IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v9y2017i2p11-d95229.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation and Privacy Perception in Virtual Environments: The Role of Sense of Community, Culture and Gender between Italian and Turkish

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Guazzini

    (Department of Education and Psychology, University of Florence, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Firenze, Italy
    Center for the Study of Complex Dynamics (CSDC), University of Florence, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Firenze, Italy)

  • Ayça Saraç

    (Department of Educational Sciences, Çukurova University, Balcali, Adana 01330, Turkey)

  • Camillo Donati

    (Department of Education and Psychology, University of Florence, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Firenze, Italy)

  • Annalisa Nardi

    (Department of Education and Psychology, University of Florence, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Firenze, Italy)

  • Daniele Vilone

    (LABSS (Laboratory of Agent Based Social Simulation), Institute of Cognitive Science and Technology, National Research Council (CNR), Via Palestro 32, 00185 Rome, Italy
    Grupo Interdisciplinar de Sistemas Complejos (GISC), Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, 28911 Leganés, Spain)

  • Patrizia Meringolo

    (Department of Education and Psychology, University of Florence, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Firenze, Italy)

Abstract

Advancements in information and communication technologies have enhanced our possibilities to communicate worldwide, eliminating borders and making it possible to interact with people coming from other cultures like never happened before. Such powerful tools have brought us to reconsider our concept of privacy and social involvement in order to make them fit into this wider environment. It is possible to claim that the information and communication technologies (ICT) revolution is changing our world and is having a core role as a mediating factor for social movements (e.g., Arab spring) and political decisions (e.g., Brexit), shaping the world in a faster and shared brand new way. It is then interesting to explore how the perception of this brand new environment (in terms of social engagement, privacy perception and sense of belonging to a community) differs even in similar cultures separated by recent historical reasons. Recent historical events may in effect have shaped a different psychological representation of Participation, Privacy and Sense of Community in ICT environments, determining a different perception of affordances and concerns of these complex behaviors. The aim of this research is to examine the relation between the constructs of Sense of Community, Participation and Privacy compared with culture and gender, considering the changes that have occurred in the last few years with the introduction of the web environment. A questionnaire, including ad hoc created scales for Participation and Privacy, have been administered to 180 participants from Turkey and Italy. In order to highlight the cultural differences in the perception of these two constructs, we have provided a semantic differential to both sub-samples showing interesting outcomes. The results are then discussed while taking into account the recent history of both countries in terms of the widespread of new technologies, political actions and protest movements.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Guazzini & Ayça Saraç & Camillo Donati & Annalisa Nardi & Daniele Vilone & Patrizia Meringolo, 2017. "Participation and Privacy Perception in Virtual Environments: The Role of Sense of Community, Culture and Gender between Italian and Turkish," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:9:y:2017:i:2:p:11-:d:95229
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/9/2/11/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/9/2/11/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthias Sutter & Stefan Haigner & Martin G. Kocher, 2010. "Choosing the Carrot or the Stick? Endogenous Institutional Choice in Social Dilemma Situations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(4), pages 1540-1566.
    2. Rand, David Gertler & Dreber, Anna & Fudenberg, Drew & Ellingson, Tore & Nowak, Martin A., 2009. "Positive Interactions Promote Public Cooperation," Scholarly Articles 3804483, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    3. Vilone, Daniele & Carletti, Timoteo & Bagnoli, Franco & Guazzini, Andrea, 2016. "The Peace Mediator effect: Heterogeneous agents can foster consensus in continuous opinion models," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 462(C), pages 84-91.
    4. Simon Gächter, 2012. "Carrot or stick?," Nature, Nature, vol. 483(7387), pages 39-40, March.
    5. Changji Wang & Dongyuan Shi & Xilei Xu, 2015. "AIB-OR: Improving Onion Routing Circuit Construction Using Anonymous Identity-Based Cryptosystems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tatsuya Sasaki, 2014. "The Evolution of Cooperation Through Institutional Incentives and Optional Participation," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 345-362, September.
    2. Alexander Isakov & David Rand, 2012. "The Evolution of Coercive Institutional Punishment," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 97-109, March.
    3. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2015. "Norm enforcement in social dilemmas: An experiment with police commissioners," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 74-85.
    4. Daniele Nosenzo & Martin Sefton, 2012. "Promoting Cooperation: the Distribution of Reward and Punishment Power," Discussion Papers 2012-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    5. Nikos Nikiforakis & Helen Mitchell, 2014. "Mixing the carrots with the sticks: third party punishment and reward," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-23, March.
    6. Choi, Jung-Kyoo & Ahn, T.K., 2013. "Strategic reward and altruistic punishment support cooperation in a public goods game experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 17-30.
    7. Gangadharan, Lata & Nikiforakis, Nikos & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2017. "Normative conflict and the limits of self-governance in heterogeneous populations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 143-156.
    8. Karakostas, Alexandros & Kocher, Martin G. & Matzat, Dominik & Rau, Holger A. & Riewe, Gerhard, 2023. "The team allocator game: Allocation power in public goods games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 73-87.
    9. Luo-Luo Jiang & Matjaž Perc & Attila Szolnoki, 2013. "If Cooperation Is Likely Punish Mildly: Insights from Economic Experiments Based on the Snowdrift Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-7, May.
    10. Hayo, Bernd & Vollan, Björn, 2012. "Group interaction, heterogeneity, rules, and co-operative behaviour: Evidence from a common-pool resource experiment in South Africa and Namibia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 9-28.
    11. Stoop, Jan & van Soest, Daan & Vyrastekova, Jana, 2011. "Carrots without Bite: On the Ineffectiveness of 'Rewards' in sustaining Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," MPRA Paper 30538, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Chugunova, Marina & Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Nicklisch, Andreas, 2020. "When to leave carrots for sticks: On the evolution of sanctioning institutions in open communities," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    13. Francesco Bripi & Daniela Grieco, 2023. "Participatory incentives," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(4), pages 813-849, September.
    14. Jie Chen, 2022. "Carrots and sticks: new evidence in public goods games with heterogeneous groups," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(4), pages 1139-1169, October.
    15. Dekel, Sagi & Fischer, Sven & Zultan, Ro’i, 2017. "Potential Pareto Public Goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 87-96.
    16. Ernst Fehr & Tony Williams, 2017. "Social norms, endogenous sorting and the culture of cooperation," ECON - Working Papers 267, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Apr 2018.
    17. Molenmaker, Welmer E. & de Kwaadsteniet, Erik W. & van Dijk, Eric, 2016. "The impact of personal responsibility on the (un)willingness to punish non-cooperation and reward cooperation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    18. Yoshio Kamijo, 2014. "A theory of sanctions: Objectives, degree of heterogeneity, and growth potential matter for optimal use of carrot or stick," Working Papers SDES-2014-13, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Oct 2014.
    19. Gürerk, Özgür, 2013. "Social learning increases the acceptance and the efficiency of punishment institutions in social dilemmas," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 229-239.
    20. Stefan Moser & Oliver Mußhoff, 2016. "Ex-ante Evaluation of Policy Measures: Effects of Reward and Punishment for Fertiliser Reduction in Palm Oil Production," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 84-104, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:9:y:2017:i:2:p:11-:d:95229. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.