2019
DOI: 10.1177/0894439319851163
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

From Use to Overuse: Digital Inequality in the Age of Communication Abundance

Abstract: Public discourse about overuse as an undesired side effect of digital communication is growing. This article conceptually develops and empirically analyzes users' perceived digital overuse (PDO) as a widespread social phenomenon sensitive to existing inequalities. In an age of digital communication abundance and closing Internet access divides, overuse has not been systematically investigated nor are its social disparities known. In a first step, PDO is demarcated from Internet addiction, theoretically defined… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
72
1
8

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(83 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
2
72
1
8
Order By: Relevance
“…This conclusion is inconsistent with previous studies, which may be due to the fact that CO has been widely perceived as an emerging social problem. However, compared with the more prominent problematic Internet use or social network addiction, it appears to have a lower impact and is easily ignored (Gui and Büchi, 2019). In addition, academic research results on the correlation between CO and negative emotions are inconsistent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This conclusion is inconsistent with previous studies, which may be due to the fact that CO has been widely perceived as an emerging social problem. However, compared with the more prominent problematic Internet use or social network addiction, it appears to have a lower impact and is easily ignored (Gui and Büchi, 2019). In addition, academic research results on the correlation between CO and negative emotions are inconsistent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers have identified three main levels of digital inequality ( van Dijk, 2005 ; Witte & Mannon, 2010 ), all of which are particularly consequential during the COVID-19 pandemic. While first-level digital inequalities encompass resource inequalities in terms of hardware or network access, second-level digital inequalities concern digital skills; third-level digital inequalities are responsible for disparities in offline/behaviors and conditions ( Gui & Büchi, 2019 ; Helsper, 2012 ; Ragnedda, 2017 ; Robinson et al, 2018 ; Robinson et al, 2020c ). All levels of the digital divide have been tied to sociodemographic disparities including age, gender, race/ethnicity, income, and education ( Pew Research Center, 2019 ).…”
Section: Building the Bridge: The Covid-19 Pandemic And Digital Inequmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, a couple of decades ago, “new owners of telephone answering machines were commonly concerned about obligations to monitor their machines constantly and return calls expeditiously” (Mick & Fournier, 1998, p. 137). Today, this “soft coercion” (Ling, 2016) includes expectations regarding online responsiveness, skills, and social presence (Gui & Büchi, 2019). Social digital pressure (SDP) thus reflects the norm or perceived societal expectation to function digitally and to be able to manage everyday challenges of digital media.…”
Section: Additional Contextual and Individual Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%