Chapter 5: Discussion
5.2. Limitations and future research
One major limitation to the study would be the use of convenient sampling, as parents who were available in the afternoon to pick up their child may have shared certain traits or profiles. The question of whether the parent who picked up the child at school would be the same one who set up the rules at home also could only be answered with a mere guess at the moment. That is, the survey was done by one half of the parents and therefore may not have told the whole story. It would also be insightful to do an in depth interview with some of the parents to find the motivational factor behind their behavior, as it would explain why certain parents choose to adopt certain methods and to find out
whether some parents actually learn the Internet skills to better for a purpose of mediating children’s Internet behavior better.
In regards to questionnaire items, certain questions in this study were more difficult to answer among parents who had younger child as some of the situations may not have applied to the child as yet and therefore could only be answered hypothetically, including questions such as banning the use of e-mail, social media, and online shopping. With this in mind, future research may benefit from narrowing and focusing on particular age group (e.g. 6-9 years old or 10-12 years old) to prevent such inconsistencies. Some questions also did not take into account Internet access through mobile phone / Smartphone. Survey item such as “I would not put computer in my children’s bedroom” may not be sufficient to explain parents’ mediation behavior and children’s Internet usage in current situation.
While Smartphone may not be owned by all of the children, especially considering some of their ages, its inclusion into the variables will still be helpful in explaining the whole picture. As Smartphone starts booming in a highly digital city nowadays such as that of Taipei, children’s uses of Internet are consequently more sporadic and even more difficult to track down. As such, Internet’s risks for children are more likely to increase, and the dynamics of parents’ Internet mediation may have been slightly altered, which in turn, demand future research in this area.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological review, 84(2), 191.
Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices, 17-32.
Byron, T. (2008). Safer children in a digital world: the report of the Byron Review: be safe, be aware, have fun. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families, and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
Cassell, J., & Cramer, M. (2007). High tech or high risk: Moral panics about girls online.
Digital Youth, Innovation, and the Unexpected, 53-75.
Cassidy, W., Brown, K., & Jackson, M. (2012). " Making Kind Cool": Parents' Suggestions for Preventing Cyber Bullying and Fostering Cyber Kindness.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(4), 415-436.
Clark, L. S. (2009). Digital media and the generation gap: Qualitative research on US teens and their parents. Information, Communication & Society, 12(3), 388-407.
Clark, L. S. (2011). Parental mediation theory for the digital age. Communication Theory, 1(4), 323-343.
DeHue, F., Bolman, C., & Völlink, T. (2008). Cyberbullying: Youngsters' experiences and parental perception. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(2), 217-223.
Eastin, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self‐efficacy and the psychology of the
digital divide. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 6(1).
Elena, A., Laouris, Y., & Taraszow, T. (2010). Identifying and Ranking Internet Dangers.
2010 Social Applications for Life Long Learning, 68.
Henke, L. L. (1999). Children, advertising, and the Internet: An exploratory study.
Advertising and the World Wide Web, 73-80.
Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2000). What parents know, how they know it, and several forms of adolescent adjustment: further support for a reinterpretation of monitoring.
Developmental Psychology, 36(3), 366.
Lee, S. J. (2013). Parental restrictive mediation of children’s Internet use: Effective for what and for whom?. New Media & Society, 15(4), 466-481.
Liau, A. K., Khoo, A., & Ang, P. H. (2008). Parental awareness and monitoring of adolescent Internet use. Current Psychology, 27(4), 217-233.
Lin, C. W. (2007). E-Learning Strategies for Aboriginal Children in Taiwan.
International Journal of Learning, 14(6).
Livingstone, S., Bober, M., & Helsper, E. (2005). Internet literacy among children and young people: Findings from the UK Children Go Online Project.
Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2008). Parental mediation of children's Internet use.
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52(4), 581-599.
Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. (2010). Balancing opportunities and risks in teenagers’ use of the Internet: The role of online skills and Internet self efficacy. New Media &
Society, 12(2), 309-329.
Lou, S. J., Shih, R. C., Liu, H. T., Guo, Y. C., & Tseng, K. H. (2010). The influences of
the sixth graders’ parents’ Internet literacy and parenting style. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4).
Lwin, M. O., Stanaland, A. J., & Miyazaki, A. D. (2008). Protecting children's privacy online: How parental mediation strategies affect website safeguard effectiveness.
Journal of Retailing, 84(2), 205-217.
Masters. J., & Yelland. N .(2010). Changing learning ecologies: Social media for cyber-citizens. In S. Shariff., & A. Churchill. (Eds.), Truths and Myths of Cyber-Bullying:
International Perspectives on Stakeholder Responsibility and Children's Safety (pp.229-248) . New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Munro, M. C., Huff, S. L., Marcolin, B. L., & Compeau, D. R. (1997). Understanding and measuring user competence. Information & Management, 33(1), 45-57.
Nathanson, A. I. (1999). Identifying and explaining the relationship between parental mediation and children's aggression. Communication Research, 26(2), 124-143.
Nathanson, A. I. (2001). Parent and child perspectives on the presence and meaning of parental television mediation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 45(2), 201-220.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Rideout, V. (2007). Parents, Children & Media: A Kaiser Family Foundation Survey.
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
Savolainen, R. (2002). Network competence and information seeking on the Internet:
From definitions towards a social cognitive model. Journal of documentation, 58(2), 211-226.
Shariff, S., & Churchill, A. (2010). Appreciating complexity: detangling the web of
stakeholder influence and responsibility. In S. Shariff., & A. Churchill. (Eds.), Truths and Myths of Cyber-Bullying: International Perspectives on Stakeholder Responsibility and Children's Safety (pp.1 – 23) . New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Shariff, S., & Churchill, A. (Eds.). (2010). Truths and Myths of Cyber-Bullying:
International Perspectives on Stakeholder Responsibility and Children's Safety.
New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Stald, G. (2003). Outlook and insight: Young Danes' uses of the Internet, navigating global seas and local waters. The Wired Homestead, 227-260.
Staksrud, E., & Livingstone, S. (2009). Children and online risk: Powerless victims or resourceful participants?. Information, Communication & Society, 12(3), 364-387.
Turow, J., & Kavanaugh, A. L. (Eds.). (2003). The Wired Homestead: An MIT Press Sourcebook on the Internet and the Family. MIT Press.
Valcke, M., Bonte, S., De Wever, B., & Rots, I. (2010). Internet parenting styles and the impact on Internet use of primary school children. Computers & Education, 55(2), 454-464.
Valcke, M., De Wever, B., Van Keer, H., & Schellens, T. (2011). Long-term study of safe Internet use of young children. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1292-1305.
Walrave. M., & Heirman. W. (2010). Appreciating Complexity: Detangling the Web of Stakeholder Influence and Responsibility. In S. Shariff., & A. Churchill. (Eds.), Truths and Myths of Cyber-Bullying: International Perspectives on Stakeholder Responsibility and Children's Safety (pp.27-47) . New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Warren, R., & Bluma, A. (2002). Parental mediation of children's Internet use: The
influence of established media. Communication Research Reports, 19(1), 8-17.
Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K. J., & Ybarra, M. L. (2010). Online “predators” and their victims. Psychology of Violence, 1, 13-35.
Zinga, D. (2010). Boundaries in Cyber-space. In S.Shariff., & A. Churchill (Ed.), Truths and Myths of Cyber-Bullying: International Perspectives on Stakeholder
Responsibility and Children's Safety (pp.105-127) . New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Appendix A – Questionnaire (Chinese version)
網路內容。 電視 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
報紙 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
網路 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
第
_____ 80001 元–110000 元 _____110001 元 - 140000 元 _____140001 元–160000 元 _____
160001 元以上
如果您對本研究有任何相關問題，或是您希望得到關於本研究之後續發展、結果，歡迎與我 聯繫：Vittorio Adrianus (vawritten@yahoo.com).您亦可與本研究之指導教授聯絡：:鄭
怡卉(icheng@nccu.edu.tw) , 副教授, 傳播學院廣告學系, 國立政治大學,
台北市文山區指南路二段 64 號
Appendix B – Questionnaire (English version)
Hello, my name is Vittorio Adrianus . I came from Indonesia. I am currently a second year Master degree student in National Chengchi University, majoring in International
communication. I am currently doing a research on how parents in Taiwan handle elementary school students’ Internet use. The survey will take around 10 minutes to complete. I really appreciate your help and cooperation to make this happen.
PART 1
The first section will ask you about how familiar you are in using Internet technology.
Please circle the number that represents your answer (1 represent “strongly disagree”, 5 represent “strongly agree”):
I feel confident . . . Strongly disagree
navigating social networking sites
(e.g. Facebook). 1 2 3 4 5
filtering or blocking websites with inappropriate contents.
1 2 3 4 5
II. The next section will ask you about how you supervise your child / children’s Internet activities. Please circle the number that represents your answer (1 represent “strongly disagree”, 5 represent “strongly agree”):
I put computer in separate to child’s bedroom
1 2 3 4 5
I talk to child about Internet use 1 2 3 4 5
I forbid child to use social
networking sites (Facebook , etc) 1 2 3 4 5
I forbid child to download things 1 2 3 4 5
I forbid child to give out personal
info 1 2 3 4 5
I forbid child to buy anything online 1 2 3 4 5
I set up filters / monitoring software on websites
1 2 3 4 5
I check websites that child has visited
1 2 3 4 5
I check child’s social networking
sites (Facebook, etc) 1 2 3 4 5
I check child’s e-mail messages 1 2 3 4 5
I check who my child has been
chatting with online. 1 2 3 4 5
III. The next section will ask you questions on how you perceive the risk of your children’s Internet use. Please circle the number that represents your answer (1 represent “strongly disagree”, 5 represent “strongly agree”): contents in the past 12 months.
1 2 3 4 5
My child is likely to be severely affected by inappropriate Internet contents.
1 2 3 4 5
My child is likely to experience online interaction/ communication with other that is risky to their physical and psychological being.
1 2 3 4 5
My child is likely to be severely affected by risky interaction with other people online.
1 2 3 4 5
My child is likely to produce inappropriate Internet contents, or initiated risky online interaction with other people.
1 2 3 4 5
My child is likely to be severely affected by risks associated with being the conductor of Internet risks.
1 2 3 4 5
The next section will ask you questions on your media usage, how you gather news information, and how have you previously heard about children’s Internet risk.
IV. How often do you see the news about Internet risk from the news following media (1 represent “ never”, 5 represent “common”):
Never rarely sometimes often common
Television 1 2 3 4 5
Newspaper 1 2 3 4 5
Internet 1 2 3 4 5
V. How many days a week do you watch / see the news on the following media：
1 day 2days 3days 4days 5days 6days 7days
Television ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
Newspaper ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
Internet ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
1. How many days a week do you watch / see the news on the following media：
a) Television ________________________________
b) Newspapers ________________________________
c) Internet ________________________________
2. How much do you see the news about Internet risk from the news following media:
a) Television ________________________________
b) Newspapers ________________________________
c) Internet ________________________________
PART 2
The last section will ask you a little bit of your profile information that will be very useful for the research. The data will be used for the research data purpose only, will not be misused or carelessly disseminated / spread out.
1. Gender： _____Male _____Female 2. The (average) age of your elementary school child / children: _______
3. Your age category：____Under 25 ____25–30 ____30–35 ____36 - 40 ____41–45 ____Over 46
4. What is your household monthly income?
_____Under 36000 NTD _____36000–60000 NTD _____60001–80000 NTD _____80001–110000 NTD _____110001–140000 NTD _____140001–160000 NTD _____ Over 160001 NTD
If you have any question regarding the research or you are interested in following up with the results of the study, you can contact myself: Vittorio Adrianus (vawritten@yahoo.com), or contact my thesis advisor：Cheng I – Hui (icheng@nccu.edu.tw) , Associate Professor, Advertising department, National Chengchi University
Appendix C – List of visited school’s names in Taipei