the   province  of  Gipuzkoa);  Catalonia  (1  private  center);  Italy  (1  public  center  in  Urbino  and  1  private  center  in   Ravenna);  and  the  US  (2  private  centers:  1  in  Reno  and  the  other  in  Elko).  Socio-­‐‑economic  level  and  center   type   (public-­‐‑private)  variables  have  been  controlled  in  every  analysis  conducted.     Data   was   collected   from   fathers/mothers  and  students.     Variables  and  instruments  of  measure   The  instrument  used  to  collect  the  profile  and/or  digital  user  is  the  Questionnaire  of  Social  Networks,   and  it  was  designed  by  a  research  team  of  the  University  of  the  Basque  Country.  After  the  pilot  test  ended,   the   survey   was   modified   and   simplified.   The   final   questionnaire   has   4   initial   questions   that   collect   the   5     following   data:   age,   gender,   educational   center,   and   information   about   the   family.   In   addition,   the   survey   presents  23  items  that  were  divided  into  4  fields  of  study:  Internet  and  e-­‐‑mail;  Internet  applications  (blogs,   chat,   etc.);   social   networks;   and   mobile   phones.   The   validity   and   reliability   of   the   questionnaire   has   been     supported  by  .822  alfa  cronbach.     The   questions   were   selected   with   the   intention   of   providing   values   on   the   use   and   knowledge   of   different   Internet   applications,   social   networks,   and   even   mobile   phone   applications.   Seven   variables   (1.   Have   an   e-­‐‑mail   account;   2.   Daily   use   of   the   Internet;   3.   Chat   participation;   4.   Have   a   blog;   5.   Be   on   social   networks;  6.  Do  Internet  downloads;  and  7.  Use  own  mobile  phone)  were  grouped  in  a  composite  variable   called  “Digital  User.”  In  this  regard,  we  consider  a  person  to  be  a  “heavy  digital  user”  if  the  person  answers   affirmatively  to  most  of  the  7  dichotomous  variables.  The  reliability  of  the  composite  variable  results  in  .57  in   Cronbach’s   alpha.   This   variable   will   be   compared   with   others   in   order   to   achieve   the   research   objectives   identified  at  the  beginning  of  the  investigation.       Procedure   In   order   to   collect   the   data,   the   survey   was   translated   into   Catalan,   Basque,   English,   and   Italian.   At   a   later   stage,   a   pilot   test   was   conducted   with   a   class   in   order   to   test   the   comprehension   of   the   instrument   before  the  final  test.     The   majority   of   the   participants   responded   to   the   online   version   of   the   questionnaire,   although   there   were   some   that   completed   the   paper   version.   The   participants   were   fathers/mothers   and   minors   who   had   their  parents’  or  guardians’  consent.  The  survey—on  paper  or  online—lasted  for  20  to  25  minutes.     Regarding   the   analysis   of   the   data,   we   used   the   SPSS   program.   In   addition,   we   carried   out   different   types   of   descriptive   and   inferential   analyses   depending   on   the   type   of   variable   being   studied,   such   as   median   comparative   tests   (One   way   Anova)   and   Chi-­‐‑square   analysis.   These   analyses   have   allowed   us   to   learn  about  the  presence  of  differences  in  the  variables  according  to  different  factors;  to  test  the  meaning  of   them;  and  to  know  the  size  of  the  effect,  that´s  to  say,  the  magnitude  of  such  differences.       Results   First  of  all,  we  will  begin  by  showing  general  data  on  the  possible  differences  among  users  by  gender,   territory,   and   age.   Later   on,   we   will   present   more   specific   data   where   other   variables   come   into   play   and   where  social  networks  acquire  more  prominence.         Digital  User  and  Gender       In  order  to  infer  differences  among  users  regarding  gender,  we  carried  out  a   comparison  of  means  as   shown  in  Table  1.                         International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …       Table   1.   Descriptive   analysis   of   the   assessment   of   digital   users   according   to   the   gender   of   the   participants  in  the  simple.       1.5613         Se     .1115   4.339   1.4830   4.268   1.5192   Digital   User       Male     N     196   M     4.183   Female   236   Total   432       Sd                 F   95%  confidence   interval  for  the   average   Limit   Limit   inf.   supe.   3.9637   4.4036   Min     0   Max     7   .0965   4.1488   4.5292   0   7   1.119   .0731   4.1248   4.4122   0   7                 Sig.               Eta2   .291   .003       There  are  no  significant  differences  between  men  and  women.  The  women  have  a  mean  (M)  of  4.339  in   comparison  with  men  who  have  a  mean  of  4.183  out  of  7.     After  analyzing  the  contexts,  we  do  not  observe  important  differences  in  the  use  of  digital  applications   by  gender  (see  Table  2).       Table  2:  Descriptive  analysis  of  the  assessment  of  digital  users  according  to  the  participants’  gender  by   context  in  the  sample.   Western  USA     Context   N   Western  USA   Context  Mean   M   Southern  EUROPE   Context     N   Southern  EUROPE   ContextMean   M   Male   102   4.6569   94   3.6702   Female   126   4.7540   110   3.8636   Total   228   4.7105   204   3.7745   Digital     User         Digital  user  and  place  of  residence  or  context       Another  factor  that  we  analyzed  was  the  place  of  residence.  Although  the  participants’  schools  belong   to   quite   diverse   cities   and   situations,   we   grouped   them   into   two   unique   contexts   that   were   balanced   in   relation  to  the  number  of  subjects  in  order  to  compare  the  differences  between  them.  The  first  group  is  made   up  of  the  schools  and  the  participants  from  the  Western  USA  and  the  second  one  by  the  those  in  Southern   Europe.  The  results  are  shown  in  Table  3.         Table   3:   Descriptive   analysis   of   the   assessment   of   digital   users   according   to   the   participants’   place   of   residence.   95%  confidence         interval  for  the         average         Digital         User     Limit   Limit   F   Sig.   Eta2   Context   N   M   SD   SE     inf.   supe.   Min   Max   7     Western   USA     228   4.710   1.4187   .0939   4.5254   4.8957   0   7     Southern   45.042   .000   .095   Europe     204   3.774   1.4783   .1035   3.5704   3.9786   0   7     Total   432   4.268   1.5192   .0731   4.1248   4.4122   0   7     We  observe  significant  differences  regarding  the  means  obtained  in  the  variable  “Digital  User,”  which   includes   the   use   and   knowledge   of   Internet   services.   For   instance,   Western   USA   participants   present   a   higher  mean  of  4.71  than  Southern  Europeans  3.77,  the  highest  possible  being  7.  Later  on,  in  the  5th  section   of  the  paper,  we  will  come  back  to  this  issue  and  will  present  the  simple  variables  that  shaped  the  “Digital   User”  variable,  which  will  explain  these  significant  differences.     Digital  user  and  differences  between  age  groups     Regarding   age,   we   identify   quite   interesting   results,   which   offer   clues   on   the   nature,   existence,   or   inexistence  of  digital  divides  between  generations,  as  well  as  the  use  and  knowledge  of  these  technologies.         Table   4:   Descriptive   analysis   of   the   assessment   of   digital   users   according   to   the   age   group   of   the   participants.   95%  confidence                     interval  for  the   Digital               average         User               Age  Group           Limit   Limit            F   Sig.   Eta2   N   M   SD   SE   inf.   super.   Min    Max   10-­‐‑12   42   2.666   1.0744   .1657   2.3318   3.0015   0   5   13-­‐‑15   178   4.724   1.6147   .1210   4.4859   4.9636   0   7   16-­‐‑18   82   4.695   1.0851   .1198   4.4567   4.9336   2   7   Average   14.4   302   4.028   1.258   0.136   3.758   4.300   0.66   6.33   30-­‐‑40   25   3.960   1.2741   .2548   3.4341   4.4859   2   6   41-­‐‑50   95   3.926   1.2902   .1323   3.6635   4.1892   1   6   51-­‐‑70   10   3.400   1.2649   .4000   2.4951   4.3049   1   5   Average   44.2   130   3.762   1.2764   0.262   3.1975   4.3266   1.33   5.66   Total   432   4.268   1.5192   .0731   4.1248   4.4122   0   7   18.921   .000   .182   Table  4  shows  the  main  differences  between  the  diverse  age  groups.  Among  the  students,  the  age  group   with   the   highest   digital   use   is   between   13   and   15   years   old   (mean   4.724).   In   the   case   of   families,   those   between  30  and  40  years  old  (within  this  group  is  the  youngest  sub-­‐‑group)  present  the  highest  mean,  3.960.   Although  a  priori  we  may  think  that  there  is  a  considerable  difference  on  the  use  between  these  groups,  this   is  not  the  main  difference  found.     That’s  to  say,  the  highest  distance  in  the  theoretical  digital  divide  is  not  between  teens  and  their  parents   but  between  students  from  10  to  12  years  old,  with  the  lowest  mean  (2.666),  and  teens  from  13  to  15  years  old   (mean  4.724).  This  fact  clearly  questions  the  notion  of  young  people  as  “digital  natives”  according  to  Prensky   (2001)  in  comparison  to  “digital  immigrants”  (fathers  and  mothers).     International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …       Furthermore,   in   this   hypothetical   digital   divide,   there   should   be   a   great   difference   between   young   people   and   older   adults.   However,   the   findings   of   our   study   evidence   a   much   lower   difference   when   comparing  the  mean  of  all  students’  age  groups  with  the  mean  of  parents.  The  students’  mean  is  4.028,  while   the  mean  of  the  parents  is  3.762.     Moreover,   we   cannot   ignore   the   existence   of   considerable   differences   among   certain   age   groups.   For   this  reason,  we  present  the  results  of  the  analysis  of  homogeneous  sub-­‐‑groups  done  by  using  the  test  Tukey   Ba,b  (see  Table  5).       Table  5:  Groups’  medians  in  homogeneous  sub-­‐‑groups   Digital   User   Tukey  Ba,,b   Age  groups   N   Age(10-­‐‑12)   Subset  for  alpha  =  0.05   1   2   3   42   2.6667       Age  (51-­‐‑70)   10   3.4000   3.4000     Age  (41-­‐‑50)   95     3.9263   3.9263   Age  (30-­‐‑40)   25     3.9600   3.9600   Age  (16-­‐‑18)   82       4.6951   Age  (13-­‐‑15)   178       4.7247   a.  Use  the  sample  size  of  the  harmonic  mean  =  31,226;  b.  The  size  of  the  groups  is  not  identical.  The  harmonic   mean  of  the  sizes  of  the  groups  will  be  used.  Type  I  error  levels  are  not  guaranteed.       Table  5  has  been  divided  into  3  blocks.  In  the  first  block,  we  find  the  youngest  students  (from  10  to  12   years   old),   who   have   the   lowest   mean,   together   with   a   good   percentage   of   the   oldest   fathers   and   mothers   (from  51  to  70  years  old).  In  the  second  block,  we  find  nearly  all  fathers  and  mothers  between  30  and  51  years   old  and  some  parents  between  51  and  70  years  old.  They  have  the  intermediate  values.  Finally,  in  the  third   block,   we   find   the   highest   mean,   which   belongs   to   young   people   between   13   and   18   years   old   and   some   fathers  and  mothers  between  41  and  50  years  old.     Consequently,  despite  the  fact  that  there  are  differences  between  the  age  groups  of  participants,  those   are  not  as  evident  as  predicted  in  previous  studies  presented  in  the  first  part  of  this  article,  and  they  are  not   only  related  to  the  generational  gap  between  minors  and  their  parents.  It  is  from  12  years  up  to  the  age  of  18   when   there   is   a   significant   increase   in   the   use   of   digital   applications.   From   19   up   to   the   age   close   to   retirement,  there  is  a  slow  and  progressive  decrease  of  the  use  of  digital  services.  In  short,  the  lowest  use  of   digital   applications   is   related   to   our   youngest   and   oldest   samples   of   participants,   the   teen   years   being   the   highest  peak  in  the  use  of  digital  applications.       Social  networks,  age,  and  differences  between  users     In   this   section,   we   would   like   to   go   farther   in   the   analysis   by   studying   the   participation   of   users   on   social  networks  with  respect  to  age.  In  Table  6,  we  present  the  age  groups  between  10  to  70  years  old,  despite   knowing  that  many  children  under  the  age  of  13  and  people  older  than  51  are  sub-­‐‑groups  that  have  fewer   numbers  of  digital  users.       Table  6:  Descriptive  analysis  of  the  presence  on  social  networks  by  age  group.       Are  you  on  any   social  network?   Chi-­‐‑ Age  groups   Age   (10-­‐‑12)   Age   (13-­‐‑15)   Age   (16-­‐‑18)   Age   (30-­‐‑40)   Age   (41-­‐‑50)   Age   (51-­‐‑70)   Total   Sig.   square   9     No   Yes   Total   N   38   39   5   13   57   6   158   %   90.5%   21.9%   6.1%   52.0%   60.0%   60.0%   36.6%   N   4   139   77   12   38   4   274   %   9.5%   78.1%   93.9%   48.0%   40.0%   40.0%   63.4%   N   42   178   82   25   95   10   432   %   100.0%   100.0%   100.0%   100.0%   100.0%   100.0%   100.0%   129.341   .000     Table   6   shows   the   significant   differences   between   groups,   depending   on   the   age   of   participants,   regarding   their   presence   on   social   networks.   Within   the   students’   groups,   the   age   group   with   the   highest   presence  on  social  networks  is  the  one  between  16  and  18  years  old  (93.9%),  followed  by  the  one  between  13   and  15  years  old  (78.1%).  The  lowest  percentage  belongs  to  the  age  group  under  13  years  old  (9.5%).     Within   the   parents’   groups,   the   age   group   with   the   highest   presence   on   social   networks   is   the   one   between  30  and  40  years  old  (48%),  followed  by  ones  between  41  to  50  years  old  and  older  than  51.       If   we   group   the   values   of   the   students   together,   as   well   as   the   values   of   the   parents   together,   the   differences   regarding   the   presence   on   social   networks   are   evident:   86%   of   young   people   (excluding   those   under  13  years  old)  and  42.6%  of  mothers  and  fathers  have  a  presence  on  social  networks.     We  present  the  results  of  the  analysis  of  homogeneous  sub-­‐‑groups,  done  by  using  the  test  Tukey  Ba,b,  in   order  to  evidence  this  digital  divide  between  students  and  their  families  (see  Table  7).       Table  7:  Groups  mean  in  homogeneous  sub-­‐‑groups:  a.  Use  the  sample  size  of  the  harmonic  median  =   31,226;  b.  The  size  of  the  groups  is  not  identical.  The  harmonic  mean  of  the  sizes  of  the  groups  will  be  used.   Type  I  error  levels  are  not  guaranteed.   Subset  for  alpha  =  0.05   Tukey  Ba,,b   Age  groups   N   1   2   3   Age  (10-­‐‑12)   42   .10       Age  (41-­‐‑50)   95     .40     Age  (51-­‐‑70)   10     .40     Age  (30-­‐‑40)   25     .48     Age  (13-­‐‑15)   178       .78   Age  (16-­‐‑18)   82       .94   As   a   result   of   the   test   (see   Table   7),   those   present   on   online   social   networks   are   divided   into   3   blocks   according  to  age  group.  In  the  first  sub-­‐‑group,  we  find  students  under  12  years  old  whose  participation  on   social   networks   is   quite   low.   In   the   second   sub-­‐‑group,   we   find   fathers   and   mothers   between   30   and   40,   41   and  50,  and  older  than  51  years  old.  In  the  third  sub-­‐‑group,  there  are  students  between  13  and  15  and  16  and   18  years  old.  The  results  evidence  the  existence  of  an  important  digital  divide  regarding  the  social  network   presence  of  teens  (from  12  to  18  years  old)  in  comparison  to  fathers  and  mothers.     Differences   in   the   presence   of   social   networks   and   the   regular   use   of   online   chats   according   to   the   participants’  place  of  residence     After  demonstrating  that  there  are  significant  differences  regarding  the  variable  “digital  user”  between   the  Southern  European  context  and  Americans  from  the  Western  USA  (see  the  second  section  of  the  result   “digital  user  and  place  of  residence  or  context”),  we  analyzed  the  7  dichotomous  variables  to  find  out  where   those  differences  take  place.  The  most  significant  differences  are  found  in  2  of  the  7  variables:  “the  presence   on  social  networks”  and  “the  regular  use  of  online  chats.”   International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …           Table  8:  Percentage  of  presence  on  social  networks  by  place  of  residence  and  type  of  user  (students  and   parents).     Context     Chi-­‐‑square   Sig.   Are  you  on  any  social  network?   Total   Western     Southern   Person   USA   Europe   No   Students   Yes   Total  Students   No   Parents     Yes   Total  Parents   N   %   N   %   N   %     N   %     N   %     N   %     33   18.9%   142   81.1%   175   100.0%   19   35.8%   34   64.2%   53   100.0%   18   19.1%   76   80.9%   94   100.0%   57   74.0%   20   26.0%   77   100.0%   51   19,0%   218   81,0%   269   100.0%   76   58,5%   54   41,5%   130   100.0%   .003   .954   18.841   .000     Table  8  shows  that  there  are  no  significant  differences  between  students  from  13  to  18  years  old  in  the   Western   USA   and   Southern   Europe.   Nearly   81%   of   students,   in   the   aforementioned   age   group,   from   the   context  of  USA  and  Europe  are  present  on  social  networks.  In  the  case  of  the  fathers  and  mothers  (from  30  to   70  years  old),  the  differences  are  significant  in  the  studied  context  schools,  because  the  64%  of  Western  USA   parents  have  a  presence  on  social  networks,  while  only  26%  of  Southern  European  parents  are  online.     That’s   to   say,   the   Western   USA   digital   generational   gap   context   is   lower   than   the   Southern   European   context   regarding   the   presence   on   online   social   networks.   In   the   West   of   USA   context,   the   difference   in   percentage  between  fathers/mothers  (81.1%)  and  teens  (64.2%)  registered  on  social  networks  is  16.9;  while  in   South  of  Europe,  it  is  54.9%  (80.9%  of  parents  and  26.0%  of  teens).       Another  interesting  fact  is  found  in  the  total  percentage  of  users,  regardless  of  territory,  age,  and  type  of   user  (fathers/mothers  and  students),  who  are  registered  on  social  networks.  According  to  our  sample,  in  the   Western  USA,  77.19%  (176  out  of  228  participants)  are  registered,  while  in  Southern  Europe,  only  56.14%  (96   out  of  171)  belong  to  a  social  online  network.     In   relation   to   the   regular   use   of   chat   applications,   we   also   observe   considerable   differences   in   its   use,   depending  on  the  place  of  residence  (the  West  USA  or  South  Europe  context)  and  the  type  of  user  (parents   and  children).       Table  9:  Percentages  of  regular  use  of  chat  applications  by  place  of  residence  and  type  of  user  (students   and  parents).     Context     Chi-­‐‑square   Do  you  regularly  use  any  "ʺchat"ʺ   Total   Sig.   Western     Southern   Person   application  to  talk  over  the  Internet?   USA   Europe   Students     No   N   57   64   121   %   32.6%   68.1%   45.0%   Yes   N   118   30   148   31.185   .000   %   55.0%   31.9%   67.4%   Total  Students   N   175   94   269   %     100.0%   100.0%   100.0%   11     Parents   No   Yes   Total  Parents   N   %     N   %     N   %     37   69.8%   16   30.2%   53   100.0%   63   81.8%   14   18.2%   77   100.0%   100   76.9%   30   23.1%   130   100.0%   2.549   .110   . Table  9  shows  how  students  in  both  Western  USA  and  Southern  Europe  regularly  use  chat  applications   and  do  so  twice  as  much  as  their  parents.    Fifty-­‐‑five  percent  of  Western  USA  students  use  online  chats,  while   31.9%   of   their   South   European   counterparts   also   use   it.   Despite   the   fact   that   the   test   Chi-­‐‑square   has   not   found  any  significant  difference  among  the  parents’  group,  30%  of  West  context  of  USA  fathers  and  mothers   use  online  chats,  while  only  18%  of  Southern  European  parents  use  it.  In  short,  the  majority  of  the  West  of   USA   participants   in   the   study   regularly   use   chat   applications   to   communicate,   in   comparison   with   a   minority  of  participants  from  South  of  Europe  context.     In  the  analysis  of  both  variables  “being  on  a  social  network”  and  “using  the  chat  application,”  we  have   discarded   the   age   variable   as   a   possible   reason   for   the   aforementioned   differences.   The   average   age   of   the   Western  USA  parent  is  43.6,  while  the  average  age  of  the  Southern  European  parent  is  45.5.       Relationship  between  digital  users  and  the  presence  on  social  networks       In   this   section,   we   are   presenting   the   results   of   crossing   the   variables   of   the   participants’   digital-­‐‑user   level   and   their   presence   on   social   networks.   Our   intention   is   to   know   whether   those   who   participate   on   social  networks  are  advanced  digital  users.         Table   10:   Descriptive   analysis   of   the   assessment   of   digital   users   according   to   their   presence   on   social   networks.   95%  confidence         interval  for  the         average         Are  you         on  a  social       Limit   Limit   F   Sig.   Eta2   network?   N   M   SD   SE   inf.   sup.   Min   Max   No   Yes   Total   158   274   432   2.930   1.1950   .0950   2.7426   3.1182   0   6   5.040   1.0903   .0658   4.9105   5.1698   2   7   4.268   1.5192   .0731   4.1248   4.4122   0   7   349.505   .000   .448     As   shown   in   Table   10,   those   who   have   a   presence   on   social   networks   use   digital   services   and   technologies  more  (value  of  5.04  over  7)  than  those  who  are  not  using  social  networks,  whose  digital  use  is   considerably  lower  (2.93  over  7).       Conclusions     In   general,   the   so-­‐‑called   generational   digital   divide   decreases   between   minors   and   parents   in   both   contexts  (in  the  Western  USA  context  as  well  as  in  the  Southern  European  context).       International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …       Despite   the   fact   that   there   are   differences   between   the   age   groups,   those   are   not   as   clear-­‐‑cut   as   previously   argued   by   Prensky   (2001)—young   people   are   considered   “digital   natives”   and   parents   are   defined   as   “digital   immigrants.”   However,   Corrin,   Bennett   and   lockyer   (2010)   stated   that   web-­‐‑generation   pupils´  use  of  the  social  Web´s  learning  technologies  was  quiet  poor.  In  our  case  study,  it  is  over  the  age  of   12  when  there  is  a  significant  increase  in  the  use  of  digital  applications,  and  this  continues  up  to  the  age  of   18.  After  the  age  of  18,  there  is  a  slow  and  constant  decrease.  That’s  to  say,  the  lowest  use  of  digital  services   is  found  in  the  earliest  stage  of  life  (from  0  to  11  years  old)  as  well  in  the  latest  stage  of  life  (beyond  70  years   old),  the  teen  years  being  the  zenith  of  the  use  of  digital  applications.  The  fact  that  the  digital  divide  is  higher   in   the   eldest   group   had   been   reported   in   other   studies   (Vicente   &   López   2011).   However,   fathers   and   mothers  are  increasingly  using  digital  technologies.  Particularly,  the  youngest  parents  are  the  ones  who  use   those  technologies  the  most.  Consequently,  the  trend  would  be  a  steady  reduction  of  the  digital  divide  for   the   foreseeable   future.   This   does   not   mean   that   currently   there   are   no   differences   in   relation   to   specific   Internet  services.         There  are  differences  in  relation  to  the  age  groups  of  social  network  users.     The  number  of  users  of  social  networks  under  13  years  old  is  constantly  increasing,  although  the  legal   age  to  join  most  of  the  social  networks  is  over  13.  It  is  about  that  age  when  there  is  a  significant  increase  in   the   number   of   social   network   users.   This   trend   is   evidenced   by   comparing   our   research   with   previous   studies  (e.g.,  Lenhart  and  Madden,  2008),  where  55%  of  North  American  teens  (between  12  and  17  years  old)   used   social   networks.   In   our   study   (for   2011),   the   percentage   goes   up   to   78%   for   teens   between   13   and   15   years   old—i.e.,   3   in   every   4.   The   percentage   increases   up   to   94%   for   teens   between   16   and   18   years   old.   Nevertheless,   we   observe   a   significant   difference   when   comparing   the   results   obtained   for   mothers   and   fathers.  Forty-­‐‑eight  percent  and  40%  of  the  parents  use  social  networks  in  the  age  groups  of  30  to  40  and  of   41  to  50  years  old,  respectively.  This  difference  increases  in  the  case  of  Southern  European  mothers:  26%  of   Southern  European  mothers  are  on  social  networks  compared  to  64%  of  Western  of  USA  mothers.     There   are   no   significant   differences   between   digital   users   in   relation   to   gender,   neither   in   the   Western   USA,  nor  in  Southern  Europe.     Taking  into  account  our  sample  and  the  studied  contexts,  we  have  not  found  any  significant  differences   between  men  and  women.  We  can  only  highlight  the  fact  that  Western  USA  and  Southern  European  women   obtain  a  higher  mean  than  men  in  the  use  of  digital  applications.       There   are   significant   differences   between   the   Western   USA   context   and   the   second   Southern   European   context  regarding  the  presence  of  parents  and  teens  on  social  networks.     In  general,  the  Western  USA  participants  obtain  higher  scores  in  all  variables,  but  not  all  of  them  can  be   considered  meaningful,  as  the  established  limit  of  significance  is  0.05.  One  of  the  clearest  cases  in  which  the   difference  can  be  seen  is  in  the  presence  on  social  networks.  In  the  Western  US,  slightly  more  than  half  of  the   parents  belong  to  a  social  network,  in  comparison  to  81.1%  of  their  teens.  But,  in  Southern  Europe,  only  26%   of   the   parents   are   registered   to   an   online   social   network.   Consequently,   there   are   significant   differences   between   the   Western   US   and   Southern   Europeans   regarding   the   presence   of   parents   and   teens   on   social   networks,  those  differences  being  more  pronounced  in  Southern  Europe.     In   the   near   future,   there   is   a   need   to   study   the   consequences   resulting   from   the   parents’   absence   on   online  social  networks,  which  could  lead  to  a  better  use  of  the  Internet  and  the  prevention  of  potential  risks   for   their   teens,   particularly   for   children   under   13   years   old.   In   this   regard,   as   Garmendia,   Garitaonandia,   Martínez,  and  Casado  (2011)  points  out,  40%  of  minors  between  9  and  13  years  old  have  a  profile  on  social   networks,  despite  the  fact  that,  as  we  have  said  earlier,  the  minimum  legal  age  is  13  or  14  years  old.     13     There   are   important   differences   between   the   Western   US   context   and   the   Southern   European   context   regarding  the  use  of  synchronous  communication  when  comparing  teens  to  their  parents.       The  use  of  different  synchronous  communication  systems,  such  as  online  chats,  is  more  extended  in  the   Western   US   than   in   Southern   Europe—the   former   nearly   doubles   the   latter   in   use.   This   difference   is   also   present  in  the  teens’  and  parents’  groups.  The  regular  use  of  this  service  by  the  youngest  members  of  both   groups   is   double   that   of   their   parents.   In   short,   as   with   the   participation   on   social   networks,   there   is   a   significant   generational   (parents/teens)   and   contextual   (West   USA/   South   Europe)   difference   in   relation   to   synchronous  communication.       References     Albero,  M.  (2002).  Adolescentes  e  Internet.  Mitos  y  realidades  de  la  sociedad  de  la  información  (Teenagers   and  internet.  Myths  and  realities  of  the  information  society).  Zer  Revista  de  estudios  de  comunicación,  13,   Retrieved  on  June,  07,  2011,  from  http://www.ehu.es/zer/zer13/adolescentes13.   Agarwal,   R.,   Animesh,   A.,   &   Prasad,   K.   (2009).   Social   interactions   and   the   “digital   divide”:   Explaining   variations  in  Internet  use.  Information  Systems  Research,  20(2),  277-­‐‑294.  doi:10.1287/isre.1080.0194   Aranda,  D.,  Sánchez-­‐‑Navarro,  J  &Tabernero,  C.  (2009).  Jóvenes  y  ocio  digital.  Informe  sobre  el  uso  de  herramientas   digitales   por   parte   de   adolescentes   en   España   (Youth   and   digital   entertainment.   The   use   of   digital   tools   by   adolescents  in  Spain  report).  Barcelona:  UOC.   Balaguer,  R.  (2006).Videojuegos,  Internet,  Infancia  y  Adolescencia  del  nuevo  milenio  (Video  Games,  Internet,   Children  and  Adolescents  of  the  new  millennium).   Kairos.  Revista  de  temas  sociales,  10,  en  Retrieved  on   June,  07,  2011,  from  http://www2.fices.unsl.edu.ar/~kairos/k10-­‐‑06.htm   Beniger,   J.R.   (1986).   The   control   revolution:   Technological   and   economic   origins   of   the   information   society.   Cambridge,  Mass.:  Harvard  University  Press.   Bennett,   S.,   Maton,   K.   &   Kevin,   L.   (2008).   The   “digital   natives”   debate:   A   critical   review   of   the   evidence.   British  Journal  of  Educational  Technology,  39  (5),  775-­‐‑786.   Corrin,  L.,  Bennett,  S.  &  Lockyer,  L.  (2010).  Digital  natives:  Everyday  life  versus  academic  study.  Proceedings   of  the  Seventh  International  Conference  on  Networked  Learning  2010  (pp.  643-­‐‑650).  Lancaster:  Lancaster   University.   Duerager,  A.  &  Livingstone,  S.  (2012)  How  can  parents  support  children’s  internet  safety?  London,  UK:  EU   Kids  Online.   Feixa,  C.;  González,  I.;  Martínez,  R;  Porzio,  L.  (2002).  “Identitats  culturals  i  estils  de  vida”  (Cultural  identities   and   lifestyles),   C.   Gómez-­‐‑Granell;   M.   Garcia-­‐‑Mila;   A.   Ripoll-­‐‑Millet;   C.   Panchón   (eds.),   La   infància   i   les   famílies   als   inicis   del   segle   XXI   (Children   and   families   at   the   beginning   of   the   century),   Barcelona:   Institut   d’Infància  i  Món  Urbà-­‐‑Observatori  de  la  Infància,  vol  III:  325-­‐‑474.     Foresight,  I.  (2010).  Norton  Online  Family  Report.  NY:  Symantec  Corporation.   Garmendia,   M.,   Garitaonandia,   C.,   Martínez,   G.,   Casado,   M.   A.   (2011).   Riesgos   y   seguridad   en   internet:   Los   menores   españoles   en   el   contexto   europeo   (Risks   and   safety   on   the   internet:   Spanish   teenagers   in   the   European   context).  Universidad  del  País  Vasco/Euskal  Herriko  Unibertsitatea,  Bilbao:  EU  Kids  Online.   Gurpegui,  C.  (2010).  Nuevas  tecnologías  en  familia  (New  technologies  in  family).  Zaragoza:  Gobierno  de  Aragón.   Hasebrink,  U.,  Livingstone,  S.  &  Haddon,  L.  (2008).  Comparing  Children’s  Online  Opportunities  and  Risks  across   Europe:   Cross-­‐‑national   comparisons   for   EU   Kids   Online.   Retrieved   on   July   10,   2012,   from   www.eukidsonline.net   Holloway,D.,  Green,  L.  &  Livingstone,  S.  (2013).  Zero  to  eight.  Young  children  and  their  internet  use.  LSE,   London:  EU  Kids  Online.   International  Online  Journal  of  Educational  Sciences,  2014,5  (3),  …-­‐‑  …       Lenhart,   A.   (2005).   “Protecting   teens   online,”   Pew   Internet   &   American   Life   Project.   Retrieved   on   March   14,   2012,  from  http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Filters_Report.pdf,     Lenhart,   A.   and   Madden,   M.   (2008).   Social   Networking   Websites   and   Teens:   An   Overview.   Washington:   Pew   Internet  &  American  Life  Project.   Livingstone,  S.,  Haddon,  L.,  Görzig,  A.,  Ólafsson,  K.  (2010).  Risks  and  safety  on  the  internet:  The  perspective  of   European  children.  Initial  Findings.  LSE,  London:  EU  Kids  Online.   Prensky,   M.   (2001).   Digital   Natives,   Digital   Immigrants,   On   the   Horizon,  9,   1-­‐‑6,   Retrieved   on   June   10,   2012,   from,   http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants %20-­‐‑%20Part1.pdf,     Tapscott,  D.  (1998).  Growing  Up  Digital:  The  Rise  of  the  Net  Generation,  New  York:  McGraw-­‐‑Hill.   UNESCO   (2010).   Le   guide   de   mesure   pour   l’integration   des   technologies   de   l’information   et   de   la   communication   (TIC)  en  education  (Measuring  Guide  for  the  integration  of  information  and  communication  technology  (ICT)  in   education).  Montreal:  Institut  de  statistique  de  l’UNESCO.   Vicente,   M.R.   &   López   A.J.   (2011)   Assessing   the   regional   digital   divide   across   the   European   Union-­‐‑27.   Telecommunications  Policy  35  (3),  220–237.   West,   A.,  Lewis,   J.   and  Currie,   P.   (2009).   Students'ʹ   Facebook   'ʹfriends'ʹ:   public   and   private   spheres.   Journal   of   Youth  Studies,  12  (6),  615-­‐‑627.