Internet risk perceptiondevelopment and validation of a scale for adults

  1. Norma Torres Hernández 1
  2. Inmaculada García Martínez 1
  3. María Jesús Gallego Arrufat 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Granada
    info

    Universidad de Granada

    Granada, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04njjy449

Revista:
EJIHPE: European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education

ISSN: 2174-8144,  2254-9625

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 12

Número: 11

Páginas: 1581-1593

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.3390/EJIHPE12110111 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: EJIHPE: European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education

Resumen

Despite the importance of Internet risk perception, no instrument currently exists that measures this awareness in the Spanish population. The goal of this study was to provide information on studies of the validity and reliability of the Internet Risk Perception (IRP) Scale for adult Spanish citizens. We began with a literature review and validation using a mixed panel with 20 participants. We analyzed the degree to which the subjects agreed or disagreed with the criteria evaluated, including contributions for improving the instrument, and performed a pilot test with 517 adults aged 18 to 77. Construct reliability and validity were analyzed using various statistical analyses. The results from the confirmatory factor analysis showed a sufficient accuracy of the data with parameters that indicated an excellent fit for all items. The Spanish version of the scale for adults is a reliable and valid instrument for use in studies that investigate Internet risk perception in people over 18 years of age.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Al-Motlaq, M.A.; Carter, B.; Neill, S.; Hallstrom, I.K.; Foster, M.; Coyne, I.; Arabiat, D.; Darbyshire, P.; Feeg, V.D.; Shields, L. Toward developing consensus on family-centred care: An international descriptive study and discussion. J. Child Health Care 2019, 23, 458–467.
  • Ba ˘gatarhan, T.; Müge, D. Programs for Preventing Internet Addiction during Adolescence: A Systematic Review. Addicta Turk. J. Addict. 2017, 4, 243–265.
  • Blais, A.; Weber, E. A Domain-specific Risk-taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations. Judgement Decis. Mak. 2006, 1, 33–47. Available online: https://journal.sjdm.org/jdm06005.pdf (accessed on 17 September 2022).
  • Brill, J.M.; Bishop, M.J.; Walker, A.E. The competencies and characteristics required of an effective project manager: A web-based Delphi study. Educa. Technol. Res. Develop. 2006, 54, 115–140.
  • Burger, C.; Strohmeier, D.; Spröber, N.; Bauman, S.; Rigby, K. How teachers respond to school bullying: An examination of self-reported intervention strategy use, moderator effects, and concurrent use of multiple strategies. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2015, 51, 191–202.
  • Byrne, J.; Burton, P. Children as Internet users: How can evidence better inform policy debate? J. Cyber Policy 2017, 2, 39–52.
  • Byrne, Z.S.; Dvorak, K.J.; Peters, J.M.; Ray, I.; Howe, A.; Sanchez, D. From the user’s perspective: Perceptions of risk relative to benefit associated with using the Internet. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 59, 456–468.
  • Chang, C. Internet safety survey: Who will protect the children? Berkeley Technol. Law J. 2010, 25, 501–527
  • Choi, S.W.; Kim, D.J.; Choi, J.S.; Ahn, H.; Choi, E.J.; Song, W.Y.; Youn, H. Comparison of risk and protective factors associated with smartphone addiction and Internet addiction. J. Behav. Addict. 2015, 4, 308–314.
  • Crocker, L.; Algina, J. Introduction to Classical and Modern Theory; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, NY, USA, 1986.
  • Cronbach, L.J. Essentials of Psychological Testing; Harper and Row: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1990.
  • Demetrovics, Z.; Szeredi, B.; Rózsa, S. The three-factor model of Internet addiction: The development of the Problematic Internet Use Questionnaire. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 563–574.
  • Dönmez, O.; Odaba¸sı, H.F.; Kabakçı Yurdakul, I.; Kuzu, A.; Girgin, Ü. Development of a scale to address perceptions of pre-service teachers regarding online risks for children. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 2017, 17, 923–943.
  • Fink-Hafner, D.; Dagen, T.; Doušak, M.; Novak, M.; Hafner-Fink, M. Delphi method: Strengths and weaknesses. Adv. Methodol. Stat. 2019, 16, 1–19.
  • Gasser, U.; Maclay, C.M.; Palfrey, J.G. Working towards a deeper understanding of digital safety for children and young people in developing nations. In Berkman Center Research Publication No. 2010-7; Harvard Public Law Working Paper: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2010; pp. 10–36. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1628276 (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  • Jantz, G.; McMurray, A. Hidden Dangers of the Internet: Using It without Abusing It; H. Shaw Publishers: Wheaton, IL, USA, 1998.
  • Jelenchick, L.A.; Eickhoff, J.; Zhang, C.; Kraninger, K.; Christakis, D.A.; Moreno, M.A. Screening for adolescent problematic internet use: Validation of the problematic and risky internet use screening scale (PRIUSS). Acad. Pediatr. 2015, 15, 658–665.
  • Jones, L.M.; Mitchell, K.J.; Finkelhor, D. Trends in youth internet victimization: Findings from three youth internet safety surveys 2000–2010. J. Adolesc. Health 2012, 50, 179–186.
  • Ka¸sıkçı, D.N.; Ça ˘gıltay, K.; Karaku¸s, T.; Kur¸sun, A.; Ogan, C. Türkiye ve Avrupa’daki çocukların internet alı¸skanlıkları ve güvenli internet kullanımı [Internet habits and safe Internet use of children in Turkey and Europe]. E ˘gitim Ve Bilim 2014, 39, 230–243.
  • Kasperson, R.; Renn, O.; Slovic, P.; Brown, H.; Emel, J.; Goble, R.; Kasperson, J.; Ratick, S. The Social Amplification of Risk A Conceptual Framework. Risk Anal. 1999, 8, 177–188.
  • Keegan, R.J.; Barnett, L.M.; Dudley, D.A.; Telford, R.D.; Lubans, D.R.; Bryant, A.S.; Roberts, W.M.; Morgan, P.J.; Schranz, N.K.; Weissensteiner, J.R.; et al. Defining physical literacy for application in Australia: A modified Delphi method. J. Teach. Phys. Educ. 2019, 38, 105–118.
  • Kelley, K.J.; Gruber, E.M. Problematic Internet use and physical health. J. Behav. Addict. 2013, 2, 108–112.
  • Kuss, D.J.; Griffiths, M.D.; Karila, L.; Billieux, J. Internet addiction: A systematic review of epidemiological research for the last decade. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2014, 20, 4026–4052.
  • Lašek, J.; Kalibová, P.; Andršová, J. Adolescents and information and communication technologies: Use and a risk of addiction. Adolescents and information and communication technologies. New Educa. Rev. 2016, 44, 72–83.
  • Livingstone, S.; Davidson, J.; Bryce, J.; Hargrave, A.M.; Grove-Hills, J. Children’s Online Activities: Risks and Safety: The UK Evidence Base; UK Council for Child Internet Safety: London, UK, 2012.
  • Livingstone, S.; Stoilova, M. The 4Cs: Classifying Online Risk to Children. 2021.
  • Lorenzo-Seva, U.; Ferrando, P.J. FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 2006, 38, 88–91.
  • Lorenzo-Seva, U.; Ferrando, P.J. MSA: The Forgotten Index for Identifying Inappropriate Items Before Computing Exploratory Item Factor Analysis. Methodology 2021, 17, 296–306.
  • Martínez, E.; García, A.; Sendín, J. Perception of Risk in the Network by Adolescents in Spain: Problematic uses and ways of control. Anal. Monográfico 2013, 48, 111–130.
  • Milková, E.; Ambrožová, P. Internet Use and Abuse: Connection with Internet Addiction. J. Effic. Respons. Educ. Sci. 2018, 11, 22–28.
  • Montiel, I.; Molina, N.; Escalona, Y.; Riquelme, J.; Rojas, L.; Guerra, C. Analysis of a brief scale of Internet risk behavior in Chilean youth. Anu. De Psicol./UB J. Psychol. 2019, 49, 32–39.
  • National Technology and Society Observatory [ONTSI] Technology + Society in Spain 2021; Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation, General Technical Secretariat: Madrid, Spain, 2021. Available online: https://bit.ly/35JKIeR (accessed on 11 June 2022).
  • Pozo, M.T.; Gutiérrez, J.; Rodríguez, C. The use of the Delphi method in the definition of criteria for quality training in socio-cultural and leisure time activities. Rev. De Investig. Educ. 2007, 25, 351–366.
  • Purkait, S.; Kumar, S.; Suar, D. An empirical investigation of the factors that influence Internet user‘s ability to correct identify a phishing website. Inf. Manag. Comput. Secur. 2014, 22, 194–234.
  • Qian, B.; Huang, M.; Xu, M.; Hong, Y. Internet Use and Quality of Life: The Multiple Mediating Effects of Risk Perception and Internet Addiction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1795.
  • Rittmannsberger, D.; Kocman, A.; Weber, G.; Lueger-Schuster, B. Trauma exposure and post-traumatic stress disorder in people with intellectual disabilities: A Delphi expert rating. J. Appl. Res. Intellect. Disab. 2019, 32, 558–567.
  • Schmider, E.; Ziegler, M.; Danay, E.; Beyer, L.; Bühner, M. Is it really robust? Reinvestigating the robustness of ANOVA against violations of the normal distribution assumption. Methodol. Eur. J. Res. Methods Behav. Soc. Sci. 2010, 6, 147–151.
  • Schomakers, E.; Lidynia, C.; Müllmann, D.; Ziefle, M. Internet users’ perceptions of information sensitivity–insights from Germany. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 46, 142–150.
  • Smahel, D.; Helsper, E.; Green, L.; Kalmus, V.; Blinka, L.; Ólafsson, K. Excessive Internet Use among European Children; EU Kids Online, LSE: London, UK, 2012.
  • Smahel, D.; Machackova, H.; Mascheroni, G.; Dedkova, L.; Staksrud, E.; Ólafsson, K.; Livingstone, S.; Hasebrink, U. EU Kids Online 2020: Survey Results from 19 Countries; EU Kids Online: London, UK, 2020.
  • Soto, A.; Miguel, N.; Pérez, V. Approaching addictions to New Technologies: A proposal for prevention in the school context and rehabilitation treatment. Pap. Del Psicólogo 2018, 39, 120–126.
  • Spanish Institute of Statistics. Science and technology, information society. Population using the Internet (in the last three months). In Type of Activities Carried out via the Internet. Tipo de Actividades Realizadas por Internet; Spanish Institute of Statistics: Madrid, Spain, 2021.
  • Thomée, S. Mobile phone use and mental health: A review of the research that takes a psychological perspective on exposure. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2692.
  • Tynes, B.M. Internet safety gone wild?: Sacrificing the educational and psychosocial benefits of online social environments. J. Adolesc. Res. 2007, 22, 575–584.
  • UNESCO. Unesco ICT Competency Framework for Teachers; Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 2018.
  • Unión Internacional de Telecomunicaciones [ITU]. Tendencias Digitales en Europa 2021. Tendencias y Evoluciones de las TIC en Europa, 2017–2020; ITU Publicaciones: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://bit.ly/3I87RVc (accessed on 10 May 2022).
  • Urbina, S. Essentials of Psychological Testing; John Wiley & Sons Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2004.
  • Valcke, M.; De Wever, B.; Van Keer, H.; Schellens, T. Long-term study of safe internet use of young children. Comput. Educ. 2011, 57, 1292–1305.
  • Weber, E. Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not care about us (yet). Clim. Change 2006, 77, 103–120.
  • Wood, A.; Wheatcroft, J. Young Adult Perceptions of Internet Communications and the Grooming Concept. Sage Open 2020, 10, 2158244020914573.
  • Zarouali, B.; Strycharz, J.; Helberger, N.; de Vreese, C. Exploring people’s perceptions and support of data-driven technology in times of COVID-19: The role of trust, risk, and privacy concerns. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2022, 41, 1–12.
  • Zartha Sossa, J.W.; Halal, W.; Hernandez Zarta, R. Delphi method: Analysis of rounds, stakeholder and statistical indicators. Foresight 2019, 21, 525–544.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet