=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3090/paper35
|storemode=property
|title=Value Orientations in the Digital Era: Comparison of Adolescents and Parents
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3090/spaper35.pdf
|volume=Vol-3090
|authors=Galina Soldatova,Elena Rasskazova
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/ims2/SoldatovaR21
}}
==Value Orientations in the Digital Era: Comparison of Adolescents and Parents==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3090/spaper35.pdf
Value Orientations in the Digital Era: Comparison
of Adolescents and Parents
Galina Soldatovaa,b, Elena Rasskazovaa
a
Lomonosov Moscow State University, 11/9 Mokhovaya str., Moscow, 125009, Russia
b
School of Future Anthropology, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration,
84 Vernadsky Prospekt, Moscow, 119571, Russia
Abstract
The digital universe becomes a place where values and rules of communication are created,
shaped and redefined, especially in children and adolescents. Objective. To compare value
orientations of parents and adolescents and to reveal a possible role of user activity and digital
competence in their value orientations. Methods. 313 adolescents aged 14-17 years and 356
parents of adolescents aged 14-17 years from five Russian Federal Districts appraised their
user activity and excessive Internet use (based on EU Kids Online methodology), filled Mixed
Activity Scale, Brief Index of Digital Competence, Schwartz’s Short Portrait Values
Questionnaire and Ten-item Personality Inventory. Results. Self-transcendence and openness
to change values (benevolence, universalism, self-direction) dominate in adolescents but it is
not because these values are more significant for them than for their parents but because
conformity, tradition and security values are less important for them. Extraverts choose
conformity and tradition less often and hedonism, stimulation and achievement more often than
introverts. Higher level of agreeableness is related to higher benevolence and lower power
value. Openness to experience is related to denying conformity and tradition values and to the
importance of self-direction. Among the adolescents, user activity is not related to value
orientations. Higher digital competence is related to weaker disposition to conformity. Among
the parents, time spent online is related to power value, and combination of online and offline
activities to hedonism and achievement. Among all the respondents, self-direction value is
related to digital competence within the safety component. Conclusion. Data are discussed in
accordance to the psychological model of digital socialization.
Keywords 1
Values, digitalization, user activity, digital competence, generations, adolescents, parents
1. Introduction
Nowadays, the digital universe appears to be a place where values and rules of communication are
created, shaped and redefined, where new digital ‘cultural tools’ are mastered [1], where world and
one’s image is transformed [2]. For children and adolescents, the Internet appears to be a place where
digital socialization happens [3, 4]. And it is perhaps where they shape new values that differ from age
to age, depend on user activity experience, on what a person does online and other factors. Some authors
even suggest to describe a specific phenomenon of “digital childhood” as a specific historical type of
the childhood [5].
According to psychological model of digital socialization [1], digital aspects of social situation of
development are crucial characteristic of the development defining direction and content of child’s
development as well as social expectations and demands in the system of his/her relationships. Using
the term suggested in the extension of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems’ model [6], there is a
IMS 2021 - International Conference "Internet and Modern Society", June 24-26, 2021, St. Petersburg, Russia
EMAIL: soldatova.galina@gmail.com (A. 1); e.i.rasskazova@gmail.com (A. 2)
ORCID: 0000-0002-6690-7882 (A. 1)
© 2021 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
356 PART 2: Internet Psychology
techno-subsystem [7] that is becoming one of the most important ecological levels in the developmental
perspective and that includes interactions between child, technologies and others.
However, taking into account that values and value orientations are universal in the world, digital
universe raises a set of interesting questions: (1) Do values change with generations considering that
these generations are going more and more digital? (2) Are differences in values between generations
related to user activity and digital competence? Or maybe the differences are defined exclusively by
personality traits?
For the authors of one of the most popular concepts of generations [8, 9] who offered to divide
generations according to X, Y and Z classification, values and orientations act as one of criteria to
differentiate generations along with social, historical and cultural factors. It is natural to assume that,
by becoming a part of socialization of Z-generation children and adolescents, the digital world
influences the children’s value system and aspirations so that they might differ from and be unclear to
the generations Y and X. Although the strict differentiation of generations based on analyzing social
and cultural changes within one country is notional, the aim of comparing values of adolescents and
adults and also comparing them to digital competence and user activity is a relevant task for modern
studies on digital socialization of children and adolescents. The obvious difficulty for such comparisons
is impossibility to differ between the role of socialization (including digital socialization) that is specific
for generations and the role of age that is also important factor of values. However, such correlational
comparisons could provide hypotheses for further research of values in “digital era”.
The Schwartz model (see Fig. 1) provides a convenient methodology for such research that allows
to assume that, for modern adolescents, self-transcendence and self-direction values are first, and
conformity, tradition and security values recede into the background [10]. However, in our opinion,
present value orientations, expectations for the future, and a vision of the future might be different for
adolescents and youth. And their correlation is frequently left out by classical models. This especially
applies to the digital universe with its changeability and transitivity, and its unapparent perspectives for
further development.
Figure 1: Schwartz Model of Value Orientations
The aim of this study is to compare value orientations of parents and adolescents and also to reveal
a possible role of user activity and digital competence in what type of values they prefer.
IMS-2021. International Conference “Internet and Modern Society” 357
2. Methods and Procedure
2.1. Sample
A total of 669 participants took part in the study: 313 adolescents aged 14-17 years (129 boys
(41.2%) and 171 girls (54.6%) and 13 people did not state their gender), 356 parents of adolescents
aged 14-17 years (51 males (14.3%) and 276 females (77.5%) and 29 respondents did not state their
gender). Among the parents, 133 people (37.4) are parents of boys, and 192 people (53.9%) are parents
of girls, and 31 respondents (8.7%) did not state the child’s gender. The sample comprised respondents
from the following towns and cities in Northwestern, Volga, Central, Southern, Far Eastern Federal
Districts: Vologda (14.9%), Kirov (18.8%), Moscow (23.0%), Moscow Region (6.7%), Rostov-on-Don
(17.6%), Khabarovsk (18.8%). The parents’ age varied from 29 to 65 years (41.99±5.78 years). It should
be noted that although the majority of parents referred to Y generation, some of them should be
considered as X generation [8;9]. However, the aim of this study was to compare value orientations in
adolescents (Z generation) with adults (X and Y generation). Exclusion of parents from X generation
led to the same patterns of results. The sample of adolescents and parents was balanced in accordance
with the place of their residence and socioeconomic status of the family.
2.2. Methods
The following methods were used in the study:
1. The user activity was appraised in accordance with the methodology of EU Kids Online [11] and
Russian Kids Online [12] and included items on how much time children and adolescents spend
online during the week and over the weekend. The answers to the questions were evaluated
according to the scale from “Almost do not spend” to “12 hours and more” with an hour difference
in between the questions (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.82 for adolescents and 0.70 for parents).
2. Mixed activity as an activity that is combined with the Internet usage at daytime and nighttime
was measured by 11 items describing different activities. The participants were asked to appraise
how frequently they use the Internet during each of the activities using a 5-point Likert scale (from
“Never” to “Always”): “Immediately after awakening”, “While eating”, “During classes / at
work”, “During school breaks / during work breaks”, “While doing homework / while doing
housework”, “While communicating with friends”, “On the way (on the bus, subway or in the
car)”, “In public places (cafes, museums, shops, etc.)”, “In the bathroom”, “Just before bedtime”,
“When up at night” [13] (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83 for adolescents and 0.82 for parents).
3. Excessive Internet use was assessed in accordance with the methodology of EU Kids Online [9]
using 7 items describing disturbance in communication, habitual activities and other areas of life
due to activities on the Internet (Cronbach’s alpha of 0.78) and evaluating the answers by a 5-
point Likert scale (“I did not sleep or eat because of the Internet”, “I felt discomfort when I could
not use the Internet”, etc).
4. Brief Index of Digital Competence [14] consists of 32 items and designed to measure four
components of digital competence (knowledge, skills, responsibility (safety) and motivation) in
four areas (work with content, communication, technosphere, consumption). Index of digital
competence is measured using percentage of the maximum possible value – 100%.
5. Schwartz’s Short Portrait Values Questionnaire [15] consists of 21 items and measures 10 types
of values: power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence,
tradition, conformity, security.
6. Ten-item Personality Inventory [16] consists of 10 items that are consistent with Big Five traits
model and designed to evaluate distinctiveness of personal traits like neuroticism, extraversion,
agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience.
358 PART 2: Internet Psychology
2.3. Procedure
The respondents filled in paper questionnaires in the presence of a specially trained interviewer. The
staff of the Faculty of Psychology of the Lomonosov Moscow State University controlled and
supervised the interviewers’ work. Data collection was performed in autumn 2019.
2.4. Data processing
Data were processed in SPSS Statistics 23.0 using descriptive statistics, Student’s t-test (Cohen’s d
were reported as effect sizes), correlational analysis.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Value orientations of adolescents and parents
Core values of the older adolescents are related to self-transcendence and openness to change and to
which benevolence, universalism, self-direction are related, whereas values like tradition and
conformity are more likely to be denied. For the parents, security, benevolence and universalism are
the most important. They deny the importance of stimulation and power in their lives the most.
Adolescents 14-17 years old Parents
0,60
0,40
CENTERED SCORES
0,20
0,00
-0,20
-0,40
-0,60
-0,80
Figure 2: Value orientations of adolescents aged 14-17 years and parents (upon centering, the mean
score for the respondent in the whole method is deducted from the mean score on the scale)
The statistical comparison shows that (Fig. 2), comparing to the parents, for the adolescents, security,
conformity and tradition are less important, and self-direction, stimulation, hedonism and achievement
are more important. This result is intuitively comprehensible. As an adolescent, it is especially
important to enjoy your life and gain independence, achieve as much as possible, whereas, with age,
security and following established practices become more important than freedom and achievements.
In our opinion, the other result is interesting: the core values of the adolescents - benevolence and
universalism - are not higher but on the same level with the parents. In other words, this is not about
something new but about the fact that these values became a priority for the adolescents because
security, conformity and tradition are less important for them than for the adults.
From the digital socialization perspective [1;3;4], it could be hypothesized that in adolescents early
Internet-related experiences are related not to higher benevolence or universalism but to less emphasize
on conformity, security and tradition that is related to the opportunity to see different social
relationships.
IMS-2021. International Conference “Internet and Modern Society” 359
Table 1
Comparison of value orientations of adolescents aged 14-17 years and parents: Student’s t-test
Value orientations Adolescents aged Parents Student’s Cohen’s d
14-17 years t-test effect size
Standard Standard
Mean Mean
deviation deviation
Security 0.12 0.84 0.53 0.79 -6.43** -0.50
Conformity -0.70 1.11 -0.20 0.79 -6.61** -0.52
Tradition -0.48 0.99 0.13 0.81 -8.61** -0.68
Benevolence 0.38 0.76 0.42 0.72 -0.65 -0.05
Universalism 0.26 0.69 0.27 0.62 -0.21 -0.02
Self-direction 0.32 0.86 0.07 0.76 3.86** 0.30
Stimulation -0.08 0.94 -0.57 0.93 6.72** 0.53
Hedonism 0.16 0.92 -0.19 0.90 5.00** 0.39
Achievement 0.17 0.82 -0.19 0.82 5.63** 0.44
Power -0.29 0.90 -0.39 0.83 1.46 0.11
* - p<0.05, ** - p<0.01
No differences in value orientations were found between the boys and girls and also between the
parents of boys and the parents of girls (see Table 1). The male parents said about the importance of
power for them more often than the female parents (t=4.20, p<0.01, d=0.64). The older parents show a
little bit less disposition to hedonism value (r=-0.17, p<0.01) which can be explained by common age-
related changes. Comparing to the adults, for the adolescents, hedonism appears to be more important.
And for the younger parents, hedonism appears to be more important than for the older ones. Perhaps,
that is with age when people are more often willing to live, as the famous saying goes, “not for
satisfaction but for conscience”.
3.2. Preference of value orientations with different personality
characteristics: comparison of adolescents and parents
Differences in value orientations often raise a question whether we talk about differences in
personality characteristics between generations or about the fact that, in a new situation, the same
personality characteristics start to dictate other values and ways of their implementation.
Table 2
Relations of value orientations and personality characteristics among adolescents and parents
(correlations are shown in the form of adolescents/parents)
Value Emotional
Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Openness
orientations stability
Security -0.08/-0.05 -0.04/0.07 -0.03 / 0.23** -0.08/-0.10 -0.08/0.07
** ** * **
Conformity -0.28 /-0.32 -0.12 /-0.23 0.02 /-0.12* -0.01/-0.17** -0.26**/-0.29**
Tradition -0.30**/-0.28** 0.04 /0.05 -0.02 / -0.04 -0.02 /-0.11* -0.34**/-0.25**
** ** ** * *
Benevolence 0.16 /0.04 0.27 /0.22 0.13 /0.10 0.06/0.12 0.10 /0.03
Universalism 0.03/-0.04 0.09/0.17** 0.00 /0.05 0.05/-0.02 0.04 /0.00
** * ** **
Self-direction 0.10/0.23 0.03/0.12 0.02 /0.18 0.10/0.23 0.23**/0.32**
** * **
Stimulation 0.17 /0.11 0.11/0.02 -0.04 /-0.07 0.07/0.14 0.21**/0.10
** ** *
Hedonism 0.23 /0.19 0.08/0.01 -0.12 /-0.05 0.00/-0.02 0.14*/0.10
Achievement 0.14*/0.14** -0.12*/-0.12* 0.12* /-0.05 -0.09/-0.05 0.10/0.03
** **
Power -0.08/-0.04 -0.33 /-0.31 -0.06 /-0.18** -0.07/-0.04 -0.03/-0.12*
* - p<0.05, ** - p<0.01
360 PART 2: Internet Psychology
According to the results of the correlation analysis, both the adolescents and parents’ preference of
certain values correlates to similar personality characteristics. The extraverts choose conformity and
tradition more seldom and hedonism, stimulation and achievement more often. With a high level of
agreeableness, the benevolence value is important, and power value is not important. Openness to
experience is related to denying conformity and tradition values and to the importance of self-direction.
All these relations are clear and natural. But it is important that they are true for both the adolescents
and the parents. This result is in line with universality of value orientation [10] although the profile of
them could be different for adolescents and adults (Table 2).
3.3. Value orientations, user activity and digital competence
Among the adolescents, no time on the Internet, no disposition to excessive user activity are related
to any of value orientations (r<|0.12|). The disposition to combine different activities with online
activities is typical of the adolescents for whom hedonism is important (r=0.17, p<0.01). For the parents,
the time spent on the Internet is related to power value (r=0.22, p<0.01) and has a weak positive
correlation with hedonism (r=0.13, p<0.05) and a weak negative correlation with benevolence (r=-0.13,
p<0.05). Combining online and offline is more common for the parents with stronger disposition to
hedonism and achievement (r=0.13, p<0.05) and weaker disposition to universalism (r=-0.15, p<0.01).
Digital competence is related to weaker disposition to conformity, especially among the adolescents,
although the differences in values of correlation coefficients between the adolescents and parents do
not reach the acceptable level of significance. In relation to safety, digital competence is related to the
importance of self-direction. One could speculate that better skills for safety online are related to wider
opportunity to various online activities and as a result more opportunity to find and compare different
opinions. Importance of self-direction could provoke intention to realize it online safely and vice versa
better safety skills could allow to become more self-directed because of higher confidence. These
patterns seem to be closer related to general effects of informational society than to the age and
experience of digital socialization as a child [2].
Among the adolescents, the importance of stimulation is in general related to different components
of digital competence which is natural, given that the Internet offers maximum options for interesting
experience that, basically, reflects stimulation value (Table 3).
Table 3
Relations of values and digital competence among adolescents and parents
Index of Index of Index of Index of Index of
Digital Digital Digital Digital Digital
Value orientations
Competence Competence - Competence Competence Competence
- knowledge motivation - skills - safety – overall
*
Security 0.02/0.03 0.11/0.11 -0.02/-0.01 -0.05/-0.05 0.02/0.02
-0.23**/- -0.26**/-
Conformity -0.26**/-0.12* 0.04/0.04 -0.22**/-0.09
0.13* 0.12*
-0.13*/-
Tradition -0.12*/-0.09 0.02/0.06 -0.12*/-0.07 -0.14*/-0.08
0.12*
Benevolence 0.07/0.01 -0.02/0.10 0.03/0.03 0.03/0.03 0.04/0.06
Universalism -0.02/0.00 0.00/0.05 0.06/0.05 0.17**/0.05 0.08/0.05
0.20**
Self-direction 0.13**/0.11* -0.12*/0.01 0.13*/0.08 0.15*/0.17**
/0.20**
** * *
Stimulation 0.19 /-0.02 -0.01/-0.12 0.13 /0.05 0.16**/0.04 0.17**/-0.01
* **
Hedonism 0.06/0.11 -0.05/-0.14 0.02/0.07 0.05/0.15** 0.03/0.09
Achievement 0.06/-0.03 -0.02/-0.01 0.06/-0.06 -0.02/0.08 0.03/-0.08
Power -0.07/0.03 0.00/-0.08 -0.03/-0.05 -0.17**/ -0.10/-0.10
* - p<0.05, ** - p<0.01
IMS-2021. International Conference “Internet and Modern Society” 361
4. Сonclusion
The major limitation of the study is its correlational design that did not allow to distinguish between
effects of generation (especially social and ecological situation including techno-subsystem) and age.
Moreover, although most of parents in out sample were formally from generation Y, there were some
of them from generation X according to the classical typology [8;9]. While borders between generations
should be considered as flexible and exclusion of them did not affect patterns of results, this study
concentrates on general comparison of adolescents (“generation Z”) with adults. In general, some
results seem to be important for the further discussion of values changes in the digital era and their
relationship to personality, user activity, digital competence.
1. In the structure of value orientations of modern adolescents, self-transcendence and openness
to change values (benevolence, universalism, self-direction) dominate. But it is not because these values
are more significant for them than for their parents but because conformity, tradition and security values
are less important for them. Although in this study we could not differentiate effects of social situation
(generation) and age, results are in line with the hypothesis that early digital experience provoke more
flexibility as opposed to conformity and tradition [5]. In other words, we suggest that that digital
socialization do not lead to higher openness to new ideas and behaviors than in parents but to less rigid
point of view of different opportunities [1]. The other differences in value orientations between the
adolescents and parents could possibly reflect age distinctions: stimulation, hedonism and achievement
are more important for the adolescents than for the parents.
2. Personality characteristics of both the parents and the adolescents are equally related to the
preference of certain value orientations. In other words, it is not argued that the new generation is a
totally new kind of people who see values differently [10]. More likely they have their own personality
characteristics that distinguish them from the previous generations [8;9], and for this reason they hold
certain values in their lives. Thus, both among the parents and the adolescents, the extraverts choose
conformity and tradition less often and hedonism, stimulation and achievement more often. With a high
level of agreeableness, benevolence value is important, and power value is not important. Openness to
experience is related to denying conformity and tradition values and to the importance of self-direction.
3. Among the adolescents, user activity is not related to value orientations which overturns the
hypothesis on impoverishment of the value sphere of the adolescents who spend “too much time” on
the Internet. Those for whom hedonism is important more often combine the Internet with other
activities, and it makes sense: unpleasant activities can be combined with something pleasant without
losing any productivity. From the perspective of techno-subsystem [7], it could be hypothesized that in
adolescents not user activity but the content of this activity and its characteristics (e.g., combining online
and offline activities) is important for value orientation [1].
4. Among the parents, the relation of time spent online to power value, and combination of online
and offline activities to hedonism and achievement, in our opinion, is consistent with the model of
digital socialization [1]: for the adults, that is values that appear to be an “engine” of their user activity,
and that is not observed among the adolescents who do not need such “engine” for online activities. A
combination of online and offline activities allows you to fulfil more tasks easier (and get distracted by
pleasant online activities). And, for many adults, a need for power is easier to satisfy online than offline.
5. The correlation between digital competence and value orientations does not depend on group
(adolescents versus parents). Greater digital competence (but not user activity) is related to weaker
disposition to conformity. Probably, the reason is a better perspective and opportunity to compare
different opinions. Among all the respondents, self-direction value is related to digital competence
within the safety component. Probably, this correlation is bidirectional: the desire to be self-directed
requires that the adolescents and adults protect themselves from the dangers related to self-direction.
And the better you ensure safety, the better you understand the importance of self-direction.
6. Among the adolescents, the importance of stimulation is in general related to different
components of digital competence which is natural, given that the Internet offers maximum options for
interesting experience that, basically, reflects stimulation value [5;7].
362 PART 2: Internet Psychology
5. Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project # 18-18-00365.
6. References
[1] G.U. Soldatova, Digital socialization in the cultural-historical paradigm: a changing child in a
changing world, Social'naya psihologiya i obshchestvo 9 (2018) 71–80.
doi:10.17759/sps.2018090308.
[2] T.D. Martsinkovskaya, Psychological aspects of the technological society, Psihologicheskie
issledovaniya 62 (2018). URL http://psystudy.ru/index.php/num/2018v11n62/1654-
martsinkovskaya62.html
[3] J. Smith, B. Hewitt, and Z. Skrbiš, Digital socialization: young people's changing value
orientations towards internet use between adolescence and early adulthood, Information,
Communication & Society 18 (2015) 1022–1038. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1007074
[4] A. Stornaiuolo, Contexts of Digital Socialization: Studying Adolescents' Interactions on Social
Network Sites, Human Development 60 (2017) 233–238. doi:10.1159/000480341
[5] Danby S.J., Fleer M., Davidson C., Hatzigianni M. (eds.), Digital Childhoods: Technologies and
children’s everyday lives, Springer, 2018, Vol. 22. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-6484-5.
[6] Bronfenbrenner U. (ed.), Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human
development. In Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 2004.
[7] Johnson G., Puplampu K., A conceptual framework for understanding the effect of the Internet on
child development: The ecological techno-subsystem, Canadian Journal of Learning and
Technology 34 (2008) 19—28.
[8] N. Howe, W. Strauss, Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069, William
Morrow & Company, New York, NY, 1991.
[9] N. Howe, W. Strauss, Thirteenth Gen: Abort, Retry, Ignore, Fail, Vintage Books, New York, NY,
1993.
[10] S.H. Schwartz, An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values, Online Readings in
Psychology and Culture 2 (2012). doi:10.9707/2307-0919.1116.
[11] S. Livingstone, L. Haddon, A Görzig, and K. Ólafsson, Risks and safety on the Internet: The
perspective of European children. EU Kids Online, LSE: Full findings, London, England, 2011.
[12] G.U. Soldatova, E.I. Rasskazova, and T.A. Nestik, Digital generation of Russia: competence and
security, Smysl, Moscow, 2017. (In Russ.)
[13] G. Soldatova, E. Rasskazova, Digital socialization of Russian adolescents: Internet as constant
dimension of any activities, European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences 64 (2019)
693–701. doi:10.15405/epsbs.2019.07.90
[14] G.U. Soldatova, E.I. Rasskazova, Short and screening versions of the digital competence index:
verification and application possibilities, Nacional'nyj psihologicheskij zhurnal 31 (2018)47–56.
doi:10.11621/npj.2018.02057.
[15] European Social Survey, ESS ESS4-2008 documentation report (2008). URL:
https://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/round4/survey/ESS4_data_documentation_report_e0
5_5.pdf
[16] M.S. Egorova, O.V. Parshikova, Psychometric characteristics of the Big Five Short Portrait
Questionnaire (B5-10), Psihologicheskie issledovaniya 45 (2016). URL:
http://psystudy.ru/index.php/num/2018v11n62/1653-egorova62.html