Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Taking Risks on the World Wide Web: The Impact of Families and Societies on Adolescents’ Risky Online Behavior

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Minding Minors Wandering the Web: Regulating Online Child Safety

Part of the book series: Information Technology and Law Series ((ITLS,volume 24))

Abstract

Children’s engagement in risky online behavior—such as providing personal information or agreeing to meet with a stranger—is an important predictor of whether they will encounter harmful content on the World Wide Web or be confronted with situations such as sexual harassment and privacy violations. However, and in line with research on risk taking in general, most children are not heavily engaged in risky online activities. Nevertheless, the potential consequences of adolescents’ risky online behavior are a major concern among parents and policymakers. This chapter explores the effect of contextual factors on adolescents’ engagement in risky online behavior from a cross-national and comparative perspective. To do so, it uses EU Kids Online survey data and employs a hierarchical multilevel design. The general research question underlying the study is twofold: (1) Do differences in adolescents’ risky online behavior stem from differences in family characteristics, parental Internet mediation, and the prevalence of Internet use in a country? (2) Is the relation between parental mediation and children’s risky online behavior dependent on how widespread Internet use is in a country? In today’s globalized societies, Internet usage plays an increasingly important role within the home and in society as a whole. Answers to these questions will therefore be of great interest to parents, educators, and policymakers.

Natascha Notten is Assistant Professor at Radboud University Nijmegen, Department of Sociology. A different and Dutch version of this study was published as: N. Notten, Risicogedrag en het wereldwijde web. De invloed van gezin en samenleving op het online risicogedrag van adolescenten vanuit een Europees perspectief. Mens & Maatschappij, 88(4):350–374.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See e.g., Livingstone et al. 2011b.

  2. 2.

    Hasebrink et al. 2008; Lobe et al. 2011.

  3. 3.

    Livingstone et al. 2011b.

  4. 4.

    Livingstone and Helsper 2010; Notten et al. 2009.

  5. 5.

    Livingstone and Helsper 2008; Lee 2012; Notten and Kraaykamp 2009b.

  6. 6.

    DiMaggio et al. 2004; Hargittai 2010; Notten et al. 2009.

  7. 7.

    Hasebrink et al. 2008; Lobe et al. 2011.

  8. 8.

    Notten et al. 2013; Valkenburg 2004.

  9. 9.

    Livingstone et al. 2011b; Valkenburg and Peter 2011.

  10. 10.

    Lenhart et al. 2010.

  11. 11.

    Valkenburg and Peter 2011.

  12. 12.

    Rockman 2002; Deursen et al. 2011.

  13. 13.

    Görzig and Ólafsson 2013; Lobe et al. 2011; Peter and Valkenburg 2006.

  14. 14.

    See e.g., Fogel and Nehmad 2009 for an exception.

  15. 15.

    Bandura 1977; Bronfenbrenner 1979.

  16. 16.

    Hoeve et al. 2009; Patterson et al. 1990; Notten and Kraaykamp 2009b.

  17. 17.

    D’Haenens 2001; Livingstone and Helsper 2010; Notten et al. 2009.

  18. 18.

    Bourdieu 1984.

  19. 19.

    Clark et al. 2005; Pasquier 2001; Paus-Hasebrink et al. 2013.

  20. 20.

    Livingstone and Helsper 2010; Notten et al. 2009.

  21. 21.

    Brown et al. 1990; Sayer et al. 2004.

  22. 22.

    McLanahan and Sandefur 1994; Dornbusch et al. 1985.

  23. 23.

    Notten et al. 2009.

  24. 24.

    Notten and Kraaykamp 2009a; Warren 2005.

  25. 25.

    Baumrind 1991; Steinberg et al. 1994; Patterson et al. 1990; Hoeve et al. 2009.

  26. 26.

    Valkenburg et al. 1999; Livingstone and Helsper 2008; Nikken and Jansz 2006; Sonck et al. 2013.

  27. 27.

    See e.g., Clark 2011.

  28. 28.

    Lobe et al. 2011.

  29. 29.

    Notten et al. 2013.

  30. 30.

    See e.g., De Souza and Dick 2009.

  31. 31.

    E.g., Steinberg et al. 1994; Leung and Lee 2011.

  32. 32.

    Lobe et al. 2011; Livingstone and Helsper 2010.

  33. 33.

    Livingstone and Helsper 2008, Lee 2012; Mitchell et al. 2003.

  34. 34.

    Lobe et al. 2011; Notten et al. 2009.

  35. 35.

    Kirwil 2009; Notten and Kraaykamp 2009b.

  36. 36.

    See e.g., Hasebrink et al. 2008; Lobe et al. 2011.

  37. 37.

    Livingstone et al. 2011a, b.

  38. 38.

    Lobe et al. 2011.

  39. 39.

    Livingstone and Helsper 2010.

  40. 40.

    Paus-Hasebrink et al. 2013; Lobe et al. 2011.

  41. 41.

    Lobe et al. 2011.

  42. 42.

    Countries included in the EU Kids Online survey: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and the UK.

  43. 43.

    This article draws on the work of the EU Kids Online network, funded by the European Commission (DG Information Society) Safer Internet Programme (project code SIP-KEP-321803). See www.eukidsonline.net.

  44. 44.

    See Livingstone et al. 2011a.

  45. 45.

    A factor analysis (oblimin rotation) confirmed the five parental Internet mediation indicators (together explaining 52 % of the variance) and showed that two items loaded on more than one dimension: “Talk to the child about what he/she does on the internet” and “Do you make use of software to prevent spam or junk mail or viruses?” These items were therefore excluded.

  46. 46.

    Livingstone and Helsper 2010.

  47. 47.

    Notten and Kraaykamp 2009a; Lee 2012.

  48. 48.

    Notten et al. 2009; Peter and Valkenburg 2006.

  49. 49.

    Paus-Hasebrink et al. 2013; Notten and Kraaykamp 2009a; Sonck et al. 2013.

  50. 50.

    Eurostat 2012.

  51. 51.

    Lobe et al. 2011; Notten et al. 2009.

  52. 52.

    UNESCO 2012.

  53. 53.

    See e.g., Lobe et al. 2011; Notten et al. 2009.

  54. 54.

    Although the variable ‘risky online behavior’ is skewed, a robustness check showed that logistic modeling resulted in the same substantive findings.

  55. 55.

    Snijders and Bosker 1999.

  56. 56.

    See e.g., Kalmus et al. 2013.

  57. 57.

    Due to collinearity and non-convergence of the model, it was not possible to include all cross-level interactions simultaneously.

References

  • Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory. General Learning Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumrind D (1991) The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. J Early Adolesc 11:56–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: a social critique of the judgement in taste. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner U (1979) The ecology of human development. Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JD, Childers KW, Bauman KE, Koch GG (1990) The influence of new media and family structure on young adolescents’ television and radio use. Commun Res 17:65–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark LS (2011) Parental mediation theory for the digital age. Commun Theory 21:323–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark LS, Demont-Heinrich C, Webber S (2005) Parents, ICTs, and children’s prospects for success: interviews along the digital ‘access rainbow’. Crit Stud Media Commun 22:409–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Haenens L (2001) Old and new media: access and ownership in the home. In: Livingstone S, Bovill M (eds) Children and their changing media environment: a European comparative study. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 53–84

    Google Scholar 

  • De Souza Z, Dick GN (2009) Disclosure of information by children in social networking—not a case of ‘you show me yours and I’ll show you mine’. Int J Inf Manage 29:255–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio P, Hargittai E, Celeste C, Shafer S (2004) Digital inequality: from unequal access to differentiated use. In: Neckerman K (ed) Social inequality. Rusell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 355–400

    Google Scholar 

  • Dornbusch SM, Carlsmith JM, Bushwall SJ, Ritter PL, Leiderman H, Hastorf AH, Gross RT (1985) Single parents, extended households, and the control of adolescents. Child Dev 56:326–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat (2012) Information retrieved in July 2012. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=isoc_ci_ifp_iuandlang=en

  • Fogel J, Nehmad E (2009) Internet social network communities: risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Comput Hum Behav 25:153–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Görzig A, Ólafsson K (2013) What makes a bully a cyberbully? Unraveling the characteristics of cyberbullies across 25 European countries. J Child Media 7:9–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargittai E (2010) Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the ‘net generation’. Sociol Inq 80:92–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasebrink U, Livingstone S, Haddon L, Ólafsson K (eds) (2008) Comparing children’s online opportunities and risks across Europe: cross-national comparisons for EU kids online, 2nd edn. LSE, EU kids online, London. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/24368/

  • Hoeve M, Semon Dubas J, Eichelsheim VI, Van der Laan PH, Smeenk W, Gerris JRM (2009) The Relationship between parenting and delinquency: a meta-analysis. J Abnorm Child Psychol 37:749–775

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalmus V, Blinka L, Ólafsson K (2013) Does it matter what mama says: evaluating the role of parental mediation in European adolescents’ excessive internet use. Child Soc. doi:10.1111/chso.12020

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirwil L (2009) Parental mediation of children’s internet use in different European countries. J Child Media 3:394–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee SJ (2012) Parental restrictive mediation of children’s internet use: effective for what and for whom? New media & society. http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/07/12/1461444812452412

  • Lenhart A, Purcell K, Smith A, Zickuhr K (2010) Social media & mobile internet use among teens and young adults. Pew Interet & American Life Project

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung L, Lee PSN (2011) The influence of information literacy, internet addiction and parenting styles on internet risks. New Media Soc 14:117–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone S, Helsper E (2008) Parental mediation of children’s internet use. J Broadcast Electron Media 52:581–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone S, Helsper E (2010) Balancing opportunities and risks in teenagers’ use of the internet: the role of online skills and self-efficacy. New Media Soc 12:309–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone S, Haddon L, Görzig A, Ólafsson K (2011a) Technical report and user guide: the 2010 EU kids online survey. LSE, EU kids online, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone S, Haddon L, Görzig A, Ólafsson K (2011b) Risks and safety on the internet: the perspective of European children. Full findings. LSE, EU kids online. London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobe B, Livingstone S, Ólafsson K, Vodeb H (2011) Cross-national comparison of risks and safety on the internet: initial analysis from the EU kids online survey of European children, EU kids online, Deliverable D6. EU Kids Online Network, London

    Google Scholar 

  • McLanahan S, Sandefur G (1994) Growing up with a single parent. What hurts, what helps. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell K, Finkelhor D, Wolak J (2003) The exposure of youth to unwanted sexual material on the internet. A national survey of risk, impact and prevention. Youth Soc 34:330–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikken P, Jansz J (2006) Parental mediation of children’s videogame playing: a comparison of the reports by parents and children. Learn Media Technol 31:181–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notten N, Kraaykamp G (2009a) Parents and the media. A study of social differentiation in parental media socialization. Poetics 37:185–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notten N, Kraaykamp G (2009b) Home media and science performance: a cross-national study. Educ Res Eval 15:367–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notten N, Peter J, Kraaykamp G, Valkenburg PM (2009) Research note: digital divide across borders—a cross-national study of adolescents’ use of digital technologies. Eur Sociol Rev 25:551–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notten N, Kraaykamp G, Tolsma J (2013) Parents, television and children’s weight status. J Child Media 7(2):235–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasquier D (2001) Media at home: domestic interactions and regulation. In: Livingstone S, Bovill M (eds) Children and their changing media environment: a European comparative study. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 161–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson GR, Debaryshe B, Ramsey E (1990) A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. Am Psychol 44:329–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paus-Hasebrink I, Bauwens J, Dürager AE, Ponte C (2013) Exploring types of parent-child relationship and internet use across Europe. J Child Media 7:114–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peter J, Valkenburg P (2006) Adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit material on the internet. Commun Res 33:178–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockman IF (2002) Strengthening connections between information literacy, general education, and assessment efforts. Library Trends 51:185–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayer LC, Bianchi SM, Robinson JP (2004) Are parents investing less in children? Trends in mothers’ and fathers’ time with children. Am J Sociol 110:1–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snijders TAB, Bosker RJ (1999) Multilevel analysis. An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Sage Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonck N, Nikken P, De Haan J (2013) Determinants of internet mediation: a comparison of the reports by Dutch parents and children. J Child Media 7:96–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg L, Lamborn SD, Darling N, Mounts NS, Dornbusch SM (1994) Over-time changes in the adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Dev 65:754–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2012) Information retrieved July 2012 via http://stats.uis.unesco.org. See also http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2010_EN_Tables_reprint.pdf

  • Valkenburg PM (2004) Children’s responses to the screen. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Valkenburg PM, Peter J (2011) Online communication among adolescents: an integrated model of its attraction, opportunities, and risks. J Adolesc Health 48:121–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valkenburg PM, Krcmar M, Peeters AL, Marseille NM (1999) Developing a scale to assess three styles of television mediation: ‘Instructive mediation’, ‘restrictive mediation’, and ‘social coviewing’. J Broadcast Electron Media 43:53–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Deursen A, Van Dijk JA, Peeters O (2011) Rethinking internet skills. The contribution of gender, age, education, internet experience, and hours online to medium- and content-related internet skills. Poetics 39:125–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren R (2005) Parental mediation of children’s television viewing in low-income families. J Commun 55:847–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Natascha Notten

Authors
  1. Natascha Notten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natascha Notten .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. eLaw – Center for law in the information society, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Simone van der Hof

  2. eLaw – Center for law in the information, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Bibi van den Berg

  3. Faculty of Law eLaw – Centre for Law in the Information, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Bart Schermer

Appendix A

Appendix A

Table A.1 Country-level characteristics
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 © T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Notten, N. (2014). Taking Risks on the World Wide Web: The Impact of Families and Societies on Adolescents’ Risky Online Behavior. In: van der Hof, S., van den Berg, B., Schermer, B. (eds) Minding Minors Wandering the Web: Regulating Online Child Safety. Information Technology and Law Series, vol 24. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-005-3_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation