New Determinants of Social Capital in Digital Age: Digital Divide and Social Media Literacy

Year 2017, Volume: 18 Issue: 2, 353 - 373, 01.05.2017

Osman Yılmaz Kartal Akan Deniz Yazgan , Remzi Y. Kıncal

Abstract

In this research, it is investigated whether the digital divide and social media literacy are significant determinants in the social capital levels of prospective teachers. This is a causal comparison study which is one of the quantitative research methods. In the study, as data collection tools, digital divide measurement tool, social media literacy measurement tool and social capital measurement tool were used. Ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed in the prediction of social capital according to digital divide and social media literacy. As a conclusion, the digital divide and social media literacy are potentially influential as determinants of social capital. However, it is understood that these variables vary from region to region. Moreover, it seems that it is not possible to generalize factors that affect a phenomenon directly affected by group dynamics, such as social capital Therefore, it is recommended to research the factors affecting social capital with each group specific studies, follow up the changes

Keywords

digital divide, social media literacy, social capital

BİLİŞİM ÇAĞINDA SOSYAL SERMAYENİN YENİ BELİRLEYİCİLERİ: DİJİTAL UÇURUM VE SOSYAL MEDYA OKURYAZARLIĞI

Abstract

Araştırmada, öğretmen adaylarının sosyal sermaye düzeylerinde, dijital uçurumun ve sosyal medya okuryazarlığının anlamlı birer belirleyici olup olmadıkları incelenmektedir. Çalışma, nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden nedensel karşılaştırma araştırmasıdır. Çalışmada veri toplama aşamasında dijital uçurum ölçme aracı, sosyal medya okuryazarlığı ölçme aracı ve sosyal sermaye ölçme aracı kullanılmıştır. Sosyal sermayenin dijital uçurum ve sosyal medya okuryazarlığına göre yordanmasında sıralı ordinal lojistik regresyon analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, sosyal sermayenin belirleyicileri olarak dijital uçurum ve sosyal medya okuryazarlığının etkili olma potansiyeli taşımaktadır. Fakat bu değişkenlerinin, bölgeden bölgeye farklılık gösterdiği anlaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte, sosyal sermaye gibi grup dinamiklerinden doğrudan etkilenen bir olguyu etkileyen faktörleri genellemenin mümkün olamayacağı görülmektedir. Dolayısıyla, sosyal sermayeyi etkileyen faktörlerin, her gruba özgü çalışmalarla incelenmesi, değişim ve dönüşümlerinin takip edilmesi önerilmektedir.

Keywords

dijital uçurum, sosyal medya okuryazarlığı, sosyal sermaye

References

• Ali-Hassan, H., Nevo, D. & Wade, M. (2015). Linking dimensions of social media use to job performance: The role of social capital. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24, 65–89.
• Bostancı, M. (2010). Sosyal medyanın gelişimi ve İletişim Fakültesi öğrencilerinin sosyal medya kullanım alışkanlıkları (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Ege Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir.
• Bouchillon, B. C., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2016). Making them count: Facebook sociability for optimizing the accumulation of social capital. Social Science Computer Review, 1- 20. DOI: 10.1177/0894439315626422
• Bridwell-Mitchell, E. N. & Cooc, N. (2016). The ties that bind: how social capital is forged and forteited in teacher communities. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 7-17.
• Cheng, S-L. (2006). Relationship between demographics, ınternet experience, leisure- time ınternet usage, and social capital (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of North Carolina, United States.
• Coalter, F. (2007). A wider social role for sport: Who’s keeping the score? London, England: Routledge.
• Cottle, S. (2011). Media anda rab uprisings of 2011: Research notes. Journalism, 12(5), 647-659.
• Cruz-Jesus, F., Vicente, M. R., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2016). The education related digital divide: An analysis for EU-28. Computers in Human Behaviour, 56, 72-82.
• Cuervo, M.R.V., & Menendez, A.J.L. (2006). A multivariate framework for the analysis of the digital divide: Evidence for the European Union-15, Information & Management, 43,756-766.
• Devamoğlu, S. (2008). Sosyal sermaye kuramı açısından Türkiye’de demokrasi kültürü üzerine bir değerlendirme (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Pamukkale Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Denizli.
• Dewan, S., & Riggins, F. J. (2005), The digital divide: Current and future research directions. Journal of Association for Information Systems, 6(2), 298–337.
• Dodd, M. D., Brummette, J., & Hazleton, V. (2015). A social capital approach: An examination of Putnam’s civic engagement and public relations roles. Public Relations Review, 41(4), 472-479.
• Donoso, V.N.& Verdoodt , V. (2014). White paper social media literacy: Time for an update (https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/471013/1/EMSOC+White+Paper. pdf ) adresinden erişilmiştir.
• 03.2016 tarihinde
• Eastin, M.S., Cicchirillo, V., & Mabry, A. (2015) Extending the digital divide conversation: Examining the knowledge gap through media expectancies. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media,59(3), 416-437.
• Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168.
• Erdiaw-Kwasie, M. O., & Alam, K. (2016). Towards understanding digital divide in rural partnerships and development: A framework and evidence from rural Australia. Journal of Rural Studies, 43, 214-224.
• Field, J. (2006). Sosyal sermaye (B.Bilgen ve B. Şen, Çev.). İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Fine, B. (2010). Theories of social capital: Researchers behaving badly. London: Pluto Press.
• Friemel, T. N. (2016). The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media & Society, 18(2), 313-331.
• Fu, P-W., Wu, C-C. & Cho, Y-J. (2017). What makes users share content on facebook? Compatibility among psychological incentive, social capital focus, and content type. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 23-32.
• Geber, S., Scherer, H., & Hefner, D. (2016). Social capital in media societies: the impact of media use and media structures on social capital. The International Communication Gazette, 1-21, DOI: 10.1177/1748048516640211
• Glanville, J. L., Paxton, P., & Wang, Y. (2016). Social capital and generosity: a multilevel analysis. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45(3), 526-547.
• Gunelius, S. (2011). 30 minute social media marketing. New York: McGraw Hill.
• Gürcan, F. (2015). Türkiye’de ve dünyada sayısal bölünme (Uzmanlık Tezi). T.C Kalkınma Bakanlığı, Yayın no: 2020, Ankara.
• Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008). Digital inequality: differences in young adults’ use of the Internet. Communication Research, 35 (5), 602–621.
• Hinman, Al. K. (2012). Internet use and trust: Predicting Internet use and its effect on a user's general social trust (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of Wyoming, Wyoming, United States.
• Hooghe, M., & Stolle, D. (Eds.). (2003). Generating social capital. New York: Palgrave.
• Kangal, N. (2013). Sosyal sermaye teorileri ve sosyal sermaye kalkınma ilişkisi: Türkiye örneği (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Selçuk Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya.
• Larm, P., Aslund, C., Starrin, B., & Nilsson, K. W. (2016). How are social capital and sense of coherence associated with hazardous alcohol use? Findings from a large population- based Swedish sample of adults. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 44, 525-533.
• Lee, S-J.(2007). The internet and adolescent social capital: Who benefits more from internet use? (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). The University of Texas, Austin, United States.
• Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22, 28–51.
• Livingstone, S. (2015). From mass to social media?: advancing accounts of social change. Social Media + Society,1(1), 1-3.
• Mihailidis, P. (2011). New civic voices & the emerging media literacy landscape. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 3(1), 4-5.
• Moore, M. D., & Recker, N.L. (2016). Social capital, type of crime, and social control. Crime & Delinquency, 62 (6), 728-747.
• Mukherjee, D. (2006). Influence of Internet on social capital (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of South Carolina, United States.
• Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/259373.
• Özcan, B. (2011). Sosyal sermaye ve ekonomik kalkınma (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
• Park, K-G., Han, S. & Kaid, L. L. (2012). Does social networking service usage mediate the association between smartphone usage and social capital? New Media & Society, 15(7), 1077– 1093.
• Park, S.R., Choi, D.Y.,& Hong, P. (2015). Club convergence and factors of digital divide across countries. Technological & Social Change, 96, 92-100.
• Pearce,K.E. &Rice,R.E. (2013).Digital divides from access to activities:comparing mobile and personal computer Internet users.Journal of Communication,63(4), 721-744.
• Pfeil, U., Arjan, R. & Zaphiris, P. (2009). Age differences in online social networking – A study of user profiles and the social capital divide among teenagers and older users in MySpace. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 643–654.
• Pick, J. B., Sarkar, A.& Johnson, J. (2015). United States digital divide: state level analysis of spatial clustering and multivariate determinants of ICT utilization. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 49, 16-32.
• Pick, J. B., & Nishida, T. (2015). Digital divides in the world and its regions: a spatial and multivariate analysis of technological utilization. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 91, 1-7.
• Preeti, M. (2009). Use of social networking in a linguistically and culturally rich India. The International Information & Library Review, 41(3), 129-136.
• Puga, P., Cardoso, G., Espanha, R., & Mendonça, S. (2009). Telecommunications fort he needy: how are they? Informatico Economica, 13 (2),175-188.
• Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: civic traditions in Modern Italy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press
• Putnam, R. D. (1996). Who killed civic America? Prospect, 7(24), 66-72.
• Putnam, R., Goss, K.A. (2002). Introduction in Robert D. Putnam (Ed.), Democracies in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Raicheva, M. (2005). Bowling alone in a big small city: re-examining the relationship between social capital and mass media use (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Southern Illinois University Carbondale, United States.
• Rehm, M. & Notten, A. (2016). Twitter as an informal learning space for teachers ? The role of social capital in Twitter conversations among teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 215-223.
• Seid, A. K., Hesse, M., & Bloomfield, K. (2016). “Make it another for me and my mates”: Does social capital encourage risky drinking among the Danish general population? Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 44, 240-248.
• Svendsen, G., & Sorensen, F. L. (2006). The socioeconomic power of social capital. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 26, 411-429.
• United Nations (2012). The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the internet, Document A/HRC/20/l.13. New York, NY: United Nations General Assembly.
• Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: a critical history of social media. Oxford University Press: New York.
• Ye, Q., Fang, B., He, W. & Hsieh, JJ. P. (2012). Can social capital be transferred cross the boundary of the real and virtual worlds? An empirical investigation of twitter. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 13(2).
• Zillien, N, & Hargittai, E. (2009). Digital distinction: status-spesific types of internet usage. Social Science Quarterly, 90(2), 274-291.