An Agenda for ‘Mobility in Everyday Life’ for ICT
researchers
Draft 2
October 2000
Leslie Haddon
(E-mail: LesHaddon@aol.com)
Contents
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................
2. The Consumption
of ICT: User Research......................................................................
3. Mobility in
Everyday Life..............................................................................................
4. Defining
‘Mobility in Everyday Life’..............................................................................
5. Distinctions..................................................................................................................
5.1 Stages of
Mobility...................................................................................................
5.2 Potential
Mobility, Immobility and Hypermobility.....................................................
5.3 Differentiating
the Travel Experience........................................................................
5.4 Travel Time............................................................................................................
5.5 The Purposes of
Travel...........................................................................................
5.6 Public and
Private spaces........................................................................................
5.7 Factors Shaping
the Experience of Social Spaces....................................................
6. End Note.....................................................................................................................
7. References...................................................................................................................
7.1 English language......................................................................................................
7.2 French language....................................................................................................
7.3 Italian Language....................................................................................................
7.4 Norwegian
Language............................................................................................
7.5 US Research........................................................................................................
The following
paper provides a preliminary agenda for consideration by the Cost269 workgroup
currently looking at mobility and ICTs and acts as a public document for those
outside to see our work. It starts by
briefly reviewing the recent development of European research on the consumption
of ICTs as a prelude to making the case for ICTs researchers to consider
mobility in everyday life. The rest of
the paper aims to identify what that subject matter could include, given the
interests of ICT researchers, and draws attention to a range of distinctions
which we might want to make. The aim is
that this document should provoke further thought amongst the workgroup members
and provide a first step towards charting what relevant empirical research exists,
evaluating its adequacy and identifying absences. Comments - including further relevant references - are invited
from workgroup members, Cost269 members and any other interested parties.
One central tenant
of COST269, and of its predecessor COST248, has been the view that that the
degree to which users have been taken into account in much ICT design has been
relatively limited. That said,
companies differ in the extent to which and manner in which they have
considered users, and some have better track records than others. Moreover, this neglect is now being
recognised and addressed more generally within, especially large, ICT
companies. Nevertheless, empirical
research has noted that barriers to building in more user input into design and
development remain doing so (van Dusseldorp et al, 1998).
The various social
science sections and representatives within companies have tried with varying
degrees of success to establish a greater user-orientation (and hence their
interest in the two Cost programmes cited above). Indeed, some of these staff have a tradition of making certain
research available in the public domain as academic contributions to knowledge,
such as CNET at France Telecom (especially through the journal Reseaux)
and Telenor Research and Development (see, for example, their journal Telektronikk) That interest in gaining greater knowledge
of users is also reflected in some tentative shifts within EURESCOM, the
research body owned jointly by the European telecoms companies, which has
recently funded a number of different
user orientated research programmes - including P-903, which emerged directly
from COST248.
At the same time,
the last decade has seen some growth of interest in the study of the
consumption of ICTs within universities[1]. Reflecting this, European-wide networks have
emerged to bring together scholars in this field, such as EMTEL (European
Media, Technology and Everyday Life)
In recent years, this interest has led to both quantitative studies
(e.g. Fortunati, 1998, Livingstone, 1999) and a range of qualitative empirical
studies. While some, especially studies
for telecommunications companies, have looked at patterns of everyday life
beyond the home (e.g. Jouët, 1994; Jauréguiberry, 1994; De Gournay et al
1995/1998[2];
de Gourney, 1997), a number have looked at social processes surrounding ICTs
within the home, reflecting in part an interest in the framework provided by
the concept of domestication (Silverstone et al, 1992). These have included such themes as the
blurring of the boundaries between home and work (Mante-Meijer and van de Loo,
1998), the dynamics of different forms of household composition (Haddon, 1995), lifestyle (Klamer, 1998),
the influence of the spatial organisation of the home (Lohan, 1998), the
effects of the economic circumstances of households (Silverstone, 1996) and the
longer term careers of ICTs in the home
after they have been acquired (Haddon and Silverstone, 1994).
Some of the
European research has also focused on
particular social groups such as teleworkers (Haddon and Silverstone,
1993/1996), lone parents (Haddon and Silverstone, 1995 ), the young elderly
(Haddon and Silverstone, 1996) and dual income households (Frissen, 1997). Sometimes attention has been paid to
specific technologies, charting the integration of telephony into the domestic
sphere (Monjaret, 1997), home computers (Haddon, 1992; Skinner, 1994; Wheelock,
1992; Murdock et al, 1992) Minitel (Lie and Sørensen, 1996; Aune, M., 1992;
Berg, 1994a, 1994b), cable television (Silverstone and Haddon, 1996), Satellite
(Moores, 1993) and the Internet (Haddon, 1999; Le Fournier, 1999).
There are a number
of reasons why, at this juncture, it is timely to consider people’s mobility in
everyday life as a topic for investigation when considering the contest of ICT
use. As noted above, a fair proportion
of the studies referred to tended to focus on social process within the home. The home is clearly an important site for
the consumption of ICTs, if we consider the amount of time spent in the home,
the use of household as well as individual resources to actually acquire ICTs
and how the (sometimes intense) relationships within family life, involving
elements of both consensus and conflict, influence patterns of access to and
usage of ICTs.
But clearly the
home is not the only site in which we live our lives, nor the only site for the
consumption of ICTs, if we use consumption it is broadest sense to include not
just usage but also encounters with ICTs and the evolution of ICTs’
symbolism. Moreover, to understand some
phenomenon we really need to look outside the home to other sites where
meanings and practices are being shaped through people’s interaction in other
sites (for example, this was important for understanding the popularity of
interactive games, Haddon, 1992).
This requirement
to look beyond the home has become all the clearer in the light of the
emergence of new portable ICTs, the mobile phone being the most striking in
recent years. While some of the same
analytical frameworks such as the
‘domestication’ of ICTs can be used partially understand the consumption of
mobile ICTs, we also need to ask how they can be extended beyond the home
(Haddon, 1998) and how we can develop our methodologies, conceptual tools and
empirical insights to cover other spatial locations.
From the
perspective of those working in companies which develop ICTs, be that in a
technical or social science capacity, this emergence of mobile ICTs and services
has similarly led to an interest in consumption outside the home. Again, to date, the mobile phone has
received most attention and in fact much of the early empirical research on its
usage has, understandably, emerged from or been sponsored by the telecoms
companies themselves (de Gourney,1994/1996; de Gourney et al,1995/1998,
Jauréguiberry, 1994, 1996, 1997; Heurtin, 1998,
Fortunati, 1998; Ling, 1998, Ling et al, 1998). The move to mobile Internet access and the
prospect of accessing other forms of (textual) information and communication
has stimulated ICT companies to ask what users will actual want and find a use
for. We would argue that this requires
us to consider their everyday lives, one dimension of which is their mobility
in everyday life.
One body of
literature already exists which addresses some aspects of mobility: the writings
on travel behaviour. Part of
understanding mobility in everyday life, for those with an interest in the
implications for ICTs, would require some appreciation of why people travel
when they do and how they travel, i.e. in order to understand existing and
emerging trends and patterns. Here the
research of agencies such as transport planners, as well as academics with an
interest in spatial geography, can provide useful background information, as
well as giving insight into how travel patterns are shaped by and in turn shape
other spatial constraints in people’s lives.
This can all have a bearing upon why we might choose to use ICTs, for
different purposes in different circumstances, perhaps to replace the need for
some forms of travel but also to help us in that very process of travelling or
help us better to exploit that travelling time.
However, beyond
actual travel patterns, the sheer flow of human traffic, it may also be
pertinent to consider other travel-related dimensions because these might
provide motivations for using ICTs. For
example, asking about the subjective experience of travelling, how it is
evaluated, to what extent people have peace of mind or feel secure when
travelling, and how people plan their travel may also well be pertinent for ICT
use.
Finally, as
indicated in the introduction above, from the perspective of those interested
in ICTs, the topic of mobility in everyday life would involve more than travel
itself. It would involve understanding behaviour in social spaces other than
the home (e.g. the workplace in de Gourney 1997/1997; Cybercafes in Lee, 1999),
including moving around in public spaces (e.g. shopping, tourism).
If we are to
disentangle the different dimensions of mobility in everyday life, one first
distinction can be one of stages. These
would be preparation for mobility, actual mobility and the consequences of that
mobility. If we take the middle stage, actual mobility would be exemplified by
the act of travelling. Before that,
again if we take the example of travelling, ICTs and especially the Internet
have been used for some time to make travel arrangements or find out the
pertinent travel information[3]. Meanwhile, ethnographies, show how social
networks of people use basic telephony to plan their meetings (Manceron,
1998). Finally, the consequences of
that mobility, might, for example, include the effects of fatigue or stress (or being re-freshed through pleasurable
travel). Or we might consider how the time used up in travelling or the timing
of travelling, impinges upon our freedom to organise the rest of our life. In all these ways, travel might have
implications for how people feel, how they evaluate their lives or how they
(can) act - and hence can have a
bearing on the acquisition, meaning and use of ICTs.
Of course, this
scheme assumes that some mobility, in this case travelling, takes place. Other writers (Salomon et al, 1993) have
made further distinctions such as ‘potential action’ (the individual might like
to pursue an activity involving travel but is constrained in some way) and
‘freedom of action’ (the individual knows that the are free to perform an
activity, which may include travel, even if they choose not to take up this
option).
We might also want
to consider the experience of immobility, the factors limiting movement in
everyday life and its consequences, and the social consequences of what has
been called ‘hypermobility’, a term implying ‘too much’ mobility (Adams, 2000).
If we take the
case of travelling, we would need to further differentiate the travelling
experience. Different types of travel occur with different degrees of frequency
and duration. They occur with different degrees of regularity, more or less routinely or spontaneously . Both in their planning and execution travel
takes place with different degrees of difficulty. It may be motivated by different types of social obligations and
commitments. The extent to which it
occurs through an individual’s (perceived) ‘free choice’ varies. And travel entails different levels of
pleasure or stress . In other words, we
need to dis-aggregate the different forms of travel if we are to appreciate
their salience and meaning and hence, potentially, the different roles that
ICTs may have in relation to these different travel experiences.
To take these
distinctions just a little further, we might consider the different experiences
of time associated with different forms of mobility, in this case, with
different forms of travelling. Some
forms of time spent travelling may also count as personal time, time for
oneself (de Gourney, 1997/1997) while other time might mark or enable the
psychological transition between two spaces and maybe two roles (e.g. home vs.
work). The usability of that travel
time for other, additional purposes varies.
For example, it depends on the duration of time spent travelling,
whether that time is fragmented into many small periods of time (e.g. through
changing modes of transport) or whether it consists of a larger block of time;
whether for other reasons that time is ‘dead time’ that cannot easily be used
for something else.
Turning to particular
reasons for travelling, rather than the dimensions of the travel experience
outlined above, we might first consider how work-related travel needs to be
deconstructed into different elements: commuting (with its routines, regular
and often obligatory nature), the more varied and often flexible mobile work
(e.g. travelling to clients) or other occasional work-related trips, include
those involving periods away from home as well as from a workplace. Then we have ‘reproduction’ travel which
Vilhelmson (1999) defines as travel related to housework, medical care and other social services - which would include travelling to shops. We have, from an individual’s perspective,
travel related to other household members (e.g. driving children about to school, events, or
otherwise giving them lifts). There are the travel practices related to our
relations with social networks, including visiting friends and relatives. These might arise from both choice and
obligation, and entail different degrees of pleasure and of obligation. Then we might consider travelling because
of non-work (voluntary) commitments (e.g. to clubs, societies) as well as
travelling to a place of entertainment.
Lastly, we have the, with various degrees of frequency, travel for
holidays or for days or weekends away from home.
If we move on to
consider differences in the experience of being away from or out of the home,
one consideration is the nature of the different social spaces which people
occupy since their different qualities might have a bearing on the use of ICTs. Certainly we would have to consider how
different social spaces are to be evaluated in terms of notions of public and
private, albeit cautiously. We might
want to differentiate what are often perceived to be relatively public spaces
(pubs, bars, cinemas, shops) from semi-public (times and) spaces (private
members and social clubs, social events which selected people are invited to
attend) and from relatively private spaces (a friend’s or relative’s
home).
However, the
picture is more complex. If we think about the home, there are (or rather
people construct) relatively more public, communal spaces (such as living
rooms) and private ones (such as bedrooms).
Furthermore, there are arguments that the boundaries of public and
private blur as the home becomes more of a public space both through the entry
of work into the home (Mante-Meijer and van der Loo, 1998) and through allowing
more outsiders deeper into all parts of the home (Wellman, 1999). Or if we consider seemingly more public
spaces, we have private enclaves (tables) within public spaces such as
restaurants (Ling, 1998), the efforts
of people to create a sense of privacy when in public settings (e.g. on public
transport) and the process of blurring
boundaries when private affairs are conducted within the workplace (de Gourney
1997/1997).
However
complicated, all of this is relevant since the public-private construction of
social spaces has a bearing on people’s expectations of appropriate behaviour
in those spaces, including the use of ICTs.
Hence the strong reaction by those co-present against mobile phones in
various settings which has been frequently researched and well documented
(Ling, 1998; Haddon, 1998; Klamer et al, 2000). And hence the attempt to make and implement rules, with varying
degrees or formality or informality, about the use of ICTs in different social
spaces, or the attempts on the part of uses to restrain their use of the
technologies.
Finally, ICTs can
also be used as resources to personalise space in public settings, be that through
the wall of sound from the Walkman (de Gay et al, 1997) or through signalling
detachment through the use of a mobile phone (Cooper, 2000).
Over and above the
social nature of different spaces noted above, there are other factors shaping
the way in which people experience them.
For example, whether it is worthwhile to take some portable ICTs, such
as laptops, may well depend on the duration of the time spent somewhere (e.g. a
day visiting or based at a client’s premises vs. being based in a hotel when
away at meetings) Then there are the
motivations for being in certain social spaces, for instance, whether it is for
work purposes or a holiday. As with
travelling, there are broader questions of the degrees of freedom one has in
choosing to be in some spaces and degrees of pleasure in being there. Even a recurrent activity (e.g. shopping)
can be experienced differently on different occasions - e.g. as a necessary
chore vs. a pleasurable outing.
As noted in the
introduction, the intention is that these notes and observations might provide
a starting point for analysis of mobility in everyday life and its relevance
for our understanding of the consumption of ICTs. Further comments are invited.
Adams, J.(2000)
‘Hypermobility’, Prospect, March -
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/highlights/hypermobility/index.htlm
Berg, A. (1994a) Technological Flexibility: Bringing Gender into
Technology, in Cockburn, C. and Fürst Dilic, R.(eds) Bringing Technology
Home: Gender and Technology in a Changing Europe. Buckingham, Open
University Press.
Berg, A. (1994b) ‘The Domestication of Telematics in Everyday Life’. Paper presented at the COST 248 Workshop:
‘The European Telecom User’, April
13-14th, Lund, Sweden.
Cooper, G.(2000) The
Mutable Mobile: Social Theory in the Wireless World, paper presented at the
‘Wireless World’ workshop, University of Surrey, April 7th.
de Gay, P, Hall, S., Janes, L., Mackay, H. and Negus,
K. (1997), Doing Cultural Studies, The Story of the Sony Walkman, Sage, London.
de Gourney (1996) ‘Waiting for the Nomads: Mobile
Telephony and Social Change’, Reseaux: the French Journal of Communication,
Vol.4, no.2
de Gourney (1997) ‘“Its Personal”. Private
Communication Outside the Home’, Reseaux: the French Journal of
Communication, Vol.5, No.2.
de Gourney, C., Tarrius, A. and Missaoui, L. (1998)
‘The Structure of Communication Usage of Travelling Managers’, in Haddon, L.
(ed.) Communications on the Move: The Experience of Mobile Telephony in the
1990s, COST248 Report, Telia, Farsta.
Frissen, V. (1997) ICTs in the Rush Hour of Life:
Acceptance, Use and Meaning of ICTs in Busy Households. Paper presented to the ‘Beyond
Infrastructure’ Conference, University of Antwerp, September, 1997.
Fortunati, L.(1998) ‘The Ambiguous Image of the Mobile
Phone’, in Haddon, L. (ed.) Communications on the Move: The Experience of
Mobile Telephony in the 1990s, COST248 Report, Telia, Farsta.
Haddon, L. (1992)
‘Explaining ICT Consumption: The Case of
the Home Computer’, in Silverstone, R. and Hirsch, E. (eds.) Consuming
Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, Routledge, London
Haddon, L. and
Silverstone, R. (1994) ‘The Careers of
Information and Communication Technologies in the Home’, in Bjerg, K.
and Borreby, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the the International Working
Conference on Home Oriented Informatics, Telematics and Automation,
Copenhagen, June 27th-July 1st
Haddon, L.(1998) The
Experience of the Mobile Phone, Paper presented to the XIV World Congress
of Sociology, ‘Social Knowledge: Heritage, Challenges, Prospects’, Montreal,
July 26th-August 1st.
Haddon, L.(1999) European
Perceptions and Use of the Internet.
Paper for the conference ‘Usages and Services in Telecommunications’, Arcachon,
7-9 June.
Haddon, L. and Silverstone, R. (1993) Teleworking
in the 1990s: A View from the Home, SPRU/CICT Report Series, No. 10,
University of Sussex, August
Haddon, L. and Silverstone, R. (1995) Lone
Parents and their Information and Communication Technologies, SPRU/CICT
Report Series, No.12, University of Sussex, January
Haddon, L. and Silverstone, R. (1996) The
Young Elderly and their Information and Communication Technologies,
SPRU/CICT Report Series, University of Sussex.
Jouët, J.(1994) ‘Communication and Mediation’, Reseaux: The French
Journal of Communication, Spring, Vol.2, No.1.
Klamer, l.(1998)
‘Analysis of Residential Telephone Users in Denmark and their Consumption of
ICTs’, in The Future European Telecommunications User Home and Work Group Blurring
boundaries: When are Information and Communication Technologies Coming Home?
COST248 Report, Telia, Farsta.
Klamer, L., Haddon, L. and Ling, R. (2000) The
qualitative analysis of ICTs and mobility, time stress and social networking,
Report of EURESCOM P-903, Heidelberg.
Lee, S.(1999) ‘Private Uses in Public spaces: A Study
of an Internet Café’, New Media and Society, Vol.1, No.3.
Lie, M. and Sørensen, K.H. (eds.) (1996) Making Technology Our Own?:
Domesticating technology into Everyday Life, Oslo, Scandinavian University
Press.
Ling, R. (1998) ‘“One can talk about Common Manners!”
The Use of Mobile Telephones in Inappropriate Situations’, in Haddon, L. (ed.) Communications
on the Move: The Experience of Mobile Telephony in the 1990s, COST248
Report, Telia, Farsta.
Ling, R., Julsrud, T. and Kroug, E. (1998) ‘The
Goretex Principle: The Hytte and Mobile Telephones in Norway’, in Haddon, L.
(ed.) Communications on the Move: The Experience of Mobile Telephony in the
1990s, COST248 Report, Telia, Farsta.
Livingstone, S.(1999) Young People, New Media,
LSE, London.
Lohan, M.(1998) ‘No Parents No Kids Allowed: Telecoms
in the Individualist household’, in The Future European Telecommunications User
Home and Work Group Blurring boundaries: When are Information and
Communication Technologies Coming Home? COST248 Report, Telia, Farsta.
Manceron, V. (1998) ‘Get Connected! Social Uses of the Telephone and Modes of
Interaction in a Peer Group of young Parisians’, in The Future European
Telecommunications User Home and Work Group’ Blurring boundaries: When are
Information and Communication Technologies Coming Home? COST248 Report,
Telia, Farsta.
Mante-Meijer, E. and van de Loo, H. (1998) ‘Blurring
of the Life Spheres: Flexibility and Teleworking’, in The Future European
Telecommunications User Home and Work Group Blurring boundaries: When are
Information and Communication Technologies Coming Home? COST248 Report,
Telia, Farsta.
Moores, S.(1993) Interpreting Audiences: The
Ethnography of Media Consumption, Sage, London
Murdock, G., Hartmann, P. and Gray, P.(1992)
‘Contextualising Home computers: Resources and Practices’, in Silverstone, R.
and Hirsch, E.(eds.) Consuming Technologies, Routledge, London.
Salomon, I., Bovy,
P. and Orfeuil, J. (eds) (1993) A Billion Trips a Day: Tradition and
Transition in European Travel Patterns, Kluwer Acadmic Press, Dordrecht.
Silverstone, R.
(1996) ‘Future Imperfect: Information and Communication Technologies in
Everyday Life’, in Dutton, W.(ed.) Information and Communication
Technologies: Visions and Realities, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Silverstone, R., Hirsch, E. and Morley, D. (1992)
'Information and Communication Technologies and the Moral Economy of the
Household', in Silverstone, R. and Hirsch, E.(eds.) Consuming Technologies,
Routledge, London.
Silverstone, R.
and Haddon, L.(1996): Television, Cable and AB Households: A Report for
Telewest, August, University of Sussex, Falmer.
Skinner, D. (1994) ‘Computerised Homes: Visions and Realities’, in
Bjerg, K. and Borreby, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Working
Conference on Home Orientated Informatics, Telematics and Automation,
Copenhagen, June 27th-July 1st
van Dusseldorp, M.
Haddon, L. and Paul, G. (1998) Design For All and ICT Business Practice. A Report for TIDE.
Vilhelmson, B.
(1999) ‘Daily Travel: Trends, Limits and Susceptibility to Influence’, in
Ludgren, L.(ed) Changing Environmental Behaviour, Swedish Council for
Building Research, Stockholm.
Wellman, B. (1999) Networks in the global Village:
Life in Contemporary Communities, Westview Press, Oxford.
Wheelock, J. (1992) ‘Personal Computers, Gender and an
Institutional Model of the Household’ in Silverstone, R. and Hirsch, E.(eds.) Consuming
Technologies, Routledge, London.
de Gourney, C.(1994) ‘En attendant les Nomades:
Téléphonie Mobile et Modes de Vie’, Reseaux, No.65.
de Gournay, C., Tarrius, A et Missaoui, L. (1995) Structures
d’usages des communications chez les entrepreneurs circulants, Université
de Toulouse-Le Mirail / CNET, RP/PAA/TSA/UST/4446, Août.
de Gourney, C.(1997) ‘C’est personnel…La Communication
Priveé hors de ses Murs’, Reseaux, Mars-Juin, No.82/83.
Haddon, L. and
Silverstone, R. (1996) ‘Le Télétravail et l’Évolution des Relations entre le
Domicile et le Travail’, Reseaux, No.79, September-October.
Heurtin, J-P (1998) ‘La Téléphonie
Mobile, une Communication Itinérante ou Individuelle ? Premiers Éléments
d’une Analyse des Usages en France’, Réseaux, n°90.
Jauréguiberry, F. (1994) Une Expérience d’Ubiquité Médiatique:
Usages du Bi-bop à Paris et Strasbourg, CNET PAA/TSA/UST/4135, Décembre.
Jauréguiberry, F. (1996),
“De l’usage des téléphones portatifs comme expérience du dédoublement et de
l’accélération du temps ”, Technologie de l’information et Société,
8(2), pp. 169-187.
Jauréguiberry, F. (1997)
“ L’usage du téléphone portatif comme expérience sociale ”, Réseaux,
n°82-83, pp. 149-164.
Jauréguiberry, F. (1998)
“ Lieux public, téléphone mobile et civilité ”, Réseaux, n°90,
pp. 71-83.
Le Fournier,
V.(1998) De l’Acte d’Abonnement a l’Appropriation d’Internet, La Lente
Construction des Pratiques de Internautes,. Paper for the conference ‘Usages
and Services in Telecommunications’, Arcachon, 7-9 June
Monjaret, A.(1997) ‘Ethnographie des Pratiques
Téléphoniques de “Cardes” Parisiens ou un Univers de Relations Paradoxicales’, Reseaux,
Mars-Juin, No.82/83.
Fortunati, L.
(ed.) (1998) Telecomunicando in Europa, Franco Angeli, Milano,.
Haddon, L.(1998).
Il Controllo della Comunicazione.
Imposizione di limiti all’uso del telefono, in Fortunati, L (ed.) (1998)
Telecomunicando in Europa, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Aune, M. (1992) Datamaskina I hverdagslivet. En studie av brukeres domestisering av en ny
teknologi, hovedoppgave, University of Trondheim, Trondheim.
Dutton, W., Rogers
E. and Jun, S.(1987a) ‘Diffusion and Impacts of Information Technology in
Households’, Oxford Surveys in Information Technology, Vol.4
Dutton, W., Rogers
E. and Jun, S.(1987b) ‘The Diffusion and Social Impacts of Personal Computers’,
Communications Research, Vol.14, No.2.
Dutton, W., Sweet,
P. and Rogers E. (1989) ‘Socio-Economic Status and Early Diffusion of Personal
Computing in the United Sates’ Social Science Computer Review, Vol.?.
Rogers, E,(1985)
‘The Diffusion of Home Computers among Households in Silicon Valley’, Marriage
and Family Review, Vol.8.
Steinfield, C.,
Dutton, W. and Kovaric, P.(1989), ‘A Framework and Agenda for Research on
Computing in the Home’, in Salvaggio, J. and Bryant, J.(eds) Media Use in
the information Age: Emerging patterns of Adoption and Computer Use,
Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Hove.
[1] This review focuses mainly on European research, but there had been prior research in the US - for example, Rogers (1985) Dutton et al, 1987a, 1997b, Dutton et al 1989, Steinfield et al (1989). The review also omits the vast literature on more traditional media such as television, although research on some ‘newer’ adjuncts to these media, such as cable and satellite, is mentioned
[2] When two dates are give separated by a ‘/’ this indicates that versions exist and are referenced below in different languages.
[3] In fact, in the field of public transport, ICTs are increasingly finding a role in this stage, for example, with touch screens showing timetables, fares and routes