Dijital aile iletişimi: Ebeveyn dijital medya okuryazarlığı modeli üzerine kavramsal bir çalışma

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 39 Sayı: 4, 1169 - 1183, 31.12.2025

Mustafa Böyük

https://doi.org/10.48070/erciyesakademi.1801264

Öz

Dijital medya ortamlarının algoritmik yapısı, çocukların medya deneyimlerini ve ebeveynlerin bu deneyimler üzerindeki kontrolünü derinden dönüştürmektedir. Bu çalışma, ebeveynlerin dijital medya okuryazarlığını, algoritmalarla baş etme stratejileri bağlamında kavramsallaştıran özgün bir model önerisi sunmaktadır. Literatür taraması ve kavramsal analiz yöntemleriyle geliştirilen Ebeveyn Dijital Medya Okuryazarlığı Modeli (EDMOM), algoritmik farkındalık, eleştirel dijital okuryazarlık, yönlendirici ebeveynlik stratejileri ve algoritmik direnç/uyum bileşenlerinden oluşmaktadır. Model, ebeveynlerin çocuklarının medya tüketimini bilinçli ve etik temelde yönlendirmeleri için gereken bilgi, tutum ve davranışları bütüncül biçimde açıklamaktadır. Çalışmanın sonuçları, dijital medya okuryazarlığı eğitimlerinin ve aile rehberlik programlarının algoritmik boyutu içermesi gerektiğini vurgulamakta; ebeveynlerin sadece içerik odaklı değil, aynı zamanda teknoloji altyapısına eleştirel yaklaşan bir medya okuryazarlığına gereksinim duyduğunu göstermektedir. Model, hem akademik araştırmalarda hem de uygulamada ebeveynlerin dijital medya ile etkileşimlerini anlamak ve geliştirmek adına önemli bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dijital Ebeveynlik , Dijital Medya Okuryazarlığı , Dijital Etik , Aile İletişimi

Digital family communication: A conceptual study on the parental digital media literacy model

Öz

The algorithmic structure of digital media environments profoundly transforms children's media experiences and parents' control over these experiences. This study proposes an original model that conceptualises parents' digital media literacy in the context of strategies for dealing with algorithms. Developed through literature review and conceptual analysis, the Parental Digital Media Literacy Model (PDMLM) consists of algorithmic awareness, critical digital literacy, guiding parenting strategies, and algorithmic resistance/adaptation components. The model comprehensively explains the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours required for parents to guide their children's media consumption in a conscious and ethical manner. The study's findings emphasise the need for digital media literacy education and family guidance programmes to include an algorithmic dimension, demonstrating that parents require media literacy that is not only content-focused but also critically approaches the technological infrastructure. The model provides an important framework for understanding and improving parents' interactions with digital media, both in academic research and in practice.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Digital Parenting , Digital Media Literacy , Digital Ethics , Family Communication

Kaynakça

• Beer, D. (2019). The data gaze: Capitalism, power and perception. SAGE Publications.
• Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books.
• Bucher, T. (2018). If... then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford University Press.
• Bulger, M., & Davison, P. (2018). The promises, challenges, and futures of media literacy. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 10(1), 1–21.
• Clark, L. S. (2012). The parent app: Understanding families in the digital age. Oxford University Press.
• Cotter, K., & Reisdorf, B. C. (2020). Algorithmic knowledge gaps: A new dimension of (digital) inequality. International Journal of Communication, 14, 745–765.
• Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford University Press.
• Dogruel, L., Masur, P. K., & Joeckel, S. (2021). Development and validation of an algorithm literacy scale for Internet users. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1968361
• Eslami, M., Rickman, A., Vaccaro, K., Aleyasen, A., Vuong, A., Karahalios, K., Hamilton, K., & Sandvig, C. (2015). “I always assumed that I wasn’t really that close to [her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 153–162). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702556
• Frau-Meigs, D. (2012). Transliteracy as the new research horizon for media and information literacy. Medijske Studije / Media Studies, 3(6), 14–27.
• Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. A. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society (pp. 167–194). MIT Press.
• Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and media literacy: A plan of action. The Aspen Institute.
• Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800406
• Koltay, T. (2011). The media and the literacies: Media literacy, information literacy, digital literacy. Media, Culture & Society, 33(2), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710393382
• Livingstone, S. (2004). Media literacy and the challenge of new information and communication technologies. The Communication Review, 7(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420490280152
• Livingstone, S., & Blum-Ross, A. (2020). Parenting for a digital future: How hopes and fears about technology shape children’s lives. Oxford University Press.
• Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2008). Parental mediation of children’s Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52(4), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150802437396
• Livingstone, S., & Third, A. (2017). Children and young people’s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. New Media & Society, 19(5), 657–670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318
• Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., & Staksrud, E. (2017). European research on children’s Internet use: Assessing the past and anticipating the future. New Media & Society, 20(3), 1103–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816685930
• Lupton, D., & Williamson, B. (2017). The datafied child: The dataveillance of children and implications for their rights. New Media & Society, 19(5), 780–794. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686328
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
• Nikken, P., & Schols, M. (2015). How and why parents guide the media use of young children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(11), 3423–3435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-015-0144-4
• Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.
• Pangrazio, L., & Sefton-Green, J. (2021). Digital rights, digital citizenship and digital literacy: What’s the difference? Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2021.1.616
• Pangrazio, L., & Selwyn, N. (2018). “Personal data literacies”: A critical literacies approach to enhancing understandings of personal digital data. New Media & Society, 21(2), 419–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818799523
• Stoilova, M., Nandagiri, R., & Livingstone, S. (2019). Children’s understanding of personal data and privacy online: A systematic evidence mapping. Information, Communication & Society, 24(4), 557–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1657164
• Swedberg, R. (2014). The art of social theory. Princeton University Press.
• Tufekci, Z. (2015). Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13, 203–218.