SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri / 2013 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 2

The comparison of different age groups on the attitudes toward and the use of ICT

Milan KUBİATKO
Pages
1263–1272
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The construct validity was determined by using an exploratory factor analysis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Different factors may be influencing the use of information and communication technology (ICT).
📊
Key Findings & Data:A well-known age-based categorization, commonly used especially in the field of economics,, is based on whether people belong to the Millennial Generation which are born after 1980.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The construct validity was determined by using an exploratory factor analysis.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Different factors may be influencing the use of information and communication technology (ICT). One of the important factors is age. The society is divided into different groups according to age. A well-known age-based categorization, commonly used especially in the field of economics,, is based on whether people belong to the Millennial Generation which are born after 1980. The Millennial generation has some typical behaviors which are different from those of the older people regarding ICT. In this study Millennial Generation was compared to other older respondents while also taking into account factors like gender and residence. The sample was composed of 266 respondents from ages between 18 and 57. The questionnaire was administered on an e-form and contained 73 items regarding the use of Internet and ICT and attitudes toward these. The items regarding the attitudes were 5-point Likert type items and the items regarding the use of Internet and ICT had multiple-choice answers with 2 to 5 options to choose from. The first part of questionnaire included demographic variables like gender, age, the ownership of PC, etc. The analysis of the data focused on determining the differences in the use of Internet and ICT. The methods of inductive statistics like Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were used. Reliability was tested by conducting a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient analysis. The construct validity was determined by using an exploratory factor analysis.

🔖

Cite This Article

KUBİATKO, M. (2013). The comparison of different age groups on the attitudes toward and the use of ICT. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 2, 1263–1272. https://ajindex.com/articles/347333

References (13)

  1. Akande, B. O. (2008). The I.P.O.D. generation. Diverse. Issues in Higher Education, 25 (15), 20-23.
  2. Anderson, N., Lankshear, C., Timms, C., & Courtney, L. (2007). Because it’s boring, irrelevant and I don’t like computers: Why High school girls avoid professionally-oriented ICT subjects. Computers and Education, 50 (4), 1304-1318.
  3. Arhin, A. O., & Johnson-Mallard, V. (2003). Encouraging alternative forms of self expression in the generation Y student: A strategy for effective learning in the classroom. Association of Black Nursing Faculty Journal, 14 (6), 121-122.
  4. Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39 (5), 775-786.
  5. Beyers, R. N. (2009). A five dimensional model for educating the net generation. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 218-227.
  6. Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5 (3), 235-245.
  7. Cowan, N., Nugent, L. D., Elliott, E. M., Ponomarev, I., & Saults, J. S. (1999). The role of attention in the development of short-term memory: Age differences in the verbal span of apprehension. Child Development, 70 (5), 1082-1097.
  8. Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., & Tullis, T. (2010). Generation Y, web design, and eye tracking. International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, 68 (5), 307-323.
  9. Goldenberg, B. (2005). The consumer of the future. Customer Relationship Manager, 25 (4), 22-22.
  10. Hills, C. R., Smith, D. R., & Warren-Forward, H. (2012). The impact of ‘Generation Y’ occupational therapy students on practice education. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 59 (2), 156-163.
  11. Howe, N., & Straus, W. (2000). Millenials rising: The next great generation. New York: Random House. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2003). Millennials go to college. Washington, DC: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. Jones, C., & Hosein, A., (2010). Profiling university students’ use of technology: Where is the net generation divide? The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society, 6 (3), 43-58.
  12. Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Dalgarno, B., & Waycott, J. (2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: Exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26 (5), 332-343.
  13. Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). For