Quality & Quantity

, Volume 51, Issue 6, pp 2555–2576 | Cite as

Gender digital divide in a patriarchal society: what can we learn from Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition?

  • Wun-Ji Jiang
  • Yir-Hueih LuhEmail author


Based on the self-reported usage time, this paper aims at analyzing the gender differences in computer and internet use at home. Using data from the 2012 Survey of Digital Divide in Taiwan, we apply a regression-based decomposition method to identify the underlying causes of observed usage differential between males and females. Conditioned on adoption, it is found that compared with their high-income counterparts, low-income females in Taiwan do not spend more time on internet surfing as a result of the high opportunity cost of leisure time. A further decomposition analysis suggests while the gender-specific factors are not the main causes of gender differences in computer and internet use, differences in internet experience and opportunity cost of leisure time between the two gender groups are root causes of observed gender usage differential. The present study adds to the literature by providing a framework that can be easily extended to understanding the root causes, such as that of gender digital divide, for patriarchal societies where female self-stereotyping is a pronounced problem.


Gender digital divide Patriarchal society Theory of time allocation Computer and internet use at home Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition 


  1. Aguiar, M., Hurst, E.: Measuring trends in leisure: the allocation of time over five decades. Q. J. Econ. 122, 969–1006 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, G.S.: A theory of the allocation of time. Econ. J. 75, 493–517 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biernat, M., Crandall, C., Young, L., Kobrynowicz, D., Halpin, S.: All that you can be: stereotyping of self and others in a military context. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 75, 301–317 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bimber, B.: Measuring the gender gap on the internet. Soc. Sci. Q. 81, 868–876 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. Blinder, A.: Wage discrimination: reduced forms and structural estimation. J. Hum. Resour. 8, 436–455 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cassidy, S., Eachus, P.: Developing the computer user self efficacy (CUSE) scale: investigating the relationship between computer self-efficacy, gender and experience with computers. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 26, 133–153 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheong, P.H.: Gender and perceived Internet efficacy: examining secondary digital divide issues in Singapore. Women Stud. Commun. 30, 205–228 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiu, C.Y., Hong, Y.Y., Lam, I.C.M., Fu, J.H.Y., Tong, J.Y.Y., Lee, V.S.L.: Stereotyping and self-presentation: effects of gender stereotype activation. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 1, 81–96 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cotton, J.: On the decomposition of wage differentials. Rev. Econ. Stat. 70, 236–243 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dickerson, M.D., Gentry, J.W.: Characteristics of adopters and non-adopters of home computers. J. Consum. Res. 10, 225–235 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Drouard, J.: Costs or gross benefits?—What mainly drives cross-sectional variance in internet adoption. Inf. Econ. Policy 23, 127–140 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duncan, G.M., Leigh, D.E.: Wage determination in the union and nonunion sectors: a sample selectivity approach. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 34, 24–34 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Durndell, A., Hagg, Z.: Computer self efficacy, computer anxiety, attitudes towards the Internet and reported experience with the Internet, by gender, in an East European sample. Comput. Hum. Behav. 18, 521–535 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feldman, L., Hornik, J.: The use of time: an integrated conceptual model. J. Consum. Res. 7, 407–419 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gardeazabal, J., Ugidos, A.: More on identification in detailed wage decompositions. Rev. Econ. Stat. 86, 1034–1036 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaudron, J.P., Vignoli, E.: Assessing computer anxiety with the interaction model of anxiety: development and validation of the computer anxiety trait subscale. Comput. Hum. Behav. 18, 315–325 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goldfarb, A., Prince, J.: Internet adoption and usage patterns are different: implications for the digital divide. Inf. Econ. Policy 20, 2–15 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hafkin, N.: Gender issues in ICT policy in developing countries: an overview. Paper presented at the United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women Expert Group Meeting on “Information and Communication Technologies and Their Impact On and Use as an Instrument for the Advancement and Empowerment of Women”, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Accessed 11–14 November 2002
  19. Hargittai, E., Hinnant, A.: Digital inequality: differences in young adults’ use of the internet. Commun. Res. 35, 602–621 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heckman, J.: The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection, and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Ann. Econ. Soc. Meas. 5, 475–592 (1976)Google Scholar
  21. Heckman, J.: Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47, 153–161 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Halpern, D.F.: Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities, 4th edn. Psychology Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  23. Hitt, L., Tambe, P.: Broadband adoption and content consumption. Inf. Econ. Policy 19, 362–378 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Horrace, W.C., Oaxaca, R.L.: Inter-industry wage differentials and the gender wage gap: an identification problem. Ind. Labor Relat. Rev. 54, 611–618 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson, L.A., Ervin, K.S., Gardner, P.D., Schmitt, N.: Gender and the Internet: women communicating and men searching. Sex Roles 44, 363–379 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jiang, W.-J.: Essays on computer use and gender inequality. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, National Taiwan University, in Chinese (2006)Google Scholar
  27. Jones, F.L.: On decomposing the wage gap: a critical comment on Blinder’s method. J. Hum. Resour. 18, 126–130 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kennedy, T., Wellman, B., Klement, K.: Gendering the digital divide. It Soc. 1, 72–96 (2003)Google Scholar
  29. Koch, S.C., Muller, S.M., Sieverding, M.: Women and computers. Effects of stereotype threat on attribution of failure. Comput. Educ. 51, 1795–1803 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Li, N., Kirkup, G.: Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: a study of China and the UK. Comput. Educ. 48, 301–317 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lorenzi-Cioldi, G.: Self-stereotyping and self-enhancement in gender groups. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 21, 403–417 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lun, J., Sinclair, S., Cogburn, C.: Cultural stereotypes and the self: a closer examination of implicit self-stereotyping. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31, 117–127 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lyons, S.: Timing and determinants of local residential broadband adoption: evidence from Ireland. Empir. Econ. 47, 1341–1363 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McFadden, D.: The measurement of urban travel demand. J. Public Econ. 3, 303–328 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McFadden, D.: Econometrics models of probabilistic choice. In: Manski, C., McFadden, D. (eds.) Structural Analysis of Discrete Data, pp. 198–272. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1981)Google Scholar
  36. Neumark, D.: Employers’ discriminatory behavior and the estimation of wage discrimination. J. Hum. Resour. 23, 279–295 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oaxaca, R.: Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets. Int. Econ. Rev. 14, 693–709 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oaxaca, R.L., Ransom, M.R.: Searching for the effect of unionism on the wages of union and nonunion workers. J. Labor Res. 9, 139–148 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oaxaca, R.L., Ransom, M.R.: On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials. J. Econom. 61, 5–21 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oaxaca, R.L., Ransom, M.R.: Identification in detailed wage decompositions. Rev. Econ. Stat. 81, 154–157 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Oswald, D.L., Lindstedt, K.: The content and function of gender self-stereotypes: an exploratory investigation. Sex Roles 54, 447–458 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Reimers, C.W.: Labor market discrimination against Hispanic and black men. Rev. Econ. Stat. 65, 570–579 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roycroft, T.R.: Empirical study of broadband adoption using data from the 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey. J. Regul. Econ. 43, 214–228 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sabzian, F., Gilakjani, A.P.: Teachers’ attitudes about computer technology training, professional development, integration, experience, anxiety, and literacy in English language teaching and learning. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 3, 67–75 (2013)Google Scholar
  45. Schumacher, P., Morahan-Martin, J.: Gender, internet and computer attitudes and experiences. Comput. Hum. Behav. 17, 95–110 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sherman, R.C., End, C., Kraan, E., Cole, A., Campbell, J., Birchmeier, Z., Klausner, J.: The Internet gender gap among college students: forgotten but not gone? CyberPsychol. Behav. 3, 885–894 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Steele, C.M.: A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. Am. Psychol. 52, 613–629 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Steele, C.M., Aronson, J.: Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 69, 797–811 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tai, C.-C., Lin, C.-C.: Taiwanese adolescents’ perceptions and attitudes regarding the internet: exploring gender differences. Adolescents 39, 725–734 (2004)Google Scholar
  50. Van Deursen, A.J.A.M., Van Dijk, J.A.G.M.: The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media Soc. 16, 507–526 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van Dijk, J.A.G.M.: Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics 34, 221–235 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Van Dijk, J.A.G.M: The evolution of the digital divide: the digital divide turns to inequality of skills and usage. In: Bus, J., Crompton, M., Hildebrandt, M., Metakides, G. (eds.), Digital Enlightenment Yearbook, pp. 57–75 (2012)Google Scholar
  53. Wilder, G., Mackie, D., Cooper, J.: Gender and computers: two computer-related attitudes. Sex Roles 13, 215–228 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yun, M.-S.: A simple solution to the identification problem in detailed wage decompositions. Econ. Inq. 43, 766–772 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Taiwan WTO and RTA CenterChung-Hua Institution for Economic ResearchTaipeiTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Agricultural EconomicsNational Taiwan UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations