Advertisement

Towards a More Balanced Approach to Digital Families

  • Sakari TaipaleEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The book concludes with the claim that the modes and frequency of intra-family digital communication cannot be studied separately from the social functions that the different technologies have in extended families. In digital communication, when problems related to the use of new technology arise, a caring relationship emerges between a carer, attentive to the expressed care needs of the cared-for, and the latter, expected to provide some response in exchange for the help received. Finally, avenues for future research to are outlined, with the future of the digital family briefly considered.

Keywords

Caring relationship Digital family Digital technology Warm expert 

References

  1. Baldassar, L. (2008). Missing kin and longing to be together: Emotions and the construction of co-presence in transnational relationships. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 29(3), 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldassar, L. (2016). Mobilities and communication technologies: Transforming care in family life. Family life in an age of migration and mobility (pp. 19–42). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chib, A., Malik, S., Aricat, R. G., & Kadir, S. Z. (2014). Migrant mothering and mobile phones: Negotiations of transnational identity. Mobile Media & Communication, 2(1), 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Colombo, F., Aroldi, P., & Carlo, S. (2018). “I use it correctly!”: The use of ICTs among Italian grandmothers in a generational perspective. Human Technology, 14(3), 343–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fischer, B., & Tronto, J. (1991). Towards a feminist theory of care. In E. Abel & M. Nelson (Eds.), Circles of care: Work and identity in women’s lives (pp. 35–54). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  6. Kennedy, T., & Wellman, B. (2007). The networked household. Information, Communication & Society, 10(5), 645–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ling, R., & Yttri, B. (2002). Hyper-coordination via mobile phones in Norway. In K. Katz & M. Aakhus (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 139–169). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  8. Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2011). Mobile phone parenting: Reconfiguring relationships between Filipina migrant mothers and their left-behind children. New Media & Society, 13(3), 457–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2012). Migration and new media: Transnational families and polymedia. London & New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Neustaedter, C., Harrison, T., & Sellen, A. (Eds.) (2013). Connecting families: The impact of new communication technologies on domestic life. Dordrecht: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  11. Nie, N. H., & Erbring, L. (2002). Internet and society: A preliminary report. IT & Society, 1(1), 275–283.Google Scholar
  12. Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38(6), 771–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Park, N., & Lee, H. (2012). Social implications of smartphone use: Korean college students’ smartphone use and psychological well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(9), 491–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Peng, S., Silverstein, M., Suitor, J. J., Gilligan, M., Hwang, W., Nam, S., et al. (2018). Use of communication technology to maintain intergenerational contact: Toward an understanding of ‘digital solidarity’. In B. B. Neves & C. Casimiro (Eds.), Connecting families? Communication technologies, generations, and the life course (pp. 159–180). Bristol: Polity.Google Scholar
  15. Pham, B., & Lim, S. S. (2016). Empowering interactions, sustaining ties: Vietnamese migrant students’ communication with left-behind families and friends. In Lim, S. S. (Ed.), Mobile Communication and the Family (pp. 109–126). Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar
  16. Sinanan, J., & Hjorth, L. (2018). Careful families and care as ‘kinwork’: An intergenerational study of families and digital media use in Melbourne, Australia. In B. B. Neves & C. Casimiro (Eds.), Connecting families? Communication technologies, generations, and the life course (pp. 181–200). Bristol: Polity.Google Scholar
  17. Sourbati, M. (2015). Age(ism) in digital information provision: The case of online public services for older adults. In J. Zhou & G. Salvendy (Eds.), Human aspects of IT for the aged population (pp. 376–386). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tronto, J. (1994). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  20. Vilhelmson, B., Thulin, E., & Elldér, E. (2017). Where does time spent on the Internet come from? Tracing the influence of information and communications technology use on daily activities. Information, Communication & Society, 20(2), 250–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vriens, E., & van Ingen, E. (2018). Does the rise of the Internet bring erosion of strong ties? Analyses of social media use and changes in core discussion networks. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2432–2449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yoon, K. (2016). The cultural appropriation of smartphones in Korean Transational Families. In Lim, S. S. (Ed.), Mobile Communication and the Family (pp. 93–108). Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations