Instructional Set and Internet Use by Low-Income Adults

This research examined the effects of instructional set on Internet use by low-income adults during a 16-month longitudinal study. Participants (n = 117) received instructions that focused on either the Internet's communication tools or its information tools. Internet use was continuously and automatically recorded. Survey measures of computer and Internet experiences, affect and attitudes were obtained to examine their mediational role in the relationship between instructional set and Internet use. Results indicated that instructions focused on the Internet's information tools led to greater Internet use than instructions focused on its communication tools or only basic instructions about how to use the Internet. Implications for reducing the digital divide are discussed.

[1]  B. Wellman Networks in the Global Village , 1998 .

[2]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[3]  Jeffrey Barlow,et al.  Internet and American Life Project , 2006 .

[4]  Frank Biocca,et al.  Personality, cognitive style, demographic characteristics and Internet use - Findings from the HomeNetToo project , 2003 .

[5]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  The HomeNet field trial of residential Internet services , 1996, CACM.

[6]  Pramod K. Nayar,et al.  The Internet in everyday life , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[7]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Internet paradox. A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? , 1998, The American psychologist.

[8]  Y. Hamburger,et al.  The relationship between extraversion and neuroticism and the different uses of the Internet. , 2000 .

[9]  S. Kiesler,et al.  The Social Impact of Internet Use , 2003 .

[10]  Frank Biocca,et al.  Does home Internet use influence the academic performance of low-income children? findings from the HomeNetToo project , 2003, Proceedings of the IEEE/LEOS 3rd International Conference on Numerical Simulation of Semiconductor Optoelectronic Devices (IEEE Cat. No.03EX726).

[11]  B. Wellman An electronic group is virtually a social network. , 1997 .

[12]  Frank Biocca,et al.  INTERNET USE IN LOW-INCOME FAMILIES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DIGITAL DIVIDE , 2003 .

[13]  Tracy L. Tuten,et al.  Understanding differences in web usage: The role of need for cognition and the five factor model of personality. , 2001 .

[14]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Work, Friendship, and Media Use for Information Exchange in a Networked Organization , 1998, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[15]  Douglas A. Levin,et al.  The Digital Disconnect: The Widening Gap Between Internet-Savvy Students and Their Schools , 2002 .

[16]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Searchers, The Subjects They Search, And Sufficiency: A Study Of A Large Sample Of Excite Searches , 1998, WebNet.

[17]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Internet Paradox Revisited , 2002 .

[18]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Accessing and Browsing Information and Communication , 2001 .

[19]  Kelly S. Ervin,et al.  The Racial Digital Divide: Motivational, Affective, and Cognitive Correlates of Internet Use1 , 2001 .

[20]  Frank Biocca,et al.  The social impact of Internet use on the other side of the digital divide 1 , 2003 .

[21]  Eric B. Weiser,et al.  The Functions of Internet Use and Their Social and Psychological Consequences , 2001, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[22]  Kelly S. Ervin,et al.  Gender and the Internet: Women Communicating and Men Searching , 2001 .

[23]  Frank Biocca,et al.  Internet attitudes and Internet use: some surprising findings from the HomeNetToo project , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[24]  James E. Katz,et al.  Motivations for and barriers to Internet usage: results of a national public opinion survey , 1997, Internet Res..

[25]  Frank Biocca,et al.  The impact of Internet use on the other side of the digital divide , 2004, CACM.