The Internet and computers increasingly determine our daily lives. This goes for almost everyone in the Netherlands. Still, it is mostly teenagers who are well informed on how to use all the possibilities of new technologies. They are building a digital world of their own that parents usually know very little about. This booklet intends to inform teachers, parents and other interested parties on what teenagers are actually doing online and how important it is to keep abreast of the new developments that the Internet and computers bring into their world. On the basis of research into these issues in the Netherlands and abroad we attempt to indicate what the digital world of teenagers looks like and how it differs from that of grown-ups. What do they do, exactly, and why? We also look into teenagers’ ICT behaviour and into dangers and abuse of the Internet. Moreover we provide tips for parents and teachers on how to handle certain phenomena. This book does not pretend to provide an exhaustive overview of the digital world of teenagers. It is focused on some important characteristics and parts of that world. It reports on research of the INHOLLAND Centre for eLearning into various aspects of ICT behaviour among teenagers. The research was undertaken in the spring of 2006, focusing mainly on texting, networking, gaming, dangers and abuse on the Internet and the digital relation between school and the home. Ultimately we are especially concerned with the question of what teenagers really learn in their digital world, and how education can profit. This book also addresses that issue.
DOCUMENT
Specific approaches are needed to reach and support people with a lower socioeconomic position (SEP) to achieve healthier eating behaviours. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that digital health tools exhibit potential to address these needs because of its specific features that enable application of various behaviour change techniques (BCTs). The aim of this scoping review is to identify the BCTs that are used in diet-related digital interventions targeted at people with a low SEP, and which of these BCTs coincide with improved eating behaviour. The systematic search was performed in 3 databases, using terms related to e/m-health, diet quality and socioeconomic position. A total of 17 full text papers were included. The average number of BCTs per intervention was 6.9 (ranged 3–15). BCTs from the cluster ‘Goals and planning’ were applied most often (25x), followed by the clusters ‘Shaping knowledge’ (18x) and ‘Natural consequences’ (18x). Other frequently applied BCT clusters were ‘Feedback and monitoring’ (15x) and ‘Comparison of behaviour’ (13x). Whereas some BCTs were frequently applied, such as goal setting, others were rarely used, such as social support. Most studies (n = 13) observed a positive effect of the intervention on eating behaviour (e.g. having breakfast) in the low SEP group, but this was not clearly associated with the number or type of applied BCTs. In conclusion, more intervention studies focused on people with a low SEP are needed to draw firm conclusions as to which BCTs are effective in improving their diet quality. Also, further research should investigate combinations of BCTs, the intervention design and context, and the use of multicomponent approaches. We encourage intervention developers and researchers to describe interventions more thoroughly, following the systematics of a behaviour change taxonomy, and to select BCTs knowingly.
DOCUMENT
Parents who grew up without digital monitoring have a plethora of parental monitoring opportunities at their disposal. While they can engage in surveillance practices to safeguard their children, they also have to balance freedom against control. This research is based on in-depth interviews with eleven early adolescents and eleven parents to investigate everyday negotiations of parental monitoring. Parental monitoring is presented as a form of lateral surveillance because it entails parents engaging in surveillance practices to monitor their children. The results indicate that some parents are motivated to use digital monitoring tools to safeguard and guide their children, while others refrain from surveillance practices to prioritise freedom and trust. The most common forms of surveillance are location tracking and the monitoring of digital behaviour and screen time. Moreover, we provide unique insights into the use of student tracking systems as an impactful form of control. Early adolescents negotiate these parental monitoring practices, with responses ranging from acceptance to active forms of resistance. Some children also monitor their parents, showcasing a reciprocal form of lateral surveillance. In all families, monitoring practices are negotiated in open conversations that also foster digital resilience. This study shows that the concepts of parental monitoring and lateral surveillance fall short in grasping the reciprocal character of monitoring and the power dynamics in parent-child relations. We therefore propose that monitoring practices in families can best be understood as family surveillance, providing a novel concept to understand how surveillance is embedded in contemporary media practices among interconnected family members.
MULTIFILE
(‘Co’-)Designing for healthy behaviour greatly benefits from integrating insights about individual behaviour and systemic influences. This study reports our experiences in using insights about individual and systemic determinants of behaviour to inform a large co-design project. To do so, we used two design tools that encourage focusing on individual determinants (Behavioural Lenses Approach) and social / systemic aspects of behaviour (Socionas). We performed a qualitative analysis to identify 1) when and how the team applied the design tools, and 2) how the tools supported or obstructed the design process. The results show that both tools had their distinctive uses during the process. Both tools improved the co-design process by deepening the conversations and underpinnings of the prototypes. Using the Behavioural Lenses under the guidance of a behavioural expert proved most beneficial. Furthermore, the Socionas showed the most potential when interacting with stakeholders, i.c. parents and PPTs.
MULTIFILE
Technological developments go fast and are interrelated and multi-interpretable. As consumer needs change, the technological possibilities to meet those needs are constantly evolving and new technology providers introduce new disruptive business models. This makes it difficult to predict what the world of tomorrow will look like for an organization and that makes the risks for organizations substantial. In this context, it is difficult for organizations to determine what constitutes a good strategy to adopt digital developments. This paper describes a first step of a study with the objective to design a method for organizations to formulate a future-proof strategy in a rapidly changing, complex and ambiguous context. More specifically, this paper describes the results of a sequence of three focus groups that were held with a group of eight experts, with extensive experience as members of the decision making unit in organizations. The objectives of these sessions were to determine possible solutions for the outlined challenge in order to provide direction for continuation and scoping of the following research phases.
MULTIFILE
The use of mobile digital devices requires secure behaviour while using these devices. To influence this behaviour, one should be able to adequately measure the behaviour. The purpose of this study is to establish a model for measuring secure behaviour, and to use this model to measure the secure behaviour of individuals while using mobile digital devices such as smartphones and laptops.
DOCUMENT
Study about voluntary use of mobile apps to promote behaviour change presented at the Etmaal voor de Communicatiewetenschap
LINK
Habitual behavior is often hard to change because of a lack of self-monitoring skills. Digital technologies offer an unprecedented chance to facilitate self-monitoring by delivering feedback on undesired habitual behavior. This review analyzed the results of 72 studies in which feedback from digital technology attempted to disrupt and change undesired habits. A vast majority of these studies found that feedback through digital technology is an effective way to disrupt habits, regardless of target behavior or feedback technology used.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Cancer survivors face physical, lifestyle, psychological, and psychosocial challenges. Despite the availability of aftercare services, survivors still have unmet needs. Digital aftercare programs may offer support, but their use is limited. This study aimed to examine what is needed to improve uptake and adoption of these programs. Additionally, it explored sociodemographic and clinical variables that may influence these needs. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used, involving qualitative interviews and a questionnaire. The research was guided by the COM-B model of behaviour, which considers capability, opportunity, and motivation crucial for behaviour. Qualitative analysis was performed using the framework method. Statistical analyses involved descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Results: Fourteen cancer survivors were interviewed, and 213 participants completed the questionnaire. Findings indicated that most respondents had a positive or neutral attitude towards digital aftercare programs, believing these could address their cancer-related challenges. Still, only a small percentage had experience with them, and most were unaware of their existence. Many expressed a desire to be informed about them. Some were uncertain about their effectiveness. Others were concerned about a lack of reimbursement. No significant influence of the sociodemographic and clinical variables was found. Conclusion: Cancer survivors are generally positive about digital aftercare programs but are often unaware of their availability. Raising awareness, clarifying their value, and providing support and reimbursement could enhance uptake and adoption. Implications for Cancer Survivors: The current insights can help improve participation in digital aftercare programs, ultimately fostering health, well-being, and quality of life of cancer survivors.
MULTIFILE
Can you remember the last time the ground gave way beneath you? When you thought the ground was stable, but for some reason it wasn’t? Perhaps you encountered a pothole on the streets of Amsterdam, or you were renovating your house and broke through the floor. Perhaps there was a molehill in a park or garden. You probably had to hold on to something to steady yourself. Perhaps you even slipped or fell. While I sincerely hope that nobody here was hurt in the process, I would like you to keep that feeling in your mind when reading what follows. It is the central theme of the words that will follow. The ground beneath our feet today is not as stable as the streets of Amsterdam, your park around the corner or even a poorly renovated upstairs bedroom. This is because whatever devices we use and whatever pathways we choose, we all live in hybrid physical and digital social spaces (Kitchin and Dodge 2011). Digital social spaces can be social media platforms like Twitter or Facebook, but also chat apps like WhatsApp or Signal. Crucially, social spaces are increasingly hybrid, in which conversations take place across digital spaces (WhatsApp chat group) and physical spaces (meeting friends in a cafe) simultaneously. The ground beneath our feet is not made of concrete or stone or wood but of bits and bytes.
DOCUMENT
