IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v22y2011i1p170-187.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualizing and Testing a Social Cognitive Model of the Digital Divide

Author

Listed:
  • Kwok-Kee Wei

    (Department of Information Systems, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, People's Republic of China)

  • Hock-Hai Teo

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117417)

  • Hock Chuan Chan

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117417)

  • Bernard C. Y. Tan

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117417)

Abstract

The digital divide has loomed as a public policy issue for over a decade. Yet, a theoretical account for the effects of the digital divide is currently lacking. This study examines three levels of the digital divide. The digital access divide (the first-level digital divide) is the inequality of access to information technology (IT) in homes and schools. The digital capability divide (the second-level digital divide) is the inequality of the capability to exploit IT arising from the first-level digital divide and other contextual factors. The digital outcome divide (the third-level digital divide) is the inequality of outcomes (e.g., learning and productivity) of exploiting IT arising from the second-level digital divide and other contextual factors. Drawing on social cognitive theory and computer self-efficacy literature, we developed a model to show how the digital access divide affects the digital capability divide and the digital outcome divide among students. The digital access divide focuses on computer ownership and usage in homes and schools. The digital capability divide and the digital outcome divide focus on computer self-efficacy and learning outcomes, respectively. This model was tested using data collected from over 4,000 students in Singapore. The results generate insights into the relationships among the three levels of the digital divide and provide a theoretical account for the effects of the digital divide. While school computing environments help to increase computer self-efficacy for all students, these factors do not eliminate knowledge the gap between students with and without home computers. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwok-Kee Wei & Hock-Hai Teo & Hock Chuan Chan & Bernard C. Y. Tan, 2011. "Conceptualizing and Testing a Social Cognitive Model of the Digital Divide," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 170-187, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:22:y:2011:i:1:p:170-187
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1090.0273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0273
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1090.0273?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deborah R. Compeau & Christopher A. Higgins, 1995. "Application of Social Cognitive Theory to Training for Computer Skills," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 118-143, June.
    2. Menzie D. Chinn & Robert W. Fairlie, 2007. "The determinants of the global digital divide: a cross-country analysis of computer and internet penetration," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 16-44, January.
    3. Oecd, 2001. "Understanding the Digital Divide," OECD Digital Economy Papers 49, OECD Publishing.
    4. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    5. Ritu Agarwal & V. Sambamurthy & Ralph M. Stair, 2000. "Research Report: The Evolving Relationship Between General and Specific Computer Self-Efficacy—An Empirical Assessment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 418-430, December.
    6. George M. Marakas & Mun Y. Yi & Richard D. Johnson, 1998. "The Multilevel and Multifaceted Character of Computer Self-Efficacy: Toward Clarification of the Construct and an Integrative Framework for Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 126-163, June.
    7. Hiroshi Ono, 2005. "Digital Inequality in East Asia: Evidence from Japan, South Korea, and Singapore," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 4(3), pages 116-139, Fall.
    8. Maryam Alavi & George M. Marakas & Youngjin Yoo, 2002. "A Comparative Study of Distributed Learning Environments on Learning Outcomes," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 404-415, December.
    9. Oecd, 2007. "Broadband and ICT Access and Use by Households and Individuals," OECD Digital Economy Papers 135, OECD Publishing.
    10. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    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. Mun Y. Yi & Fred D. Davis, 2003. "Developing and Validating an Observational Learning Model of Computer Software Training and Skill Acquisition," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 146-169, June.
    2. Lionel P. Robert Jr. & Tracy Ann Sykes, 2017. "Extending the Concept of Control Beliefs: Integrating the Role of Advice Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 84-96, March.
    3. Peng, Zeyu & Sun, Yongqiang & Guo, Xitong, 2018. "Antecedents of employees’ extended use of enterprise systems: An integrative view of person, environment, and technology," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 104-120.
    4. Lee, Kyootai & Yan, Aihua & Joshi, Kailash, 2011. "Understanding the dynamics of users’ belief in software application adoption," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 160-170.
    5. Ritu Agarwal & V. Sambamurthy & Ralph M. Stair, 2000. "Research Report: The Evolving Relationship Between General and Specific Computer Self-Efficacy—An Empirical Assessment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 418-430, December.
    6. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    7. Paul Juinn Bing Tan, 2019. "An Empirical Study of How the Learning Attitudes of College Students toward English E-Tutoring Websites Affect Site Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-19, March.
    8. Radhika Santhanam & Sharath Sasidharan & Jane Webster, 2008. "Using Self-Regulatory Learning to Enhance E-Learning-Based Information Technology Training," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 26-47, March.
    9. Rajiv Sabherwal & Anand Jeyaraj & Charles Chowa, 2006. "Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1849-1864, December.
    10. Nan Zhang & Xunhua Guo & Guoqing Chen, 2011. "Why adoption and use behavior of IT/IS cannot last?—two studies in China," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 381-395, July.
    11. Alexander Mayr & Philip Stahmann & Maximilian Nebel & Christian Janiesch, 2024. "Still doing it yourself? Investigating determinants for the adoption of intelligent process automation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 34(1), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Neill, William D. & Richard, James E., 2012. "Intranet portals: Marketing and managing individuals’ acceptance and use," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 147-157.
    13. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 0. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    14. Ritu Agarwal & Viswanath Venkatesh, 2002. "Assessing a Firm's Web Presence: A Heuristic Evaluation Procedure for the Measurement of Usability," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 168-186, June.
    15. M Vimalkumar & Jang Bahadur Singh & Sujeet Kumar Sharma, 0. "Exploring the Multi-Level Digital Divide in Mobile Phone Adoption: A Comparison of Developing Nations," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    16. M Vimalkumar & Jang Bahadur Singh & Sujeet Kumar Sharma, 2021. "Exploring the Multi-Level Digital Divide in Mobile Phone Adoption: A Comparison of Developing Nations," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1057-1076, August.
    17. Sarv Devaraj & Robert F. Easley & J. Michael Crant, 2008. "Research Note ---How Does Personality Matter? Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 93-105, March.
    18. Olimpia NEAGU, 2019. "Digital Divide Gap Convergence Across European Union: The Role Of Urbanisation," Contemporary Economy Journal, Constantin Brancoveanu University, vol. 4(1), pages 43-48.
    19. Mäntymäki, Matti & Salo, Jari, 2013. "Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An examination of Habbo Hotel," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 282-290.
    20. Kuldeep Baishya & Harsh Vardhan Samalia, 2020. "Factors Influencing Smartphone Adoption: A Study in the Indian Bottom of the Pyramid Context," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 21(6), pages 1387-1405, December.

    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:inm:orisre:v:22:y:2011:i:1:p:170-187. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.