Literacy and training in digital research: Researchers’ views in five social science and humanities disciplines

Abstract

This paper examines the views of researchers in five social science and humanities disciplines on their digital literacy and the training they need or have undertaken. Theoretically, the paper draws upon two competing conceptualisations of digital literacy: digital literacy as 'user skills' and digital literacy as 'user-technology interactivity'. Empirically, it suggests that social science and humanities researchers' understandings and evaluations of their digital literacy unfolds at two levels -the factual and the perceptual -and involves not only (technical) skills but also user experiences, emotions, and complex processes of learning, practicing and self-development when interacting with technology. Furthermore, researchers challenge the value of generic institutional training for literacy enhancement and envision the development of informal communities of experience exchange and knowledge-sharing across the research community. These findings lead to recommendations on training provision and support the conceptualisation of digital literacy as a process where user interactivity with technology results in certain experiences, reflections and lessons, rather than merely reflecting users' technical skills.

Using Social Media as a Source for Understanding Public Perceptions of Archaeology: Research Challenges and Methodological Pitfalls

“…Digital social research requires an interdisciplinary approach and will inevitably require some form of engagement with coding and data retrieval. And as Tsatsou (2018Tsatsou ( : 1253 notes, these areas of digital literacy are not necessarily ones that researchers with a non-digital humanities or social science background have been trained for to a sufficient degree. Tsatsou also identifies that the complexity of methodological issues in digital research and lack of highlevel technical skills for the humanities researcher could pose digital literacy challenges relating to ethics (2018: 1245).…”

Intensive and excessive Internet use: Different predictors operating among adolescents

“…On one hand, digital devices and the Internet enrich the children's experience, help them to preserve the old and make new connections, promote learning and personal development, and provide numerous opportunities for entertainment and performing various activities that the child would otherwise do but in more difficult ways (Amichai-Hamburger, McKenna, & Tal, 2008;Livingstone & Haddon, 2009). A series of studies within the digital literacy framework and the digital literacy theory (Glister, 1997;Tsatsou, 2018) have shown that the intensive Internet use -often operationalized as the amount of time spent on the Internet -is positively correlated with a number of desirable characteristics, which points to the enhancing and encouraging effect of digital technologies and the Internet use (Kuzmanović et al, 2019;O'Neill & Dihn, 2012;Popadić, Pavlović, Petrović, & Kuzmanović, 2016;Van Deursen & Helsper, 2018).The use of the Internet has also been recognized as one of the basic children's rights and, hence, preventing or restricting its use, with too little Internet, could be interpreted as violating children's fundamental rights and denying them the skills necessary for living in the 21st century (Livingstone, 2016). From this perspective, the motto that we can formulate as "the more (Internet time), the better" is quite appropriate.…”

Sociology and Digital Culture

“…On the big data, it is permanently (re)constructed throughout the experience of the individuals (Baldi, 2017;Lupton, Pedersen, & Thomas, 2016), with profound implications in its control and access (Tsatsou, 2017). Dewey (2017, para.…”