Content area
Abstract
In this project, I consider the Internet's implications for social inequality. I challenge the dichotomous approach to the “digital divide” and argue that inequalities in Internet use exist on different dimensions. I ask how users differ in their Web use skills and what social factors explain these differences. I also examine how institutional factors that shape the way content is organized, presented and distributed online influence what types of content people access on the Web.
I developed a methodology to collect data on people's online skills. I conducted in-person observations and in-depth interviews with 100 randomly selected Internet users from a New Jersey county. Findings suggest that there is some variance in people's ability to locate content online and considerable variation in how long people take to complete tasks. Successful completion is positively related to youth, higher levels of education and more experience with the medium. Efficiency (speed) in completing tasks is not universal across different tasks. Rather, skill is domain (topic) specific and depends on the type of information being sought. Three factors emerge as important across several tasks, nonetheless: youth, experience, and autonomy of use, especially at work.
To account for how institutional factors influence users' online actions, I discuss the evolution of content organization and presentation on the Web and focus in particular on the role of commercial interests in what content is most easily accessible to users. I present examples of how people navigate online content and what strategies they pursue for locating various types of material. I find that the most efficient users flexibly switch between strategies to achieve their goal. Although a bigger repertoire of approaches is important for effective use, the flexibility to change strategies quickly is essential for efficiency. I also find that particular types of site organization do influence people's ability to locate content online.
Finally, I consider the policy implications of the study and call for a more refined understanding of the “digital divide.” I argue that policies must allocate resources to training in addition to subsidizing access if they are to benefit disadvantaged groups.
