Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The social representation of telecommunications

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 11 March 2008

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. We used “telecommunications” as a general cue word because at the time it was the most comprehensive of all the means of communication that we wished to investigate. In that context we had decided to exclude the Internet because it was still so little known that we would not have had sufficient figures to be able to analyse the new meta-medium adequately. In another research project carried out on ICTs at a European level, of 6,609 respondents only 2.7% had access to Internet at home [1].

  2. This index is calculated according to the following formula:

    $$ \frac{{n_{{\text{c}}} }} {{{\sqrt {n_{{\text{1}}} {\text{ $ \times $ }}n_{{\text{2}}} } }}}, $$

    where n c = number of words common to the two dictionaries; n 1 = number of different words in the first dictionary, and n 2 = number of different words in the second dictionary. The index indicates values between 0 and 1; the higher the proportion of common words, the closer the index comes to 1.

References

  1. Fortunati L (ed) (1998a) Telecomunicando in Europa. Angeli, Milano

  2. Ling R, Yttri B, Anderson B, DiDuca D (2003) Mobile communication and social capital in Europe. In: Nyiri K (ed) Mobile democracy. Essays on society, self and politics. Passagen, Wien, pp 359–374

  3. Mante-Meijer E et al (2001) ICT uses in everyday life: checking it out with the people—ICT markets and users in Europe. Confidential EURESCOM P903 Project Report, EDIN0161–0903. http://www.eurescom.de/public/projects/P900-series/p903/default.asp (used with permission)

  4. Woolgar S (ed.) (2002) Virtual Society? Get real: the social science of electronic technologies. Oxford University Press, Oxford. But see also the website: http://www.virtualsociety.sbs.ox.ac.uk/reports.htm

  5. Pratt ML (1977) Toward a speech act theory of literary discourse. Indiana University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  6. Maldonado T (1998) Ancora la tecnica. Un “tour d’horizon”‘. In: Nacci M (ed) Oggetti d’uso quotidiano, Marsilio, Venezia, pp 197–228

  7. Moscovici S (1961) La psychanalyse, son image et son public. P.U.F, Paris

  8. Moscovici S (1981) On social representations. In: Forgas JP (ed) Social cognition. Academic, London, pp 181–224

    Google Scholar 

  9. Moscovici S (1984) The phenomenon of social representations. In: Farr R, Moscovici S (eds) Social representations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–69

    Google Scholar 

  10. Moscovici S (1961) La psychanalyse, son image et son public. P.U.F, Paris, p XIII

  11. Jodelet D (1989) Les représentations sociales. P.U.F., Paris

  12. Moscovici S (1961) La psychanalyse, son image et son public. P.U.F, Paris

  13. Jodelet D (1984) Représentations sociales: phénomènes, concepts et théorie. In: Moscovici S (ed) Psychologie sociale, PUF, Paris, pp 357–378

    Google Scholar 

  14. Rouquette ML (1996) Social representations and mass communication research. J Theory Soc Behav 26(2):221–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sensales G (1990) L’informatica nella stampa italiana. Le comunicazioni di massa nel processo psicosociale delle rappresentazioni. Angeli, Milano

  16. Fortunati L, Contarello A (2002) Internet–mobile convergence: via similarity or complementarity?. Trends Commun 9:81–98

    Google Scholar 

  17. Contarello A et alii (2003) Social representations of ICTs and the human body. A comparative study in five countries. In: Haddon L et al (eds) The good, the bad and the irrelevant: the user and the future of information and communication technologies. Media Lab UIAH, Helsinki, pp 56–62

  18. Rosch E (1977) Human categorization. In: Warren N (ed) Studies in cross-cultural psychology, vol 1. Academic, New York, pp 3–49

  19. Sklovskij VB (1970) Tetivà. O neschodstve schodnogo. Sovetsij Pisatel, Mosca

  20. De Rosa AS (1990) Per un approccio multi-metodo allo studio delle rappresentazioni sociali. Rassegna Psicol 7(3):101–152

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Le Boudec G (1984) Contribution à la méthodologie d’étude des représentations sociales. Cahiers Psychol Cogn 4–3:245–272

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bellelli G (1990) La tecnica delle associazioni libere nello studio delle rappresentazioni sociali. Aspetti cognitivi e linguistici. Rassegna Psicol 7(3):17–30

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rosenberg S, Russel J (1972) A method for investigating and representing a Person’s implicit theory of personality: theodore Dreiser’s view of people. J Pers Soc Psychol 22:372–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Doise W et al (1995) Rappresentazioni sociali e analisi dei dati. Il Mulino, Bologna

  25. Benzécri JP et al (1976) L’analyse des données. Dunod, Paris

  26. Ong WJ (1977) Interfaces of the Word. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fortunati L, Manganelli AM (1998) La comunicazione tecnologica: comportamenti, opinioni ed emozioni degli europei. In: Fortunati L (ed) Telecomunicando in Europa. Angeli, Milano, pp 125–194

  28. Fortunati L, Contarello A (2002) Internet–mobile convergence: via similarity or complementarity?. Trends Commun 9:81–98

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fortunati L (1998b) Revêtir des technologies. Réseaux 90:85–92

    Google Scholar 

  30. Katz JE, Aakhus M (eds) (2002) Perpetual contact: mobile communication, private talk, public performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  31. Fortunati L, Katz JE, Riccini R (eds) (2003) Mediating the human body: technology, communication and fashion. Erlbaum, Mahwah

  32. Fortunati L (2005) Der menschliche körper, Mode und Mobiltelefone. In: Höflich JR, Gebhardt J (eds) Mobile Kommunikation. Perspektiven und Forschungsfelder. Peter Lang Gmbh, Frankfurt, pp 223–248

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economy, Society and Geography University of Udine, Padova, Italy

    Leopoldina Fortunati

  2. Department of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Anna Maria Manganelli

Authors
  1. Leopoldina Fortunati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Maria Manganelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leopoldina Fortunati.

Additional information

The research has been designed and discussed in all its parts by both the authors. As the writing of the paper, the Introduction, the Structure of the field of Representation and the Conclusions were written by Leopoldina Fortunati; Method, Results, Similarities between Communicative Technologies, Field of representation were written by Anna Maria Manganelli.

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00779-008-0199-y

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fortunati, L., Manganelli, A.M. The social representation of telecommunications. Pers Ubiquit Comput 12, 421–431 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-006-0139-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-006-0139-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation