Changing Unsafe Behaviour on Social Network Sites. Collaborative Learning vs. Individual Reflection
- 3k Downloads
Recently, a lot of safety interventions have been developed about teenagers’ privacy and security on social network sites (SNSs). However, these interventions often do not have an impact on attitudes and behaviour. Possibly, the instructional principles that guided their development only lead to better knowledge-construction and are not adequate in changing reputation-related behaviour. Following the theory of planned behaviour and theories about peer pressure during adolescence, it was hypothesised that interventions emphasising collaborative learning are less effective in changing attitudes and behaviour than interventions emphasising individual reflection. A quasi-experimental intervention study using a pre-test post-test design was set up in 115 classes. It was found that both a course with collaborative learning and a course with individual reflection raised awareness about contact risks on SNSs. However, only a course with an emphasis on individual reflection had a consistent impact on attitudes and behaviour. Implications of these results are discussed.
KeywordsOnline risk Social network sites Secondary education Intervention study Collaborative learning Teenagers Prevention Safety Individual reflection
- Choo, K.-K. R. (2009). Online child grooming: A literature review on the misuse of social networking sites for grooming children for sexual offences. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.Google Scholar
- De Moor, S., Dock, M., Gallez, S., Lenaerts, S., Scholler, C., & Vleugels, C. (2008). Teens and ICT: Risks and opportunities. Belgium: TIRO. http://www.belspo.be/belspo/fedra/TA/synTA08_en.pdf. Accessed 6 July 2010.
- Duffy, T., & Cunningham, D. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170–198). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O’Brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., & Elias, M. J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58(6–7), 466–474. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gruber, J. (2001). Risky behavior among youths: An economic analysis. NBER. http://www.nber.org/books/grub01-1. Accessed 24 Sept 2012.
- Heirman, W., & Walrave, M. (2012). Predicting adolescent perpetration in cyberbullying: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Psicothema, 24(4), 614–620.Google Scholar
- Insafe. (2014). Educational resources for teachers. http://lreforschools.eun.org/web/guest/insafe. Accessed 28 Jan 2014.
- Livingstone, S. (2004b). What is media literacy? Intermedia, 32(3), 18–20.Google Scholar
- Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2009). EU kids online: Final report (EC Safer Internet Plus Programme Deliverable D6.5). London: EU Kids Online: LSE.Google Scholar
- Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Görzig, A., & Olafsson, K. (2011). Risks and safety on the internet: The perspective of European children. Full findings. London: LSE: EU Kids Online.Google Scholar
- Madden, M., & Smith, A. (2010). A reputation management and social media. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.Google Scholar
- Martens, H. (2010). Evaluating media literacy education: Concepts, theories and future directions. The Journal of Media Literacy Education, 2(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
- Marwick, A. E., Murgia-Diaz, D., & Palfrey, J. G. (2010). Youth, privacy and reputation (Literature review). Berkman Center Research Publication, 5, 10–29.Google Scholar
- Mcgivern, P., & Noret, N. (2011). Online social networking and E-safety: Analysis of risk-taking behaviors and negative online experiences among adolescents. British Conference of Undergraduate Research 2011 special issue. www.warwick.ac.uk/go/reinventionjournal/issues/BCUR2011specialissue/mcgivernnoret. Accessed 24 Sept 2012.
- Phillips, R., McNaught, C., & Kennedy, G. (2012). Evaluating e-learning: Guiding research and practice (Connecting with e-learning). New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
- Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt, P., & Runnel, P. (2012). Online opportunities. In S. Livingstone, L. Haddon, & A. Görzig (Eds.), Children, risk and safety on the internet: Research and policy challenges in comparative perspective. Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
- Safer Internet Programme. (2009). Assessment report on the status of online safety education in schools across Europe. http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/docs/forum_oct_2009/assessment_report.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2012.
- Steinke, J., Lapinski, M. K., Crocker, N., Zietsman-Thomas, A., Williams, Y., Evergreen, S. H., & Kuchibhotla, S. (2007). Assessing media influences on middle school–aged children’s perceptions of women in science using the draw-a-scientist test (DAST). Science Communication, 29(1), 35–64. doi: 10.1177/1075547007306508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vanderhoven, E., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2013). Exploring the usefulness of school education about risks on social network sites: A survey study. The Journal of Media Literacy Education, 5(1), 285–294.Google Scholar
- Vandoninck, S., d’ Haenens, L., & Segers, K. (2012). Coping and resilience: Children’s responses to online risks. In S. Livingstone, L. Haddon, & A. Görzig (Eds.), Children, risk and safety on the internet research and policy challenges in comparative perspective (pp. 205–218). Bristol/Chicago: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar