Transnational Family Communication as a Driver of Technology Adoption

The diffusion of information and communication technologies (ICTs) has made transnational communication more affordable and intensive. In this article, we examine how transnational family communication shapes immigrant families’ technology adoption and appropriation. Through interviews with immigrant Latino families about their experiences with computers, mobile devices, and the Internet, transnational family communication emerged as a motivating factor for purchasing and introducing digital technologies into the household. Digital ICTs help parents maintain virtual intimacy with faraway relatives, secure emotional support, and engage in transnational caregiving. For their children, cross-border interactions serve as opportunities to support their parents’ efforts to maintain family continuity. Such motivations facilitate a process of appropriation as families negotiate the affordances of particular devices and platforms.

[1]  Mirca Madianou,et al.  Migration and the accentuated ambivalence of motherhood: the role of ICTs in Filipino transnational families , 2012 .

[2]  N. Hoffart.  Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory , 2000 .

[3]  Andrew A. Beveridge,et al.  Keeping the Immigrant Bargain: The Costs and Rewards of Success in America , 2015 .

[4]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[5]  Dana Diminescu.  The connected migrant: an epistemological manifesto , 2008 .

[6]  J. Creswell.  Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. , 1998 .

[7]  L. Baldassar,et al.  ICT-based co-presence in transnational families and communities: challenging the premise of face-to-face proximity in sustaining relationships , 2016 .

[8]  R. Waldinger,et al.  Making the connection: Latino immigrants and their cross-border ties , 2010 .

[9]  Vikki S. Katz,et al.  Toward Meaningful Connectivity: Using Multilevel Communication Research to Reframe Digital Inequality , 2016 .

[10]  M. Driessnack,et al.  Video-Mediated Communication to Support Distant Family Connectedness , 2013, Clinical nursing research.

[11]  Katy E. Pearce,et al.  Transnational Families in Armenia and Information Communication Technology Use , 2013 .

[12]  Matthew S. Weber,et al.  Mobile technology appropriation in a distant mirror : baroque infiltration , creolization and cannibalism , 2007 .

[13]  R. Larossa,et al.  Grounded Theory Methods and Qualitative Family Research. , 2005 .

[14]  A. Portes,et al.  The study of transnationalism: pitfalls and promise of an emergent research field , 1999 .

[15]  Stephanie Rodriguez.  “We’ll only see parts of each other’s lives:” The role of mundane talk in maintaining nonresidential parent–child relationships , 2014 .

[16]  R. Wilding.  'Virtual' intimacies? Families communicating across transnational contexts , 2006 .

[17]  Tracy L. M. Kennedy,et al.  The Networked Household , 2007 .

[18]  L. Baldassar,et al.  Families Caring Across Borders: Migration, Ageing and Transnational Caregiving , 2007 .

[19]  S. Vertovec.  Cheap Calls: The Social Glue of Migrant Transnationalism , 2004 .

[20]  L. Baldassar.  Transnational Families and Aged Care: The Mobility of Care and the Migrancy of Ageing , 2007 .

[21]  H. Horst,et al.  Return to Cyberia: technology and the social worlds of transnational migrants , 2006 .

[22]  Vicki Mayer,et al.  Living Telenovelas/Telenovelizing Life: Mexican American Girls' Identities and Transnational Telenovelas , 2003 .

[23]  K. Hertlein.  Digital Dwelling: Technology in Couple and Family Relationships , 2012 .

[24]  L. Clark.  Parental Mediation Theory for the Digital Age , 2011 .

[25]  L. Baldassar.  Missing Kin and Longing to be Together: Emotions and the Construction of Co-presence in Transnational Relationships , 2008 .

[26]  David Fitzgerald,et al.  Transnationalism in Question1 , 2004, American Journal of Sociology.

[27]  Sonia Livingstone,et al.  Young People and New Media: Childhood and the Changing Media Environment , 2000 .

[28]  Myria Georgiou.  Diaspora, identity, and the media : diasporic transnationalism and mediated spatialities , 2006 .

[29]  Mihaela Nedelcu,et al.  Migrants' New Transnational Habitus: Rethinking Migration Through a Cosmopolitan Lens in the Digital Age , 2012 .

[30]  Primus M. Tazanu.  On the liveness of mobile phone mediation: Youth expectations of remittances and narratives of discontent in the Cameroonian transnational family , 2015 .

[31]  Meenakshi Gigi Durham,et al.  Constructing the “new ethnicities”: media, sexuality, and diaspora identity in the lives of South Asian immigrant girls , 2004 .

[32]  E. Morawska.  Immigrants, Transnationalism, and Ethnicization: A Comparison of this Great Wave and the Last , 2001 .

[33]  Daniel Miller,et al.  Mobile phone parenting: Reconfiguring relationships between Filipina migrant mothers and their left-behind children , 2011, New Media Soc..

[34]  H. Horst.  The blessings and burdens of communication: cell phones in Jamaican transnational social fields , 2006 .

[35]  E. Vasta.  Italy's Many Diasporas , 2001 .

[36]  J. L. Benítez.  Transnational dimensions of the digital divide among Salvadoran immigrants in the Washington DC metropolitan area , 2006 .

[37]  François Bar,et al.  Mobile technology appropriation in a distant mirror: Baroquization, creolization, and cannibalism , 2016, New Media Soc..

[38]  Vikki S. Katz.  Communication Dynamics of Immigrant Integration , 2014 .

[39]  M. Waters,et al.  Inheriting the City: The Children of Immigrants Come of Age , 2008 .

[40]  Carmen Gonzalez,et al.  Community Variations in Low-Income Latino Families’ Technology Adoption and Integration , 2016 .

[41]  Vikki S. Katz.  Kids in the Middle: How Children of Immigrants Negotiate Community Interactions for Their Families , 2014 .

[42]  Steven J. Taylor.  Introduction to qualitative research methods , 1975 .

[43]  Susan K. Walker,et al.  Parents' use of information and communications technologies for family communication: differences by age of children , 2015 .

[44]  Gonzalo Bacigalupe,et al.  Transnational Families and Social Technologies: Reassessing Immigration Psychology , 2012 .

[45]  E. Morawska.  A sociology of immigration : (re)making multifaceted America , 2009 .

[46]  G. Bacigalupe,et al.  Virtualizing intimacy: information communication technologies and transnational families in therapy. , 2011, Family process.

[47]  A Froese-Fretz,et al.  Children and the Internet. , 1998, Journal of the Society of Pediatric Nurses : JSPN.

[48]  R. Waldinger.  Immigrant transnationalism , 2013 .