Startseite Analysis of Demographic Variables Affecting Digital Citizenship in Turkey
Artikel Open Access

Analysis of Demographic Variables Affecting Digital Citizenship in Turkey

  • Gülbeniz Akduman ORCID logo EMAIL logo , Himmet Karadal ORCID logo und Evren Dinçer ORCID logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 3. Juli 2024
Artikel downloaden (PDF)
Economics
Aus der Zeitschrift Economics Band 18 Heft 1

Abstract

The new technologies generated by the digital age are changing how individuals and societies communicate, learn, work, and manage. Although digital citizenship is defined as the behavioral norms regarding the use of technology in the most general sense, it also includes ethical and appropriate behaviors and being informed about this issue while using technology. However, there is a generational gap in digital information and literacy. In this context, the research analyzes digital citizenship according to gender, age, number of children, job position, and education level. In this analysis, which was structured as exploratory research to examine the digital citizenship status of participants, the descriptive model was preferred over quantitative research models. According to the analysis results, it can be said that the participants’ digital citizenship behavior is in the range of “I am undecided” (at a moderate level). Citizenship behavior with the lowest score was “political activism on the internet.” The groups with a significantly higher level of digital citizenship are women, those between the ages of 22 and 42 working as managers, and those at the graduate level.

Keywords: digital age; digitization; digital citizenship

1 Introduction

Information and communication technologies have significant effects on economic development. The differences in countries’ economic performance and global competitiveness largely depend on the adoption, availability, and use of information and communication technologies (Mitrović, 2020). The development of information and communication technologies and innovations also increases the growth performance of economies because technological innovations play an essential role in growth (Taşel, 2020, p. 128). The effects of digitalization on both the economy and trade are of great importance. In particular, there are factors, such as global epidemics experienced today, that make the benefit of digital technologies necessary to reach their customers differently (Taşel, 2020, p. 127). The issue of digital citizenship has gained more importance in this context.

Digital citizenship is the digital dimension of citizenship (Lyons, 2012, p. 40). Behavioral standards are required to use digital technologies (Ribble, 2011, p. 10). The concept of digital citizenship has emerged to provide standards for fulfilling general citizenship responsibilities, providing rights and opportunities, and maintaining their daily lives in this digital society. Responsible digital citizens avoid criticizing others while using information and communication resources, know the ethical consequences of online behavior, make moral decisions online, avoid harming others and misusing technology, and encourage the correct behavior when communicating and collaborating in the virtual world.

The sense of isolation created by the coronavirus epidemic has made the use of digital technologies and the lack of digital skills more evident. The youth of the digital age, who are born into the digital world and are accustomed to acquiring new information quickly and easily, see the use of digital technologies as an effective strategy for accessing education, reducing social isolation among people, as well as providing new information and helping them adapt to the changing society.

The popularity and use of digital technologies will continue to grow. However, some websites and apps pose risks to the health of vulnerable youth by promoting ideas such as self-harm, suicide, or anorexia.

Moreover, there is a generational gap in the approach to digital information and literacy. Digital citizenship encompasses the technical ability to participate online and act appropriately and responsibly using digital technology. It is necessary for parents and educators to understand the levels of digital citizenship first in order to teach children and young people digital skills and online safety.

Technological developments, innovations, and digitalization in every sector increase the importance of helping people adapt to digitalization. Digital citizenship is an issue that should be carefully addressed at all educational levels, starting with the family. This subject being examined among different faculties and departments can be associated with lifelong learning, and activities can be organized to increase information sharing between departments and faculties.

Digital citizenship courses or subjects can be integrated into existing curricula so that university students become more conscious of digital citizenship. An action plan can be created by using the opinions of instructors and administrators on the factors that emerged in this study, which was carried out from the perspective of university students. It would be recommended to inform instructors about this aspect of the research.

Employees across professions should take part in ensuring human rights and equality while using digital media, as well. Training employees in digital competencies will support the creation of responsible digital citizens for the future.

Helping people adapt to digitalization will enhance the digital citizenship skills of people born into the digital world and who became digital citizens before their citizenship identities were developed through training, from an early age. In order to teach children and young people digital skills and online safety, it is necessary for parents and educators to understand the levels of digital citizenship first. Effective understanding of the concept of digital citizenship often depends on a person’s age, that is, whether they were born in the digital world. Are there criteria other than age that affect digital citizenship? This research aims to evaluate the participants’ approaches to digital media, increase awareness about digitalization according to the research results, and provide suggestions for training and practices that will enable the development of digital citizenship skills. In this context, the research aims to analyze the participants’ digital citizenship levels based on their demographic variables. Although digital citizenship is a concept that attracts attention in international literature, this research is also essential in providing a source for future research, as there are very few studies on this subject in Turkey.

The lack of awareness about digital citizenship, especially considering the intense use of social media, increases the importance of this study. This article will focus and shed light on the adverse effects of low levels of digital citizenship on social interactions carried out on social media platforms widely used in Turkey. This article will also focus on the importance of digital citizenship, especially in an era of intense social media use. Overall, this article aims to emphasize the critical need to raise and generate self-aware digital citizens to mitigate social media’s negative impact on our society. It will emphasize how critical it is to create responsible digital citizens.

In today’s fast-paced world, digital citizenship has become a crucial aspect of social responsibility with the rapid evolution of technology. This article highlights the concept of digital citizenship in Turkey, urging individuals to comprehend their obligations and corresponding rights while interacting on the internet. Furthermore, we aim to draw the reader’s attention to the significance of cyber security concerns and the positive impact of responsible digital citizens on society’s overall security.

The digital citizenship identity that emerged with digitalization has directly affected the lifestyles and processes of governments, corporations, and individual people. Mainly the COVID-19 pandemic, which affected the whole world, and the emergence of using digital technologies to access health services, have paved the way for people to obtain a digital identity and accelerated the process of obtaining this identity. While collecting Turkish literature to review for this analysis, research examining the concept of digital citizenship using a demographic breakdown was found. It was understood that the sample populations needed to be expanded. For example, Yılmaz and Doğusoy (2020) examined a specific population of teachers in their study to determine the digital citizenship levels of teacher candidates, but the results could not be generalized. In an empirical evaluation study to examine the perception of digital citizenship, Yalçınkaya and Cibaroğlu (2019) analyzed just the digital citizenship dimensions but did not analyze them according to demographic variables. While there are differences in digital citizenship levels among different demographics, the limited number of studies examining digital citizenship based on demographic variables is the main reason for conducting more research on this topic in Turkey. In this context, the research question is “Do digital citizenship levels differ according to demographic variables? If digital citizenship levels differ, which demographic variables differ?”

The research method and findings will be shared after the concept and dimensions of digital citizenship are defined in light of relevant sources from the current literature. Finally, the results will be discussed along with the limitations and suggestions for future research.

2 Literature Review

The digital age is the time that encompasses the beginning, climax, and culmination of the digital and information revolution from the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

Within the digital age, new technologies have profoundly changed development patterns in childhood and adolescence. Internet access tools, such as tablets, smartphones, social media platforms, and messaging applications, have become integral to young people’s lives. It has digitized their education and learning, how they form and maintain friendships, how they spend their free time, and more broadly, how they interact with society.

While the world is changing so quickly, digital platforms are essential sources for people to get information about what is happening worldwide (Gentry, 2022, p. 1). While digital technologies change people’s thoughts, attitudes, and behaviors, they also offer some opportunities. The sense of isolation created by the coronavirus epidemic has made the good and bad aspects of using digital technologies more evident. For instance, there are websites and apps that pose risks to the health of vulnerable youth, by promoting such ideas as self-harm, suicide, or eating disorders. Current trends show us that the popularity and use of digital technologies will only continue to grow. Digitalization can offer significant opportunities for socioeconomic development, as well.

The twenty-first century, under the influence of globalization and near-constant technological transformation, alongside economic difficulties and new ideas on citizenship, is a century of controversy. New concepts such as “constitutional citizenship, world citizenship, European citizenship, and digital citizenship” have emerged in this process (Ersoy, 2013, p. 70).

Access, commerce, communication, literacy, ethics, law, security, health, and rights responsibilities are sub-dimensions of digital citizenship in Turkey, and it is essential to be mobilized on these levels to learn responsible digital citizenship practices. In order to pursue all these sub-dimensions, financial resources are required, which are directly affected by Turkey’s economy. While planning for economic and social development issues in the country, having a solid digital infrastructure behind all sectors and projects should be a strategic goal. In addition to the existence of digital infrastructures, citizens must know how to use them.

Parallel to the increasing rate of using digital technologies every year, the popularity of the concept of digital citizenship in the relevant literature has also increased. The features that make the concept of digital citizenship so popular are listed as follows (Mossberger et al., 2007, pp. 1–6):

  1. The risks and advantages created by the rapidly increasing use of digital technology, opportunities offered to people who can access the internet regardless of time and place, thanks to digital tools,

  2. The need to ensure the safe, responsible, and effective use of digital tools and technologies,

  3. Advantages of using digital tools and technologies more intensively and widely in learning activities. Ribble (2004), who was the first to use the concept of digital citizenship, defined the concept as the necessary standards and rules for using digital technologies (Ribble, 2004, p. 7).

There are also different definitions of digital citizenship in the related literature. The International Association for Technology in Education has defined digital citizenship as the ability to actively use digital media in matters involving the nation and people in the societies that make up a nation.

When the effects of the digital age were seen, asked the following question: “Why is almost everyone, from children to families, from employees to managers, being driven to digitalization?” While this problem was a subject that could not be explained in that time period, the answer was found 5 years after the coronavirus epidemic. Physical and psychological isolation that occurred as a result of the coronavirus epidemic forced people to communicate, work, study, and socialize through digital platforms (Buchholz et al., 2020, p. 11).

The transformation of society into an e-society and its digitalization have affected interpersonal relations, education, the business world, and people’s well-being. While digital socialization allows people to express themselves more freely and interact democratically, it has increased inequality in people’s rights (Lemos de Paiva & Miranda, 2022). There has been a need for legislation on this issue as the effects of digital transformation on social exclusion and inclusion have become a rapidly developing problem for professionals, citizens, and law enforcement (Picornell-Lucas & López-Peláez, 2022, p. 33). Being a digital citizen is not just about having the competence to use digital platforms and tools, but to participate in the digital world knowing their responsibilities and rights (Buchholz et al., 2020, p. 12). An inclusive digitalization strategy should be implemented to ensure democracy in digital societies. Citizenship rights and responsibilities should also be maintained in digital media (Picornell-Lucas & López-Peláez, 2022, p. 36).

Ribble (2011) introduced the concept of digital citizenship and defined it in detail with nine sub-dimensions. Those nine sub-dimensions of digital citizenship are organized under three principal dimensions. It is briefly expressed by the definition of “REP,” which takes its name from the initials of the English equivalents of self-respect, education, and protection. The main and sub-dimensions within the scope of REP (Ribble & Bailey, 2006) are Respect for yourself and those around you (digital ethics, access, and law), education for yourself and those around you, and communicating with yourself and those around you (digital communication, literacy, and commerce), and protecting yourself and others (digital rights and responsibilities, security, and health).

Digital Ethics: They are the norms of behavior in the digital environment. It is the reflection of traditional citizenship in the digital environment. It is the continuation of ethical principles, moral responsibilities, and appropriate and decent behavior in the internet environment (Ribble & Bailey, 2006). Digital ethics means being responsible and respecting the rights of others when using digital tools, not engaging in cyberbullying, complying with etiquette while communicating digitally, respecting other people in digital media, not harming others while using digital tools, and ensuring that the information being shared is ethical, accurate, and reliable, being sure is the first level of etiquette that should be considered within the scope of digital ethics (Ribble, 2011).

Digital Access: This is the act of accessing digital media whenever and wherever a person wants, regardless of time and place (Ribble, 2004). Digital access is also interpreted as the unlimited participation of citizens in the online environment (Siira & Wolf, 2022).

Digital Law: Within the scope of digital law, which is one of the most critical dimensions of digital citizenship, people need to have information about digital law in order to know what they can download and use without permission (Ribble, 2011).

Digital Communication: To be a digital citizen, one must communicate with digital tools. In order to communicate in digital environments, people may face many financial or moral obstacles. Having the necessary equipment to communicate in the digital environment, knowing how to use digital communication tools, and having an internet connection to communicate in the digital environment are seen as the most critical obstacles to digital communication (Girardin, 2020).

Digital Literacy: This is perceiving and making sense of the information in digital media. In order for an individual to be recognized as literate in the digital environment, he or she must have the following skills: computer skills, problem-solving competence, being able to use software and standard tools, and being able to communicate in the digital environment, internet literacy (Ba et al., 2002, pp. 5–6).

Digital Commerce: This allows consumers to search, browse, compare, and purchase goods online (Ather and Ejaz, 2015, p. 634). Although digital commerce is a tool that makes people’s lives easier, people face some risks when shopping in digital environments. The most critical risks are fraud, when the product displayed and received is not the same, theft of personal information, the risks involved in purchasing intangible services such as virtual games, and the deceptions that may be encountered from products sold through auction (Ribble, 2011).

Digital Rights and Responsibilities: Behaviors such as not using the information found in digital media without permission, using the information and displaying its source even if permission is obtained, complying with rules and ethics while using the information, and reporting inappropriate behaviors are the most important digital rights and responsibilities (Ribble, 2011).

Digital Security: People store and share information about themselves on the internet, so the importance of taking continuous precautions against the misuse of technology should be noted (Hollandsworth et al., 2017). The misuse of technology poses a significant risk within the scope of digital security. For instance, using an internet connection not protected against viruses and attacks or connecting to the internet without a password are behaviors that affect digital security, equal to leaving the house door open to thieves (Ribble, 2011). Digital citizens must take some precautions when online or using digital tools. These are precautions such as using secure browsers and installing antivirus programs on computers, tablets, and phones. These measures will minimize the risks in the online environment (Çubukçu & Bayzan, 2013).

Digital Health: There are mental and physical risks when using digital tools, especially online technology. These risks start with health problems such as musculoskeletal disorders and addiction to gaming and being online. Digital citizens should be aware of the psychological problems caused by the digital environment (Çubukçu & Bayzan, 2013).

Technological developments, innovations, and digitalization in every sector increase the importance of helping people adapt to digitalization. This research aims to evaluate the participants’ approaches to digital media, increase awareness about digitalization according to the research results, and provide suggestions for training and practices that will enable the development of digital citizenship skills. In this context, the research aims to analyze the digital citizenship levels of participants based on demographic variables.

3 Methods and Findings

3.1 Model and Data Collection Tool

The descriptive model was preferred over quantitative research models for this analysis, which was structured as exploratory research to examine the digital citizenship status of participants.

Since the research population was generalized simply as white-collar employees, it is not practically possible to determine a specific population description beyond that. An exhaustive list of every white-collar position within that designation is nearly impossible to generate, so succinctly, this research was conducted with white-collar employees currently working in a non-specified institution using the cluster sampling method. Within the scope of the research, the demographic information form and the developed Digital Citizenship Scale were applied online to 415 white-collar employees and managers working in the public sector reached by convenience sampling method between May and June 2022.

A questionnaire consisting of two parts was used as a data collection tool in the research. In the first part of the data collection tool, a personal information form consists of the participant’s gender, age, marital status, number of children, position, education status, working time, and spouse’s employment status.

In the second part of the questionnaire, there is the Digital Citizenship Scale and adapted into Turkish by Erdem and Koçyiğit (2019), to evaluate the level of digital citizenship. The scale has a seven-point Likert type (1: I strongly disagree, 7: I completely agree) and 18 items exploring five dimensions (political activism on the internet, technical skills, local/global awareness, critical perspective, and network activity). In this study, the Cronbach Alpha coefficient of the whole scale was 0.91; Cronbach Alpha coefficients of the sub-dimensions were determined as 0.90/0.88/0.79/0.88/0.81.

  1. Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.

3.2 Analysis of Data

SPSS 21.0 software was used to analyze the data in this study. The demographic characteristics of the participants are shown in the frequency and percentage tables. Scale and sub-dimension scores are shown in the descriptive statistics table consisting of mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis. In testing the normality of the scale scores, the skewness and kurtosis coefficients were taken into account. The fact that the skewness and kurtosis coefficients used in the regular distribution feature of the scores obtained from a continuous variable are within the limits of ±1 can be interpreted as the scores do not show a significant deviation from the normal distribution. Parametric tests can be performed by performing square root, logarithmic, or inverse transformations of scores that do not show normal distribution (Büyüköztürk, 2011). The Pearson correlation test was used to determine the relationship between sub-dimension scores after square root transformations of non-normally distributed dimension scores (political activism on the internet, technical skills, and critical perspective) were made. In comparing the scale and sub-dimension scores according to gender, age, marital status, position, and spouse’s employment status, from two independent sample t-test, the ANOVA test was used to compare the number of children according to the variables of educational status and working time. When a significant difference was observed in the ANOVA test, the LSD post hoc test was used to determine the difference between those groups. The statistical significance level in the analysis was accepted as 0.05 (p < 0.05).

4 Findings

4.1 Demographic Findings

Table 1 shows the distribution of the participants according to their demographic characteristics.

Table 1

Distribution of the participants by demographic characteristics

Demographic variable Groups N %
Gender Female 64 15.4
Male 351 84.6
Age 22–42 age 284 68.4
43–58 age 131 31.6
Marital status Married 332 80.0
Single 83 20.0
Number of children None 92 22.2
1 Child 67 16.1
2 Children 125 30.1
3 Children 94 22.7
4 Children and above 37 8.9
Position Employee 376 90.6
Manager 39 9.4
Education status Primary Education 128 30.8
High School 123 29.6
Associate Degree 71 17.1
Undergraduate 71 17.1
Graduate 22 5.3
Seniority Less than 1 year 27 6.5
1–5 years 115 27.7
6–11 years 135 32.5
12 years and above 138 33.3
Working status of spouse Working 92 22.2
Not working 323 77.8

Female participants made up 15.4% of the population (N = 415), and 84.6% were male. Participants in the 23–42 age group made up 68.4% of the population, and 31.6% were in the 43–58 age group. Married participants made up 68.4% of the population, and 31.6% were single. Participants without children made up 22.2% of the population, where 16.1% have one child, 30.1% have two children, 22.7% have three children, and 8.9% have four or more children. Employees make up 90.6% of the participants, and 9.4% are in managerial positions. Participants with only a primary education made up 30.8% of the population, while 29.6% completed high school, 17.1% completed an associate degree, 17.1% completed an undergraduate degree, and 5.3% completed postgraduate education. The working period of 6.5% of the participants is less than one year, 27.7% of them had worked 1–5 years, 32.5% had worked 6–11 years, and 33.3% had worked 12 years or more. The spouses of 22.2% of the participants also have a job.

4.2 Descriptive Findings

Descriptive statistics from the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores are given in Table 2.

Table 2

Descriptive statistics of digital citizenship scores

Dimensions N Available for purchase Obtained X ¯ SS Skew Stickiness
Min. Maks. Min. Maks.
Political activism on the internet 415 1 7 1.00 7.00 2.35 1.41 0.80 −0.23
Technical skills 415 1 7 1.00 7.00 5.68 1.29 −0.94 0.57
Local/Global awareness 415 1 7 1.00 7.00 4.69 1.77 −0.66 −0.74
Critical perspective 415 1 7 1.00 7.00 3.85 1.77 0.32 −0.84
Network activity 415 1 7 1.00 7.00 3.09 1.64 0.53 −0.74
Digital citizenship 415 1 7 1.00 7.00 3.93 1.19 −0.04 −0.53

According to Table 2, the Digital Citizenship Scale score was 3.93 ± 1.19. Accordingly, it can be said that the digital citizenship behavior of the participants is in the range of “I am undecided” (at a moderate level). When the digital citizenship dimensions are examined, the digital citizenship behavior with the highest score is “technical skills” (5.68 ± 1.29 [in the range of “agree”]), and the digital citizenship behavior with the lowest score is “political activism on the internet” (2.35 ± 1.41 [in the range of “I do not agree”]). According to the scores obtained, the range of local/global awareness fell in the “partially agree” to “I am undecided” range in the critical point of view, and it has been determined that network activity is in the range of “partially disagree.”

4.3 Comparison of Digital Citizenship Scores by Demographic Variables

The results of the independent two-sample t-test for the comparison of digital citizenship scores by gender are given in Table 3.

Table 3

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by gender

Dimensions Gender N X ¯ SS t p
Political activism on the internet Female 64 2.26 1.52 −0.83 0.407
Male 351 2.37 1.39
Technical skills Female 64 6.13 0.94 3.23 0.001
Male 351 5.60 1.32
Local/Global awareness Female 64 5.34 1.60 3.25 0.001
Male 351 4.57 1.78
Critical perspective Female 64 4.64 1.71 4.07 0.000
Male 351 3.71 1.74
Network activity Female 64 3.00 1.72 −0.48 0.628
Male 351 3.11 1.63
Digital citizenship Female 64 4.27 1.12 2.49 0.013
Male 351 3.87 1.20

Bold value indicates the scores of female participants are significantly higher than male participants.

It was determined that the sub-dimension scores of political activism and network activity on the internet did not differ significantly by gender (p > 0.05). Technical skills (t = 3.23; p < 0.05), local/global awareness (t = 3.25; p < 0.05), critical perspective (t = 4.07; p < 0.05) sub-dimension scores, and Digital Citizenship Scale (t = 2.49; p < 0.05) scores were found to differ significantly by gender. Technical skills, local/global awareness, critical perspective, and digital citizenship scores of female participants are significantly higher than those of male participants.

Table 4 shows the results of the independent two-sample t-test for comparing the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores according to age groups.

Table 4

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by age groups

Boyutlar Age groups N X ¯ SS t p
Political activism on the internet 22–42 age 284 2.38 1.42 0.71 0.479
43–58 age 131 2.29 1.39
Technical skills 22–42 age 284 5.88 1.18 4.99 0.000
43–58 age 131 5.26 1.41
Local/Global awareness 22–42 age 284 4.92 1.72 3.90 0.000
43–58 age 131 4.20 1.80
Critical perspective 22–42 age 284 4.05 1.74 3.38 0.001
43–58 age 131 3.42 1.76
Network activity 22–42 age 284 3.14 1.64 0.83 0.404
43–58 age 131 2.99 1.64
Digital citizenship 22–42 age 284 4.07 1.12 3.58 0.000
43–58 age 131 3.63 1.30

Bold value indicates the scores of the 22–42 age group participants are significantly higher than the 43–58 age group participants.

It was determined that the sub-dimension scores of political activism and network activity on the internet did not differ significantly by age group (p > 0.05). Technical skills (t = 4.99; p < 0.05), local/global awareness (t = 3.90, p < 0.05), critical perspective (t = 3.38; p < 0.05) sub-dimension scores, and Digital Citizenship Scale (t = 3.58; p < 0.05) scores were found to differ significantly according to age group. The technical skills, local/global awareness, critical perspective, and digital citizenship scores of the 22–42 age group participants are significantly higher than those of the 43–58 age group participants.

Table 5 shows the results of the independent two-sample t-test for comparing the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores according to marital status.

Table 5

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by marital status

Dimensions Marital status N X ¯ SS t p
Political activism on the internet Married 332 2.34 1.39 −0.17 0.865
Single 83 2.40 1.50
Technical skills Married 332 5.64 1.27 −1.68 0.093
Single 83 5.85 1.35
Local/Global awareness Married 332 4.62 1.75 −1.55 0.122
Single 83 4.96 1.83
Critical perspective Married 332 3.76 1.77 −2.07 0.039
Single 83 4.22 1.71
Network activity Married 332 3.03 1.63 −1.53 0.128
Single 83 3.34 1.67
Digital citizenship Married 332 3.88 1.19 −1.89 0.060
Single 83 4.15 1.18

Bold value is the one which score differed significantly according to the marital status.

It was determined that political activism, technical skills, local/global awareness, and network activity on the internet sub-dimension scores and digital citizenship scores did not differ significantly according to marital status (p > 0.05). It was determined that critical perspective scores differed significantly according to marital status (t = −2.07; p < 0.05). The critical perspective score of the single participants is significantly higher than married participants.

The results of the ANOVA test for comparing the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores according to the number of children are given in Table 6.

Table 6

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by number of children

Dimensions Number of children N X ¯ SS F p Significant difference
Political activism on the internet A – None 92 2.34 1.44 1.16 0.329
B – 1 child 67 2.55 1.58
C – 2 children 125 2.16 1.20
D – 3 children 94 2.52 1.54
E – 4 children and above 37 2.25 1.29
Technical skills A – None 92 5.86 1.32 3.02 0.018 A, B > D, E
B – 1 child 67 5.89 1.12
C – 2 children 125 5.75 1.15
D – 3 children 94 5.42 1.44
E – 4 children and above 37 5.32 1.40
Local/Global awareness A – None 92 4.81 1.93 2.61 0.035 A, B, C > D, E
B – 1 child 67 5.05 1.81
C – 2 children 125 4.82 1.62
D – 3 children 94 4.30 1.70
E – 4 children and above 37 4.28 1.82
Critical perspective A – None 92 4.05 1.72 2.17 0.071
B – 1 child 67 4.26 1.81
C – 2 children 125 3.71 1.77
D – 3 children 94 3.73 1.69
E – 4 children and above 37 3.39 1.89
Network activity A – None 92 3.11 1.77 0.61 0.659
B – 1 child 67 2.94 1.65
C – 2 children 125 2.99 1.55
D – 3 children 94 3.28 1.66
E – 4 children and above 37 3.19 1.57
Digital citizenship A – None 92 4.03 1.19 1.23 0.299
B – 1 child 67 4.14 1.21
C – 2 children 125 3.88 1.07
D – 3 children 94 3.85 1.28
E – 4 children and above 37 3.69 1.34

It was determined that the Digital Citizenship Scale score and the sub-dimension scores of political activism, critical perspective, and network activity on the internet were similar according to the number of children (p > 0.05).

Technical skills (F = 3.02; p < 0.05) and local/global awareness (F = 2.61; p < 0.05) sub-dimension scores were found to differ significantly according to the number of children. According to the results of the LSD post hoc test performed to determine the difference between groups:

  1. The technical skills score of the participants who do not have children and have one child is significantly higher than those with three or more children.

  2. The local/global awareness score of the participants who do not have children, who have one child and two children, is significantly higher than that of those with three or more children.

Two independent samples t-test results for comparing the digital citizenship scale and sub-dimension scores according to position are given in Table 7.

Table 7

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by position

Dimensions Position N X ¯ SS t p
Political activism on the internet Employee 376 2.31 1.38 −1.82 0.070
Manager 39 2.76 1.64
Technical skills Employee 376 5.64 1.31 −1.92 0.055
Manager 39 6.06 0.91
Local/Global awareness Employee 376 4.62 1.78 −2.59 0.010
Manager 39 5.38 1.50
Critical perspective Employee 376 3.81 1.76 −1.52 0.130
Manager 39 4.24 1.85
Network activity Employee 376 3.06 1.64 −1.07 0.286
Manager 39 3.36 1.68
Digital citizenship Employee 376 3.89 1.20 −2.35 0.019
Manager 39 4.36 1.07

Bold values are the ones which scores differed significantly according to the position.

It was determined that the sub-dimension scores of political activism, technical skills, critical perspective, and network activity on the internet were similar according to work position (p > 0.05).

Local/global awareness (t = −2.59; p < 0.05) sub-dimension score and Digital Citizenship Scale (t = −2.35; p < 0.05) score were found to differ significantly according to work position. The local/global awareness and digital citizenship scores of the participants in a managerial role are significantly higher than those of the non-managerial participants.

The results of the ANOVA test for the comparison of the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores according to educational status are given in Table 8.

Table 8

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by educational status

Scale and dimension Education status N X ¯ SS F p Significant difference
Political activism on the internet A – Primary education 128 2.42 1.49 1.57 0.183
B – High school 123 2.44 1.43
C – Associate degree 71 2.26 1.23
D – Undergraduate 71 2.03 1.17
E – Graduate 22 2.82 1.97
Technical skills A – Primary education 128 5.18 1.49 12.97 0.000 E > A, B, C
B – High school 123 5.72 1.04 D > A, B
C – Associate degree 71 5.77 1.37
D – Undergraduate 71 6.14 0.98
E – Graduate 22 6.63 0.50
Local/Global awareness A – Primary education 128 4.03 1.87 10.47 0.000 C, D, E > A, B
B – High school 123 4.60 1.68
C – Associate degree 71 5.11 1.57
D – Undergraduate 71 5.26 1.61
E – Graduate 22 5.82 1.38
Critical perspective A – Primary education 128 3.47 1.75 7.36 0.000 E > A, B, C, D
B – High school 123 3.80 1.68 D > A
C – Associate degree 71 3.87 1.64
D – Undergraduate 71 4.13 1.83
E – Graduate 22 5.39 1.68
Network activity A – Primary education 128 3.09 1.72 0.40 0.810
B – High school 123 3.22 1.52
C – Associate degree 71 3.05 1.56
D – Undergraduate 71 2.92 1.67
E – Graduate 22 3.06 2.08
Digital citizenship A – Primary education 128 3.64 1.36 5.11 0.001 E > A, B, C, D
B – High school 123 3.96 1.12 B, C, D > A
C – Associate degree 71 4.01 1.01
D – Undergraduate 71 4.10 1.06
E – Graduate 22 4.74 1.07

Bold values are the ones which scores differed significantly according to the education level.

It was determined that the sub-dimension scores of political activism and network activity on the internet did not differ significantly according to educational status (p > 0.05).

It was determined that technical skills (F = 12.97; p < 0.05), local/global awareness (F = 10.47; p < 0.05), critical perspective (F = 7.36; p < 0.05) sub-dimension scores and the Digital Citizenship Scale (F = 5.11; p < 0.05) score differed significantly according to the education level. According to the results of the LSD post hoc test performed to determine the differences between groups:

  1. The technical skills scores of the graduate students are significantly higher than those of the participants studying at primary, high school, and associate degree levels. The technical skills scores of the participants studying at the undergraduate level are significantly higher than those of the participants studying at the primary and high school levels.

  2. Local/global awareness scores of participants studying at the associate, undergraduate, and graduate levels are significantly higher than those of participants at primary and high school levels.

  3. The critical perspective score of the participants studying at the graduate level is significantly higher than the scores of the participants studying at primary, high school, and associate degree levels. The critical perspective score of the participants studying at the undergraduate level is significantly higher than those of the participants studying at the primary education level.

  4. The digital citizenship score of the participants studying at the graduate level is significantly higher than those studying at the primary, high school, and associate degree levels. The digital citizenship scores of the participants studying at high school, associate degree, and undergraduate levels are significantly higher than those of participants studying at the primary education level.

The results of the ANOVA test for comparing the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores according to working time are given in Table 9.

Table 9

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by seniority

Scale and dimension Seniority N X ¯ SS F p Significant difference
Political activism on the internet A – Less than 1 year 27 2.17 1.23 2.60 0.052
B – 1–5 years 115 2.67 1.58
C – 6–11 years 135 2.25 1.43
D – 12 years and above 138 2.23 1.25
Technical skills A – Less than 1 year 27 5.65 1.41 1.32 0.268
B – 1–5 years 115 5.85 1.25
C – 6–11 years 135 5.66 1.34
D – 12 years and above 138 5.57 1.23
Local/Global awareness A – Less than 1 year 27 4.30 2.21 2.07 0.104
B – 1–5 years 115 5.02 1.72
C – 6–11 years 135 4.58 1.84
D – 12 years and above 138 4.60 1.63
Critical perspective A – Less than 1 year 27 3.64 1.72 1.29 0.279
B – 1–5 years 115 4.10 1.80
C – 6–11 years 135 3.76 1.85
D – 12 years and above 138 3.78 1.66
Network activity A – Less than 1 year 27 3.12 1.88 1.12 0.342
B – 1–5 years 115 3.32 1.75
C – 6–11 years 135 3.02 1.62
D – 12 years and above 138 2.97 1.51
Digital citizenship A – Less than 1 year 27 3.78 1.39 2.56 0.055
B – 1–5 years 115 4.19 1.21
C – 6–11 years 135 3.85 1.20
D – 12 years and above 138 3.83 1.10

It was determined that the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores were similar according to a participant’s seniority (p > 0.05).

Table 10 shows the results of the independent two-sample t-test for comparing the Digital Citizenship Scale and sub-dimension scores according to the spouse’s employment status.

Table 10

Comparison of digital citizenship scores by spouse’s employment status

Dimensions Spouse N X ¯ SS t p
Political activism on the internet Working 92 2.29 1.45 −0.58 0.562
Not working 323 2.37 1.40
Technical skills Working 92 5.98 1.11 2.73 0.007
Not working 323 5.60 1.32
Local/Global awareness Working 92 5.10 1.62 2.52 0.012
Not working 323 4.57 1.80
Critical perspective Working 92 4.17 1.78 2.01 0.045
Not working 323 3.76 1.76
Network activity Working 92 2.98 1.71 −0.75 0.454
Not working 323 3.12 1.63
Digital citizenship Working 92 4.11 1.15 1.57 0.118
Not working 323 3.89 1.20

Bold values are the ones which was differed significantly according to the spouse’s employment status.

It was determined that political activism, network activity on the internet sub-dimension scores and Digital Citizenship Scale scores did not differ significantly according to the working status of the spouse (p > 0.05).

It was determined that the sub-dimension scores of technical skills (t = 2.73; p < 0.05), local/global awareness (t = 2.52; p < 0.05), and critical perspective (t = 2.01; p < 0.05) differed significantly according to the spouse’s employment status. The technical skills, local/global awareness, and critical perspective scores of the participants whose spouses are working are significantly higher than those of whose spouses are not working.

4.4 Findings Regarding the Relationship Between the Sub-Dimensions of Digital Citizenship

The results of the Pearson correlation analysis between digital citizenship sub-dimension scores are given in Table 11.

Table 11

The relationship between the sub-dimensions of digital citizenship

Dimensions N 2 3 4 5 6
1. Political activism on the internet 415 0.16 0.34 0.48 0.61 0.68
2. Technical skills 415 1 0.53 0.41 0.25 0.60
3. Local/Global awareness 415 1 0.64 0.47 0.81
4. Critical perspective 415 1 0.55 0.84
5. Network activity 415 1 0.78
6. Digital citizenship 415 1

It was determined that there was a positive and significant relationship between political activism on the internet and technical skills (r = 0.16; p < 0.05), local/global awareness (r = 0.34; p < 0.05), critical perspective (r = 0.48; p < 0.05), and network efficiency (r = 0.61; p < 0.05) according to Table 11.

According to Table 11, technical skills and local/global awareness (r = 0.53; p < 0.05), critical perspective (r = 0.41; p < 0.05), network activity (r = 0, 25; p < 0.05) have a positive and significant relationship between them.

It was determined that there was a positive and significant relationship between local/cultural awareness and critical perspective (r = 0.64; p < 0.05) and network activity (r = 0.47; p < 0.05) according to Table 11.

Table 11 shows a positive and significant relationship between critical perspective and network effectiveness (r = 0.55; p < 0.05).

5 Conclusion

5.1 Theoretical Implications

According to the analysis results, the participants’ digital citizenship behaviors are moderate. It is an expected result. The unequal access to digital technologies and the unequal quality of technology are the most ethical problems underlying digital citizenship. The income inequality of people worldwide is the most important criterion that prevents them from meeting the digital citizenship criteria. There is only one piece of research that supports the results of this research (Öztürk, 2015). Unlike the research results, some studies argue that digital citizenship knowledge levels are pretty low (Elçi & Sarı, 2016; Ünal, 2017) and high (Akduman & Karahan, 2022).

The groups with a significantly higher digital citizenship level are women between the ages of 22–42, acting as managers, at a postgraduate education level. The Digital Citizenship Scale score of the participants was determined as 3.93 ± 1.19. Accordingly, it can be said that the digital citizenship behavior of the participants is in the range of “I am undecided” (at a moderate level). When the digital citizenship dimensions are examined, technical skills (5.68 ± 1.29 [in the range of “I agree”]) was the digital citizenship behavior with the highest score, and it was determined that the digital citizenship behavior with the lowest score was political activism on the internet (2.35 ± 1.41 [in the range of “disagree”]).

According to the scores obtained, local/global awareness falls in the “partially agree” range (in the range of “I am undecided”), and it was determined that the network activity sub-dimension is in the range of “partially disagree.”

When the related literature is examined, there are studies that support and contradict the results of this research. As a result of their research, Elçi and Sarı (2016) and İşman and Güngören (2013) found that there is no difference between the digital citizenship values of female and male participants, and the average values of all dimensions of digital citizenship and the sum of the scales are higher for those who have a computer at home. As a result of their research, Akduman and Karahan (2022) found that digital skills, digital commerce, and digital citizenship scores did not differ significantly according to gender and age, and the scores of the perception of digital rights and responsibility differed significantly according to gender alone. The digital rights and responsibility perception score of female participants is significantly higher than that of male participants.

Supporting these findings, there are also studies (Karaaslan Aydoğdu & Budak, 2012; Vural, 2016) that argue that women’s digital citizenship levels are higher than men, in parallel with the high rate of internet use.

Steps can be taken to develop digital citizenship in Turkey by implementing the following:

  1. Educational Programs: Creating educational programs on digital citizenship to raise awareness of this issue among younger generations through schools and other educational institutions.

  2. Campaigns and Seminars: Organizing campaigns and seminars that inform society about digital security, information sharing, and online respect.

  3. Social Media Tags: Launching unique tags or campaigns on social media platforms to raise awareness about digital citizenship.

  4. Raising Internet Security Awareness: Organizing awareness campaigns on internet security and guiding individuals on safe internet use.

  5. Cooperation and Joint Projects: Developing joint projects by providing cooperation between the public and private sectors, and non-governmental organizations.

  6. Legal Regulations: Updating legal regulations regarding digital crimes to fight against crimes in the digital world effectively.

Implementing these steps can offer effective strategies to increase society’s awareness of digital citizenship and create a safer digital environment.

5.2 Limitations and Future Research Direction

The most important limitations of the study are the number of participants and the scale used. Since the research population was generalized simply as white-collar employees, it is not practically possible to determine a specific population description beyond that. An exhaustive list of every white-collar position within that designation is nearly impossible to generate, so succinctly, this research was conducted with white-collar employees currently working in a non-specified institution using the cluster sampling method. A study using larger sample populations will better support reaching more generalizable results. Research based on more of the participants’ demographic characteristics, such as city, sociocultural status, and economic conditions, will also provide more comprehensive results.

The sample is heavily skewed towards the male populace, which makes the findings questionable and biased. So, this is another big limitation of the study.

Future studies can be designed in different ways. In particular, more in-depth and more detailed findings can be reached through research in which qualitative data collection methods, such as observation and interviews, are used. The results from this research were obtained from quantitative data based on scale application.

In addition, evaluation by adding different independent variables such as technology perspectives, digital technology habits and duration of use, purposes of internet use, internet use history, membership in social networks, ownership of digital tools and applications, and family income will also provide more detailed results.

  1. Funding information: Authors state no funding involved.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and consented to its submission to the journal, reviewed all the results and approved the final version of the manuscript. GA, HK, ED: contributed to the preparation, development and publication of the article.

  3. Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.

  5. Data availability statement: The data generated during the study (survey data) and the analyzed datasets are available from the corresponding author upon request.

  6. Article note: As part of the open assessment, reviews and the original submission are available as supplementary files on our website.

References

Akduman, G., & Karahan, G. (2022). Dijital çağın öğrencileri dijital vatandaşlar mı? FSM Mesleki Bilimler Dergisi (FSMB), 1(1), 92–111.Suche in Google Scholar

Ather, A., & Ejaz, A., (2015). Digital commerce in emerging economies. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 10(4), 634–647.10.1108/IJoEM-01-2014-0051Suche in Google Scholar

Ba, H., Tally, W., & Tsikalas, K. (2002). Investigating children’s emerging digital literacies. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 1(4), 1–49.Suche in Google Scholar

Buchholz, B. A., DeHart, J., & Moorman, G. (2020). Digital citizenship during a global pandemic: Moving beyond digital literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 64(1), 11–17. doi: 10.1002/jaal.1076.Suche in Google Scholar

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. (14. Baskı). PEGEM Akademi.Suche in Google Scholar

Çubukcu, A., & Bayzan, Ş. (2013). Türkiye’de dijital vatandaşlık algısı ve bu algıyı internetin bilinçli, güvenli ve etkin kullanımı ile artırma yöntemleri. Middle Eastern & African Journal of Educational Research, 5(1), 148–174.Suche in Google Scholar

Elçi, A. C., & Sarı, M. (2016). Bilişim teknolojileri ve yazılım dersi öğretim programına yönelik öğrenci görüşlerinin dijital vatandaşlık bağlamında incelenmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25(3), 87–102.Suche in Google Scholar

Erdem, C., & Koçyiğit, M. (2019). Dijital vatandaşlık ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. 28. Uluslararası Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi Bildirisi.10.24106/kefdergi.3763Suche in Google Scholar

Ersoy, A. F. (2013). Vatandaşlık: Yeni Yaklaşımlarla Vatandaşlık ve Eğitimi. In İ. Acun, B. Tarman, & E. Dinç (Eds.), İnsan hakları demokrasi ve vatandaşlık eğitimi (pp. 69–90). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.Suche in Google Scholar

Gentry, J. W. (2022). Ro Khanna, Dignity in a digital age: Making tech work for all of us (2022). Markets, Globalization & Development Review, 7(3), 1–7. Article 4.10.23860/MGDR-2022-07-03-04Suche in Google Scholar

Girardin, L. (2020). The 7 Barriers to digital communication. https://www.govloop.com/community/blog/7-barriers-digital-communication/.Suche in Google Scholar

Hollandsworth, R., Donovan, J., & Welch, M. (2017). Digital citizenship: You can’t go home again. TechTrends, 61(1), 1–7.10.1007/s11528-017-0190-4Suche in Google Scholar

İşman, A., & Güngören, Ö. C. (2013). Being digital citizen. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 551–556.10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.063Suche in Google Scholar

Karaaslan Aydoğdu, İ., & Budak, L. (2012). Üniversite öğrencilerinin cep telefonu özelliklerini kullanımlarının ve gündelik iletişimlerine etkisinin araştırılması. Journal of Yasar University, 26(7) 4548–4525.Suche in Google Scholar

Lemos de Paiva, I., & Miranda, G. (2022). Contribuciones para una mirada marxista acerca de los usos de la tecnología bajo el capitalismo. Research in Education and Learning Innovation Archives, 28, 50–60.10.7203/realia.28.21421Suche in Google Scholar

Lyons, R. (2012). Investigating student gender and grade level differences in digital citizenship behavior. (Doctorate thesis). Walden University.Suche in Google Scholar

Mitrović, Ð. (2020). Measuring the efficiency of digital convergence. Economics Letters, 188, 108982. doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2020.108982.Suche in Google Scholar

Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2007). Digital citizenship: The internet, society and participation. The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/7428.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Öztürk, M. (2015). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin dijital vatandaşlık düzeyleri (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans tezi). Kastamonu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.Suche in Google Scholar

Picornell-Lucas, A., & López-Peláez, A. (2022). The digital citizenship of children and adolescents: Challenges for social work education. Research in Education and Learning Innovation Archives, 28, 32–37.10.7203/realia.28.23001Suche in Google Scholar

Ribble, M. (2004). Digital citizenship: Addressing appropriate technology behavior. Learning & Leading With Technology, 32(1), 6–11.Suche in Google Scholar

Ribble, M. (2011). Digital citizenship in schools (2nd ed.). International Society for Technology in Education.Suche in Google Scholar

Ribble, M., & Bailey, G. (2006). Digital citizenship at all grade levels. Learning and Leading With Technology, 33(6), 26–33.Suche in Google Scholar

Siira, E., & Wolf, A. (2022). Are digital citizen panels an innovative, deliberative approach to cardiovascular research? European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 21, 287–291.10.1093/eurjcn/zvab132Suche in Google Scholar

Taşel, F. (2020). Dijitalleşmenin Ticarete ve Ekonomiye Etkisi. Beykoz Akademi Dergisi, 8(2), 127–137.10.14514/BYK.m.26515393.2020.8/2.127-137Suche in Google Scholar

Ünal, D. P. (2017). Digital citizenship elements in a curriculum and secondary school students’ states of having digital citizenship elements. Karaelmas Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(2017), 180–195.Suche in Google Scholar

Vural, S. S. (2016). Üniversite öğrencilerinin bakış açısıyla dijital vatandaşlık göstergelerinin incelenmesi (Doktora Tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.Suche in Google Scholar

Yalçınkaya, B., & Cibaroğlu, M. O. (2019). Dijital vatandaşlık algısının incelenmesi: Ampirik bir değerlendirme. Business And Management Studies An International Journal, 7(4), 1188–1208.10.15295/bmij.v7i4.1140Suche in Google Scholar

Yılmaz, M., & Doğusoy, B. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının dijital vatandaşlık düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28(6), 2362–2375.10.24106/kefdergi.692492Suche in Google Scholar
Received: 2023-01-29
Revised: 2024-04-02
Accepted: 2024-04-08
Published Online: 2024-07-03

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Political Turnover and Public Health Provision in Brazilian Municipalities
  3. Examining the Effects of Trade Liberalisation Using a Gravity Model Approach
  4. Operating Efficiency in the Capital-Intensive Semiconductor Industry: A Nonparametric Frontier Approach
  5. Does Health Insurance Boost Subjective Well-being? Examining the Link in China through a National Survey
  6. An Intelligent Approach for Predicting Stock Market Movements in Emerging Markets Using Optimized Technical Indicators and Neural Networks
  7. Analysis of the Effect of Digital Financial Inclusion in Promoting Inclusive Growth: Mechanism and Statistical Verification
  8. Effective Tax Rates and Firm Size under Turnover Tax: Evidence from a Natural Experiment on SMEs
  9. Re-investigating the Impact of Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, Financial Development, Institutional Quality, and Globalization on Environmental Degradation in OECD Countries
  10. A Compliance Return Method to Evaluate Different Approaches to Implementing Regulations: The Example of Food Hygiene Standards
  11. Panel Technical Efficiency of Korean Companies in the Energy Sector based on Digital Capabilities
  12. Time-varying Investment Dynamics in the USA
  13. Preferences, Institutions, and Policy Makers: The Case of the New Institutionalization of Science, Technology, and Innovation Governance in Colombia
  14. The Impact of Geographic Factors on Credit Risk: A Study of Chinese Commercial Banks
  15. The Heterogeneous Effect and Transmission Paths of Air Pollution on Housing Prices: Evidence from 30 Large- and Medium-Sized Cities in China
  16. Analysis of Demographic Variables Affecting Digital Citizenship in Turkey
  17. Green Finance, Environmental Regulations, and Green Technologies in China: Implications for Achieving Green Economic Recovery
  18. Coupled and Coordinated Development of Economic Growth and Green Sustainability in a Manufacturing Enterprise under the Context of Dual Carbon Goals: Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality
  19. Revealing the New Nexus in Urban Unemployment Dynamics: The Relationship between Institutional Variables and Long-Term Unemployment in Colombia
  20. The Roles of the Terms of Trade and the Real Exchange Rate in the Current Account Balance
  21. Cleaner Production: Analysis of the Role and Path of Green Finance in Controlling Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
  22. The Research on the Impact of Regional Trade Network Relationships on Value Chain Resilience in China’s Service Industry
  23. Social Support and Suicidal Ideation among Children of Cross-Border Married Couples
  24. Asymmetrical Monetary Relations and Involuntary Unemployment in a General Equilibrium Model
  25. Job Crafting among Airport Security: The Role of Organizational Support, Work Engagement and Social Courage
  26. Does the Adjustment of Industrial Structure Restrain the Income Gap between Urban and Rural Areas
  27. Optimizing Emergency Logistics Centre Locations: A Multi-Objective Robust Model
  28. Geopolitical Risks and Stock Market Volatility in the SAARC Region
  29. Trade Globalization, Overseas Investment, and Tax Revenue Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa
  30. Can Government Expenditure Improve the Efficiency of Institutional Elderly-Care Service? – Take Wuhan as an Example
  31. Media Tone and Earnings Management before the Earnings Announcement: Evidence from China
  32. Review Articles
  33. Economic Growth in the Age of Ubiquitous Threats: How Global Risks are Reshaping Growth Theory
  34. Efficiency Measurement in Healthcare: The Foundations, Variables, and Models – A Narrative Literature Review
  35. Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Economics I: The Multilevel Paradigm
  36. Financial Literacy as Part of Empowerment Education for Later Life: A Spectrum of Perspectives, Challenges and Implications for Individuals, Educators and Policymakers in the Modern Digital Economy
  37. Special Issue: Economic Implications of Management and Entrepreneurship - Part II
  38. Ethnic Entrepreneurship: A Qualitative Study on Entrepreneurial Tendency of Meskhetian Turks Living in the USA in the Context of the Interactive Model
  39. Bridging Brand Parity with Insights Regarding Consumer Behavior
  40. The Effect of Green Human Resources Management Practices on Corporate Sustainability from the Perspective of Employees
  41. Special Issue: Shapes of Performance Evaluation in Economics and Management Decision - Part II
  42. High-Quality Development of Sports Competition Performance Industry in Chengdu-Chongqing Region Based on Performance Evaluation Theory
  43. Analysis of Multi-Factor Dynamic Coupling and Government Intervention Level for Urbanization in China: Evidence from the Yangtze River Economic Belt
  44. The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Technological Innovation of Enterprises: Based on Empirical Evidences of the Implementation of Pollution Charges in China
  45. Environmental Social Responsibility, Local Environmental Protection Strategy, and Corporate Financial Performance – Empirical Evidence from Heavy Pollution Industry
  46. The Relationship Between Stock Performance and Money Supply Based on VAR Model in the Context of E-commerce
  47. A Novel Approach for the Assessment of Logistics Performance Index of EU Countries
  48. The Decision Behaviour Evaluation of Interrelationships among Personality, Transformational Leadership, Leadership Self-Efficacy, and Commitment for E-Commerce Administrative Managers
  49. Role of Cultural Factors on Entrepreneurship Across the Diverse Economic Stages: Insights from GEM and GLOBE Data
  50. Performance Evaluation of Economic Relocation Effect for Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations: Evidence from China
  51. Functional Analysis of English Carriers and Related Resources of Cultural Communication in Internet Media
  52. The Influences of Multi-Level Environmental Regulations on Firm Performance in China
  53. Exploring the Ethnic Cultural Integration Path of Immigrant Communities Based on Ethnic Inter-Embedding
  54. Analysis of a New Model of Economic Growth in Renewable Energy for Green Computing
  55. An Empirical Examination of Aging’s Ramifications on Large-scale Agriculture: China’s Perspective
  56. The Impact of Firm Digital Transformation on Environmental, Social, and Governance Performance: Evidence from China
  57. Accounting Comparability and Labor Productivity: Evidence from China’s A-Share Listed Firms
  58. An Empirical Study on the Impact of Tariff Reduction on China’s Textile Industry under the Background of RCEP
  59. Top Executives’ Overseas Background on Corporate Green Innovation Output: The Mediating Role of Risk Preference
  60. Neutrosophic Inventory Management: A Cost-Effective Approach
  61. Mechanism Analysis and Response of Digital Financial Inclusion to Labor Economy based on ANN and Contribution Analysis
  62. Asset Pricing and Portfolio Investment Management Using Machine Learning: Research Trend Analysis Using Scientometrics
  63. User-centric Smart City Services for People with Disabilities and the Elderly: A UN SDG Framework Approach
  64. Research on the Problems and Institutional Optimization Strategies of Rural Collective Economic Organization Governance
  65. The Impact of the Global Minimum Tax Reform on China and Its Countermeasures
  66. Sustainable Development of Low-Carbon Supply Chain Economy based on the Internet of Things and Environmental Responsibility
  67. Measurement of Higher Education Competitiveness Level and Regional Disparities in China from the Perspective of Sustainable Development
  68. Payment Clearing and Regional Economy Development Based on Panel Data of Sichuan Province
  69. Coordinated Regional Economic Development: A Study of the Relationship Between Regional Policies and Business Performance
  70. A Novel Perspective on Prioritizing Investment Projects under Future Uncertainty: Integrating Robustness Analysis with the Net Present Value Model
  71. Research on Measurement of Manufacturing Industry Chain Resilience Based on Index Contribution Model Driven by Digital Economy
  72. Special Issue: AEEFI 2023
  73. Portfolio Allocation, Risk Aversion, and Digital Literacy Among the European Elderly
  74. Exploring the Heterogeneous Impact of Trade Agreements on Trade: Depth Matters
  75. Import, Productivity, and Export Performances
  76. Government Expenditure, Education, and Productivity in the European Union: Effects on Economic Growth
  77. Replication Study
  78. Carbon Taxes and CO2 Emissions: A Replication of Andersson (American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2019)
https://doi.org/10.1515/econ-2022-0092
Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel
digital age; digitization; digital citizenship
Creative Commons
BY 4.0

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Political Turnover and Public Health Provision in Brazilian Municipalities
  3. Examining the Effects of Trade Liberalisation Using a Gravity Model Approach
  4. Operating Efficiency in the Capital-Intensive Semiconductor Industry: A Nonparametric Frontier Approach
  5. Does Health Insurance Boost Subjective Well-being? Examining the Link in China through a National Survey
  6. An Intelligent Approach for Predicting Stock Market Movements in Emerging Markets Using Optimized Technical Indicators and Neural Networks
  7. Analysis of the Effect of Digital Financial Inclusion in Promoting Inclusive Growth: Mechanism and Statistical Verification
  8. Effective Tax Rates and Firm Size under Turnover Tax: Evidence from a Natural Experiment on SMEs
  9. Re-investigating the Impact of Economic Growth, Energy Consumption, Financial Development, Institutional Quality, and Globalization on Environmental Degradation in OECD Countries
  10. A Compliance Return Method to Evaluate Different Approaches to Implementing Regulations: The Example of Food Hygiene Standards
  11. Panel Technical Efficiency of Korean Companies in the Energy Sector based on Digital Capabilities
  12. Time-varying Investment Dynamics in the USA
  13. Preferences, Institutions, and Policy Makers: The Case of the New Institutionalization of Science, Technology, and Innovation Governance in Colombia
  14. The Impact of Geographic Factors on Credit Risk: A Study of Chinese Commercial Banks
  15. The Heterogeneous Effect and Transmission Paths of Air Pollution on Housing Prices: Evidence from 30 Large- and Medium-Sized Cities in China
  16. Analysis of Demographic Variables Affecting Digital Citizenship in Turkey
  17. Green Finance, Environmental Regulations, and Green Technologies in China: Implications for Achieving Green Economic Recovery
  18. Coupled and Coordinated Development of Economic Growth and Green Sustainability in a Manufacturing Enterprise under the Context of Dual Carbon Goals: Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality
  19. Revealing the New Nexus in Urban Unemployment Dynamics: The Relationship between Institutional Variables and Long-Term Unemployment in Colombia
  20. The Roles of the Terms of Trade and the Real Exchange Rate in the Current Account Balance
  21. Cleaner Production: Analysis of the Role and Path of Green Finance in Controlling Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
  22. The Research on the Impact of Regional Trade Network Relationships on Value Chain Resilience in China’s Service Industry
  23. Social Support and Suicidal Ideation among Children of Cross-Border Married Couples
  24. Asymmetrical Monetary Relations and Involuntary Unemployment in a General Equilibrium Model
  25. Job Crafting among Airport Security: The Role of Organizational Support, Work Engagement and Social Courage
  26. Does the Adjustment of Industrial Structure Restrain the Income Gap between Urban and Rural Areas
  27. Optimizing Emergency Logistics Centre Locations: A Multi-Objective Robust Model
  28. Geopolitical Risks and Stock Market Volatility in the SAARC Region
  29. Trade Globalization, Overseas Investment, and Tax Revenue Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa
  30. Can Government Expenditure Improve the Efficiency of Institutional Elderly-Care Service? – Take Wuhan as an Example
  31. Media Tone and Earnings Management before the Earnings Announcement: Evidence from China
  32. Review Articles
  33. Economic Growth in the Age of Ubiquitous Threats: How Global Risks are Reshaping Growth Theory
  34. Efficiency Measurement in Healthcare: The Foundations, Variables, and Models – A Narrative Literature Review
  35. Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Economics I: The Multilevel Paradigm
  36. Financial Literacy as Part of Empowerment Education for Later Life: A Spectrum of Perspectives, Challenges and Implications for Individuals, Educators and Policymakers in the Modern Digital Economy
  37. Special Issue: Economic Implications of Management and Entrepreneurship - Part II
  38. Ethnic Entrepreneurship: A Qualitative Study on Entrepreneurial Tendency of Meskhetian Turks Living in the USA in the Context of the Interactive Model
  39. Bridging Brand Parity with Insights Regarding Consumer Behavior
  40. The Effect of Green Human Resources Management Practices on Corporate Sustainability from the Perspective of Employees
  41. Special Issue: Shapes of Performance Evaluation in Economics and Management Decision - Part II
  42. High-Quality Development of Sports Competition Performance Industry in Chengdu-Chongqing Region Based on Performance Evaluation Theory
  43. Analysis of Multi-Factor Dynamic Coupling and Government Intervention Level for Urbanization in China: Evidence from the Yangtze River Economic Belt
  44. The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Technological Innovation of Enterprises: Based on Empirical Evidences of the Implementation of Pollution Charges in China
  45. Environmental Social Responsibility, Local Environmental Protection Strategy, and Corporate Financial Performance – Empirical Evidence from Heavy Pollution Industry
  46. The Relationship Between Stock Performance and Money Supply Based on VAR Model in the Context of E-commerce
  47. A Novel Approach for the Assessment of Logistics Performance Index of EU Countries
  48. The Decision Behaviour Evaluation of Interrelationships among Personality, Transformational Leadership, Leadership Self-Efficacy, and Commitment for E-Commerce Administrative Managers
  49. Role of Cultural Factors on Entrepreneurship Across the Diverse Economic Stages: Insights from GEM and GLOBE Data
  50. Performance Evaluation of Economic Relocation Effect for Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations: Evidence from China
  51. Functional Analysis of English Carriers and Related Resources of Cultural Communication in Internet Media
  52. The Influences of Multi-Level Environmental Regulations on Firm Performance in China
  53. Exploring the Ethnic Cultural Integration Path of Immigrant Communities Based on Ethnic Inter-Embedding
  54. Analysis of a New Model of Economic Growth in Renewable Energy for Green Computing
  55. An Empirical Examination of Aging’s Ramifications on Large-scale Agriculture: China’s Perspective
  56. The Impact of Firm Digital Transformation on Environmental, Social, and Governance Performance: Evidence from China
  57. Accounting Comparability and Labor Productivity: Evidence from China’s A-Share Listed Firms
  58. An Empirical Study on the Impact of Tariff Reduction on China’s Textile Industry under the Background of RCEP
  59. Top Executives’ Overseas Background on Corporate Green Innovation Output: The Mediating Role of Risk Preference
  60. Neutrosophic Inventory Management: A Cost-Effective Approach
  61. Mechanism Analysis and Response of Digital Financial Inclusion to Labor Economy based on ANN and Contribution Analysis
  62. Asset Pricing and Portfolio Investment Management Using Machine Learning: Research Trend Analysis Using Scientometrics
  63. User-centric Smart City Services for People with Disabilities and the Elderly: A UN SDG Framework Approach
  64. Research on the Problems and Institutional Optimization Strategies of Rural Collective Economic Organization Governance
  65. The Impact of the Global Minimum Tax Reform on China and Its Countermeasures
  66. Sustainable Development of Low-Carbon Supply Chain Economy based on the Internet of Things and Environmental Responsibility
  67. Measurement of Higher Education Competitiveness Level and Regional Disparities in China from the Perspective of Sustainable Development
  68. Payment Clearing and Regional Economy Development Based on Panel Data of Sichuan Province
  69. Coordinated Regional Economic Development: A Study of the Relationship Between Regional Policies and Business Performance
  70. A Novel Perspective on Prioritizing Investment Projects under Future Uncertainty: Integrating Robustness Analysis with the Net Present Value Model
  71. Research on Measurement of Manufacturing Industry Chain Resilience Based on Index Contribution Model Driven by Digital Economy
  72. Special Issue: AEEFI 2023
  73. Portfolio Allocation, Risk Aversion, and Digital Literacy Among the European Elderly
  74. Exploring the Heterogeneous Impact of Trade Agreements on Trade: Depth Matters
  75. Import, Productivity, and Export Performances
  76. Government Expenditure, Education, and Productivity in the European Union: Effects on Economic Growth
  77. Replication Study
  78. Carbon Taxes and CO2 Emissions: A Replication of Andersson (American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2019)
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 19.10.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/econ-2022-0092/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen