Cultures Of The Internet: The Internet In Britain
AdoptionSection ICultures of the Internet:The Internet in BritainWilliam H. Dutton and Grant Blankwith assistance from Darja GroseljOxford Internet Survey 2013 Report1
AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank the entire OII team for their support of OxISresearch. Our particular thanks to Dr Monica Bulger, Dr CristobalCobo, Dr Rebecca Eynon, Darja Groselj, Dr Bernie Hogan, Dr EricMeyer and Dr Victoria Nash for their contributions to this report. Wealso wish to acknowledge Kunika Kono for her design input into thereport, David Sutcliffe for his editorial support and Tim Davies foradministrative support. For research assistance we are indebted toDarja Groselj. Thanks also to Dr Nicholas J. Cox for providing a specialversion of his slideplot program for use in this report.For their early involvement with OxIS we would like to thank Dr Ellen J.Helsper, Professor Richard Rose, Dr Adrian Shepherd and Dr Corinnadi Gennaro. All have helped shape the evolution of this research.We are particularly grateful for the financial support of OxIS 2013by the dot.rural Digital Economy Hub, Nominet Trust and Ofcom.Our colleagues from these sponsoring organisations offered usefulsuggestions and valuable comments, helping to ensure that OxIScontinues to address issues of policy and practice.Contact OxISOxford Internet InstituteUniversity of Oxford1 St GilesOxford OX1 3JSUnited KingdomTelephone: 44 (0) 1865 287210Fax: 44 (0) 1865 287211Email: oxis@oii.ox.ac.ukWeb: http://oxis.oii.ox.ac.uk/The full report and the questionnaire are available at the OxIS website.Please cite the source of text and data excerpts as:Dutton, W.H. and Blank, G., with Groselj, D. (2013) Cultures of theInternet: The Internet in Britain. Oxford Internet Survey 2013. OxfordInternet Institute, University of Oxford. The University of Oxford for the Oxford Internet Institute 2013. Thiswork may be copied freely for non-commercial research and study. Ifyou wish to undertake any of the other acts restricted by the copyrightyou should apply in writing to the Director of the Institute at 1 St Giles,Oxford OX1 3JS, United Kingdom.
Cultures of the Internet:The Internet in BritainWilliam H. Dutton and Grant Blankwith assistance from Darja GroseljOxford Internet Survey 2013 ReportOxford Internet InstituteUniversity of Oxford1 St GilesOxford OX1 3JSUnited KingdomWith contributions by Dr Monica Bulger, Dr Cristobal Cobo, Dr RebeccaEynon, Darja Groselj , Dr Bernie Hogan, Dr Eric Meyer and Dr Victoria Nash.http://oxis.oii.ox.ac.uk/Sponsored by
Table of Contents2Introduction3Cultures of the Internet in Britain4Next Generation Users: An Update10I. AdoptionA. DiffusionB. Ubiquitous AccessC. Digital Households, Mobility & Changing InfrastructureD. ExperienceE. Skill and Expertise121314151717II. Characteristics and Attitudes of Internet UsersA. Characteristics of Users and Non-UsersB. Attitudes Toward Technology and the Internet191923III. UseA. Information SeekingB. EntertainmentC. Online ServicesD. Creativity and Production2526282930IV. Government and PoliticsA. Use of Government ServicesB. Civic and Political Participation313134V. Reshaping Social Networks and FriendshipsA. Communication and Social NetworkingB. Social Network SitesC. Reconfiguring Social NetworksD. Reconfiguring Friendships3637394143VI. Impact of Internet UseA. Centrality of the InternetB. Media Habits: The Internet, Television and NewspapersC. TrustD. Personal, Financial and Economic Opportunities4444454647VII. Regulation and ControlA. Concerns: Bad Experiences and the InternetB. Children’s RegulationC. Government Regulation49505253VIII. Digital DividesA. Rationales for Non-UseB. Help and Proxy Use545557Methodology59
IntroductionKey FindingsThe Oxford Internet SurveysKey findings of the 2013 OxIS survey include thefollowing:The Oxford Internet Surveys (OxIS) are core to theresearch of the Oxford Internet Institute (OII), aleading world centre for the multidisciplinary studyof the Internet and society. A department within theSocial Sciences Division of the University of Oxford,the OII focuses its research and teaching on thesocial shaping and implications of the Internet, andon informing related policy and practice.Launched by the Oxford Internet Institute in2003, OxIS has become an authoritative sourceof information about Internet access, use andattitudes—and the difference this makes foreveryday life—in Britain. Areas covered include:digital and social inclusion and exclusion;regulation and governance of the Internet;privacy, trust and risk concerns; and uses of theInternet, including networking, content creation,entertainment and learning.The OxIS 2013 survey is the sixth in a series, withprevious surveys conducted in 2003, 2005, 2007,2009 and 2011. Each has used a multi-stagenational probability sample of 2000 people inBritain, enabling us to project estimates to Britainas a whole. In 2013 we received funding from dot.rural for an additional 600 rural respondents, sothe total sample is 2,657. Sampling details are inthe methodological bMarFebFeb-AprMarNumber e rate60%66%68%53%47%52%Fielded in2013The UK in a Global ContextOxIS provides the UK’s contribution to the WorldInternet Project (WIP), an international collaborativeproject that joins over two dozen nations in studiesof the social, economic and political implicationsof the Internet. More information about WIP can befound at: http://www.worldinternetproject.net/. The use of the Internet is Britain has risensubstantially over the last two years, reaching78% of the population 14 years and over. There has been progress on narrowing digitaldivides with a rise in Internet access forlower income groups, people with no formaleducational qualifications, retired people, andindividuals with disabilities. The beliefs and attitudes of Internet usersare diverse, reflecting five broad cultures, thelargest of which, the “cyber-moderates”, havemore tempered views about the value and risksof Internet use than most other groups of users. The rise of next generation users, who usemultiple devices, one or more of which aremobile, has grown to represent 67% of users. Patterns of use have not changed dramatically,but the diffusion of social networking hasstabilised at a plateau of 61% of Internet users. Use of digital government services hascontinued to progress, particularly aroundtransactional services, such as renewal ofautomobile licences. Use of the Internet and social media tendsto complement rather than substitute fortraditional forms of communication, but isnevertheless tied to social changes, such as inmeeting new people. The perceived benefits of Internet use accrue farmore to the next generation users, creating a seconddigital divide beyond mere access to the Internet. A majority of users believe that the governmentshould not regulate the Internet more than itdoes, but there is an increase in the proportionof the public that wants the government to domore to protect children online. Digital choice remains a key factor leading manynon-users to remain offline, underscoring thevalue of support of non-users to experience theInternet.Detailed results of relevance to all of these generalpoints and more are presented in the following sections.3
In 2013, 78% of the UK population said that they use theInternet. Does this large proportion of Internet users inBritain herald the rise of a common Internet culture, orare beliefs and attitudes about the Internet as diverse asopinions can be across the general population?Analysis of the 2013 OxIS survey shows that most usersin Britain can be grouped into five clusters, or cultures,each comprising individuals who responded in similarways to questions about their attitudes and beliefsabout the Internet (see Methodology).Five Cultures of the InternetThese five cultures are overlapping, but each has adistinctive profile. They can be defined as the:e-Mersives: This group of users is comfortable andnaturally at home in the online world and happybeing online. They are pleased to use the Internetas an escape, to pass time online, and think of it assomewhere they feel they can meet people and be partof a community. They see the Internet as a technologythey can control—a tool they can employ—to maketheir life easier, to save time, and to keep in touch withpeople. They are immersed in the Internet as part oftheir everyday life and work. They comprise only about12% of the UK’s Internet users (Figure 1).Techno-pragmatists: This cluster of users stands out bythe centrality they accord to using the Internet to savetime and make their lives easier. Like the e-mersives,they feel in control of the Internet, employing it forinstrumental reasons that enhance the efficiency oftheir day-to-day life and work. Unlike the e-mersives,the pragmatists do not view the Internet as an escape,nor do they often go online just for the fun of it. Theirs isa more instrumental agenda of efficiency. Pragmatistsconstitute about 17% of the UK’s Internet users.Cyber-savvy: A third cluster of users expressedmixed feelings and beliefs about the Internet, holdingsomewhat ambivalent views. On the one hand, theyenjoy being online, in order to pass time, easily findinformation, and become part of a community in whichthey can escape and meet people. On the other hand,they also feel as if the Internet is, to a greater or lesser4degree, taking control of their lives, because it canbe frustrating, wastes time and invades their privacy.Rather than always feeling in control, they feel that theymight lose control to technology, which could drainthem of time and privacy. Despite their concerns, theyfully exploit the Internet as a pastime, as an efficientinformation resource, and as a social tool. For thisreason, they are in some sense street wise, or cybersavvy, living comfortably in an Internet world but awareof the risks. They represent nearly one in five (19%) ofthe UK’s Internet users.Cyber-moderates: The fourth cluster of users is mostclearly defined by patterns of attitudes and beliefs thatshow them to be more moderate in their view of theInternet as a good place to pass the time, an efficientway to find information or shop, or a good way tomaintain and enhance their social relationships. On theother hand, they are also not uniformly fearful that thereis a risk that the Internet will expose them to immoralmaterial, pose a threat to their privacy, or waste theirtime. They seem to be moderate in both hopes andfears, thus we have called them ‘cyber-moderates’.They are the largest single cluster of Internet users inBritain, accounting for 37% of users (Figure 1).Adigitals: This final group does not feel that the Internetmakes them more efficient, nor do they enjoy beingonline simply to pass the time or escape from thereal world. To members of this culture, the Internet islikely to be perceived as out of their control, potentiallycontrolled by others. For example, they feel frustratedbecause the Internet is difficult to use and harbourstoo much ‘immoral material’. Compared to the othercultures, the adigital group appears to resonate mostlywith the problems generated by the Internet. They feelmore excluded from a technological context that is ‘notmade for them’. This adigital culture fits about 14% ofthe UK’s online population.Figure 1: Internet Cultures in 201310080% of current usersCultures of the Internetin Britain60374020171219140e-MersedPragmatistsOxIS current users: 2013 N 2,083Cyber-savvyModeratesAdigital
The following sections show how these cultures ofthe Internet were discovered and identified throughanalysis of our survey responses. They also show thestability of these underlying attitudes and beliefs overthe years, the characteristics of these groups, and theirimplications for patterns of use, as well as for policyand practice. However, to preface this discussion, thenext section focuses on why it is useful to explore thesecultures of the Internet.The Idea of Internet CulturesIn the early decades of the Internet, its diffusion waslinked to the rise of a ‘cyberculture’—a particularpattern of beliefs and attitudes about the virtues ofbeing online (Castells 2001; Bell et al. 2004). Many earlydiscussions of a cyberculture were tied to particularkinds of users, such as the culture of participation inearly virtual communities, which Howard Rheingold(1993) likened to ‘homesteaders’, or to intenselyengaged programmers, such as ‘hackers’ (Weizenbaum1976) and to the hacking ethic (Himanen 2002). In thefounding decades of the Internet, cybercultures oftendefined these and other pioneering groups of those whocreated and were early users of the Internet.Since the turn of the century, the Internet has diffused tolarge proportions of the populations of many nations, andthe number of new settlers has long since overrun theearly homesteaders. Nevertheless, the cultures of theearly and contemporary creators of the Internet remainimportant and are often believed to be associated withthe values and interests of the Internet’s evolving creativesector, from computer scientists to entrepreneurs,which continues to shape the Internet’s design anddevelopment (Castells 2010). However, characterisationsof the early adopters have become increasingly removedfrom the values and attitudes of many users, who havebegun to more closely mirror the general populationof nations and regions. For example, with over threequarters (78%) of people in Britain now online, theproportion of hackers will be almost undetectable in ageneral population survey. Internet users are no longerhomesteaders. For this reason, it is becoming morecommon for people to speak of the Internet culture ofBritain as a whole, as compared with other nations.However, people within any nation are likely to havecontrasting perspectives on the Internet. This isevident in everyday conversations as well as in nationaldebates over such issues as content regulation andprivacy online. It is not necessarily the case that somepeople are right and others wrong, but that groups ofindividuals within Britain have differing values, attitudesand beliefs about the Internet—that is, debates areshaped by different cultures of the Internet.For example, since the earliest surveys of Britain, OxIShas found that a sizeable proportion of people (18% in2013) say they have no interest in the Internet, and thisis one key reason why many have chosen not to getonline—what we have called ‘digital choice’ (Dutton etal. 2007). In 2013, 81% of non-users said they have nointerest in the Internet.Others are excluded from the online world dueto their location, such as in a remote rural area,or their inability to afford being online. Yet, evenamong the online public in Britain—those whouse the Internet—there are likely to be people withdramatic as well as subtle differences in viewsabout how use of the Internet fits with their ownvalues and interests. Are they (un)comfortable withliving and working online, for example sharinginformation and photographs with people they maynot know?One of the conventional arguments is that there is a setof ‘digital natives’, primarily younger people who grewup around the Internet and who are more comfortableusing the Internet in their everyday life (Palfrey andGasser 2008). While the concept of the ‘digital native’has been challenged by a number of researchers (e.g.Helsper and Eynon 2009), the idea squares with someanecdotal evidence, and reinforces the perception thatthere may be categories of users with systematicallydifferent perspectives on the Internet that might be tiedto their cohort or to technologies that predominatedwhen they were young.Therefore, given the maturity of the Internet inBritain, we moved away from early notions of smallcommunities of homesteaders or hackers, and didnot take the idea of the ‘digital native’ for granted. Wefocused instead on empirically locating the attitudes ofthe large population of individuals in Britain who chooseto (not) use the Internet in their everyday life and work.Are they sharing a set of beliefs and attitudes about theInternet that could be called a culture of the Internet,or, as we argue here, are there multiple cultures ofthe Internet in Britain? If so, how can we identify andcharacterise these cultures?5
1. Enjoyable escape: providing an enjoyable activity thatis a good way to pass time and to escape from dayto-day activities, meet people, and not feel alone;2. Instrumental efficiency: by making life easier, suchas providing ways to save time, for example byfinding information quickly;3. Social facilitation: helping you keep in touch withfriends, such as helping people to find informationabout you, and making it easier to meet people;4. Problems: such as being frustrating to work with,wasting time with email, creating difficulties incontrolling personal information, and exposingpeople to too much immoral material.Each dimension was relatively independent of theothers, so that someone could view the Internetas a wonderful escape, but still feel that it cangenerate problems (such as wasting time). Thesefour dimensions of attitudes and beliefs were furtheranalysed to locate clusters of people who tended toanswer these questions in relatively similar ways. Weidentified five clusters of individuals among the Internetusers, each corresponding to a particular culture.As shown in Table 1, each cluster was defined by thedimensions on which 50% or more of the individuals inthat cluster were above average. For example, 97% oftechno-pragmatists agreed that the Internet is high on‘instrumental efficiency’ in that it saves them time whenthey need to find information, and generally makes theirlives easier. Large proportions of respondents classified6Cyber SavvyCyberModerateEnjoyable Escape99%35%100%39%3%Instrumental Efficiency88%97%63%26%12%Social Facilitator79%81%81%30%24%Problem matistThese fourteen items were analysed in order todetermine whether there was a smaller numberof dimensions that could summarise most of thevariance among respondents. This analysis yielded fourseparate dimensions, or principal components, whichrepresented the degree that respondents believed thatthe Internet led to:Table 1. Percentage of Cluster whoAgree with Each Dimensione-MersiveTo discover whether or not there is a coherent set ofattitudes and beliefs about the Internet among usersin Britain, we conducted a set of multivariate analyses(see the Methodology for a more detailed operationaldefinition). We began with fourteen Likert-type agree–disagree questions that tapped the attitudes and beliefsof individuals about the Internet. These questions weredeveloped and refined for our biennial survey that hasevolved since 2003.as ‘e-mersive’ saw the Internet as an escape (99%),an efficient tool (88%), and a social facilitator (79%).Likewise, over three-quarters (78%) of the adigitalstended to see the Internet as a problem generator.Note: Table shows the percent above average on each dimension.Agreement of over 50% is shaded.Cultures of the Internet and Attitudestowards TechnologyThe validity of these cultural groupings is reinforcedby their relationship with general attitudes towardtechnology. Generally, the e-mersives have morepositive attitudes toward technology, such as believingtechnology makes things better, and not finding thattechnologies fail when you need them most (Figure2); 84% of e-mersives said they leave their mobileon in bed. The techno-pragmatists have a similarlypositive attitude toward technology, unlike the cybermoderates and adigitals, who more often fear that theInternet threatens their privacy and concentration,and that technologies often fail. Finding the Internetof value in most respects, the cyber-savvy are muchmore concerned than all other cultures over threatsto privacy, and also harbour a general lack of trust intec
Oxford Internet Survey 2013 Report . Acknowledgements . Introduction The Oxford Internet Surveys The Oxford Internet Surveys (OxIS) are core to the . of information about Internet access, use and attitudes—and the difference this m
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. 3 Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
