Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0635-3

LONG PAPER

Аlways with them: smartphone use by children, adolescents,

and young adults—characteristics, habits of use, sharing,
and satisfaction of needs
Gila Cohen Zilka1

Published online: 16 October 2018

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Because of the extensive use of smartphones by children, adolescents, and young adults, we set out to explore the character-
istics and habits of usage of smartphones from their perspective, and to examine the relationship between usage habits and
the satisfaction of needs. As part of a mixed-method study, 551 respondents from Israel completed the questionnaires, and
110 of the respondents were also interviewed. The study provides an explanation for the dramatic rise and the massive use of
smartphones by children, adolescents, and young adults. The findings show that respondents feel that with the help of their
smartphones they can maintain extensive communication with those around them, satisfying their important needs, and more.
Respondents have become highly dependent on the use of various applications, which leads to an even more extensive use.
As the use of smartphones increases, respondents feel that they are maximizing the potential offered by these applications.

Keywords Smartphones · Social networking apps · WhatsApp · Identity · Friendship · Social development

1 Introduction 2 The environment in which children,

adolescents, and young adults grow up
Because of the widespread use of smartphones by children,
adolescents, and young adults, we have sought to examine Researchers (Atwal et al. [2]; Comstock and Scharrer [13];
the characteristics and habits of smartphone usage, from Gatfield and Millwood-Hargrave [19]; Holbert and Stephen-
their point of view; the differences between gender and age son [23]; Livingstone [29, 30]; Millwood-Hargrave [43];
groups; the correlation between usage habits and the sat- Millwood-Hargrave and Livingstone [44, 46]) have argued
isfaction of needs; which apps are used more than others, that because the new media is part of our living environ-
when, and why; which needs are addressed; what character- ment, its influence in shaping the personality of children lies
izes this dramatic rise; and why is it so appealing to children, in its interaction with other environmental factors, which
adolescents, and young adults. affect each other in different ways. The new media is part of
the natural social environment that affects the children and
does not stand by itself. People grow, develop, and shape
their personality, attitudes, opinions, and beliefs, according
to innate tendencies, and as part of a complex environment,
which includes direct, face-to-face experiences as well as
new media experiences [12, 17, 45]. Researchers have found
that the most popular means of using the Internet and its
applications is the smartphone [20, 24, 31, 36, 40].

* Gila Cohen Zilka

gila.zilka@gmail.com
http://www.drgilazilka-the-elements-way.com/#!home/c1o1a
1
Achva Academic College, Bar-Ilan University, 106 HaZayit,
79265 Emunim, Israel

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
146 Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155

3 Social networking apps (SNAs) inherent in face-to-face interactions, such as facial expres-
sions and body language, are missing and this leads to
Social networking apps (SNAs), such as WhatsApp and miscommunication, messages being misinterpreted or mis-
Facebook, are the most popular online apps used by ado- construed and, at times, leading to conflict. Something
lescents [1, 25, 42, 50, Lenhart et al. 2010]. The fabric of that is said face-to-face with a smile may be understood
our social interactions has recently extended to integrate in an entirely different way than if posted on someone’s
SNAs, which are now widely used as a medium for com- Facebook Timeline [53, 55].
munication and networking [7, 8, 51]. SNAs allow people
to connections with them, and form new connections inter-
actions [18, 49]. According to estimates, 81% of online 4 The present study
teenagers use social media sites [39].
As social creatures, individuals aspire to a sense In this study, we sought to examine the characteristics and
of belonging to a social group, to gain recognition and habits of usage and sharing of smartphones from the per-
affection from others. Interpersonal relationships play an spective of children, adolescents, and young adults; dif-
important role in satisfying these basic human needs [3, ferences between genders and age groups; the correlation
41]. Friendships satisfy several essential psychosocial between usage habits and the satisfaction of needs; and
needs for children and adolescents, which are not satisfied which applications are used more, when, and why.
by other types of relationships. Friends allow individu-
als to develop intimacy, empathy, and perspective-taking
skills, as well as skills for conflict resolution. They also 5 Methodology
provide companionship, emotional acceptance, and a sense
of connectedness, inclusion, and affiliation [10]. Studies 5.1 Sample
show that adolescent friendships are reliable predictors
of overall wellbeing, self-esteem, and social adjustment The study sample included 551 respondents, 71.1% of which
[6, 21]. were female. For the purpose of the study, the respondents
A number of studies on the use of the Internet and social were divided into three research groups: children (up to age
media by children and teenagers found that these media 15), adolescents (ages 15–18), and young adults (aged 18
enhance the ability of children to communicate with others and above), with a median of 18.4 (SD 3.7).
and foster a sense of social belonging and connectivity.
They also make possible experiences of close friendships 5.2 Tools
and social acceptance. Writing makes it possible to convey
one’s message without others interrupting the flow, unlike This is a quantitative mixed-method study with a qualitative
face-to-face talking, in which others can break the flow of element. A total of 110 children, adolescents, and young
speech. The writer can concentrate on writing rather than adult were interviewed. Media preference tools are based
being hampered by distracting issues such as stuttering or on previous studies Ofcom [46, 47], Livingstone and Bober
body language. Writing is often similar to “internal talk” [34], Livingstone et al. [35, 37, 38] and Millwood-Hargrave
and enables the expression of feelings, compensating for and Livingstone [45].
difficulties in face-to-face communication. It provides the Below is the description of the research tools:
option to edit the text and use different representations,
such as emoticons. Writing can have a therapeutic value, 1. Socio-demographic questionnaire. The questionnaire
contributing to emotional relief, the airing of emotions, contained 13 items, including age, country of birth, year
and the release of stress. Positive online interactions pro- of immigration, marital status of the parents, parents’
mote a sense of self-value and determination, afford feel- occupations, number of siblings, area of residence, type
ings of meaningful contribution to the community, and of housing, number of rooms in the house, social sector,
provide opportunities to display talents and abilities and and economic situation;
to receive feedback from others. At the same time, chil- 2. Habits of use and fulfillment of needs in SNAs. The
dren and teenagers are exposed to a large amount of media questionnaire contained 14 items, such as: “Why do you
and must cope with increasingly complex situations [11, think so many children, adolescents, and young adults
16, 27, 28, 32, 33, 53, 54]. Social media makes them feel use SNAs?”, “What needs do SNAs satisfy for you?”,
more socially confident and allows them to stay informed “What do you like about SNAs?”, “What you don’t you
with what is happening. They stated that their need for like about SNAs?”, “In how many groups do you par-
belonging is met online, but that the lack of clues that are ticipate in SNAs?”, “How many messages, on average,
do you send per day?”;

13
Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155 147

3. Effects and characteristics: The questionnaire contained 6.1 Scope and habits of usage
15 items assessed on a 5-point scale, ranging from
1 = not at all to 5 = to a very large extent. For example: The findings indicate that 98.1% of children, adolescents,
“What are the advantages and disadvantages of com- and young adults stated that the smartphone was always
munication by SNAs for you?”, “Do SNAs help you on them. They photograph the board in class, because they
solve problems in your daily life?”, “Do SNAs create feel that taking pictures is more effective than writing
problems in your daily life?”; down in the notebook whatever is on the board. They take
4. Comparison between face-to-face and SNA communica- pictures of transparencies that the teacher shows during
tion. The questionnaire contained seven statements in the lesson, record important parts of the lesson, search for
response to the question “Where do you feel that there materials for homework and research papers while trave-
is more feedback (in SNAs or face-to-face)?”: (a) it is ling, waiting in line, etc. (91%); record ideas that come
easier to communicate with others; (b) there are more to mind so as not to forget them (89%); keep a diary on
problems in understanding messages; (c) cooperation; the phone (85%); use an alarm clock throughout the day
(d) planning activities and events; (e) pleasure; (f) (95%); play games (90%); watch YouTube (80%), some
mutual help; (g) responsibility for and control of the (37%) even noted that they were “youtubers;” take pic-
conversation; tures and videos (98%); use communication applications
5. Personal interviews: A total of 110 children, adoles- (98%). It was found that the most popular application is
cents and young adult were interviewed. Interviewees WhatsApp (98%).
were asked questions to clarify the quantitative findings, Table 1 below shows the amount of time respondents
to help us understand the reasons behind the findings. spent on frequent activities over a period of one week.
The semi-structured interviews covered all the subjects Assessment of activity scope was carried out using a
included in the research topics, but the order of ques- 5-point ordinal scale reflecting the number of hours.
tions was determined by the dynamics of the interview. Based on these patterns, the activities were divided into
The interviewees wanted to share events they lived five main groups, as detailed in Table 2, 3.
through, positive and negative experiences, and some A comparison of the extent to which participants
gave detailed descriptions. engaged in activities by age group shows that there is a
significant difference (F(2,482) = 5.564, p < .01) in the
use of SNAs between children (M = 8.52), adolescents
6 Findings (M = 11.06), and young adults (M = 10.26). In general,
a comparison of the time devoted to independent digital
We present the findings of the study in the following order: activity between the different subgroups, following Bon-
scope and habits of usage; patterns of usage; group mem- ferroni correction for multiple comparisons, revealed that
bership; friends in SNAs and face-to-face; topics of conver- adolescents (M = 5.91) engaged in this activity more than
sations with friends in SNAs and face-to-face; reasons for did young adults (M = 5.16).
using and the needs addressed by smartphones.

Table 1  Distribution of use of Activities Distribution Summary

SNAs and other activities
Not at all (%) 1–5 h (%) 6–10 h (%) 11–15 h (%) Over 15 h (%) N M

SNAs 1.9 25.4 24.3 24.1 24.3 523 10.21

Friends 5.1 55.1 23.0 8.9 7.9 508 6.06
Television 23.2 54.2 13.9 4.4 4.2 518 4.08
YouTube 19.6 54.9 13.2 7.5 4.8 521 4.54
Movies and 23.9 48.7 17.0 6.4 4.0 519 4.37
programs on the
computer
Surfing the Web 4.9 32.2 23.9 18.1 21.0 515 9.00
Newspapers 67.2 29.0 3.4 0.4 0.0 524 1.19
Books 45.8 42.6 8.4 1.9 1.3 524 2.44
Phone conversations 6.1 58.5 20.0 8.4 6.9 521 5.69

13
148 Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155

6.2 Membership in groups

Independ-
ent digital

20.14**
activity
6.2.1 Multivariate Linear Regression Analysis (MANOVA)

We found that the amount of messages sent increases as

the perceived influence of the application on behavior and
Phone con-
versations
social involvement increases (b = 135.69). We also found

17.20**
t test for the row-column difference

1.01
that the number of messages sent was lower among mem-
bers in study-related groups (b = 188.42), as well as among
members in other groups (b = − 254.78) (Table 4).
Members

Analysis of the number of groups in which participants

18.83**
2.33*
1.34 are members indicates that this number does not depend
on the amount of time devoted to other activities. It also
31.81** transpires from this model that the number of groups in
14.27**
17.89**
20.18**

which the participants are members increases as the per-

SNAs

ceived influence of the application on behavior and social

involvement increases (b = 6.25).
digital activity
Independent

6.3 Friends in SNAs and face‑to‑face

0.055

A survey of the distribution of friends in SNAs and face-

to-face is illustrated in Fig. 1 below. Respondents could
Phone con-
versations

specify more than one answer, so that percentages may add

0.466**

up to more than 100%.

0.032
Correlation coef. (Pearson)

6.4 Topics of conversations with friends in SNAs

Members

0.241**
0.221**

and face‑to‑face
0.084
Table 2  Extent of weekly activity—distribution indices, connections, and differences

Examination of the common topics of conversation

between SNA friends (Fig. 2). A qualitative analysis of
0.260**
0.420**
0.428**
SNAs

0.062

the answers to the question “What do you talk about with

your friends in the SNAs?”. The analysis includes parallel
references to several topics, and therefore, the distribution
Cronbach α

rates may not add up to 100%.

A qualitative analysis of the answers to the question
0.750
0.493

“Are there any topics that are better discussed in SNAs

and other topics that are better discussed face-to-face?”
is summarized in Fig. 3. This analysis includes parallel
Distribution ind.

5.75
4.84
4.72
3.67
2.22
SD

references to several topics, and therefore, the distribution

rates may not add up to 100%.
10.21
6.06
5.69
5.50
1.82
M

6.5 Reasons for using and the needs addressed

by SNAs
Independent digital activity

A qualitative analysis of the answers to the question “Why

Phone conversations

**p < .01, *p < .05

do you think so many children and adults use SNAs?” is

summarized in Fig. 4. This analysis includes parallel refer-
ences to several issues, and therefore, the distribution rates
Members

Reading

may not add up to 100%.

SNAs

13
Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155 149

Table 3  Scope of engagement Activities Children Adolescents Young adults Total F differences
in various activities by age between groups
group
SNAs 8.52 11.06 10.26 10.38 5.564**
Members 5.16 6.64 5.94 6.13 2.441
Phone conversations 4.55 6.06 5.70 5.70 3.475*
Digital activity 5.82 5.91 5.16 5.56 0.157
Reading 0.89 1.71 2.21 1.83 7.557**

**p < .01, *p < .05

Table 4  Scope of engaging Dependent variables

with SNAs, number of
messages sent and number of Independent variables SNAs (hours daily) Messages (number) Membership in
groups in which respondents groups (number)
are members relative to other
activities, effects of SNA use, Activities
management and membership in Intercept − 4.58** − 316.74* − 2.27
group, age group Friends 0.14** − 0.72 0.52
Phone conversation 0.25** 15.85* 0.71
Independent digital activity 0.47** 6.86 0.48
Reading 0.11 − 28.97* − 0.93
Effects
Social conduct and involvement 1.73** 135.69** 6.25*
Need for family support 0.56 48.12 0.67
Membership in groups
Membership in study groups and educa- − 0.71 − 188.42** − 16.57**
tional networks
Membership in family group 1.44* − 27.27 0.84
Membership in group of friends 0.47 13.41 − 6.45
Membership in interest groups − 0.25 80.44 7.42
Membership in work groups 0.65 12.00 − 6.55
Membership in other groups 1.73 − 254.78* − 7.95
Management of groups
Group management 1.41* − 54.62 11.23*
Management of company groups 0.37 134.85* 2.20
Management of family groups − 0.09 − 115.12 − 11.79
Management of work and study groups − 0.68 94.82 11.46
Management of other groups 0.50 22.28 4.21

**p < .01, *p < .05

6.6 Needs addressed by SNAs 6.7 Comparison of reasons for SNA use

and of the needs it addresses
Table 5 presents the analysis of participants’ responses
by age group. The distribution presented is the result of a The results of the analysis of the ways SNAs address the
qualitative analysis of the answers to the question “What respondents’ needs are summarized in Table 6.
needs are addressed by SNAs?”. The analysis includes
parallel references to several issues, and therefore, the
distribution rates may not add up to 100%.

13
150 Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155

Fig. 1  Distribution of friends in 70.0%

SNAs and face-to-face
58.5% 57.6%
60.0%

50.0%

40.2%
40.0% 35.5%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0% 5.8%
5.4%
1.1% 0.9%
0.0%
Of my age Older than myself Of all ages Younger than myself

Fig. 2  Comparison of topics 35.0%

of conversation in SNAs and 28.8%
30.0%
face-to-face 24.9% 23.7%
25.0%
18.7%
20.0%

15.0% 12.0% 11.0%

10.0%

5.0% 3.6% 2.8%

0.0%
Friends General Everything Seeking Studies and Areas of Work Family
updates advice academic interest
regarding frameworks
personal
issues and
problems

Fig. 3  Are there topics not to be 20% 19%

18%
discussed in the SNAs? 18%
16% 15%
14%
12%
10%
8% 8%
8%
6%
6%
4%
2% 1%
0%
Important, Secrets and General Quarrels and Feelings and No such topics Other
deep, serious privacy preference for disputes thoughts
conversaons face-to-face
conversaons

13
Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155 151

Fig. 4  Why do you think so 80.0%

many children and adults use 70.0%
68.0%
SNAs?
60.0% 51.8%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0% 25.4% 23.0%
20.0% 15.9%
13.1%
10.0% 6.0%

0.0%

Table 5  Answers to the question “What needs are addressed by SNAs?” by age group
Children (%) Adoles- Young Total (%) F differences
cents (%) adults (%) between the
groups

Being sure I’m up to date 49 41 38 41 0.111

Belonging: I feel part of a group, accepted, loved by my friends 56 47 46 47 1.257
Social appreciation: I feel appreciated and respected 53 31 29 33 1.096
Self-realization: I feel that I’m realizing my personal abilities 26 28 25 26 0.896
Awareness of current developments and ongoing updates 63 82 83 80 3.274*

*p < .05

Table 6  Analysis of needs addressed by SNAs relative to reasons for using SNAs
Which needs do SNAs satisfy?
Confidence (“being Belonging Social appreciation Self-realization Knowledge of
plugged in”) developments and
current updates
No (%) Yes (%) No (%) Yes (%) No (%) Yes (%) No (%) Yes (%) No (%) Yes (%)

Reasons for using the SNAs

Transfer of information and files 23 24 25 21 24 20 23 24 14* 25*
Convenience and efficiency 69 66 68 68 67 71 67 71 57* 71*
Interpersonal communication 49 56 50 54 50 55 51 53 49 53
Cost 16 15 14 18 16 15 15 17 13 17
Innovation 13 13 15 11 14 12 13 14 8 14
The accepted standard of com- 23 29 25 26 26 24 24 29 18* 27*
munication in society
Escapism 8* 3* 7 5 6 6 6 5 3 7

The difference between the columns is significant (p < .05) after Bonferroni correction

13
152 Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155

7 Discussion communication. They perceive the SNAs as part of their

life environment, and feel confident in their ability to
We sought to examine the characteristics and habits of use control information in SNAs as much as they feel confi-
and sharing of smartphones from the perspective of children, dent in their ability to control information in face-to-face
adolescents, and young adults. We found that respondents communication.
feel that smartphones satisfy various needs. With smart- We found that children, adolescents, and young adults
phones, respondents are available to others and others to developed a high dependence on the use of various appli-
them, and they are connected in real time to whatever is cations in their daily lives, and that the use of applica-
happening in different areas of their life. They feel that they tions leads to even greater use. Similar findings have been
engage in extensive and productive communication, which reported in previous studies [35, 40; 40]. The social con-
they would not be able to do without the smartphone. They text shapes the user experience and the realization of the
share their activities with others, and others share with them. potential of these applications: the more extensive the usage,
We found that children, adolescents, and young adults attach the more participants maximize the potential offered by the
great importance to the connection with others, to their own smartphone. Researchers have noted the dependence created
availability and to that of others, and equally to the content by the use of smartphones; the more massive the use, the
and messages they receive and send. For example, children, stronger the dependence, and the stronger the dependence,
adolescents, and young adults said that they send messages the more massive the use becomes [36]. Children grow up
to their grandparents, send them pictures, share funny mov- in an environment with a smartphone, and the environment
ies with them, and so on. They noted that when they send affects their usage and sharing habits. They perceive the
messages to their grandparents, it makes their grandparents device as part of their natural environment. Many respond-
happy. In other words, communicating with grandparents is ents indicated that their parents encouraged them to take the
important, but they have to choose the appropriate content. smartphone with them to be in touch and to be able to reach
Many stated that they “must” open the messages and read them if necessary. The present study reinforces the findings
the SMSs, and view the pictures and the movies, so that they of previous studies, which indicate that digital developments
are always up-to-date, not missing anything. They described are an integral and massive part of the life environment of
situations where they could not see their messages, and later children, adolescents, and young adults [2, 12, 13, 17, 19,
found out that they had received dozens of messages, mak- 23, 29, 30, 43–45]).
ing it difficult for them to process all the messages they had It has been found that the SNAs are the most popular
received. From the conversations with the respondents it applications among the respondents. Just over half of them
emerged that they read the messages and view the images stated that they use SNAs as an effective means of interper-
and the videos, and that it is important for them to under- sonal communication. Efficiency in this context means being
stand the content. It is, therefore, difficult to separate their able to communicate with others anytime, anywhere. This
desire to be in touch with others from the importance they is especially evident in the proliferation of communication
attribute to the content; the two are connected. Although the groups within the SNAs, which have become an accepted
communication is extensive and intense, the respondents still means of parallel communication with multiple participants.
attribute importance to the messages being sent. Some of the The present study showed that the most popular SNA among
interviewees mentioned the messages sent by their friends, children, adolescents, and young adults in Israel is What-
stating that they made them feel very hurt, or alternatively, sApp, and according to the respondents, the same is true
very happy. They did not discard the messages, nor consid- for their parents. The name WhatsApp is a word play on
ered them to be shallow and insignificant, but rather saw the the expression “what’s up?” “App” stands for application.
messages as useful, helping them make informed decisions, The application is available both on phones and on comput-
providing a sense of being in a shared space with others, ers. The WhatsApp social network is accessible and easy to
defying distance and alienation. Children, adolescents, and operate, and WhatsApp automatically syncs with the exist-
young adults share thoughts and feelings, as well as anger ing contact list on the phone. Anybody can open a group
and frustration, seek help with homework, organize joint and invite whomever they choose to join. Individuals who
activities, recruit friends to help others, and more. Many do not want to be part of a group to which they have been
noted that they like to use emoji to express their feelings added, they can leave immediately and without technologi-
and emotions. Similar findings were also reported by other cal difficulties.
studies [14, 26, 31, 48]. The findings indicate that there are “uniform” patterns
We found that some respondents perceive the dis- of SNA usage. Most respondents send dozens of mes-
course in the SNAs as truthful or not based on the same sages daily. It can be estimated that on average they send
parameters they use assess the truthfulness of face-to-face 296 messages a day and participate in 43.6 groups. It also
emerges that an absolute majority of respondents answer

13
Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155 153

their messages, and a similar percentage start conversa- communication takes place only during the day, and those
tions themselves, so that in practice the respondents both that have no time limit. Group members usually determine
create new conversations and take part in the existing ones. the communication patterns of the group. Certain groups
A significant positive correlation was found between the have a manager, and in other groups everyone is defined as
extent of the use of SNAs and its effect on the social con- a manager. Respondents feel that there are no technologi-
duct and involvement of the respondents (r = .260, p < .01). cal “limits”, but rather “arrangements” that characterize the
The higher the contribution of the use of the application to various groups. Most of the respondents mentioned a need
social behavior and involvement, the higher the number of for slight adjustment to the various groups in which they
messages sent (r = .235, p < .01) and the number of groups in were members. Many also noted that it was easier for them
which the respondents are members (r = .160, p < .01). Most to share their feelings and thoughts in SNAs than by com-
groups are concentrated in two areas: the family domain municating face-to-face. Difficulties that characterize face-
(73%)—the majority of respondents reported that their par- to-face interactions, especially sharing feelings, emotions,
ents are in constant contact with them through the SNAs; and thoughts, are alleviated, often making expression easier,
and the social domain relating to group conversations, meet- and at times even deeper, in SNAs than face-to-face.
ings, and organization of events (73%). Fifty-nine percent Some of the respondents also noted difficulties, for exam-
of respondents are members of groups on educational sub- ple: “Sometimes one gets confused and writes a message in
jects or subjects related to educational frameworks, and 30% the wrong group, which causes embarrassment and unpleas-
are members of groups in various fields of interest such as antness”; “All the time you have to be alert and listen to the
sports, classes, hobbies, technology, and more. No signifi- phone”; “A lot of messages, lots of groups, it is hard to keep
cant differences were found in the number of messages sent track of things; sometimes decisions are made in one of the
or in the number of groups to which the respondents belong groups and those who did not participate in the conversation
by age group. cannot express their opinion anymore because the conversa-
Researchers [4, 5, 9, 15, 22, 30, 37, 52] have argued that tion has already moved to another stage”. Some respondents
in an environment with numerous communities, the task of noted that occasionally, lack of clues, which are available
interpretation that focuses on the “me” in the community of in face-to-face interactions, cause communication failures.
which “I” am a part, in the process of defining self-identity Messages pass in a distorted and at times plainly wrong
and in relation to the communities of which the individual manner, leading to crises and conflicts. This is usually due
makes part, is more complicated than at other times. The to a lack of adaptation to the medium and to its capabilities
findings of the present study indicate that for most children, and limitations. A face-to-face remark, offered with a smile,
adolescents, and young adults, the transition from commu- is quite different from that communicated through the SNAs.
nity to community and from one group to another is easy and Furthermore, social media writing is often “speech-like,”
natural, whether it is a community of soccer fans, a commu- with only partial checks for “written” conventions [Mason
nity of students, a community of classmates, etc. The prob- 2008; Patchin and Hinduja 2006, 56].
lem for most respondents is one of time. For example, one
boy reported that he raised rare ornamental fish and that he
was part of a community of lovers of ornamental fish similar 8 Conclusion
to his own. One morning he discovered that his fish had laid
eggs, and he asked the community members for instructions Children, adolescents, and young adults feel that the smart-
on how to handle them. He shared with the members of the phone is an integral part of their life environment. Through
community his concern that if he did not handle the situa- it, they establish extensive communication with those around
tion correctly, he might provoke his parents and damage the them, obtain solutions for their important needs, enrich their
hatching process of the larvae. The boy said that he received lives, facilitate their everyday activities, and more. The pre-
support and was encouraged by members of the community. sent study provides an explanation for the dramatic rise and
At the same time, he found it difficult to spend much time massive use of smartphones by children, adolescents, and
helping others, providing assistance like the one he received young adults. They love this device because they perceive
from them, because he was a member of many communities it as “opening doors” to a space that enables them to realize
and they were all very important to him. Children, adoles- their needs, objectives, and goals, especially with regard to
cents, and young adults spoke about the groups in which social issues and to expressing feelings and thoughts. Many
they were members and about different dynamics between of them send messages in SNA communications that they
the various communities and groups. There are groups in do not dare to relate face-to-face. The need to participate
which the communication is business-like and there is no in a large number of groups simultaneously, however, cre-
sharing on “generic” issues; then there are groups where ates a burden, yet they emphasize on all occasions that they
any subject can be discussed. There are groups in which are not prepared to give up some of the groups because of

13
154 Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155

the contribution these groups make to their quality of life predictors of teen sexting across Europe. Comput. Hum. Behav.
and to their routine. The study shows that almost everything 34, 157–164 (2014). https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.041
5. Baym, N.: Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Polity,
that respondents do relates, to some extent or another, to Cambridge (2010)
social contexts and to sharing with others. For example, a 6. Berndt, T.J.: Exploring the effects of friendship quality on social
student takes a picture of the blackboard in class, with the development. In: Bukowiski, W.M., Newcomb, A.F., Hartup,
teacher’s writings, then uploads it to the class group. We W.W. (eds.) The Company They Keep: Friendship in Childhood
and Adolescence, pp. 346–365. Cambridge University Press,
found dependence between four important factors: personal Cambridge (1996)
needs, social relationships, daily routines, and Smartphones. 7. Boyd, D.M.: It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked
Teens. Yale University Press, New Haven (2014)
8. Brettel, M., Reich, J.-C., Gavilanes, J.M., Flatten, T.C.: What
8.1 Limitations of the study drives advertising success on Facebook? An advertising-effec-
tiveness model measuring the effects on sales of “likes” and
This study shows that most respondents feel that the large other social-network stimuli. J. Advert. Res. 55(2), 162–175
(2015)
number of communities and groups makes their routine eas- 9. Buckingham, D.: Introducing identity. In: Buckingham, D. (ed.)
ier. Researchers [4, 5, 9, 15, 22, 30, 37, 52] have argued that Youth, Identity and Digital Media, pp. 1–24. MIT, Cambridge
in an environment with numerous communities, the task of (2008)
interpretation that focuses on the “me” in the community of 10. Buhrmester, D.: Intimacy of friendship, interpersonal compe-
tence, and adjustment during preadolescence and adolescence.
which “I” am a part, in the process of defining self-identity Child Dev. 61, 1101–1111 (1990)
and in relation to the communities of which the individual 11. Clark, L.: The parent app: Understanding families in the digital
makes part, is more complicated than at other times. But the age. Oxford University Press, New York (2013)
findings of the present study indicate that for most children, 12. Coleman, A.M.: Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford University
Press, Oxford Reference Online (2001)
adolescents, and young adults, the transition from commu- 13. Comstock, G.A., Scharrer, E.: Media and the American Child.
nity to community and from one group to another is easy and Academic, Amsterdam; Boston (2007)
natural, whether it is a community of soccer fans, a commu- 14. Desjarlais, M., Willoughby, T.: A longitudinal study of the
nity of students, a community of classmates, etc. They feel relation between adolescent boys and girls’ computer use with
friends and friendship quality: Support for the social compensa-
that multiple communities/groups make the situation easier tion or the rich-get-richer hypothesis? Comput. Hum. Behav.,
for them rather than more complicated. A follow-up study 26, 896–905 (2010)
that focuses on the issue of identity formation may succeed 15. Donath, J., Boyd, D.: Public displays of connection. BT Tech-
in shedding more light on the topic at hand. nol. J. 22(4), 71–82 (2004)
16. Duerager, A., Livingstone, S.: How Can Parents Support Chil-
dren’s Internet Safety? London School of Economics, EU Chil-
Funding No funding/grant for this study.
dren Online, London (2012)
17. Eisen, S., Lillard, A.S.: Young children’s thinking about touch-
Compliance with ethical standards screens versus other media in the US. J. Child. Media 11, 167–
179 (2016)
Conflict of interest The author declares that there is no competing in- 18. Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C.: The benefits of Face-
terest. book ‘‘friends:’’ social capital and college students’ use of
online social network sites. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun.
Informed consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual 12,1143–1168 (2007)
participants included in the study, and parental consent to children 19. Gatfield, L., Millwood-Hargrave, A.: Dramatic Licence—Fact or
under the age of 18. Fiction? Broadcasting Standards Commission, London (2003)
20. Goggin, G., Hjorth, L.: Routledge Companion to Mobile Media.
Ethical approval The Ethics Committee of the Achva Academic Col- Routledge, New York (2014)
lege approved the research and the research tools. 21. Hartup, W.W.: Friendships and their developmental significance.
In: McGurk, H. (ed.) Childhood Social Development: Contempo-
rary Perspectives, pp. 175–205. Routledge, London (1992)
22. Ho, H., Shin, W., Lwin, M.O.: Social networking site use and
materialistic values among youth the safeguarding role of the
References parent–child relationship and self-regulation. Commun. Res. Ref.
https​://doi.org/10.1177/00936​50216​68377​5 (2017)
1. Alexa Internet Inc.: Alexa top 500 global sites. http://www.alexa​ 23. Holbert, R.L., Stephenson, M.T.: The importance of indirect
.com/topsi​tes (2011). Accessed 26 Sep 11. effects in media effects research: testing for mediation in structural
2. Atwal, K., Millwood Hargrave, A., Sancho, J., Agyeman, L., equation modeling. J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 47, 556–572
Karet, N.: What Children Watch: Analysis of Children’s Program- (2003)
ming Provisions Between 1997–2001. BSC/ITC, London (2003) 24. Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Cody, R., HerrSte-
3. Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R.: The need to belong: desire for phenson, B., Tripp, L., et al.: Hanging out, messing around,
interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. geeking out: kids living and learning with new media. The MIT,
Psychol. Bull. 117, 497–529 (1995) Cambridge (2010)
4. Baumgartner, S.E., Sumter, S.R., Peter, J., Valkenburg, P.M., 25. Knight, J., Weedon, A.: Identity and social media. Convergence
Livingstone, S.: Does country context matter? Investigating the (2014). https​://doi.org/10.1177/13548​56514​53636​5

13
Universal Access in the Information Society (2020) 19:145–155 155

26. Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., 42. Miller, V.: New media, networking and phatic culture. Conver-
Crawford, A.: Internet paradox revisited. J. Soc. Issues 58, 49–74 gence 14, 387 (2008)
(2002) 43. Millwood-Hargrave, A.: Issues facing broadcast regulation.
27. Lansdown, G., Akullo, M., Carr, J., Hecht, M., Palmer, T.: Child Broadcasting Standards Authority, London (2007)
safety online: global challenges and strategies. United Nations 44. Millwood-Hargrave, A., Livingstone, S.: Harm and Offence in
Children’s Fund (UNICEF) December. (2011). https:​ //www.unice​ Media Content: A Review of the Empirical Literature. Intellect,
f-irc.org/publi​catio​ns/pdf/ict_eng.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2018 Bristol (2006)
28. Lim, S.S.: Through the tablet glass: transcendent parenting in an 45. Millwood-Hargrave, A., Livingstone, S.:. Harm and Offence in
era of mobile media and cloud computing. J. Child. Media 10(1), Media Content: A Review of the Evidence, 2nd edn. Intellect,
21–29 (2016) Bristol (2009). ISBN:9781841502380
29. Livingstone, S.: Evaluating the online risks for children in Europe. 46. Ofcom—Office of Communications: UK adults’ media literacy
Telos 73, 52–69 (2007) report. (2010). http://stakeh​ older​ s.ofcom.​ org.uk/binari​ es/resear​ ch/
30. Livingstone, S.: Taking risky opportunities in youthful content media​-liter​acy/adult​s-media​-liter​acy.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2018
creation: teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, 47. Ofcom—Office of Communications: Children and parents: media
privacy and self-expression. New Media Soc. 10, 393–411 (2008) use and attitudes report. (2016). https​://www.ofcom​.org.uk/resea​
31. Livingstone, S.: Children and the Internet: Great Expectations, rch-and-data/media​-liter​acy-resea​rch/child​ren/child​ren-paren​ts-
Challenging Realities. Polity, Cambridge (2009) nov16​. Accessed 16 Oct 2018
32. Livingstone, S.: Online risk, harm and vulnerability: reflections 48. Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Ross, C., Simmering, M.G., Arseneault, J.M.,
on the evidence base for child internet safety policy. ZER J. Com- Orr, R.R.: The influence of shyness on the use of Facebook in an
mun. Stud. 18, 13–28 (2013) undergraduate sample. CyberPsychol. Behav. 12, 337–340 (2009)
33. Livingstone, S.: From mass to social media? Advancing accounts 49. Sheldon, P.: The relationship between unwillingness to commu-
of social change. Soc. Media Soc. 29:2056305 (2015) nicate and students’ Facebook use. J. Media Psychol. 20, 67–75
34. Livingstone, S., Bober, M.: UK Children Go Online: Final report (2008)
of key project findings. London School of Economics and Political 50. Stevens, R., Gilliard-Matthews, S., Dunaev, J., Woods, M.K.,
Science, London (2005) Brawner, B.: The digital hood: social media use among youth
35. Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Görzig, A. (eds) Children, Risk and in disadvantaged neighborhoods. New Media Soc. 19, 950–967
Safety on the Internet: Research and Policy Challenges in Com- (2016)
parative Perspective. Marston Books, Bristol (2012) 51. Valkenburg, P.M., Peter J.: Social consequences of the Internet for
36. Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Vincent, J., Mascheroni, G., Ólafs- adolescents: a decade of research. Curr. Direct. Psychol. Sci. 18,
son, K.: Net Children Go Mobile: The UK Report. London School 1–5 (2009)
of Economics and Political Science, London (2014) 52. Walther, J.B., Van Der Heide, B., Kim, S., Westerman, D., Tong,
37. Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., Murru, M.F.: Social network- S.T.: The role of friends’ behavior on evaluations of individuals’
ing among European children: new findings on privacy, iden- Facebook profiles: are we known by the company we keep? Hum.
tity and connection. In: Wolton, Dominique (eds.) Identité(s) Commun. Res. 34, 28–49 (2008)
Numérique(s). Les Essentials d’Hermès. CNRS Editions, Paris 53. Zilka, C.G.: Empowering Parents in the Social Media Age—The
(2014) Three Element Way. Butan-Galim, Hebrew (2014)
38. Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., Staksrud, E.: Risky social network- 54. Zilka, C.G.: Reducing the digital divide among children who
ing practices among ‘under-age’ users: lessons for evidence-based received desktop or hybrid computers for the home. J. Inf. Tech-
policy. J. Comput. Med. Commun. 18(3), 303–320 (2013) nol. Educ. Res. 15, 233–251 (2016)
39. Madden, M., Lenhart, A., Cortesi, S., Gasser, U., Duggan, M., 55. Zilka, C.G.: Do online friendships contribute to the social devel-
Smith, A., Beaton, M.: Teens, Social Media, and Privacy. Internet opment of children and teenagers? The bright side of the picture.
& Technology (2014). http://www.pewin​terne​t.org/2013/05/21/ IJHSS 6(8), 102–112 (2016)
teens​-socia​l-media​-and-priva​cy/. Accessed 17 Oct 2014 56. Zilka, C.G.: Awareness of ICT capabilities, digital literacy, and
40. Mascheroni, G., Olafsson, K.: Net Children go Mobile: Risks and use of reflective processes in children who received their first
Opportunities, 2nd edn. Educatt, Milano (2014). http://www.netch​ home computer. J. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 9(1), 80–98 (2017)
ildre​ngomo​bile.eu/repor​ts/. Accessed 16 Oct 2018
41. Maslow, A.: A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev. SO,
370–396 (1943)

13