DIGITAL

DIVIDE

Bruno et al. (2011) A Critical Analysis of
Current Indexes for Digital Divide Measurement

Presented by E...
The definitions of a digital divide
1

Focusing on technological resources

Individuals who use
computers and the Internet
and individuals who do not
(Mehra e...
The development of an assortment of indexes
Digital Divide Measurement
Composite indexes
•The aggregation of several
indicators into a single
figure
•Representing the...
Critiques of composite indexes
• Emphasize income, education, age, sex, and
ethnicity, while not fully addressing the deep...
Critiques of composite indexes
• Emphasize income, education, age, sex, and
ethnicity, while not fully addressing the deep...
I nvestigation on 2005 ICT-OI and 2007 IDI
1

?

To seek the possibility to increase their efficiency by reducing
the number of indicators and using the same techniq...
Geometric average
Geometric average

Main telephone lines per 100 inhabitants
Mobile cellular subscribers per 100
inhabita...
Arithmetic average
Fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants
Mobile cellular telephone subscriptions
per 100 inhabitants
I...
Correlation
Matrix

Principal Component
Analysis

Indicator
Selection

Calculate and analyze
the correlation among
each pa...
Correlation
Matrix

Principal Component
Analysis

Indicator
Selection
Correlation
Matrix

Principal Component
Analysis

Indicator
Selection
Correlation
Matrix

Principal Component
Analysis

4 components explain 90%
It suggests that we could have similar
results ...
Correlation
Matrix

Principal Component
Analysis

Indicator
Selection
Correlation
Matrix

Principal Component
Analysis

Indicator
Selection
Linear Regression Results
Original vs. Reduced DD Indexes
10

4

ICT-OI and ICT-OIreduced

0.946 (R2= 0.896)
11

4

IDI an...
Linear Regression Results
Original vs. Reduced DD Indexes
10

DD Indexes vs. Income Index

4

ICT-OI and ICT-OIreduced

IC...
“Redundant”

!

It is possible to increase efficiency
by eliminating less significant
indicators

“Reductionistic”

There ...
Internet Access and Gender Equality by Country
2008-2009, ITU

*

Female Internet
Access %
Male Internet
Access %

50
Corr...
Internet Access and Gender Equality by Country
2008-2009, ITU

*

Female Internet
Access %
Male Internet
Access %

Senegal...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

A critical analysis of digital divide measurement

656 views

Published on

This is a summery of the article "A Critical Analysis of Current Indexes for Digital Divide Measurement" by Bruno et al. (2011). It also comes with a crude comparative graph at the end.

Published in: Technology, Education
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
656
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

A critical analysis of digital divide measurement

  1. 1. DIGITAL DIVIDE Bruno et al. (2011) A Critical Analysis of Current Indexes for Digital Divide Measurement Presented by EL NO e.no@lse.ac.uk
  2. 2. The definitions of a digital divide
  3. 3. 1 Focusing on technological resources Individuals who use computers and the Internet and individuals who do not (Mehra et al. 2004) 2 Emphasizing determining factors Per capita income, telecommunications infrastructure and the quality of regulation (Chinn and Fairlie 2006) Information haves and havenots (Dewan and Riggins 2005, Ida and Horiguchi 2008, Belanger and Carter 2009) Persons who have access to digital ICTs and those do not (Dewan and Riggins 2005) Economic, regulatory, and sociopolitical characteristics of countries (Cuillen and Suarez 2005) 3 Comprehensive definitions “unequal patterns of material access to, usage capabilities of, and benefits from computer-based information and communication technologies that are caused by certain stratification processes that produce classes of winner and losers of the information society, and of participation in institutions governing ICTs and society.” (Fuchs 2005: 46) Techno-centric Multidimentional
  4. 4. The development of an assortment of indexes
  5. 5. Digital Divide Measurement Composite indexes •The aggregation of several indicators into a single figure •Representing the relative position of countries overtime 11 8 Digital Access Index 21 Infostate Index 2003 Digital Opportunity Index 10 ICT Opportunity Index 2005 11 ICT Development Index 2009
  6. 6. Critiques of composite indexes • Emphasize income, education, age, sex, and ethnicity, while not fully addressing the deeper social, cultural, and psychological causes behind access inequalities. … a lack of conceptual elaboration and definition of the indicators used in composite indexes (e.g. computer literacy, Internet use) (Van Dijk 2006) • Too many indicators make data collection difficult (Braithwaite 2007) • Measuring at the national level ignores community level inequalities (Barzilai-Nahon 2006) • The aggregation methodology of individual indicators is responsible for biases (e.g. the weight) (BarzilaiNahon 2006, James 2007)
  7. 7. Critiques of composite indexes • Emphasize income, education, age, sex, and ethnicity, while not fully addressing the deeper social, cultural, and psychological causes behind access inequalities. … a lack of conceptual elaboration and definition of the indicators used in composite indexes (e.g. computer literacy, Internet use) (Van Dijk 2006) • Too many indicators make data collection difficult (Braithwaite 2007) • Measuring at the national level ignores community level inequalities (Barzilai-Nahon 2006) • The aggregation methodology of individual indicators is responsible for biases (e.g. the weight) (BarzilaiNahon 2006, James 2007) A GOOD INDEX? should be both efficient and effective (Jollands et al. 2004)
  8. 8. I nvestigation on 2005 ICT-OI and 2007 IDI
  9. 9. 1 ? To seek the possibility to increase their efficiency by reducing the number of indicators and using the same technique of aggregation. 2 To analytically validate the critiques by Van Dijk (2005, 2006) and Fuchs (2009): current digital divide research is affected by a “reductionistic” approach to measurement that does not emphasize the role of factors other than technological access and use.
  10. 10. Geometric average Geometric average Main telephone lines per 100 inhabitants Mobile cellular subscribers per 100 inhabitants Network Geometric average International internet bandwidth Adult literacy rates Infodensity Skills Gross enrolment rates ICT-OI Internet users per 100 inhabitants Proportion of households with a TV Uptake Computers per 100 inhabitants Total broadband internet subscribers per 100 inhabitants International outgoing telephone traffic per capita Info-use Intensity
  11. 11. Arithmetic average Fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants Mobile cellular telephone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants International Internet bandwidth (bit/s) per Internet user Weighted sum ICT access x 40% Proportion of households with a computer Proportion of households with Internet access at home IDI Internet users per 100 inhabitants Fixed broadband Internet subscribers per 100 inhabitants ICT use x 40% ICT skills x 20% Mobile broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants Adult literacy rate Secondary gross enrolment ratio Tertiary gross enrolment ratio
  12. 12. Correlation Matrix Principal Component Analysis Indicator Selection Calculate and analyze the correlation among each pair of indicators Detect a set of variables able to significantly represent the phenomenon within a data set Correlate each indicator and each of the p selected principal components, then individuate the indicators with the highest values of correlation for each principal component Confirmation of the possibility to reduce variables The number of significant variables (p < n) Specific indicators to retain
  13. 13. Correlation Matrix Principal Component Analysis Indicator Selection
  14. 14. Correlation Matrix Principal Component Analysis Indicator Selection
  15. 15. Correlation Matrix Principal Component Analysis 4 components explain 90% It suggests that we could have similar results by using reduced number of indicators with the original index Indicator Selection
  16. 16. Correlation Matrix Principal Component Analysis Indicator Selection
  17. 17. Correlation Matrix Principal Component Analysis Indicator Selection
  18. 18. Linear Regression Results Original vs. Reduced DD Indexes 10 4 ICT-OI and ICT-OIreduced 0.946 (R2= 0.896) 11 4 IDI and IDIreduced 0.916 (R2= 0.839)
  19. 19. Linear Regression Results Original vs. Reduced DD Indexes 10 DD Indexes vs. Income Index 4 ICT-OI and ICT-OIreduced ICT-OI and GDP 0.946 (R2= 0.896) 0.942 (R2= 0.887) 11 4 IDI and IDIreduced IDI and GDP 0.916 (R2= 0.839) 0.921 (R2= 0.845) Strong correlation
  20. 20. “Redundant” ! It is possible to increase efficiency by eliminating less significant indicators “Reductionistic” There is a need to include more variables to comprehensively capture the phenomenon
  21. 21. Internet Access and Gender Equality by Country 2008-2009, ITU * Female Internet Access % Male Internet Access % 50 Corr=0.46 40 30 20 Higher Rank Female to Male Ratio of Internet Access* 60 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 Higher Rank Individuals Internet Access 50 60
  22. 22. Internet Access and Gender Equality by Country 2008-2009, ITU * Female Internet Access % Male Internet Access % Senegal Switzerland 50 Korea Corr=0.46 40 30 Colombia 20 Higher Rank Female to Male Ratio of Internet Access* 60 Thailand 10 UK 0 0 10 20 30 40 Higher Rank Individuals Internet Access 50 60

×