Impact with the Internet in our daily life Essay

Impact from the Internet in our daily life

Available online for

Personal computers in Individual Behavior

Personal computers in Man Behavior 24 (2008) 2005–2013

Impact of the Net on existence: Male and feminine personal viewpoints Ann Colley *, David Maltby

Institution of Mindset, University of Leicester, Henry Wellcome Building, Lancaster Street, Leicester LE1 9HN, UK Available online 30 October 2007

Abstract Sexuality differences online access and usage have already been found in many previous research. The study reported here runs this work by providing a great analysis with the impact from the Internet on men's and women's lives. A content material analysis of 200 postings from men and two hundred from girls, on the theme of ‘‘Has the Internet improved your life'' invited with a news site, was performed then reviewed for gender differences. Outcomes showed more women's postings mentioned having made new friends or perhaps having met their partner, renewing old friendships, being able to access information and advice, learning online, and shopping and booking travel around online, whilst more men's postings pointed out that the Internet had helped or presented them a job, positive socio-political effects, and negative aspects of the technology. The results are interpreted as supporting the lovely view that the Internet represents an extension of wider social tasks and interests in the ‘‘offline'' world. Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Net; Gender; Gender roles; Sexuality differences

1 ) Introduction ‘‘The Internet is usually my job, my high street, my superstore and my international social playground'' (Female participant 63). Usage of the world wide web continues to boost worldwide. In the UK 57% of households have access, when compared with 46% four years ago (National Statistics, 2006). The *

Corresponding creator. Tel.: +44 (0) 116 229 7188; fax: +44 (0) 116 229 7196. E-mail addresses: [email protected] air conditioning unit. uk (A. Colley).

0747-5632/$ - discover front subject Ó 3 years ago Elsevier Limited. All privileges reserved. doi: 10. 1016/j. chb. 3 years ago. 09. 002


A. Colley, M. Maltby / Computers in Human Patterns 24 (2008) 2005–2013

Digital Future Job in the US finds that 78. 6% of american citizens went on-line in 2006, with an accompanying increase in the amount of period spent a week on the Internet (Centre intended for the Digital Future, 2005). A number of factors have been identified to correspond with access and use, which includes socioeconomic factors, demographic factors, and education (e. g. Bimber, 2150; Wasserman & Richmond-Abbott, 2005). One significant area of study over the last 10 years has investigated the impact in the Internet upon different social groups and inevitably work on gender differences has been on the forefront, with concerns about the existence and effects of a ‘‘gender gap'' online access and usage. Many investigators (e. g. Sherman et ing., 2000) have got investigated this gender space in Internet work with. Bimber (2000) found gaps in both access and use in our midst adults, and concluded that, when access differences can be made up by socioeconomic and other factors that affect women and men differentially, the distance in use was due in least in part to gender-specific factors such as the male belief of computers, cultural associations between gender and technology and gendered cognitive and communication tastes. However , there is growing evidence that the gender gap in access can be closing or has shut down with more girls coming online, and that the difference in use in the Internet is still present although may also be concluding (e. g. Cummings & Kraut, 2002; Ono & Zavodny, the year 2003; Wasserman & Richmond-Abbott, 2005). There remains a gender gap in usage in the united kingdom: the latest figures from adults in a country wide representative sample of UK households show that forty percent of women experienced never used the Internet compared to 30% of men, and 55% of ladies had utilized the Internet inside the 3 months before the survey compared to 65% of men (National Statistics, 2006). In addition , there are...

References: Bimber, B. (2000). Measuring the gender distance on the Internet. Social Science Quarterly, 81, 868–876. Boneva, B., Kraut, R., & Frohlich, Deb. (2001). Applying e-mail for personal relationships. The difference male or female makes. American Behavioral Man of science, 45, 530–549. Broos, A. (2005). Gender and info and communication technologies (ICT) anxiety: Male self-assurance and feminine hesitation. Cyberpsychology & Habit, 8, 21–31. Center intended for the Digital Future (2005). 2005 Digital Future Survey. Los Angeles: USC Annenberg School. Cheng, G. H. L., Chan, Deb. K. S., & Tong, P. Sumado a. (2006). Characteristics of online friendships with different sexuality compositions and durations. Cyberpsychology & Habit, 9, 14–21. Cummings, M. N., & Kraut, L. (2002). Domesticating computers and the Internet. Information Society, 18, 221–231. Durndell, A., & Haag, Z. (2002). Computer self-efficacy, computer system anxiety, attitudes towards the Net and reported experience with the Internet, by gender, in an East European test. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 521–535. Durndell, A., & Thomson, K. (1997). Gender and computing: ten years of alter? Computers and Education, 28, 1–9. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Love-making differences in social tendencies: A sociable role meaning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Eagly, A. They would., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. N. (2000). Cultural role theory of sexual differences and similarities: An up-to-date appraisal. In T. Eckes & L. M. Taunter (Eds. ), The developing social mindset of sexuality (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ-NEW JERSEY: Erlbaum. Richer, J. Elizabeth. (2004). Equal rights in cyberdemocracy? Guaging sexuality gaps in on-line civic participation. Sociable Science Quarterly, 85, 938–957. Herring, H. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Record of Communication 3, herring/ejc. txt/. Jackson, D. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, And. (2001). Gender and the Internet: Women connecting and males searching. Love-making Roles, 44, 363–379. Joiner, R., Gavin, J., Duffield, J., Brosnan, M., Criminal, C., Durndell, A., ain al. (2005). Gender, Net identification, and Internet anxiousness: Correlates of Internet use. Cyberpsychology & Tendencies, 8, 371–378. Landis, J., & Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of viewer agreement pertaining to categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.

A. Colley, T. Maltby / Computers in Human Patterns 24 (2008) 2005–2013


Liaw, T. -S. (2002). An Internet review for perceptions of personal computers and the World Wide Web: Relationship, conjecture and difference. Computers in Human Patterns, 18, 17–35. McCown, J. A., Fischer, D., Page, R., & Homant, M. (2001). Internet relationships: People who meet persons. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 4, 593–596. McIlroy, D., Bunting, B., Tierney, K., & Gordon, Meters. (2001). The relation of gender and background experience to self-reported computing stress and notion. Computers in Human Habit, 17, 21–33. McGert, M. -J. (2000). ‘‘Nobody lives only in cyberspace'': Gendered subjectivities and domestic usage of the Internet. Cyberpsychology & Habit, 3, 895–899. Morahan-Martin, J. (2000). Ladies and the Internet: Promise and challenges. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, several, 683–691. Countrywide Statistics (2006). Internet access. Homeowners and Individuals. London: Nationwide Statistics. Odell, P. M., Korgen, T. O., Schumacher, P., & Delucchi, M. (2000). Internet use among female and male students. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, three or more, 855–862. Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2003). Gender and the Net. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 111–121. Schumacher, P., & Morahan-Martin, L. (2001). Sexuality, Internet and computer thinking and experience. Computers in Human Patterns, 17, 95–110. Sherman, Ur. C., End, C., Kraan, E., Cole, A., Campbell, J., Birchmeier, Z., ain al. (2000). The Internet gender gap between college students: Forgotten but not eliminated? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, a few, 885–894. Singh, S. (2001). Gender as well as the use of the web at home. New Media and Society, a few, 395–415. Teo, T. H. H., & Lim, Sixth is v. K. G. (2000). Sexuality differences online usage and task choices. Behavior and Information Technology, 19, 283–295. Todman, J. (2000). Gender differences in laptop anxiety amongst university traders since 1992. Computers and Education, 34, 27–35. Tsai, C. -C., & Lin, C. -C. (2004). Taiwanese adolescents' perceptions and thinking regarding the Internet: Exploring male or female differences. Teenage years, 39, 725–734. Turkle, S. (1984). The second self: Pcs and the human spirit. New york city: Simon & Shuster. Wasserman, I. Meters., & Richmond-Abbott, M. (2005). Gender plus the Internet: Reasons behind variation in access, level, and range of use. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 252–270. Weiser, E. B. (2000). Gender differences in Internet use patterns and Internet app preferences: A twosample comparability. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, several, 167–177. Whitley, B. Elizabeth. Jr., (1997). Gender differences in computer-related attitudes and behaviour: A meta-analysis. Personal computers in Individual Behavior, 13, 1–22. Whitty, M. T. (2002). Enfrascarse, Liar! A great examination of just how open, encouraging and honest people are in chat rooms. Pcs in Individual Behavior, 18, 343–352. Whitty, M., & Gavin, T. (2001). Age/sex/location: Uncovering the social tips in the progress online human relationships. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 5, 623–630.