You are on page 1of 72

Mapping Social Media Literacy

Towards a Conceptual Framework


December 2011

Auteurs Hadewijch Vanwynsberghe, Elke Boudry, en Pieter Verdegem Onderzoeksgroep en universiteit IBBT- Interdisciplinary Institute for Broadband Technology MICT- Research group for Media and ICT UGENT- Ghent University ISBN 9028927832

EMSOC
User Empowerment in a Social Media Culture
T + 32 (0)2 629 16 14 E info@emsoc.be W www.emsoc.be Twitter #emsocnews Powered by IWT

Abstract
Social media have become increasingly popular because of the combination of both technological developments and social change. However, there are manifest differences in the ways people use social media as well as in the level of their competence. Differences in the skills to master technology and in the use of social media may result in new types of digital inequality. In order to overcome these inequalities, an extensive body of initiatives must deal with enhancing peoples level of social media literacy. Unfortunately, due to difficulties in adequately measuring media literacy, the effectiveness of these efforts has not yet been determined. Hence, the main objective of our research is measuring social media literacy. In order to do so we first need to be able to accurately define social media literacy and understand how it can be conceptualized. Based on an extensive literature review, this report provides a conceptual framework for social media literacy and discusses its main building blocks. The proposed conceptual model posits that an accurate understanding of social media literacy requires more insight into peoples access to social media applications, knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, attitudes and actual media use.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

Acknowledgments
This paper is based on ongoing research in the framework of a four-year Flemish (Belgium) inter-university strategic research project called EMSOC (User Empowerment in a Social Media Culture). Between 2010 and 2014, an interdisciplinary research consortium of Vrije Universiteit Brussel (SMIT & LSTS), KULeuven (CUO & ICRI) and Universiteit Gent (MICT & C&E) will investigate the empowering and disempowering role of social media on the levels of inclusion, literacy and privacy. The EMSOC project is funded by IWT, the government agency for Innovation by Science and Technology in Flanders, Belgium.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

Table of contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Table of contents ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 2. Objectives and Research Questions....................................................................................................................... 9 3. Perspectives on Media Literacy ........................................................................................................................... 14 3.1. Media Literacy............................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2. Information Literacy ..................................................................................................................................... 17 3.3. Computer Literacy & ICT Literacy ................................................................................................................. 19 3.4. Internet & Network Literacy ......................................................................................................................... 20 3.5. Digital Literacy............................................................................................................................................... 23 4. Social Media Literacy ........................................................................................................................................... 28 4.1. Proposing a Definition of Social Media Literacy ........................................................................................... 30 4.2. Developing a Conceptual Model of Social Media Literacy ........................................................................... 33 5. Components of Social Media Literacy ................................................................................................................. 37 5.1. Access to Social Media Applications ............................................................................................................. 37 5.2. Social Media Competences ........................................................................................................................... 38 5.2.1. Objective Social Media Competences.................................................................................................... 40

Knowledge .............................................................................................................................................................40 Skills .........................................................................................................................................................................42


5.2.2. Subjective Social Media Competences .................................................................................................. 53

Attitudes .................................................................................................................................................................53 Self-efficacy ...........................................................................................................................................................56


5.3. Social media use............................................................................................................................................ 58
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

6. Social Media Literacy Versus Empowerment ...................................................................................................... 60 7. Discussion............................................................................................................................................................. 61 8. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 65 9. Two-page Dutch summary ................................................................................................................................... 66 10. References ......................................................................................................................................................... 69

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

1. Introduction
Todays media environment is constantly evolving due to the combination of technological developments and social change. This causes profound (r)evolutions in the way people use media in everyday life. As the technology changes, so too changes its use, as individuals are increasingly enabled to produce, distribute, save, retrieve and consume media content. The changing environment can be characterized by a shift from traditional mass media and interpersonal media to social media or media that enable mass self-communication (Castells, 2009). According to this concept media become more and more personalised, but at the same time they are accessible to a wider public. However, we argue that the three forms of media, i.e. mass, interpersonal and mass self-communication (as suggested by Castells, 2009) complement rather than substitute each other. Nevertheless, we cannot neglect that the use social media increases in importance and becomes more and more popular and omnipresent in major parts of Western society (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). This evolution to social media could not have been made without the transformation from Web 1.0. to Web 2.0. technologies. The latter refer to the increasing possibilities for users to create, participate with and collaborate in Internet content and applications. Consequently, the term social media' is often confused with seemingly-interchangeable concepts as web 2.0. and participatory web, which are actually the platforms for the proliferation of social media (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). A comprehensive definition of social media is the one proposed by Kaplan & Haenlein (2010, p. 61). These authors describe social media as a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of web 2.0., and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated content . This definition makes clear that many Internet applications are in fact social media, including blogs, social networking sites (e.g. Facebook), virtual social worlds (e.g. Second Life), collaborative Internet projects (e.g. Wikipedia), content communities (e.g. YouTube) and virtual game worlds (e.g. World of Warcraft) (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010, p. 62). Social media offer a lot of opportunities for users to collaborate and to create their own media content. Furthermore, they enable people to share collaborative knowledge (e.g. Wikipedia), to share their interests or hobbies (e.g. blogs), to share their own image (e.g. Flickr) and video creations (e.g. YouTube), to make new friends (e.g. Facebook) and to build communities (e.g. World of Warcraft). In this way, achieving goals by using
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

these applications can contribute to user empowerment or can enable people to control their own lives and to take advantage of opportunities (van der Maesen & Walker, 2002, p. 6). Notwithstanding, the failure to use or wrongly use of social media can lead to disempowerment, for example the violation of privacy. These opportunities and threats of social media are recently becoming truly visible due to the proliferation of these media. Hence, there are many questions and ambiguities about the use of social media and the relation with empowerment. The goal of the EMSOC project is to critically assess to what extent and how people are empowered or disempowered by their everyday use of social media. Within this goal, this report focuses on social media literacy or the competences to deal with social media in a critical and conscious way. We need to be aware that not all users are capable of getting involved with these media as they would like to be. Not all people are media literate or have enough competences to optimally use and take advantage of social media in their own life. In order to investigate how capable people are in dealing with social media, we must be able to adequately measure peoples level of social media literacy, which is a second step in our research. A first step in measuring social media literacy is gaining insight into the concept of media literacy itself and how to apply it to social media. In order to develop measurement instruments of social media literacy, it is vital to grasp the underlying building blocks and their mutual connections. This conceptualization of social media literacy is provided in this first deliverable. The second step in our research, the operationalization and measurement of social media literacy, will be discussed in the next deliverable. Before moving to the conceptualization of media literacy, wherein dominant perspectives and definitions of media literacy are discussed and a conceptual framework of social media literacy is presented, the objectives and research questions of the media literacy work package will be discussed.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

2. Objectives and Research Questions


The digital divide became an important topic in the second half of the 1990s. The traditional digital divide discourse stated that the lack of access to the technology was the main problem in dealing with digital media (Compaine, 2001; van Dijk, 2006). However, despite that the lack of access to digital media remains an important cause of digital inequalities (Selwyn & Facer, 2007; van Dijk, 2005), it is clear that in most Western countries the digital gap is steadily closing (Dewan & Riggins, 2005). In this respect, research in Flanders (the northern part of Belgium, home to the Dutch speaking community) points out that 89% of the Flemish families own a computer, 85,3% have an Internet connection, 64,1% have digital television and 96,6% of the Flemish population owns a mobile phone (IBBT-iLab.O., 2010). In the digital media culture, the Internet is becoming increasingly embedded in the everyday life. In an expanding array of Internet services and applications, more and more people, especially younger people, are expected to create, share and utilize user-generated content (UGC). The OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) report on the participative web 2007 (Vickery & Wunsch-Vincent, 2007) observes an increase in social media use, and thus concludes that people are now becoming increasingly engaged in online content creation and participation (Vickery & Wunsch-Vincent, 2007). In line with this observation, the Pew Research Centers Internet & American Life project has noticed a rise in the use of social networking sites: 65% of American Internet users have a profile on a social networking site such as Facebook, compared to 61% one year ago and 29% in 2008 (Madden & Zickuhr, 2011). In Europe, in particular in Flanders, research to social media has thus far mainly focused on young people. For instance the survey of the Apestaartjaren project interrogates young people (aged 12 till 18) about their new media behaviour. Results suggest that among Flemish young people there is an increase in the use of social media: more than 80% of the young people from the Apestaartjaren survey indicated to have a profile on a social networking site (87%) or that they use the computer/Internet for chatting (83%) (Apestaartjaren, 2010). Despite the increasing social media use, differences can be noticed in the way people engage with these new applications. Boyd (2008) noticed a far greater distinction when it comes to participation in social networking sites in comparison with access. Younger boys (46%) are more likely to participate than younger girls (44%) to social networking site, but, in turn, older girls (70%) are far more likely to participate than older boys (57%). In
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

addition, older girls are using these sites to communicate with friends, while older boys using them to meet new people (Boyd, 2008). The Apestaartjaren study shows similar findings: mainly girls are using social media applications for communicating with friends, uploading photos and editing their own profile on a social networking site, on the contrary, boys are uploading more movies and music and posting more messages on blogs and fora (Apestaartjaren, 2010). In addition, the younger the respondents, the more they upload media content. These findings are consistent with the research of Hargittai (2008) about gender and the use of peer-topeer communication online. Similar results can be found in the research of Pew Research Center where especially women and younger age groups (18-29) report a high use of social networking sites (Madden & Zickuhr, 2011). All of these recent reports on ICT penetration indicate that although in most Western European countries a majority of the population has access to computers, Internet and other new media technologies, there are still manifest differences in the frequency of use and the different ways in which people use these new media in their everyday life. New and emerging digital inequalities among the Internet population are especially related to differences in the level of media literacy (Ala-Mutka, 2011; Livingstone, 2003; A. Martin & Grudziecki, 2006; van Dijk, 2005). People who have little or no abilities to effectively and efficiently deal with social media can be excluded from many positive outcomes these media have to offer. This explains why media literacy, although it is not a new concept in the scholarly literature, is recently gaining increased attention from scholars and policymakers. One of the major challenges of contemporary information society policies is to ensure that all people are media literate so that they have the necessary competences to deal with social media applications. An extensive body of research projects deal with enhancing peoples level of (new) media literacy. So far, it is very difficult to determine the effectiveness of these projects, especially because the level of media use on the one hand and media literacy on the other hand, especially social media literacy, were never or hardly measured. In todays constantly changing and converging media culture it is a challenging task for measuring (new) media use and media literacy, because of the variety of questions and methods that are being used. Measuring the effectiveness of media literacy initiatives could provide us insight in how peoples level of (social) media literacy can be enhanced and consequently how it could help to re-balance participation inequality. Therefore, in the social, political and academic field there is a growing demand for adequate measuring instruments for social media use and social media literacy: () the recent nature of social computing
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

10

applications, their strong growth in terms of creation, use and adoption, and the continuous changes in technologies, applications and user behaviour, reinforce the need for continuous monitoring and scientific capacity building (Cachia, 2008, p. 5). One of the difficulties in the debate is that there is almost no consensus about the concept of media literacy, and more in general literacy itself (Graham & Goodrum, 2007; Potter, 2004). In literature there exist many different definitions, perspectives and concepts that relate to media literacy, for example information literacy, computer literacy, Internet literacy, network literacy or digital literacy. How broadly should literacy be defined? Should it be primarily regarded as a skill (van Deursen, 2010; van Deursen & van Dijk, 2010; van Dijk, 2006), as an acquisition of knowledge (Potter, 2011) or as a combination of both (A. Martin & Grudziecki, 2006)? It must be clear that media literacy is a complex construct, expressing many different ideas and streams of thoughts. Despite the variety of conceptualizations of media literacy, there is only little agreement on a concrete definition of it. For this reason it must be clear that developing a definition as well as carefully defining the concept is a first and necessary step towards the actual measuring of (social) media literacy. It is evident that research activities on both a conceptual and a methodological level are needed to support policy initiatives for enhancing peoples (social) media literacy. We need to overcome conceptual vagueness concerning (social) media literacy on the one hand and counter fight the lack of good practices for measuring (social) media use and media literacy on the other hand. In measuring social media literacy, which is the next step of our research, we will mainly focus on young people and employees. The first group has been chosen because they are the future generation and the latter group was selected because there is a lot of commotion concerning the use of social media on the work floor.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

11

The theoretical goals of the media literacy work package in the EMSOC project are: (1) To get insight in the literature on and the concept of media literacy in general; (2) To develop a definition and conceptual model of social media literacy that can be used in measurements. The practical goals of the media literacy work package in the EMSOC project are: (3) To propose measurement instruments of social media literacy; (4) To measure the level of social media literacy of young people in Flanders; (5) To measure the level of social media literacy of employees in Flanders; (6) To provide recommendations for improving the levels of social media literacy among the population. In order to achieve these goals and provide a guide for investigating social media literacy, several research questions are proposed. In this deliverable, we only discuss the theoretical goals because the practical-oriented goals can only be executed if the theoretical goals are accomplished. Before actual measurements of social media literacy can be conducted, it should be clear what comprises social media literacy. Hence, this report is devoted to the conceptualization of social media literacy. Before we can proceed to the conceptualization of social media literacy, we need to get more insight into the subject of media literacy in general. This requires a comparison of existing perspectives on media literacy definitions that so far primarily seem to cause confusion. The first research question aims to get insight in media literacy as a concept, as it is further discussed in chapter 3. RQ1: What are the existing approaches to media literacy? Once we have a more general view of media literacy, we propose a conceptual framework for social media literacy in chapters 4 and 5. These parts each have an own approach, definition and conceptual model of social media literacy. RQ2: How can we conceptualize social media literacy?

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

12

In chapter 6, we elaborate on how media literacy can contribute to user empowerment. The assumption is that people who have a higher level of media literacy will also be more empowered, taking into account that not all types of media literacy provide a similar increase in empowerment. RQ3: How can media literacy contribute to empowerment? This research report starts with a conceptualization of media literacy in general, consisting of different definitions and approaches. We come up with a (critical) contribution about the dominant approaches of media literacy and which are applicable to social media literacy. After this general introduction of the concept, we present a working definition and a conceptual model of social media literacy and explain the underlying components and elements in that model. Thereby we give an overview of potential indicators for operationalizing the components of social media literacy. Then we discuss how social media literacy can contribute to user empowerment. Finally, in the discussion we will summarize the advantages and disadvantages of our approach and conceptualization of social media literacy.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

13

3. Perspectives on Media Literacy


The competences needed to deal with media are discussed in the scholarly literature through various concepts, being media literacy, information literacy, computer literacy, network literacy, Internet literacy and digital literacy (Bawden, 2001). The choice of a concept depends on the aspects on which the focus is (e.g. skillsoriented or critical thinking). In this respect, the concepts are embedded in different approaches, such as a critical approach (e.g. media literacy as the critical evaluation of media content), a cognitive approach (e.g. media literacy are the cognitive skills to attain and use knowledge about media), a structuration or actionoriented approach (e.g. computer literacy is the ability to turn on the computer) and a rather idealistic or normative approach (e.g. digital literacy as a personal fulfilment). Based on a thorough literature review, the five most commonly used concepts are introduced and discussed in this chapter.

3.1. Media Literacy Media literacy as a field of research has developed since the advent of mass media and implies critical thinking (A. Martin & Grudziecki, 2006). It was believed that mass media messages could have a harmful effect on its user. Media literacy as a critical evaluation should serve as a protection against these negative effects of the media messages (Martin, 2006). The concept of media literacy does not only account for the more traditional mass media, such as newspapers, radio and television, but it also increasingly applies to rather new media such as the computer and the Internet. A definition of media literacy that fits this critical approach is offered by Livingstone (2004): the ability to access, analyze, evaluate and create messages across a variety of contexts (Livingstone, 2004, p. 18). The value of this broadly shared definition of media literacy lies in the fact that it underlines the importance of peoples ICT capabilities, not merely in terms of instrumental and technical skills, but also in terms of critical, analytical and creative skills. The inclusion of the latter skill is essential, because scholars, in recent literature, have argued that media creation accounts for higher levels of media literacy than only media consumption (Phang & Schaefer, 2009): directly experiencing the content production would give more insight in the conventions and merits of the produced material and on this way the user becomes a more critical consumer and producer (Livingstone, 2004). Excluding creation from a media literacy definition would according to Livingstone (2004, p. 3) be to
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

14

greatly under-utilise the potential of the Internet. In this definition there also exists a hierarchy in skills or an increase in complexity: creation of a media message is more difficult than the interpretation and evaluation of a media message and interpretation and evaluation are in turn more complex than access to a media message. Analysis and evaluation, in this definition, contain the critical thinking or interpretation and judgments of the media messages. Access, in turn, is a complex interaction between the quality of the technology and the content, the skills of the user and the social environment. The four-component definition of Livingstone (2004) has the advantage to fit equally well to all kinds of media. However, at the same time, it has as disadvantage that it does not shed light on the actual skills needed to use one particular technology or content. This definition does not give a particular clear and coherent account of media literacy itself and its underlying aspects; it is, rather, an abstract and wide-ranging account, which may lead to some confusion for anyone attempting to operationalize and measure media literacy. A quite similar, but more focused definition of media literacy is the one of Brandtweiner and Kerschbaum (2010). They proposed a two-step plan in order to become a sophisticated Internet user. First, people need the ecompetences or basic technical skills in order to operate the computer, such as the skills to type and to use a mouse. Besides these rather basic skills, people also need the higher-level competences to participate on the Internet, which are called media competences. Four major dimensions of media literacy or media competences, which includes a critical reflection, are proposed by Brandtweiner and Kerschbaum (2010, pp. 817-819): Selecting and using the appropriate media and contents (knowledge about media, usage and participation); and evaluating media contents (analysis and evaluation); recognizing and responding to the influences of media contents (self-reflection); identifying and evaluating the circumstances of production (seriousness and credibility). Especially the second step, the development of media competences, fits the critical approach. A critical interpretation and evaluation of media content and a critical reflection upon that process are required for developing a higher level of media literacy. In line with the above definition of Livingstone, this definition sheds light on both the basic or technical competences needed to operate the technology and the more complex competences related to the media content. In contrast to the definition of Livingstone, however, this definition is more focused towards one technology (in casu the Internet), what makes it more focused and easier to operationalize.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

15

The term media literacy illustrates the critical evaluation of the media content, what is essentially a cognitive capacity. Consequently, many scholars who start with the traditional concept of media literacy have developed a rather cognitive approach on media literacy. This knowledge-based perspective focuses mainly on the cognitive skills needed to analyze the media message. A fairly common concept of media literacy from a rather cognitive perspective is defined by Potter (2004):Media literacy is the set of perspectives from which we expose ourselves to the media and interpret the meaning of the messages we encounter. We build our perspectives from knowledge structures. The knowledge structures from the platform on which we stand to view the multifaceted phenomenon of the media: their business, their content, and their effects on individuals and institutions. The more people use these knowledge structures in mindful exposures, the more they will be able to use media exposures to meet their own goals and the more they will be able to avoid high risks for negative effects (Potter, 2004, pp. 58-59). According to Potter cognitive skills are needed to attain knowledge, which are the core abilities in developing a high level of media literacy: The skills associated with production (writing, photography, acting, directing, editing, sound recording, etc.) can help people become more media-literate by adding more information into their knowledge structures. But production skills are secondary to the more primary skills of analysis, evaluation, grouping, induction, deduction, synthesis, and abstracting (Potter, 2004, p. 59). The knowledge-based definition of Potter presents a very broad concept of media literacy. It recognizes the importance of cognitive skills in addition to the focus on knowledge about the media. In this respect, Potters definition is broader that the definitions of Silverblatt (1995) and Messaris (1998), which exclusively concentrate on knowledge. The cognitive approach on media literacy mainly highlights the importance of knowledge in order to deal with the media in a rather critical way. Consequently, this perspective highlights one prominent part of media literacy, namely knowledge, but underexposes the other prominent part of media literacy, which are the practical skills or the real actions needed to deal with the media. The term media literacy mainly focuses, due to its origins, on the negative effects the media content could have on the user and consequently it stimulates the critical interpretation and evaluation of that content. Hereby, no or little attention is given to the rather practical skills needed to operate that media content.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

16

3.2. Information Literacy Another term that strongly relates to the critical approach, and consequently to media literacy, is information literacy. Both the concepts information literacy and media literacy highlight the importance of the media message, however, they differ from each other in the way the message is handled. While the term media literacy mainly focuses on how the message is constructed and interpreted, information literacy draws attention to the way it is accessed and evaluated (Martin, 2006). Information literacy highlights the importance of the identification of the problem (what do you want to know?), the location where information can be found, the evaluation of the founded information and the use of this information in solving the problem (Livingstone, Van Couvering, & Thumim, 2005). The term information literacy has gained in importance since the late 1990s when academic library communities promoted information retrieval in libraries. Consequently, it is now increasingly being used to search for information on the Internet, and the availability of many information sources (Bawden, 2001). The term firstly occurred in the library context and is defined by the American Library Association (1989, p. 1) as the ability to recognize when information is needed and the ability to locate, evaluate, and use the needed information effectively. Ultimately, information literate people are those who have learned how to learn. They know how to learn because they know how knowledge is organized, how to find information and how to use information in such a way that others can learn from them. They are people prepared for lifelong learning, because they can always find the information needed for any task or decision at hand. This influential definition illustrated information literacy as a linear process of information handling. Hence, it is a rather prescriptive and formulaic definition, which is based upon the assumption of a formally expressed information need. However, people do not always have an information need in advance; it is also possible that information just comes around, for example in the case of people that are watching television. In the above definition the term information literacy has been considered as an ability needed to search for information in a library, as a kind of library literacy, but it can also be expended to the Internet as a relevant source of information. Information literacy, being able to evaluate the available information, is crucial in an

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

17

environment as the Internet where an abundance of information, also unreliable and incorrect information, is easily accessible. People who are able to critically evaluate the information and find the correct information they are looking for will benefit strongly from this capability. A broader definition of information literacy is the one of Shapiro and Hughes (Sharpio & Hughes, 1996, p. 4) in which seven types of information literacy are proposed in order to deal with computers and Internet:

1. Tool literacy: the ability to understand and use the practical and conceptual tools of current information technology, including software, hardware and multimedia. 2. Resource literacy: the ability to understand the form, format, location and access methods of information resources. 3. Social-structural literacy: knowing that and how information is socially situated and produced. 4. Research literacy: the ability to understand and use the IT-based tools relevant to the work of todays researcher and scholar. 5. Publishing literacy: the ability to format and publish research and ideas electronically, in textual and multimedia forms. 6. Emerging technology literacy: the ability to ongoingly adapt to, understand, evaluate and make use of the continually emerging innovations in information technology so as not to be a prisoner of prior tools and resources, and to make intelligent decisions about the adoption of new ones. 7. Critical literacy: the ability to evaluate critically the intellectual, human and social strengths and weaknesses, potentials and limits, benefits and costs of information technologies.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

18

A quite similar but narrowed definition is proposed by Catts & Lau (Catts & Lau, 2008, p. 8). They have elaborated a five-skill set people need in order to deal with information in the current information society. People must be able to:

1. Recognize their information needs; 2. locate and evaluate the quality of information; 3. store and retrieve information; 4. make effective and ethical use of information, and 5. apply the information to create and communicate knowledge. As the above conceptualizations of information literacy indicate, critical thinking is an important part of dealing with information, which becomes even more prominent with the abundance of information easily accessible on the Internet. Therefore, the term information literacy has many links with the term media literacy (see above), however, it is more action-oriented and focused than the latter concept (Bawden & Robinson, 2002). In most of the definitions of information literacy there is a strong focus on the information people retrieved in a library (via books) or from het Internet, while information exchange can actually be much wider, for example information can also be transmitted orally through other people. In addition, due to this focus on information there is no attention given to the other action that can be done via the Internet and other media, such as communication or interaction with other people, the creation or production of new materials and the transaction of online materials.

3.3. Computer Literacy & ICT Literacy Computer literacy or ICT literacy are terms that fit rather a structuration approach, which is an action-oriented approach that sheds light on the acting agent (Giddens, 1984). Information literacy, what has been discussed above, is also strongly related to this structuration approach, because actual skills are defined. A clear difference, however, is that it is more strongly related to the rather critical approach because a lot of attention is given to the critical interpretation and evaluation of this information. The terms computer literacy and ICT literacy are more action-oriented than information literacy and has been identified as a need from the late 1980s with the increasing popularity of the personal computer (A. Martin & Grudziecki, 2006). As evidenced by the

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

19

terms themselves, they refer to the actual use of a computer or in other words the operational or technical skills needed to use the computer for example turning on the computer, opening a folder and saving a file. In literature, computer literacy has been most commonly defined as the skills required to use a variety of computer applications packages word processing, databases, spreadsheets, etc. together with some general IT skills, such as copying disks and generating hard-copy printout (Bawden, 2001, p. 226). Computer and ICT literacy are terms that are often described narrowly and only cover the basic skills to use a computer. While, such definitions are very focused and perfectly measurable, they quickly become obsolete due to the rapidly changing media environment (Ba, Tally, & Tsikalas, 2002).

3.4. Internet & Network Literacy Also the terms Internet literacy and network literacy fit in the series of action-oriented approaches and emphasize the importance of action and interaction on the Internet. They refer to the skills needed to use the Internet. McClure (1994, P. 138) has developed the term network literacy and defined it as the ability to identify, access, and use electronic information from the network. The focus is mainly on skills, but also attention is given to the knowledge required in order to deal with these networked resources on the Internet (McClure, 1994, p. 138): 1. Knowledge: -An awareness of the range and uses of networked resources; -An understanding of the role and uses of networked information in problem solving and basic life activities; -An understanding of the system by which networked information is generated, managed and made available; 2. Skills: -Retrieval of specific types of information from networks; -Manipulation of networked information; combining, enhancing, adding value; -Use of networked information to help make work-related and personal decisions.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

20

While network literacy is certainly an important aspect of the wider concept of Internet literacy, the term itself is too restrictive, and arguably too much influenced by the idea of Internet as a network. A more operational definition of Internet literacy, in particular Internet skills, is proposed by van Deursen (2010). In his work the Internet is seen as a medium that requires more action than the rather traditional media, such as the television, newspaper or the radio. He established and validated a model of Internet skills (see figure 1) in which he distinguished four Internet skills in order of increasing complexity: operational, formal, information and strategic Internet skills. Operational and formal skills are the basic skills needed to access and use the technology. Informational skills are needed to search information, find it, evaluate it and use it. Strategic skills, which are perceived as the most advanced skills according to this model, refer to the skills to achieve a specific goal. The model focuses on one of the important 21st century skills, namely information skills and hence these skills are strongly related to the term information literacy. Therefore, the model of van Deursen offers many insights in the skills needed to access and use information. In addition, this definition also gives attention to the technical skills that falls under the heading of the previously described terms computer and ICT literacy. van Deursen (2010) focuses on very practical skills in order to deal with the Internet and the computer. Hence, no attention is given to the knowledge needed to attain these skills and stays therefore far away from the cognitive approach. In addition, by almost exclusively focusing on Internet information this definition also lacks other important skills to deal with Internet, such as creation, communication, transaction and collaboration. Unlike McClure (1994), van Deursen goes beyond the attention on purely media content and consequently sheds light on the basic skills needed to operate the technology.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

21

Figure1: Summary Internet skills of van Deursen (2010).

In the above action-oriented terms the emphasis is mainly on the practical skills needed to deal with the media technology and the content. They mainly focus on rather new media, such as the Internet, in which more action and interaction is required comparing to the rather traditional media, such as the television or radio. Little or no attention is given to the knowledge and attitudes needed in order to perform these skills. When the above action-oriented terms are completed with the insights of other approaches, they are strongly related to the term digital literacy.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

22

3.5. Digital Literacy The term digital literacy is considered as a combination of the above discussed approaches and terms. Hence, the term belongs to a more idealistic approach in which an ideally idea of media literacy is proposed, for example media literacy as a personal fulfilment or individual moral fortitude. The concept of digital literacy, as it is now generally used, was firstly introduced by Gilster (1997) who defined it as the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats form a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers and being able to understand a problem and develop a set of questions that will solve that information need (cited in Bawden, 2001, p. 19). According to Gilster (1997) the most important is the ability to make informed judgments about what you find on-line, because there is no central organisation that determines the content of the Internet and therefore any information can be put also unreliable information (cited in Bawden, 2001, p. 19). The latter ability has many similarities with the critical thinking in the information literacy. Additionally, Gilster (1997) claim that new media also require the abilities to navigate through networked technologies and to interpret the meaning of the media message. Gilster did not provide a list of actual skills; rather he presented several core competences in order to deal with digital media: 1. The ability to make informed judgements about what is found online, the art of critical thinking; 2. the skills of reading and understanding in a dynamic and non-sequential hypertext environment; 3. knowledge assembly skills; building a reliable information horde from diverse sources, with the ability to collect and evaluate both fact and opinion, ideally without bias; 4. searching skills, essentially based in Internet search engines; 5. the ability to manage the multimedia flow, using information filters and agents; 6. the ability to create a personal information strategy, with selection of sources and delivery mechanisms; 7. awareness of other people and the ability to contact them to discuss issues and get help;

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

23

8.

being able to understand a problem and develop a set of questions that will solve that information need;

9. understanding of backing up traditional forms of content with networked tools; 10. wariness in judging validity and completeness of material referenced by hypertext links. Gilster (1997) provides a broad definition of digital literacy, which has as advantage that it is applicable to all kinds of digital media. The disadvantage is that it does not give a particular clear and coherent account of digital literacy itself, of the skills, knowledge and attitudes that underline it; it is rather a wide-ranging approach, which may lead to some confusion for anyone attempting to operationalize and to measure digital literacy. In line with the above conceptualization of digital literacy, Eshet-Alkalai (2004) described digital literacy as more than the mere ability to use or operate the media technology. It also contains cognitive, motor, sociological, and emotional abilities in order to successfully function in a digital environment. She distinguishes five types of digital literacy: 1. Photo visual literacy: Reading digital images; 2. Reproduction literacy: Creating new, meaningful materials from pre-existing ones; 3. Information literacy: Evaluating information; 4. Branching literacy: Constructing knowledge from non-linear, hyper-textual navigation; 5. Socio-emotional literacy: Understanding the underlying rules in cyberspace an applying this understanding in online cyberspace communication. This conceptualization of digital literacy is also very broad and contains a lot of competences, consisting of knowledge and skills from the above-described competences. Many competences must be achieved in order to accomplish a high level of digital literacy, what makes it very difficult to measure this kind of digital literacy.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

24

A broader concept of digital literacy is found In the DigEuLit (a European Framework for digital literacy) project. Within this project Martin & Grudziecki (2006) developed a framework of digital literacy in three stages (see figure 2): digital competences, digital usage and digital transformation. These competences are a combination of for example skills, concepts, approaches and attitudes, so it contains all the abilities or skills people need in order to be able to use digital media. Therefore, these competences are seen as a criterion for using digital media for professional, private or other purposes.

Figure 2: Stages of digital literacy by Martin & Grudziecki (2006).

This sheds light on digital literacy as a personal fulfillment. Media literacy cannot be seen as equal for everyone, but must be considered from the situation of the individual. Consequently, Martin & Grudziecki (2006) state that for evaluating media literacy we must set up a personal development profile based on this conceptual model. The highest level in the model is digital transformation, innovation or creativity and this can only takes place when digital competences and usage is established. This is the most comprehensive and complete definition of digital literacy found in literature. In addition, the definition is very general and can therefore be applied to different kinds of digital media. However, in this definition, as in the other definitions of digital literacy, no clear practical skills and knowledge are distinguished what makes it very difficult to operationalize and to measure.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

25

Based on a combination of the different approaches of media literacy, Bawden (2008) proposed a conceptual model of digital literacy, in which four key components of digital literacy are distinguished, namely underpinnings, background knowledge, competences and attitudes. The underpinnings or basic skills (e.g. computer literacy) are considered together with the background knowledge as the prerequisites for the development of the central competences. The central competences and the underlying elements can be compared to the above discussed definition of Gilster (1997), in which digital literacy is described as the use of and interpretation of information gathered through digital resources. In this model attitudes are seen as the result of the central competences or the main purpose of digital literacy: what is helping individuals to learn what is necessary in their particular role in society and on this way become a literate person. Moral and social literacy, within the attitudes concept, is being aware of appropriate behaviour in a digital environment (e.g. privacy). In the model we can generally distinguish three important elements of digital literacy, being knowledge, skills and attitudes. In this respect, Bawdens model is a combination of the above approaches of media literacy and therefore fits very well in the idealistic approach. Consequently, the definition is very broad and wide-ranged, but very hard to operationalize. Recently, another inclusive model of digital competences is developed by JRC (Joint Research Centre) European commission IPTS project (Institute for Prospective Technological Studies) (Ala-Mutka, 2011). The model in figure 3 maps digital competences by using existing definitions and models of digital literacy (and synonyms). Consequently, the model exists of many different elements and competences. As in the previous models, basic or instrumental skills and knowledge are considered as the preconditions for effectively applying and enhancing the more advanced skills and knowledge. These advanced digital competences in turn have a reciprocal relationship with attitudes, which represent ways of thinking and motivations for acting in a digital environment. This model demonstrates that a certain level of digital skills and knowledge is necessary in order to develop advanced digital skills, knowledge and attitudes. In addition, this model indicates that digital competences are a personal fulfilment; digital competences are the means to develop an intercultural, critical, creative, autonomous and responsible attitude. These latter attitudes are all qualities that are prominent in the current society, but investigating if these qualities are reached through digital competences is very hard and even impossible. Also the other concepts in the model, such as meaningful participation, are quite general and therefore difficult to measure.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

26

Figure 3: Mapping of digital competences by the JRC EC IPT project (2011).

The concept of digital literacy is plainly and very broad span, from skills and knowledge to rather general awareness and critical thinking (Bawden, 2001). The term digital literacy has the purpose to describe all the important concepts that play a role in dealing with digital media. Consequently, It is a combination of all of the above-mentioned approaches of media literacy and therefore contains a lot of general elements, which are very hard to measure. However, trying to freeze these elements and different kinds of media under one definition is not only impossible, but will also lose its relevance quickly when emerging new media that do not fit the proposed definition. From the outline above, it seems that there are several approaches possible, all with their own strengths and weaknesses. The main purpose of this chapter is not to select or propose one concept definition for the conceptual framework development, but rather to compare the different concepts and to recognize the essential characteristics and elements of each concept of literacy. This should help us to choose an appropriate approach or approaches to conceptualize social media literacy.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

27

4. Social Media Literacy


There exists a variety of conceptualizations of media literacy, including digital literacy and Internet literacy. However, social media are Internet-based applications, the other conceptualizations of literacy are not or only limited applicable to social media. While the concepts media and Internet literacy mainly focus on analyzing and evaluating information online, social media competences, as indicated by Jenkins et al. (2009) and Kaplan & Haenlein (2010), must deal with the production, creation, communication, collaboration and transaction of media content. Therefore, using social media requires more action or initiative of the user. The specific competences needed to deal with social media, however, are rarely or never actually operationalized. Hence, in conceptualizing social media literacy we face a number of challenges. As mentioned above, dealing with social media demands more action and interaction from the user compared to the competences needed to deal with other media such as television. Therefore, our focus will mainly be on an action-oriented or skill-based approach in order to conceptualize social media literacy. However, although we will mainly focus on actionoriented media competences, we cannot neglect the critical-analysis competences in order to conceptualize social media literacy. The latter are competences that have been arisen with the emergence of mass media and cannot be disconnected from new media competences. Due to the media convergence some applications from other older media, such as television watching, can also be used in social media, for example streaming television programs on YouTube (Jenkins, 2006). Therefore, the challenge is to combine the both approaches, the critical and the action-oriented approach, and to ensure that the conceptualization is concrete enough to stay measurable. As mentioned above, social media are applications that enable users to communicate, share and self-produce media content. A lot of information, also unreliable information, can be put online by everyone through social media, hence, a lot of attention must be paid to the competences in order to critically deal with that content. Therefore, the conceptualization of social media literacy must go beyond the purely technical competences for operating the social media applications themselves. Furthermore, the conceptualization also needs to pay attention to the more content competences that are related with dealing with the social media messages.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

28

In line with Livingstone (2004) and Martin and Grudziecki (2006), we are aware that media literacy is more than the competences needed to deal with media, also access and use must be considered as prominent components of media literacy. Hence, another challenge is to conceptualize social media literacy in such a way that it is broad so that it can also contain access to and the actual use of social media applications. Access to social media, in this case having access to the Internet, is an important prerequisite for the development of media competences and is therefore an important part of social media literacy, for example someone without access to the Internet will not be able to make an account on a social networking site and consequently he or she will not be able to experiment and learn the competences related to that use. In addition, the actual social media use is determined by the competences people have, and which is subsequently part of social media literacy. The concepts of media literacy and media competences are used in this report as interchangeable terms, but from now on social media literacy is used as an umbrella concept for the components access, competences and use. Above all, the conceptual framework must be applicable to a wide range of social media applications, as they all have their own specific characteristics. For each component of social media literacy, we will present its underlying elements and potential indicators. The indicators serve only as a clarification, as they depend on the methodology and the chosen social media application. In the next part of the research, the measurement of social media literacy, we will elaborate on the different competences and indicators for each of the social media separately. The goal of this chapter is to develop a conceptual framework for social media literacy: a definition, a conceptual model and an explanation of the underlying components of social media literacy and their relationships. These efforts will enable scholars to easily operationalize the components of social media literacy.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

29

4.1. Proposing a Definition of Social Media Literacy In order to develop our own definition of social media competences, we start with some definitions as outlined above. The first task is to come to a common understanding of the term media literacy. A widespread and commonly used definition of media literacy is the one of Livingstone (2004), who defines it as the ability to access, analyze, evaluate and create messages across a variety of contexts (Livingstone, 2004, p. 18). Livingstone identifies the critical thinking rather than the practical competences as the main element of media literacy, and emphasizes the critical evaluation and creation of media messages, rather than the technical skills to operate the media technology. The notion of media literacy as a critical analysis and evaluation of media content is also brought out in the definition of Brandtweiner and Kerschbaum (2010), in which the abilities for this critical task are further defined. They describe media literacy as the basic technical skills to operate the Internet and the higher-level media competences for dealing with the content: Selecting and using the appropriate media and contents (knowledge about media, usage and participation); Understanding and evaluating media contents (analysis and evaluation); Recognizing and responding to the influences of media contents (self-reflection); Identifying and evaluating the circumstances of production (seriousness and credibility). (Brandtweiner, et al., 2010, pp. 817-819). Brandtweiner and Kerschbaum indicate knowledge about media, analytic and evaluation skills and self-reflection as vital competences in order deal with media content. In addition, they emphasize the prominence of basic technical skills to operate the technology. The action-oriented part of media literacy is further defined in the operational definition of van Deursen (2010). He makes a distinction between medium-related and content-related skills. The medium-related skills are the operational and formal skills to operate the technology, being the computer and the computer network the Internet- such as menu structure and hyperlinks. The content-related skills are the information and strategic skills to deal with information on the Internet. Van Deursen (2010) illustrates the importance of going beyond a technologic viewpoint when defining Internet skills. Internet skills, according to van Deursen, should contain

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

30

both the technical skills to operate the medium and more substantive skills to deal with the content of the medium. For a more comprehensive interpretation of media competences we refer the definition of Martin & Grudziecki, who defined digital literacy as the awareness, attitude and ability of individuals to appropriately use digital tools and facilities to identify, access, manage, integrate, evaluate, analyse and synthesize digital resources, construct new knowledge, create media expressions, and communicate with others, in the context of specific life situations, in order to enable constructive social action; and to reflect upon this process (A. Martin & Grudziecki, 2006, p. 7). The definition does not attach itself to only technical skills and knowledge, but also encompass competences (awareness, attitude, skills and ability) to deal with the media content. In addition, Martin & Grudziecki highlight not only the importance of critical thinking, but also the self-creation and communication what are typical social media competences. Hence, this definition implies a broadening of the elements by which all literacy is defined. However, it contains a lot of abstract and broad elements what makes it difficult to operationalize. Considering these points, we developed the following definition of social media literacy: Social media literacy is the access to social media applications, the knowledge, skills, attitudes and self-efficacy of individuals to (appropriately) use social media applications and to analyze, evaluate, share and create social media content. In this regard, social media literacy implies a broadening, and also a reinforcement of the elements by which all (media) literacies in general are defined. It does not attach itself to the rather operational or instrumental skills, but also to a critical analyze and evaluation of numerous media texts, transaction and creation of media content. Medium-related competences The first part of the definition illustrates the medium-related or technical competences needed to use social media tools. For using these tools people first need to have access to the Internet and some basic technical knowledge and skills to operate the Internet for example the abilities to open web sites by entering the URL. Considering the hypermedia nature of the Internet, not all technical skills are necessarily simple or basic, for

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

31

example navigating through different websites. In addition, people must also be able and willing (attitude) to operate the specific social media applications on the Internet. These technical competences are a precondition for effectively applying the advanced content-related competences and can enhance these competences by making new social media activities possible, for example access and skills to operate social networking sites can support communication skills. Content-related competences The second part presents the advanced content-related competences, which are the main abilities people should learn to apply in a social media environment. The analysis and evaluation of media content illustrates the critical interpretation of everything that is on a social media website, including text-messages, visuals and sounds. Sharing social media content includes the communication or interaction with other people online (=sharing textmessages) and the transaction of other electronic material (e.g. photos, movies, music, etc.). Creating social media content contains the production of that content or everything what is self-generated or created by the user (User Generated Content). However, not all people need all of the above knowledge and skills: which social media competences a person should have or learn, depends on his or her own personal objectives. People should therefore be able to select the competences according to what is relevant for them. For example, if someone does not have any friends on a social networking site and the person does not want to use the site for searching new friends, then the use of social networking sites is not relevant for him or her. How these various components of social media competences, namely medium-related and content-related knowledge and skills and attitudes, are linked together is further discussed in the next part, which also presents the conceptual model.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

32

4.2. Developing a Conceptual Model of Social Media Literacy Due to the complex nature of social media literacy, and in order to constitute the criteria by which it could be measured, we propose a conceptual framework. This framework contains the different dimensions of social media literacy, their component parts, the factors that indicate them and the indicators themselves. It also elucidates the relationships between each of these elements. Based on the literature review we can distinguish three dimensions of social media literacy, being social media access, social media competences and social media use: 1. Social media access: this concerns the access to social media applications and in fact to the Internet, because social media are a group of Internet-based applications. 2. Social media competences: this concerns the combination of knowledge, skills attitudes and selfefficacy to use social media applications and analyze, evaluate, share and create social media content and to reflect upon this process. 3. Social media use: this concerns which social media applications are used, how they are used and in which place. These three dimensions of social media literacy are in turn divided into different components. Social media access is one construct and is consequently not further broke down; it only concerns the access to social media applications. Based on the work of Sternberg & Kolligian (1990), social media competences are divided into on the one hand objective competences, being knowledge and skills, and on the other hand subjective competences, being attitudes and self-efficacy. Knowledge and skills can be objectively verified while attitudes and self-efficacy should be superseded by asking the person him or herself. The use, in turn, consists of the social media applications that are used, how much, where and how.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

33

On this way we come to the following diagram in figure 4 that illustrates the conceptual framework. It represents the different components of social media literacy and the ways that they are related to each other. The form clarifies that the higher steps cannot exist without the lower ones.

Social Media Literacy

Figure 4: Conceptual model of social media literacy

At the foundation of the model we place access to social media, which is in fact access to the Internet, because social media are internet-based applications. Without this access the development of social media competences is precluded.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

34

The second level illustrates social media competences, which encompass the abilities needed to deal with social media applications. They are divided in objective and subjective competences, according to the way they can be measured. Skills and knowledge can be objectively verified, while attitudes and self-efficacy should be measured by asking the person themselves (subjective). The objective competences are in turn subdivided in basic or medium-related knowledge and skills and rather advanced or content-related knowledge and skills. The basic or operational knowledge and skills are at the bottom of the objective competences, because they are a prerequisite for the development of the advanced competences. Without the practical knowledge and skills to operate the social media applications, people will not be able to analyse, evaluate, share and create social media messages, which are the content-related knowledge and skills. While the medium-related skills are the practical knowledge and skills with a low degree of self-conscious awareness, content-related competences contain the knowledge about social media applications, the understanding of media context and content and knowledge about knowledge (meta-knowledge). Moreover, this knowledge allows users to analyse, evaluate, share (also communicate) and to create social media content or to perform the skills to deal with social media in an advanced level. Also the advanced content-related knowledge and skills can, in turn, influence the mediumrelated knowledge and skills: when people have the knowledge and skills to deal with a particular social media application, for example Facebook, this will facilitate the development of medium-related knowledge and skills, and thereafter also the content-related knowledge and skills, to deal with quite similar social medium, for example Netlog. But the development of these objective competences does not happen without the subjective competences of the individuals themselves. Someone who hates a particular media application and therefore refuses to use it, will be reluctant towards learning the knowledge and skills to deal with that social medium. In addition, a person who is in advance underrating his or her own knowledge or skills to use a particular social media application, will be less inclined to learn these objective competences. Consequently, attitudes and selfefficacy are very closely linked to the development of knowledge and skills. Moreover, between the subjective competences there also exists a reciprocal relationship: if a person believe in his or her (objective) competences to use a particular medium, he or she will be quite positive towards that social media application and vice versa. In sum, both the objective and subjective media competences determine the actual media use.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

35

At the highest level of the model is social media use, which is the result of the development of media competences. It is the successful conversion of both, objective and subjective media competences in actual social media behaviour. This behaviour indicates not only which and how social media applications are used, but also how often, and where. Between the three levels there also exist reciprocal relationships. Once initial and physical access is accomplished, acquiring media competences conducts users to transform significantly and continually the conditions of access and use and vice versa (Livingstone, 2003). It is assumed that media literacy is the reciprocal relationship between media use and the growing and changing media competences of the user (Livingstone, 2003). The idea behind this is that media competences are shaping and being shaped by someones experience with media technology and content, both physically and symbolically. Physically in the sense of how often it is used and symbolically as the importance that is attached to it. If a particular media technology or content is used a lot and/or it is interpreted as for example important or functional, the competences of the user needed to deal with it will enhance. In order to fully understand social media literacy, we must have good understanding of the different dimensions and components of media literacy. Hence, when conceptualizing social media literacy it is important to operationalize the different dimensions of (social) media literacy and to discuss the relation between them. For each component of social media literacy, we will present their underlying elements and potential indicators. These indicators are variable, as they depend on the methodology and the chosen social media application. Hence, the indicators only serve as a clarification. In the next part of the report, we give an in-depth discussion of the different components of social media literacy. We begin with access as an important pre-condition for the development of social media competences. Thereafter, we offer a thorough overview of the literature on the elements of social media competences, being knowledge, skills, attitudes and self-efficacy. Afterwards, we will discuss the different elements of social media use.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

36

5. Components of Social Media Literacy


As mentioned above, we distinguish the following components of social media literacy: access to social media applications, objective competences (e.g. knowledge and skills), subjective competences (e.g. attitudes and selfefficacy) and social media use. In this chapter these different components of social media literacy are briefly discussed.

5.1. Access to Social Media Applications In our conceptual model, access is the first step to social media literacy as it is an important prerequisite for the development of social media competences (Livingstone, 2003). Without an Internet connection, people simply cannot develop the knowledge and skills needed to use social media applications. It was the digital divide discourse that highlighted the significance of access in the entire media literacy story. This divide indicates the differences in media possession between people, especially between young and old people, high and low educated people, people with high and low income and natives and immigrants. For a number of media, for example computer, there exists a reduction of these differences, what slacks the attention for access in research (van Dijk & Hacker, 2003; Verdegem, 2009). However, for new media technologies which are designed and intended to facilitate the use of social media applications, such as smartphones, these differences reoccur. This means that access is still a problem and therefore should not be neglected in a conceptual framework of social media literacy. Access is thus a condition that must be fulfilled in order to develop competences needed to use social media. But what access stand for is very unclear, given the many different meanings in literature (van Dijk & Hacker, 2003). In our research, we follow the most common meaning of access, which is the possession of media equipment. In the case of social media, access is the possession of a technology through which people can go on the Internet, such as a computer with Internet connection or a smartphone. In addition, it is not only important to have a device that can connect to the Internet, also the connection in itself should be accomplished and must be sufficient to open social media applications.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

37

Moreover, we are aware that access is not isolated and that it involves a lot of social and technical dimensions that influences the ownership of media, such as the financial resources, the quality of the technology, the permission of others to buy media or peer-group norms about a certain media. However, in this report we mainly focus on conceptualization of social media literacy itself. As mentioned above, access to social media applications determines the competences people can develop concerning social media. What these competences mean and contain of is explained in the next chapter. 5.2. Social Media Competences Social media competences play, besides the actual access and use, an essential role in determining the development of social media literacy. However, there exists no clear understanding of the term competences. The concept of competence is being used in many different ways, what creates confusion of thoughts (Westera, 2001). This terminological confusion reproduces different definitions and inconsistent usage of the term competences. The term competence often confused with the concept of skill or with the combination of knowledge and skills (Westera, 2001), but we conceptualize competences on a broader way. We define them as the combination of skills, knowledge, attitudes and self-efficacy. For this conceptualizations we start from the work of Sternberg & Kolligian (1990), Martin & Grudzicki (2006) and Brandtweiner et al. (2010). From a psychological viewpoint, Sternberg & Kolligian (1990) conceptualize competences by making a distinction between objective (for example knowledge and skills) and subjective competences (for example self-efficacy). A similar conceptualization, but applied to digital competences, is found in the work of Martin & Grudziecki (2006, p. 255), who describe digital competences as skill levels from basic visual recognition and manual skills to more critical, evaluative and conceptual approaches, and also includes attitudes and awareness. In addition, Brandtweiner et al. (2010) define media competences as a combination of knowledge about media, analysis and evaluation skills and selfreflection. The conceptualizations of Martin and Grudziecki (2006) and Brandtweiner et al. (2010) clarify that the mastery of knowledge and skills alone is no guarantee for dealing with media, users should also have a positive attitude and be self-confident to use the available knowledge and skills in such a way that efficient and effective media behaviour takes place.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

38

Hence, we conceptualize social media competences (in figure 5) as a combination of objective competences, being knowledge and skills, and subjective competences, being self-efficacy and attitudes, which are needed to execute a specific social media activity. We make this division, because knowledge and skills are objective or directly observable and measurable, while self-efficacy and attitudes are only indirectly measurable by asking the person him or herself. In addition, media competences are also considered to include a reflection about oneself, or metacognition, media competent users are expected to reflect upon the influence of their own media use (or that of others) on their own media knowledge, skills and attitudes (Brandtweiner, et al., 2010; Westera, 2001). This way, users are able to critically reflect on their own media behaviour, what is a prominent part of media literacy. We conceptualize social media competences as a combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes and self-efficacy (see figure 5) and are consequently not measurable with one measurement. Hence, the term media competences is used in this conceptual model as a rather descriptive or theoretical term.

Figure 5: Conceptualization (social) media competences EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

39

However, the terms media competences, media literacy and media skills are often used as synonyms, in our conceptual model we use them as separate terms. A social media competence refers to being able to perform a certain social media activity and is characterized by a specific combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes and self-efficacy. Therefore, skills are treated in our conceptual model as a component of competences and refer to the more practical aspects of these competences (van Deursen, 2010; van Deursen & van Dijk, 2010). Media competences, in turn, are considered as a component of media literacy. In moving from media competences to media literacy, we take into account media use, and consequently also the context in which it is used. In what follows, we describe the different component-parts of social media competences. We begin with the objective competences knowledge and skills. Thereafter we describe the subjective competences attitudes and self-efficacy.

5.2.1. Objective Social Media Competences Knowledge Before going into the different aspects of social media skills, we discuss knowledge as a foundation needed to execute these skills. Turning information, through cognitive abilities, into knowledge is a fundamental part of social media competences and consequently also of social media literacy (Potter, 2011). Knowledge makes it possible to evaluate media contents, different types and sources of media messages. As a result one can decide on the accuracy and usefulness of the messages, and making informed decisions. Knowledge is a cognitive ability being an internal process of the mind (Bloom, Engelhardt, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956), that includes reasoning, assessing, concluding, analysing and evaluating the available information. This way, it forms the basis of peoples media skills as the tools to retrieve knowledge from the memory and translate into behaviour. Hence, knowledge can be defined as sets of organized information in a persons memory (Potter, 2011, p. 13). It is made up by different (valuable) pieces of information that are constructed in the memory through the gathering of information. At first, this information is not only impersonal and unstructured but also temporary and fragmentary. Turning into knowledge, information is interpreted and becomes more structured, organized and enduring in a persons memory. The collection of knowledge occurs in various ways, for example through observations or experiences (Westera, 2001). People get information through friends and family, but also from the media, the school or work context. Out of this vast amount of information people select the information
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

40

they need to reach their goals. They fit those pieces of information into their proper places in a structure (Potter, 2011, p. 14). This knowledge structure is used as a mental map to find the correct information easily and to find more information about the same or a related topic. When we use the concept knowledge in this report, we refer to the knowledge structures mentioned above. For the operationalization of knowledge we follow Potter (2011) and Rogers (2003), who distinguish three types of knowledge. They make a distinction between what- or awareness-knowledge, how-(to-)knowledge and whyor principles-knowledge. The what- or awareness-knowledge is the knowledge about the existence of certain media technologies or applications. This type of knowledge is quite straightforward and refers to questions such as: What social media applications (already) exist? What can you do with them? What are the specific terms or concepts used in a certain social media application (e.g. the concept tag in Facebook)? In addition, we extend the concept of what-knowledge with the concept of who-knowledge, that also has a rather descriptive nature. Examples of this who-knowledge are questions such as: who is the maker and/ or host server of a social media website? Who is the public or audience of ones own texts or creations? Although, the what- and whoknowledge are prerequisites to be able to ask the how-and why-questions, it does not produce as much critical information as compared to the other two knowledge types. The how-(to-)knowledge produces information of how to use certain media, because it concerns how a certain media technology or application works. Finally, the why- or principles-knowledge deals with information about why media (technologies or applications) works in a certain way. In other words, it is understanding the context in which media content is constructed and operates. For example knowing that social networking sites are free because they sell the personal data of users to marketing firms.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

41

Based on the above operationalization of knowledge, we divide knowledge in figure 6 into the following components and indicators:

Figure 6: Conceptualization of (social) media knowledge

Skills What clearly emerges from the literature is that skills are important components of media competences, and consequently also of media literacy. Hence, it is necessary to consider what skills are needed for dealing with social media are and how they can be defined. Most research into media skills pays attention to the so-called operational skills or technical skills, but a broader definition of media skills is indispensable (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2009), especially in the case of social media where an active input form the user is required. Skills not only refer to the ability to use hardware and software, but also encompass a large variety of complex cognitive, motor, sociological, and emotional skills
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

42

(Eshet-Alkalai, 2004, p. 93). Next to the operational capacities such as turning on a computer or starting the Internet, social media skills also entail capacities to evaluate the quality and reliability of (online) information, to communicate and to collaborate with other people (online), to share information and to create new meaningful content (online). But how can we define social media skills more accurately? The specific skills needed to deal with social media, however, are rarely or never actually operationalized, therefore we base ourselves on existing operationalizations of skills that relate to other media. Before we go into our conceptualization of social media skills, we first discuss different conceptual frameworks of media skills in order to touch upon the different elements that make up this conceptualizations. Mossberger et al. (2003) and Judith & Stewart (2004) define computer and/or Internet skills by differentiating between technical skills on the one hand, i.e. skills that allow to operate the computer and/or the Internet, and information skills on the other hand, or the skills needed to find and to evaluate information on the computer and/or the Internet. Judith & Stewart (2004) differentiate between the skills needed to use a computer and the skills needed to find and evaluate information. OHanlon (2002) sees information literacy (skills) more as a component of computer literacy (skills) and therefore as intertwined with each other. Accordingly, any definition of information skills must take into account computer or technical skills and vice versa. A more broader definition of media skills is proposed by Eshet-Alkalai (2004). She proposed the following skills or in her words the so-called literacies: photo visual literacy, reproduction literacy, information literacy, branching literacy and socio-emotional literacy. Photo visual literacy is reading or handling visual representations (such as photos, movies, etc.). Reproduction literacy can be seen as the creative recycling of existing materials into something new (Eshet-Alkalai, 2004, p. 97). Information literacy refers to the cognitive skills to evaluate information. Branching literacy covers the hypermedia and non-linear thinking skills. Socioemotional literacy refers to the ability to know how to avoid the risks as well as obtain the benefits from online communication.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

43

A similar conceptualization is found in the work of Kuhlemeier & Hemker (2007). They developed the ISFS (Internet skills for schools) test that analyses the digital skills students need in the lower grades. In their test they distinguish four domains of skills, namely: Internet searching skills, communication skills, the use of Internetrelated terminology and understanding the window principles of webpages. The last two skills depend on the first two skills, because use of Internet-related terminology and understanding window principles are prerequisite skills for Internet searching and communication skills. Other scholars, as Steyaert (2000) and van Dijk (2005), have elaborated on defining Internet skills by distinguishing between (1) instrumental/operational, (2) structural/informational and (3) strategic skills. The Ph.D. research of van Deursen (2010) is based on the classification of Steyaert (2000) and van Dijk (2005), in which he makes a distinction between two kinds of skills, being medium-related and content-related skills. The medium-related skills are operational and formal skills. Content-related skills equate information and strategic skills. Operational skills are the basic skills to use different kind of media, while formal skills refer to the skills to deal with the formal characteristics (for example Internet menus or hyperlinks) of Internet. Information skills cover the skills to search, select and evaluate information online. Furthermore, strategic skills must be seen in terms of achieving specific goals and improving a persons status in society (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2010). These definitions serve as a starting point for our own conceptual framework. Now, we break down the concept of social media skills by distinguishing the following components: 1. Operational skills (synonyms that are often used are e.g. instrumental skills, button knowledge, technological literacy, technical proficiency, technical competence): are the basic skills needed to operate different kinds of social media. Sby (2003) describes technical proficiency as a basic aspect of digital literacy. It contains the basic knowledge of how to deal with the hard- and software of digital tools. Carvin (2000) defines technical literacy as the capacity to use hard- and software of similar IT tools. Bunz (2004) makes use of a more specific description of web fluency or operational skills. He distinguishes the following components of operational skills: opening web addresses, identifying the maker and/or host server of a web page, navigating through web pages and using online search engines. A similar description is found in the
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

44

research work of Steyaert (2000) and van Dijk (2005). They subdivide Internet instrumental or operational skills in: knowing the various terms or concepts related to the Internet, performing various web search tasks, saving or bookmarking websites, printing the content of web pages and navigating through web pages (going back- and forward through different web pages). van Deursen (2010, p. 61) describes operational Internet skills as the basic skills needed to use the Internet. He suggests the following aspects to describe or measure operational skills: using Internet browsers (for example being able to type an URL in the address bar) and search engines (for example typing key words in the input field), navigating through web sites, saving and bookmarking web pages and/ or sites, downloading or saving Internet files, dealing with different online forms (for example dealing with and/ or recognizing the different lay outs of web sites and pages) and file formats (for example pdf). We can apply these descriptions or definitions of operational skills to social media as well. These skills depend partially on the characteristics of a specific social media application, but we can give some examples of general social media skills. For example to be able to open a social media site for example through the URL or to navigate through different web pages of this social media site. Next to that, people should be able to go to the profile of others, but also to find their way back to their own profile and to deal with different formats of various social media. 2. Formal skills (synonyms are e.g. branching literacy): are the skills that refer to skills to deal with the formal characteristics (for example hyperlinks) of different social media. Every medium has specific formal characteristics that a user needs to be familiarized before he or she can use it. In the context of the Internet one needs to have the skills of browsing and navigating through the different webpages and sites. Users need the skills to use a variety of website and menu designs. But not everybody is able to do this. Furthermore, for the developers of a website the lay-out and usability can seem perfectly, however, for users this is not the case (unless they have sophisticated knowledge about web navigation). Hence, a recurring phenomenon is the disorientation of users on the Internet (M. J. Lee, 2005). This is especially the case with non-fixed formal media structures or modern hypermedia technology, such as the Internet and consequently also social media. In hypermedia users can go backward and forward, click on a link or be directed to another page. It is a challenge for users to think
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

45

or search in a nonlinear way (instead of the linear way of thinking) and not get lost somewhere in the middle of this experience. Lee and Hsu (2002) have shown that formal skills can advance navigating through different web pages and improve the feeling of orientation. Accordingly, formal skills are the skills to use, navigate through and recognize different layouts of social media applications. 3. Information skills (synonyms are e.g. information literacy, information fluency): are the skills linked with the ability of users to search, select and evaluate information in social media. For a more operational definition of Information skills we refer to the work of Marchionini (1995). He divided the information-seeking process in five steps. His model was originally designed to search for information in traditional media, but it is also applicable to new media. The first step or the start of the process is the personal information need or the definition of a problem. This is mainly a cognitive action that makes clear what the problem is and how it can be solved. The second step consists of searching for a source of information. People select these sources based on criteria as reliability, accuracy, validity, completeness, availability, rapidity, costs and precision (Brand-Gruwel, Woperies, & Vermetten, 2005). After finding an appropriate source of information, search questions are formulated. In online search engines these questions are keywords. A possible barrier that gets nowadays a lot of academic attention, is the use of wrong and/or not enough keywords to find the right information (Aula & Nordhausen, 2006). The fourth step is selecting the useful information or search results, which is a difficult step especially in the case of online searching. The online search engines give a lot of search results, which makes it impossible to scan them all (Aula & Nordhausen, 2006; Livingstone, et al., 2005). The final step is deciding what information is useful to solve the problem or to fulfil the information need. Or, in other words, this last step refers to the critical evaluation of the search results (Gilster, 1997). It is checking if the information is reliable, accurate, up-to-date and exact. This is a difficult task in the digital era, because of the ease whereby information can be published and manipulations can be added. There is no strict order in the sequence of steps, so not all stages must be completed in order to handle information in the media. This is especially the case when people do not have to look for information themselves for example advertising on a social networking site is information that is presented to people
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

46

without searching itself. In most cases the final step, or the critical evaluation, is the most important one to decide if information or media content is useful and reliable. In order to do so Buckingham (1998) distinguished the following six questions people must consider when confronted with media content: People must ask themselves what the media agency, media categories (genres, forms, channels), media technologies (production process, access and use), media languages (codes, symbols), media audiences (consumers) and media representations (relation between content and reality) are of the media message. The final step is what Livingstone (2004b) calls analysing and evaluating media content. Both these considerations and the above steps are part of the skills people need in order to deal with any kind of information on social media. 4. Creative skills (synonyms are e.g. reproduction literacy): refer to the skills needed to create something new (out of something existing) in the context of social media. Creative skills are the skills that allow to create a new, authentic, significant, expressive and creative media content (Eshet-Alkalai, 2004; Gilster, 1997). This can be the creation of a website, a self-made YouTube movie or a self-written text on a blog to name only a few examples. These creations can bring about problems of plagiarism or copyright. So, this problem is not only relevant in the field of art, science or journalism, but also in the online world. What about a text on a blog that only slightly differs from the original text of existing book? Or a music clip of a starting music group for example on YouTube that looks like an existing music clip of a popular band? When is something an original work? When is it a complete copy? When is it legitimate? The developments in the capabilities of new media make it even more difficult to make something really new and original. It is easy to copy things or rip things from Internet such as pictures, music or a text. Making a new and original work in a digital environment requires skills that are part of the creative skills. Besides avoiding plagiarism it is also important to have the ability to attract attention and arouse interest and to assess public taste or with other words knowing who the audience of your creation is and what they want (McQuail, 1985, p. 149).

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

47

Not only the making of (media) content itself (the production), is a creative skill, but also taking into account the audience and the originality of the work is part of the creative skills. These (creative) skills are mainly important in a social media environment. 5. Communication skills (synonyms are e.g. socio-emotional literacy): refer to the skills that allow individuals to interact with other people through social media. Social media offer new opportunities to interact with other people. There are several ways to share information with one person and even with more persons at the same time, for example e-mail, instant messaging, online learning communities, online discussion groups, chat rooms or social networking sites (SNS). People have to learn how to deal with the characteristics and complexities of these social media. Learning communication skills is increasingly important in the current web 2.0. environment, in which social media such as social networking sites are widely spread. These communication skills are the skills needed to make, send and react to text messages. In this respect, communication skills are strongly related to the above mentioned creative skills and hence both skills are needed to create a text message. Communication skilled or socio-emotionally-literate users are those who are willing to share data and knowledge with others, capable of information evaluation and abstract thinking, and able to collaboratively construct knowledge (Eshet-Alkalai, 2004, p. 57). In other words, communication skills enable individuals to evaluate and to analyse what the other person is saying (for example if the information is true) and who the other person is with who you are interacting. In addition, it is also using the right words or signals. When exchanging messages with others, people must not only know to who they are sending the a message (who can see it), but in addition it is also important to know how and when to respond on received messages. In order to appropriately address someone there are some (unwritten) rules, which are indicated by the Gricean maxims (Wardhaugh, 2010). There should not be given more or less information than necessary (maxims of quantity). The message must be trustworthy and true (maxims of quality). There must be evidence for the content of the message. The information in the message also must be relevant for the sender, the receiver and the aim of the interaction (maxims of relevance). The
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

48

message must be clear for the receiver (maxims of manner). Therefore, it is important to avoid unclear and ambiguous terms and difficult words. Besides all it is important that both sender and receiver know what is expected from them. The maxims of Grice can help the sender to fit the message to the receiver. But before the sender can take into account the receiver, he or she has to know first who the receiver is (for example is this a stranger, an organization, a close friend) and vice versa. In turn, the receiver must also find out who the sender is. Another aspect that can play a role in addition to the maxims of quantity is the length of the message, besides the amount of information in the message. The message should not be too long or too short. The maxims of quality can also be completed by appropriateness of the content and expressiveness. Appropriateness should be understood in the sense that the message or the content is matched with the receiver. An example is that one should not start a conversation with questions that are too personal. Expressiveness refers to the emotions and openness one can add to your message. Communication through Internet is less face-to-face than in real life. Emotions or nonverbal signals through in online conversations are often replaced by smileys (emoticons) or words. Besides appropriately sending and receiving text messages to other people also attracting attention to the message and if applicable ensuring a reaction are relevant communication skills (Hindman, 2009). The Gricean maxims could help to do this successful, but next to these maxims also the location where it is posted, whats inside (the content), the place it gets in search results and the amount of persons who already seen it are all matters of the visibility of the message. Communication skills are not only the ability to communicate with other people, but also the ability to obtain the benefits and to avoid risks from for example online communication. The new possibilities to communicate online with other people present the user with new risks or problems. For example when someone claims to be someone else than who they really are or when personal information is misused. Representing themselves online requires certain skills, as for example not releasing too much information, doing it on a comprehensible way and reflecting themselves as one has in mind. Hence, issues of privacy and security have to be taken into account in order to enable proper communication between people online.
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

49

6. Transaction skills: refer to the skills that are needed to perform a transaction using new media. New media give people the opportunities to complete transactions of goods and services. Users are attracted to these transactions because of usefulness, quickness, increasing ease of use, and, in some cases, cost savings (Anguelov, Hilgert, & Hogarth, 2004). There can be transactions for other goods (for example downloading a song) or for money (for example buying online tickets). By online transactions we mean for example downloading, online shopping or online banking. Online transactions not only require the operational and formal skills to perform it (e.g. recognizing the download button). It also requires skills such as assessing the reliability of the website, knowing to who (a company, organization or person) you pay or from who (a company, organization or person) a downloads comes, keeping a proof of payment or understand and use financial concepts. We call these skills transaction skills.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

50

We differentiate in figure 7 the following components and indicators of social media skills:

Figure 7: Conceptualization of social media skills

The six categories of social media skills can be subdivided into both medium- and content-related skills. Operational and formal skills are medium-related skills (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2010). The other four skills (information, creation, communication and transaction skills) are content-related. Research into traditional media often focuses more on the content-related skills and less on the medium-related skills (van Deursen, 2010). In traditional media the medium-related skills seems so easy to master, that they are taken for granted. It is more difficult to analyse the content of the message while research into new media mostly pays attention to
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

51

the operational and formal skills (medium-related skills) or the so-called technical skills. The reason is that these relatively new skills seems to be difficult to learn. Little attention is paid to the content of new media and the skills to analyse the content. But for research into social media it is important to take into account both categories of skills, because of the interconnectivity between these two kinds of skills (Langer, 1995). The rather basic instrumental or medium-related skills are a prerequisite for the development and execution of the content-related skills and consequently stands at the bottom of the objective competence-block in the conceptual model. It is not because we call these skills basic that they are therefore necessarily simple or easy: while there are basic instrumental skills related to tool usage, there are other medium-related skills relating to networked media tasks. Hence, for almost every skill of media competence, there are specific tools and instrumental skills that support it. For instance, before you can upload a particular movie on YouTube, you must first be able to start the Internet and open the movie on YouTube. Furthermore, content-related skills somehow improve the medium related skills. When someone achieves for example a higher level of information skills, his or her operational and formal skills will automatically improve. The combination of these six categories of skills result in the ability to use and adapt social media to the individual and personal needs. The precondition, however, is that people should have the necessary traditional literacy skills. This literacy are the skills to read and write text (basic literacy), or processing information in printed texts (print literacy). Without these basic skills people are not able to do any of the above media skills. These six (new) media skills overlap in some extent to attitudes and knowledge, insofar some knowledge and attitude are required to successfully perform the above media skills.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

52

5.2.2. Subjective Social Media Competences

Attitudes Whether and how people deal with media is closely linked to their attitudes towards media technologies (Verdegem, 2009). Attitudes, in general, are considered mental and neural representations, organized through experience, exerting a directive or dynamic influence on behaviour (Breckler & Wiggins, 1989). Applied to social media, we define attitudes as an idea, charged with affect, about the use of social media, for example the idea that Facebook is a waste of time, what includes a rather negative feeling. Different theories emphasize the importance of attitudes in determining someones intension to use and consequently also media use, which is a determinant of media literacy. The theory of reasoned action (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) states that attitudes towards a certain media behaviour influence behavioural intention and/or the implementation of that behaviour. In the sense that, negative (media) attitudes results in a negative influence on the (intention to) media behaviour. What these attitudes encompass is indicated in the decomposed theory of reasoned action (Taylor & Todd, 1995), in which attitudes are described as a mix of perceived usefulness and ease of use. Perceived usefulness is the self-assessment of how many and what benefits can occur from a certain media behaviour. While perceived ease of use concerns the self-estimation of how easy it is to use certain media. These factors or attitudes are also used in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989, 1993) and the Diffusion Theory of Rogers (1983), which will be outlined below. Existing research on (media) attitudes indicates the necessity to consider the specific attitudes that influence media use (Thompson, Higgins, & Howell, 1991). In order to gain a better understanding of the different attitudes that influence social media use, we rely on Triandis theory (1971) in which he describes attitudes as a combination of cognitive (what people believe), affective (what people feel) and behavioural (what people want to do) components. In this report we focus on the cognitive and affective attitudes, because we see the behavioural component of attitudes more as a result of the other two components and consequently as the intention to perform that (media) behaviour.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

53

Hence, in order to conceptualize media attitudes, we come to the next division: 1. Cognitive component: the personal information about a social media application and how people interpret that information. According to Triandis (1971), the cognitive component of attitudes includes beliefs, such as beliefs about the ease of use, the usefulness and the worthiness of the activity in terms of time, money and status enhancement. The perceived ease of use can be defined as a persons belief that a certain media activity, such as a social media application, is easy or difficult to understand and use. Next to perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness is also considered as an important predictor of media use (Davis, 1989; Rogers, 1983). Perceived usefulness is a consideration of which social media tool is useful to improve the personal position, for example a social networking site to contact friends. Perceived usefulness in turn depends on the consideration if the media technology or activity is not too time consuming comparing to what you can do with it (Verdegem, 2009). It takes time to use media, also social media applications, but they can also make things easier or less time consuming, for example in the case of searching information through collaborative knowledge sites such as Wikipedia. Besides the characteristics of the applications also the quality of the technology or the media skills people have play a role in deciding if a social media activity is time consuming or not. The status you can get from using media is seen as another cognitive attitude (Venkatesh & Brown, 2001). For example, it is possible that people do some media activities not only because they are easy to use and/ or useful, but also because they can give status. In this respect, status can be defined as the public recognition that would be achieved as a result of adopting an innovation (Venkatesh & Brown, 2001, p. 74). In other words, it is the social prestige individuals gain if they use the technology for example through a social networking site. Status enhancement is seen as a potential (cognitive) attitude that affects peoples media use (Sitkin, Sutcliffe, & Barrios-Choplin, 1992).

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

54

2. Affective component: the like or dislike of a social media activity and/or considering it as enjoyable, unpleasant or threatening. According to Triandis (1980), the affective component of attitudes concerns the feeling of joy, elation, or pleasure, or depression, disgust, displeasure or hate associated by an individual with a particular act. People who like certain media activities and find them enjoyable will be more likely to learn related media activities and consequently will be more likely to enjoy these activities too (Brown & Venkatesh, 2005, p. 401). On the other hand, a certain anxiety or aversion towards certain media activities can develop when people have no or less experience with these media (van Dijk, 2005; Verdegem & Verhoest, 2009). This finding is also confirmed in the research work of Ferro et al. (2010), he found a relationship between irregular Internet usage and dislike this as a leisure activity. In this respect, the relation between anxiety and media use can be described as a vicious circle: people who have negative or no experience with a certain media will not be keen of learning to use it (better) and if they dont want to learn how to use it, they will not be able to overcome their anxiety or aversion (Schumacher & Morahan-Martin, 2001; van Dijk, 2005; Verdegem, 2009). Hence, the feeling or affective attitude against social media activities can determine the development of the objective social media competences and also the actual use of social media applications. For example, if someone hates the use of social networking site the person will not be keen of learning social media skills and will consequently not use that social networking site.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

55

Following the above conceptualization, we considered the following components and indicators of media attitudes presented in figure 8:

Figure 8: Conceptualization of (social) media attitudes

Self-efficacy Although there are only a few scholars who indicate self-efficacy as a media competence, the ones who do consider self-efficacy as a crucial element in the development of media literacy (Olivier & Shapiro, 1993). We also assume that self-efficacy is an important element of social media literacy, because it determines what people will use of social media and consequently which social media skills they can develop. But what is selfefficacy and how can it be distinguished from the other media competences? According to the Social Cognitive Theory - a theory from social psychology (Bandura, 1995, p. 2) - self-efficacy is ones capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations . In other words, the concept refers to peoples belief in their own skills and knowledge to successfully perform certain (media) actions (Easten & LaRose, 2000). Self-efficacy is assumed to consists of three components, namely: (1) magnitude, what people think they will cope, (2) strength, to be convinced of the magnitude and (3) generality, knowing that they can execute the activity in any situation (Bandura, 1977). In order to conceptualize self-efficacy concerning social media use we base ourselves on the above definitions and consequently describe
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

56

it as a persons belief in the own knowledge and skills to perform a certain social media activity. We treat self efficacy as one construct and consequently we do not further divide this concept into components. It is necessary to consider self-efficacy as a distinct concept from attitudes in the research to social media use, and subsequently also in the research to social media literacy. Self-efficacy and attitudes, especially anxiety, are frequently treated as the same construct for the reason they have a strong influence on each other (Beckers & Schmidt, 2001; Colley, Gale, & Harris, 1994; Levine & Donitsa-Schmidt, 1998). If self-efficacy increases, the attitudes should also become more favourable and vice versa (Ajzen & Sexton, 1999). For example if people belief they are able to use a social networking site they will be less afraid of it. It is also possible that when the attitude against a social networking site becomes more favourable, that peoples belief in their capacities increase. Hence, both concepts (self-efficacy and attitudes) are important predictors of motivation and consequently also of media use (Venkatesh, 1999). However, attitudes and self-efficacy can counteract each other and therefore cannot be seen as proxies for each other. An unfavourable attitude towards some media use does not automatically mean that the person judge him- or herself as not able to use it. It is quite possible that a person who had a bad experience with for example a Social Networking Site develops a negative attitude towards Social Networking Sites in general. It is not because he or she does not uses Social Network Sites anymore that the person judge him or herself as not able to use it. Hence, self-efficacy should not be confused with attitudes, and must therefore be treated as a separate variable in the conceptual model.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

57

5.3. Social media use Ultimately, the core of the idea of (social) media literacy is the actual use of (social) media technologies and content. In order to understand how people use media, we look for information about the frequency of use, the used applications, the way (critical) media content is used and the place wherein it is used (Katz, 1959). All these aspects give a rather complete understanding of peoples social media use. Nowadays, users crisscross media technologies and content in such complex ways, therefore, it is impossible to understand media use by only looking to for example the frequency of use. Some media, such as the Internet, can be turned on without the user actually using it. What is use in this case? Is it the hours or minutes people are actually doing something with the media or is it sufficiently to measure when media technologies are turned on? We will focus on the time people really use or doing something with the media. We assume that the more you do something , the more knowledge and skills you can develop and consequently the better you are in doing it. By simply using the computer in a passive way (when it is turned on) you will not learn to use it appropriately. However, the frequency method gives us a notion of the perceived intensity of use, but not how often a certain media is actually used (Jensen & Helles, 2010). The perceived intensity of use gives an idea of how important (both for professional and personal purposes) the media is experienced by people, but the method gives not a full picture of someones media use. In addition, use is also about what kind of media that are used. Due to the convergence media technologies and content are not always go hand in hand anymore (Jenkins, 2006). This has implications for how media use should be measured. For example is watching a movie on YouTube still watching television or is it watching a video? Hence, we must distinct between the technology and the content or activity in order to have a clear notion of media use. It is not possible anymore to measure media use by just asking to the technology that is used, but now, we must have also attention for the activities. Jensen & Helles (2010) called these activities genres, for example file sharing, blogging, social networking. If these genres or activities are combined to the technologies through which they are used for example in a matrix, this will introduce an additional level of detail in the measurement of social media use.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

58

Also the question of how media technologies, but especially the media content, is used, sets many challenges for scholars. We wonder if the competences people have are actually used while doing a particular media activity. This aspect of media use is difficult to measure and can only be answered through observation research. In addition, it is also true that the boundary between measuring how a particular media activity is used and measuring what actual skills people have to deal with this media activity is very thin. Consequently, both are often measured on the same way (van Deursen, 2010). Another aspect of media use is the place where it is used. At home and at work seem to be the places where most media is used (van Dijk & Hacker, 2003). At home people will more experiment with media than they do at work, because of privacy considerations. Consequently, at home people develop more advanced competences than they do at work where rather routine competences are developed (van Dijk & Hacker, 2003). The same conclusion is found for youngsters, they will use more media at home than they do in school and they will experiment more at home, especially in their own room, where it is more private (Livingstone & Haddon, 2009). The above findings clarify that the place plays an important role in determining media use and therefore should be included in measurement instrument of media use. Hence, monitoring media use, especially social media use, is a challenge in the current convergent media culture (Jenkins, 2006). Scholars must redevelop and/or reinvent analytical methodologies which include all the above aspects of media use.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

59

6. Social Media Literacy Versus Empowerment


Media literacy and empowerment are strongly connected to each other, especially because social media are supposed to have the potential to contribute empowerment. In a general sense, empowerment is defined as a process enabling individuals, through participation with others, to achieve their primary goals (Perkins & Zimmerman, 1995, p. 574). The notion of empowerment has a long tradition, especially in social welfare literature (Baistow, 1995; Guttirrez, 1990; Weaver, 1982). In our research we apply the notion of empowerment to the domain of media and ICT, and in particular to social media. Given the existing and enduring inequalities in participation to and use of social media use, we must pay attention to the issue of empowerment. We must particularly investigate how enabling empowerment among social media users is possible through social media literacy and how this could help to rebalance the participation inequality. In our analysis we start from a rather individual perspective on social media empowerment: the user is the central actor, but only to the extent that he or she is actually empowered to take advantage of opportunities. However, although social media offer a lot of opportunities concerning social and information needs, the failure to use or wrongly use social media could possibly lead to disempowerment, for example the violation of privacy. Hence, it is important that people have the appropriate capabilities to deal with social media, or being social media literate, in order to enhance empowerment. This is also acknowledged by Mansell (2002): () the implications of the new media are contradictory. Once connected, there are no grounds for simply assuming that citizens will be empowered to conduct their social lives in meaningful ways. There is, therefore, a growing need to examine whether the deployment of new media is consistent with ensuring that the majority of citizens acquire the necessary capabilities for interpreting and acting upon a social world that is intensively mediated by the new media (Mansell, 2002, p. 409). Enhancing peoples social media literacy, or the capabilities to deal with social media, can make people more empowered to conduct their social lives in a meaningful way. Hence, social media literacy is needed to accomplish the social needs or goals people can obtain through the media who are most suitable (for them) in order to fulfil these objectives in an appropriate way (without drawbacks). People have different roles in society, and depending on these roles there exist different social needs and goals. In order to support and/or accomplish

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

60

these goals the use of social media can be stimulated (e.g. contact with peers through social networking sites). The more media literate people are, the more change they can achieve in their goals and consequently they can come become more empowered.

7. Discussion
The main goal of this report was to develop a conceptual framework of social media literacy. The latter entails both a definition and a conceptual model of social media literacy. To achieve this, it was considered of great importance to create an overview of the different related conceptions and approaches of media literacy. As mentioned before, it is not the intention of this report to operationalize media literacy for each of the social media applications separately. Moreover, our aim is to develop a conceptual framework for studying social media literacy that it is applicable to the whole range of social media applications. First of all, we developed the following definition of social media literacy: Social media literacy is the access to social media applications, the knowledge, skills, attitudes and self-efficacy of individuals to (appropriately) use social media applications and to analyze, evaluate, share and create social media content.. In this definition social media literacy is described in an well-elaborated way that goes beyond basic or medium-related competences. The proposed definition distinguishes between the basic medium-related and advanced content-related social media competences in order to simultaneously have attention for operating the social media application and for dealing with the social media message. The main advantage of the proposed definition is therefore the integration of both a critical and an action-oriented approach. In order to have a better notion of social media literacy, including a decent understanding of its components and the mutual relationships, we propose a conceptual model (see figure 9), in which we underline the importance of peoples media competences as a prominent part of social media literacy. Besides the more objective competences e.g. skills, we also focus on subjective competences e.g. attitudes as equally important for measuring peoples level of media literacy (Brandtweiner, et al., 2010; S. P. Martin, Robinson, J.P., 2007; Tondeur, Sinnaeve, Van Houtte, & Van Braak, 2010; Verdegem & Verhoest, 2009). Hence, we consider social media literacy as broader than only the skills in order to deal with social media applications, also the knowledge

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

61

to perform these skills, a positive attitude towards the social media use and confidence in the own skills (selfefficacy) are relevant for dealing with social media applications. In addition, we consider media competences, in line with scholars such as Livingstone (2004) and van Deursen (2010), not merely in terms of operational or medium-related knowledge and skills e.g. operating the Internet, but also in terms of content-related knowledge and skills e.g. a critical evaluation of content. Hence, the advantage of the proposed model is that both approaches on media literacy, being the critical and the actionoriented approach, are integrated in one comprehensive model of social media literacy. Moreover, in our conceptual model there exists a certain hierarchy in skills, in the sense that the more basic or medium-related knowledge and skills are necessary in order to execute the more advanced or content-related knowledge and skills. For example communicating skills on a social networking site cannot be executed without being able to operate the social networking site. Another advantage of the proposed conceptual model (see figure 9) is the attention for access, in this case access to the Internet. Because this access is a necessary prerequisite for the development of social media competences, and consequently also for social media literacy. Access determines which competences people can develop: without access to the Internet, it is not possible for people to even develop competences to deal with social media applications. Also the attention for media use, in a reciprocal relation with media competences, is important for the development of social media literacy. This because the actual use of social media applications determines the competences people can develop and these developed media competences, in turn, can change peoples actual media use. For example if people are experimenting (using) social networking sites, they will develop a few competences for dealing with social networking sites and this, in turn, enhance their use of these applications.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

62

Social media literacy

Figure 9: Conceptual model of social media literacy

Nonetheless we recognize that there are other factors, both individual (e.g. income) and social (e.g. peers network), that also play a role in the development of social media literacy. These other factors will be discussed in the operationalization of social media literacy, which is the subject of het next research stage.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

63

Moreover, the conceptual framework of social media literacy applies equally well to all kinds of social media applications, which is useful for measuring the level of social media literacy in a multifaceted social media landscape. The consequence of this social media independent framework is that it is not possible to immediately convert into a measurement instrument. Hence, the model contains elements that should be addressed and elaborated in more detail when further research, both quantitative and qualitative, on media literacy and the underlying elements is set up. This further conceptualization will be dissimilar for different research methods and different social media applications and will therefore be input for the next deliverable.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

64

8. Conclusion
This report proposes a conceptual framework of social media literacy that is developed upon and can be linked to the definitions, approaches and concepts that can be found in the scholarly literature about media literacy. The model proposes the conceptualization of the underlying elements of social media literacy, however, a more detailed description as needed in order to apply in concrete measurements and particular research methods has not been elaborated yet. Rather, the objective of this report is developing a wider conceptual framework of social media literacy which is on the one hand applicable to the whole range of social media applications and can on the other hand be adapted to different research methods (both quantitative and qualitative). In the presented conceptual framework, we shed light on all the different elements that should be considered when developing social media literacy, namely access to social media applications, social media competences (knowledge, skills, attitudes and self-efficacy) and the actual use of social media applications. The conceptual model described in this report will contribute and be developed further in the work package media literacy in the EMSOC project. Hence, the reader is invited to follow the progress and results of the project at the following website: http://www.emsoc.be

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

65

9. Two-page Dutch summary


Dankzij technologische ontwikkelingen en sociale evoluties worden sociale media steeds populairder. Ondanks de stijgende populariteit zijn er grote verschillen merkbaar in de manier waarop mensen met sociale media omgaan en bijgevolg ook in de competenties waarover mensen beschikken. Het gebruik van sociale media biedt mensen veel mogelijkheden om hun doelen te bereiken. Mensen met weinig sociale media competenties lopen echter een zeker risico om uitgesloten te worden van bepaalde voordelen die deze media kunnen bieden. In dit opzicht is sociale mediageletterdheid geen overbodige luxe, maar een noodzaak voor iedereen. Er bestaan dan ook verschillende initiatieven die mensen hun sociaal mediageletterdheidsniveau trachten te verhogen, maar de effectiviteit van deze initiatieven kon tot dusver moeilijk worden nagegaan, omdat er weinig meetinstrumenten voor sociale mediageletterdheid bestaan. De doelstelling van het werkpakket mediageletterdheid binnen het EMSOC-project focust op het meten van sociale mediageletterdheid. Vooraleer we dit kunnen doen, is er nood aan een goed inzicht van wat sociale mediageletterdheid is, uit welke elementen het bestaat en wat de relatie tussen deze onderliggende elementen is. In dit rapport gaan we op zoek naar een conceptueel kader voor mediageletterdheid, bestaande uit een definitie en conceptueel model. Op basis van verschillende benaderingen van mediageletterdheid uit de literatuur, hebben we volgende definitie van sociale mediageletterdheid ontwikkeld. Sociale mediageletterdheid omvat naast de toegang tot sociale media applicaties ook de kennis, vaardigheden, self-efficacy en attitudes die nodig zijn om deze applicaties te gebruiken en de sociale media content te analyseren, te evalueren, te delen en te creren. Deze beschrijving van mediageletterdheid impliceert een verbreding en ook een versterking van de elementen die doorgaans worden gebruikt om (media)geletterdheid te definiren. Bovenstaande definitie is toepasbaar op verschillende sociale media applicaties met elk hun eigen kenmerken. Daarbovenop wordt in de definitie niet enkel gefocust op de operationele of instrumentele competenties, maar ook op de competenties die nodig zijn om met de content te kunnen omgaan, zoals het kritisch analyseren en evalueren van verschillende mediateksten, het delen en het communiceren en het zelf creren van mediaboodschappen. Het grootste voordeel van deze definitie ligt in de combinatie van zowel een kritische als actiegerichte benadering op mediageletterdheid.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

66

Het conceptueel model (zie figuur 10), dat gepresenteerd wordt in dit rapport, onderscheidt drie dimensies van mediageletterdheid, meerbepaald toegang, competenties en het werkelijke gebruik. De toegang gaat over de toegang tot het internet, aangezien sociale media internet gebaseerde applicaties zijn, en is een belangrijke voorwaarde om sociale mediageletterdheid te kunnen ontwikkelen. Competenties vormen het belangrijkste onderdeel van sociale mediageletterdheid. Deze bestaan uit objectieve (kennis en vaardigheden) en subjectieve (attitudes en self-efficacy) competenties. Daarnaast heeft het model ook aandacht voor het werkelijke gebruik, met name welke sociale media applicaties gebruikt worden, hoe vaak, op welke manier en waar. Tussen deze drie dimensies bestaat er een onderlinge en wederkerige relatie: toegang tot media en het gebruik ervan bepaalt de mediacompetenties die mensen kunnen ontwikkelen en deze ontwikkelde mediacompetenties benvloeden op hun beurt welke media mensen gebruiken en op welke manier. Maar ook binnen de dimensies bestaan er relaties tussen de elementen. Subjectieve en objectieve competenties kunnen elkaar benvloeden, bijvoorbeeld als iemand zeer positief staat ten opzichte van bepaalde sociale media, zal deze sneller geneigd zijn om kennis en vaardigheden met betrekking tot deze media aan te leren. Hoe meer kennis en vaardigheden men heeft over bepaalde media, hoe positiever men er tegenover zal staan. Daarbovenop bestaan ook binnen de media competenties wisselwerkingen tussen de elementen. Mensen moeten bijvoorbeeld eerst over de medium-gerelateerde vaardigheden beschikken om de sociale media applicatie in werking te brengen, bijvoorbeeld het opstarten van Wikipedia, alvorens men met de content op die applicaties kan omgaan, bijvoorbeeld het opzoeken en evalueren van informatie op Wikipedia.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

67

Social media literacy

Figuur 10: Conceptueel model van sociale mediageletterdheid

Zoals gesteld, is de ontwikkeling van een conceptueel framework voor mediageletterdheid een eerste stap in het onderzoek naar de ontwikkeling van multi-methodische meetinstrumenten voor het monitoren van mediageletterdheid. De lezer wordt dan ook aangeraden om de vooruitgang en de resultaten van het project te volgen via de website: http://www.emsoc.be

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

68

10. References
Ajzen, I., & Sexton, J. (1999). Depth of processing, belief congruence, and attitude-behavior correspondence. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 117-138). New York: Guilford. Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping digital competence: Towards a conceptual understanding Luxembourg: European Union. American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy (1989). Final report. Chicago. Anguelov, C. E., Hilgert, M. A., & Hogarth, J. M. (2004). U.S. consumers and electronic banking, 1995-2003. Federal Reserve Bulletin 90, 1-18 Apestaartjaren. (2010). Apestaartjaren 3. Gent. Aula, A., & Nordhausen, K. (2006). Modelling succesful performance in web searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 1673-1693. Ba, H., Tally, W., & Tsikalas, K. (2002). Investigating children's emerging digital literacies. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 1(4), 1-48. Baistow, K. (1995). Liberation and regulation? Some paradoxes of empowerment. Critical Social Policy 42, 34-46. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behaviroal change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. New York: Cambridge University Press. Bawden, D. (2001). Information and digital literacies: A review of concepts. Journal of Documentation, 57(2), 218-259. Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacy: Concepts, policies and practices (pp. 17-33). New York. Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2002). Promoting literacy in a digital age: Approaches to training for information literacy. Learned Publishing 15(4), 297-301. Beckers, J., & Schmidt, H. (2001). The strucure of computer anxiety: A six factor model. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 35-49. Bloom, B. S., Engelhardt, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: Cognitieve Domain. New york: David McKay. Boyd, D. (2008). Why Youth love Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. In D. Buckingham, D. John & T. Catherine (Eds.), Youth, Identity and Digital Media (pp. 119-142). Cambridge, MA The MIT Press Brand-Gruwel, S., Woperies, I., & Vermetten, Y. (2005). Information problem solving by experts and novices: Analysis of a complex cognitive skill. Computers in Human Behavior 21, 487-508 Brandtweiner, R., Donat, E., & Kerschbaum, J. (2010). How to become a sophisticated user: A twodimensional approach to e-literacy. New Media and Society, 12, 813-833. Breckler, S. J., & Wiggins, E. C. (1989). On defining attitude and attitude theory: Once more with feeling. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Routledge Brown, S., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 399-426. Bunz, U. (2004). The Computer-Email-Web (CEW) Fluency Scale - development and validation. International journal of Human-Computer Interaction 17, 479-506. Cachia, R. (2008). Social computing: Study on the use and impact of social networking, retrieved 2 July 2011 from http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=1884 Carvin, A. (2000). More than just Access: Fitting literacy and content into the digital divide equation. Educause Review 35(6 ), 38-47 Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Catts, R., & Lau, J. (2008). Towards information literacy indicators. Paris.
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

69

Colley, A., Gale, M., & Harris, T. (1994). Effects of gender role identity and experience on computer attitude components. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10(2), 129-137. Compaine, B. M. (2001). The Digital Divide: Facing a Crisis or Creating a Myth? London: MIT Press. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. Davis, F. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioural impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475-487. Dewan, S., & Riggins, F. J. (2005). The digital divide: Current and future research directions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 6(12), 298-337. Easten, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 6(1). Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Jl. of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 13(1), 93-106. Ferro, E., Helbig, N. C., & Ramon Gil-Garcia, J. (2010). The role of IT literacy in defining digital divide policy needs. [10.1016/j.giq.2010.05.007]. Government Information Quarterly. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. MA: Addison-Wesley: Reading. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gilster. (1997). Digital literacy. New York, NY: Wiley Graham, P., & Goodrum, A. A. (2007). New media literacies: At the intersection of technical, cultural and discursive knowledges. In R. Mansell, C. Avgerou, D. Quah & R. Silverstone (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of information and communication technologies (pp. 473-493). New York: Oxford University Press. Guttirrez, L. M. (1990). Working with women of color: An empowerment perspective. Social work, 35, 149-154. Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 13, 276-297. Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press IBBT-iLab.O. (2010). Digimeter Rapport 3: Mediatechnologie- & ICT-gebruik in Vlaanderen Wave 3 Augustus - November 2010. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press. Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robinson, A. J. (2009). Confronting the challenge of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. United States Massachusetts Institute of Technology Jensen, K. B., & Helles, R. (2010). The Internet as a cultural forum: Implications for research. New Media and Society, 13(4), 517-533. Judith, M., & Stewart, S. (2004). Differentiating information skills and computing skills: A factor analytic approach. Libraries and the Academy, 4(1), 61-73. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenge and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons 53, 59-68. Katz, E. (1959). Mass communication research and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal. Studies in Public Communication 2(1-6). Kuhlemeier, H., & Hemker, B. (2007). The impact of computer use at home on students' Internet skills. Computer & Education, 49(2), 460-480. Langer, J. A. (1995). Envisioning literature: Literacy understanding and literature instruction. New York Teachers College press Lee, M. J. (2005). Expanding hypertext: Does it adress disorientation? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10(3).
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

70

Lee, M. L., & Hsu, Y. (2002). Web navigation: The role of metaphor, concept map and individual differences. Paper presented at the ED-MEDIA, 2001 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications Norfolk, VA Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1998). Computer use, confidence, attitudes and knowledge: A causal analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(1), 125-146. Livingstone, S. (2003). The changing nature and uses of media literacy, retrieved 5 april 2011 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.131.4409&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Livingstone, S. (2004). What is media literacy? Intermedia 32(3), 18-20. Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2009). Kids online: Opportunities and risks for children. London: The Policy Press. Livingstone, S., Van Couvering, E., & Thumim, N. (2005). Adult media literacy: A review of the research literature. Londen, UK office of Communications (Ofcom) Madden, M., & Zickuhr, K. (2011). 65% of online adults use social networking sites: Women maintain their foothold on SNS use and older Americans are still coming aboard. Washington Mansell, R. (2002). From digital divides to digital entitlements in knowledge societies. Current sociology, 50(3), 407-426. Marchionini, G. (1995). Information seeking in electronic environments. New York: Cambridge University Press Martin, A., & Grudziecki, J. (2006). DigEuLit: concepts and tools for digital literacy development. ITALICS, 5(4), 249-267. Martin, S. P., Robinson, J.P. (2007). The income digital divide: Trends and predictions for levels of internet use. Social Problems, 54(1), 1-22. McClure, C. R. (1994). Network Literacy: A role for libraries? Information Technology and Libraries 13(2), 8-17. McQuail, D. (1985). Sociology of Mass Communication. Annual Review of Sociology 11, 93-111. Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & Stansbury, M. (2003). Virtual inequality: Beyond the digital divide. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press O'Hanlon, N. (2002). Net knowledge: Performance of new college students on an Internet skills proficiency test. Internet and Higher Education 5, 55-66. Olivier, T. A., & Shapiro, F. (1993). Self-efficacy and computers. Journal of Computer-Based instruction 20(3), 81-85. Perkins, D. D., & Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Empowerment theory, research, and application. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5). Phang, A., & Schaefer, D. (2009). Is ignorance bliss? Assessing Singaporean media literacy awareness in the era of globalization. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 64(2), 156-172. Potter, W. J. (2004). Theory of media literacy: A cognitive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Potter, W. J. (2011). Media literacy - 5th ed. United States Sage Rogers, E. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York Free press Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (fifth edition). New York: The Free Press. Schumacher, P., & Morahan-Martin, J. (2001). Gender, internet and computer attitudes and experiences. Computers in Human Behavior 17, 95-110. Selwyn, N., & Facer, K. (2007). Beyond the digital divide: Rethinking digital inclusion for the 21st century Bistrol: Futurelab. Sharpio, J. J., & Hughes, S. K. (1996). Information literacy as a liberal art: Enlightenment proposals for a new curriculum. Educom review, 31(2), 31-35. Sitkin, S., Sutcliffe, K., & Barrios-Choplin, J. (1992). A dual-capacity model of communication media choice in organizations. Human Communication Research 18(4), 563-598. Sby, M. (2003). Digital competences: From ICT skills to digital 'bildung'. Oslo, Norway: University of Oslo Sternberg, R. J., & Kolligian, J. (1990). Competence considered. New Haven: Yale University press Steyaert, J. (2000). Digitale vaardigheden. Geletterdheid in de informatiesamenling. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(2), 137-155.
EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

71

Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 125-143. Tondeur, J., Sinnaeve, I., Van Houtte, M., & Van Braak, J. (2010). ICT as cultural capital: The relationship between socioeconomic status and the computer-use profile of young people. New Media and Society. Triandis, H. C. (1971). Attitude and attitude change. New York, NY: Wiley Triandis, H. C. (1980). Values, attitudes and interpersonal behavior. In H. E. Howe (Ed.), Beliefs, attitudes, and values (pp. 195-259). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press van der Maesen, L. J. G., & Walker, A. C. (2002). Social quality: The theoretical state of affairs (Vol. 24). Amsterdam: European Foundation on Social Quality van Deursen, A. (2010). Internet skills. Vital assets in an information society. Enschede: University of Twente. van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2009). Improving digital skills for the use of online public information and services. Government Information Quarterly, 26, 333-340. van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2010). Measuring Internet skills. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 26(10), 891-916. van Dijk, J. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society. London: Sage. van Dijk, J. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4-5), 221-235. van Dijk, J., & Hacker, K. (2003). The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society, 19(4), 315-327. Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creation of favorable user perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 239-260. Venkatesh, V., & Brown, S. (2001). A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 71-102. Verdegem, P. (2009). De digitale kloof en/in e-government: Uitdagingen voor de overheid in de informatiemaatschappij. Doctoraat, Universiteit Gent Verdegem, P., & Verhoest, P. (2009). Profiling the non-user: Rethinking policy initiatives stimulating ICT acceptance. Telecommunications Policy, 33, 642-652. Vickery, G., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2007). Participative web and user-generated content: web 2.0, wikis and social networking. Paris. Wardhaugh, R. (2010). An introduction to sociolinguistics. (6 ed.). Malden Wiley-Blackwell Publishers. Weaver, D. R. (1982). Empowering treatment skills for helping black families. Social Casework, 63, 100-105. Westera, w. (2001). Competences in education: A confusion of tongues. Journal of curriculum studies, 33(1), 75-88.

EMSOC IWT - Brussels Leuven Ghent - 2011 Authors:

72

You might also like