Bridging the Scientific Divide: Building a common language between computer
scientists and social scientists to understand the New Technologies and Digital
Divide
Evangelou Eleftheria, Msc student
Research Institute for the Development and Promotion of Digital Access
Non for Profit-Non Governmental Organization
Koletsi Maria, Administrator, Phd Student
Research Institute for the Development and Promotion of Digital Access
Non for Profit-Non Governmental Organization
Kyriakopoulos Georgios, Phd Student
Centre for the Psycho-Sociological Research on the Governance of Virtual Communities-Research Center
Omega
Psychology Department
Panteion University of Social and Political Science
Introduction
The term Digital Divide is reported as the inequality of access to new technologies.
Thus, Digital Divide describes the social inequalities that are created between those who
have and those who have not access in new technologies. Equal possibilities of access to
new technologies and the Internet indicate equal access to information society, e-inclusion
strategies and knowledge sharing. The statement of the problem addresses both the
capacities and the capabilities of users and social groups to the exploration and adaptation
to the on line society. Due to this reason, Digital Divide is considered to be a social
problem that contains new forms of social exclusion with political, economic and cultural
implications for users and social groups.
Originally a concept that referred to lack of physical access to computers and IT
technology, it evolved to the concept of a broader inability to access additional resources
that relate to IT technologies usage (Warschauer, 2004). Digital Divide as a phenomenon
is comprised of two basic aspects regarding “access” to Information and Communication
Technologies (I.C.T.):
In a first level, the phenomenon is related to the inability to access I.C.T., which
depends on demographic and social/economic characteristics such as sex, age, place of
residence (difference between the metropolis and the region) (Cuneo, 2002).In other
words, the lack of access in the new technologies is considered to be an effect of preexisting social inequalities that are reproduced in a new form in the era of ICT.
In a second level Digital Divide deals with access inequalities to Internet and more
specifically in the way people use it, their skills and abilities, the quality of technical
interconnections and social support, the ability of evaluation, the quality of information and
its different uses in every day life (DiMaggio, 2001).
The present study focuses on the second aspect of the Digital Divide. It explores the
types of ICT usage by members of the greek academic community.
Theoretical Framework
Members of the Academic Community are an advantaged part of the whole
population regarding the basic access to I.C.T. Professors and students enjoy a privileged
social status, have access to educational resources and are provided access to I.C.T. by
academic institutions. Although they enjoy the benefits of a ubiquitous computing
environment they don't uniformly develop ICT skills. Furthermore, academics' stances
regarding the understanding of the digital divide are extremely diverse.
Our work stresses on the importance of analysis of patterns of I.C.T. usage as it
uncovers different representations of technology and aspects of diffusion of technologies
into the whole of society.
Our explanatory framework is based on the distinction (Snow, 1993) of two different
cultures of science, “litteral intellectuals” and “natural scientists”, the relation of which is
characterised by lack of understanding which leads to weakness of the application of
technology for the bluntness of social problems. Becher and Trowler (Becher and Trowler,
2001) describe academic cultures as tribes and disciplinary knowledge as their territories.
The authors observe that even if knowledge seems to become in some ways more
interdisciplinary still there are some factors that should be taken under consideration in the
academic profession.
According to the above theoretical framework the basic research hypotheses are
described below:
1. Social scientists tend to have a different degree of engagement in the use of new
technologies and the Internet than computer scientists. The different cultures of social
scientists and computer scientists tend to affect the understanding of the upcoming Digital
Divide and their approach towards the bridging policies. More specifically, the scientists
working in the field of computer science seem to have a weakness of comprehension
concerning the social dimensions of technology. At the same time, the language they use
is enough specialised and it creates difficulty in the comprehension of significances and
the ways of application. In this way the use of new technologies is rendered problematic for
social scientists as well as for the wide public. The inability to develop a common
framework for the understanding of technology, obstructs scientific communication and
complicates the interdisciplinary approach of Digital Divide. The specific culture tends to
approach the Digital Divide as a problem that depends on the material infrastructure and
the technological development and evolution.
2. Social scientists tend to have difficulties concerning the use and exploitation of
new technologies. At the same time social scientists seem to have a lack of
comprehension on technologies' social characteristics, especially the World Wide Web.
The lack of sufficient familiarity and education, the predominance of negative stereotypes
regarding the social characteristics of technology, lead them to underestimate the
opportunities that I.C.T. offer. Thus this mentality prevents the adoption of new
technologies and the Internet as a new scientific area for social science. Bridging the
Digital Divide seems to be a problem that could be faced basically through traditional
methods for social inclusion. They tend to focus more on educational measures without
excluding as a measure the infrastructure necessity. Their attitude towards technology
leads them to the perception that new technologies and the Internet is value free,
enhancing the idea of the technological determinism.
METHODS
Data and sample
The above research hypotheses aims to investigate the attitudes and perceptions of
students and academics from social and computer science departments. The proportional
stratified sample results the sample of the Greek academic community per academic level
and scientific field. Moreover, the Greek academic community was constituted from
students that study in the Greek universities in undergraduate and master's level as well as
academic staff from the above scientific sectors. The data basis was gathered among
departments of social science and computer science from Universities in Athens. The
academic disciplines were psychology, sociology, media and computer science. A number
of 225 responses are included in the analysis. The choice of the particular sample allowed
us to observe the different way the two scientific cultures percept and comprehend
technology and its impact on science. The research was conducted by the researchers
between September and October 2008. The questionnaire was consisted by a set of both
quantitative and open-ended questions.
Demographics, Digital Divide Attitudes and I.C.T. usage questionnaire
The questionnaire investigates the scientists' status and the level of familiarity with
the new technologies, the degree of understanding the opportunities I.C.T. offer and the
degree they involve new technologies in their research field. It is comprised of 66 closed
and 4 open-ended questions. The basic research categories are the degree of use and
exploitation of new technologies and the Internet in the personal as well as in the
academic level, the exploitation of the Internet as a means of social networking and a
space of social interaction, the engagement of Digital Divide as a social problem.
Demographics and Social/Professional Characteristics
This group of questions include age, sex, educational status, academic institution,
and field of scientific expertise.
Personal Computer Usage & ICT Skills
Respondents were asked about P.C. possession and usage, I.C.T problem solving
abilities and general ICT skills.
Professional & Internet usage
A set of questions that addressed the degree, motivation and types of Internet
usage. Respondents were also asked the ways Internet usage was involved in the
everyday production of their scientific work.
Social Networking
Respondents were asked the ways they participate in online and social networking
communities.
Attitudes towards Digital Divide
Respondents were asked to express their personal attitudes towards the existence
and gravity of the Digital Divide as a social problem. They were also asked to express their
views on the measures and policies needed to address the Digital Divide.
RESULTS
Demographics and Social/Professional Characteristics
Majority of the sample were undergraduate students (73%), followed by the second
largest group of postgraduate students (23%). Academic staff was the less populated part
of the sample (4%). Most of the respondents were men and belonged to the 18-25 age
spectrum.
Personal Computer Usage & I.C.T. Skills
Approximately 99% of the respondents reported they used a P.C., and 46% stated
their level of I.T skills was high. A relatively large group (30%) of the respondents reported
having both a P.C. and a laptop. Majority of the respondents reported having the ability to
solve everyday P.C. problems. Postgraduate students were more likely (70%) solving their
P.C. problems on their own.
Professional & Internet usage
The vast majority (95%) reported having an Internet connection while 28% reported
being constantly online. The three primary Internet types of activity reported are Web
browsing, sending E-mails and downloading digital archives. Although they conceived the
internet primarily as a source of information they didn’t report to engage into specific types
of information retrieval. The majority of the sample reported avoiding online commercial
transactions. The primary professional-related Internet type of activity was bibliography
resources and reference research
Social Networking
39% of the respondents stated they own a personal weblog, while 52% of the
respondents reported they participate in social networking communities.
Attitudes towards the Digital Divide
Only 36% report awareness of the digital divide. Academic staff (59%) and
postgraduate students (46%) are more likely to be aware of the Digital Divide. Inequalities
regarding access to new technologies were reported as existent by the vast majority of the
sample (72%). Respondents declared that the primary causes of the Digital Divide are:
financial status, followed by Infrastructure shortcomings and lack of education.
Respondents stated that the professional groups mostly associated to the overcoming of
the digital divide are I.T. scientists and sociologists.
The responses showed that all scientists use and understand the need of I.C.T. and
Internet, but they do not use it in the same manner and extent. The findings showed
differences according to the academic discipline and the attitudes they have towards the
need of the use of I.C.T. in their scientific topics. Computer scientists seemed to use the
Internet more often and extensively than social scientists. They also succeeded in
comprehending the need of I.C.T. in their research area and realising the concept of digital
divide, although they attributed it to the lack of technological infrastructure.
A large group (45%) of the respondents acknowledged web science as a concept.
Most of the respondents conceived web science as related to informatics (84%) and
communication science (43%).
The Scientific Cultures Divide
We used multiple correspondence analysis to determine whether different patterns
of PC skill and Internet appear in the two different scientific domains we examined. Results
showed that when it comes to social science undergraduate and postgraduate students,
they tend to have a relatively lower level of ICT skills and demonstrate a less systematic
internet use (as part of their academic activities). On the other hand general academic staff
and postgraduate students of computer science tend to report an excellent degree of ICT
skills and a much more systematic internet use. The multiple correspondence analysis has
shown that social science undergraduate students report a lack of IT infrastructure and
internet access. On the other hand postgraduate students, academic staff and especially
computer science students in general report a very good level of IT infrastructure and
internet access. The co-presence of computer science departments seems to affect the
level of educational use of new technologies in some social science departments. On the
contrary students of “strictly” social science universities tend to report insufficient use of
new technologies in their educational environment.
We also used multiple correspondence analysis to examine the different
representations of the causes of the Digital Divide between computer and social scientists.
Results showed that computer science students tended to attribute the appearance of the
digital divide to demographic and structural reasons as the geographical distance, sex, age
and educational status. On the other hand students belonging to social science
departments tended to focus on factors such as the level of education and training in
I.C.T., and the lack of infrastructure and information.
Principal Components analysis was used to explore respondents’ attitudes towards
the policies that need to be deployed for the confrontation of the digital divide. Our
analyses showed that computer scientists tend to underestimate the importance of sociocultural measures for the prevention of the digital divide.
DISCUSSION
Results confirm the hypothesis that the sample population is highly advantaged
regarding access to new technologies. According to our research hypothesis it tends to
appear different types of I.C.T. engagement between social and computer scientists. There
seems to occur a different kind of perception regarding the the Digital Divide as a social
problem between social and computer scientists. Most of the respondents did not
acknowledge the terms “Web Science” and “Digital Divide”. Further more those who
acknowledged the term “Web Science” promote as the most relevant scientific field the
informatics. The results of the present research allow us a first mapping of opinions
regarding the Digital Divide among the social scientists and computer scientists. Further
more qualitative research is needed in order to examine the advanced parameters behind
the respondents answers.
The indication of points of convergence and points of divergence for the approach of
the phenomenon may constitute the appropriate base for the growth of a dialogue between
the social sciences and the computer science, the configuration of a common code of
communication for the more effective confrontation of the Digital Divide. The development
of a common code of communication in order to confront the major phenomenon of Digital
Divide can shape progressively a common culture of interdisciplinary approach of on line
society promoting the evolution of a new science, the web science.
The present research constitutes a first pilot collection and recording of quantitative
and qualitative data for the differentiations concerning the use of technology in the different
fields of science and their perceptions towards Digital Divide. Advancement of the research
activity of the web relies upon the effective deployment of education on new technologies
and the different, as well as the multiple, ways of their use. More concretely, for the growth
of web research, therefore for the growth of web science, further researches should
investigate the degree of growth of the Digital Divide among the scientific community and
the measures that must be taken up.
REFERENCES
Becher, T., Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual enquiry and
the culture of disciplines. UK: Open University Press
Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society.USA: Wiley-Blackwell
Cuneo, C. (2002). Globalized and Localized Digital Divides Along the Information Highway:
A Fragile Synthesis Across Bridges, Ramps, Cloverleaves, and Ladders: The 33rd Annual
Sorokin Lecture. Canada: University of Saskatchewan. Available at
http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/sociology/Digital-Divide-Sorokin-4.pdf
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E. (2001). From the 'Digital Divide' to 'Digital Inequality': Studying
Internet Use as Penetration Increases.US: Princeton University. Available at
http://www.maximise-ict.co.uk/WP15_DiMaggioHargittai.pdf
Snow, C. P., Collini, S. (1993). The two cultures (Canto). UK: Cambridge University Press.
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide,
New edition. The MIT Press.