All
 
|
 
 


Parental unawareness about online risks in adolescence: revalence and psychological factors
 
PIIS020595920002251-2-1
DOI10.31857/S020595920002251-2
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
G. Soldatova 
Occupation: professor of personality psychology department
Affiliation: Moscow State University
Address: Russian Federation
E. Rasskazova
Occupation: associate professor of clinical psychology department, senior researcher of medical psychology department
Affiliation:
Moscow State University
Mental Health Research Center
Address: Russian Federation
Journal namePsikhologicheskii zhurnal
EditionVolume 40 Issue 1
Pages71-83
Abstract

One of the key reasons for the collision of adolescents with online risks and subsequent difficulties is the lack of prevention and assistance from adults in time. The paper is devoted to identifying of psychological factors (strategies of parental mediation, online activities and adolescents’ beliefs) associated with parental unawareness about the collision of their children with online risks. Based on the analysis of data from two Russian population-based studies (1.025 pairs “parent–child of 9–16 years”; 1.203 adolescents 12–17 years and 1.209 parents of children of theses ages) we demonstrate that more than 20% of parents are unaware that their child worried about something he or she saw in the Internet. Three groups of factors of unawareness are considered. First, the nature of the risks: more often parents are not aware of the problems that the children themselves initiated (cyberbullying against others, personal meetings with online acquaintances) or that are associated with shame or embarrassment (cyberbullying against the child, receiving sexual messages). Secondly, the general factors include signs of deviant behavior in adolescents (but not parents’ concerns about deviant behavior or the safety of their children). Third, specific factors include: excessive use of the Internet, greater confidence of children, higher level of knowledge and skills on the Internet, especially in the sphere of communication accompanied by low motivation for its improvement and a wider range of their online activities. The likelihood of parental unawareness is higher if the parents explain less and participate less in the child’s online activities, especially – do not talk to him about the Internet. Prohibitions and restrictions may contribute to more responsible behavior of adolescents (reducing the probability of parental unawareness about child’s meetings with online friends, cyberbullying against others), but can provoke the concealment of common risks (viewing sexual images).

KeywordsOnline risks, adolescents, parental unawareness, online activity, parental mediation, Russian Kids Online, digital competence
AcknowledgmentResearch is supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project 17-06-00762.
Received26.02.2019
Publication date26.02.2019
Number of characters39751
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 2465

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Ayanyan A. N., Martsinkovskaya T. D. Sotsializatsiya podrostkov v informatsionnom prostranstve // Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya. 2016. V. 9. № 46. P. 8. URL: http://www.psystudy.ru/index.php/num/2016v9n46/1262-ayanyan46.html  (data obrascheniya 26.06.2018). (In Russian)
2. Bozhovich L. I. Izbrannye psikhologicheskie trudy: Problemy formirovaniya lichnosti / Pod red. D. I. Fel’dshteina. M.: Mezhdunarodnaya pedagogicheskaya akademiya, 1995. (In Russian)
3. Varga A. Ya. Vvedenie v sistemnuyu semeinuyu psikhoterapiyu. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr, 2009. (In Russian)
4. Voiskunskii A. E., Evdokimenko A. S., Fedunina N. Yu. Al’ternativnaya identichnost’ v sotsial’nykh setyakh // Vestnik MGU. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya. 2013. № 1. P. 66–83. (In Russian)
5. Vygotskii L. S. Pedologiya podrostka: Problema vozrasta // Poln. sobr. soch. v 6 t. T. 4 / Pod red. M. G. Yaroshevskogo. M.: Pedagogika, 1984. P. 224–269. (In Russian)
6. Golovei L. A., Vasilenko V. E., Savenysheva S. S., Engel’gardt E.E. K probleme differentsiatsii osnovnykh ponyatii v sisteme otnoshenii “roditel’–rebenok”: teoreticheskii i empiricheskii aspekty // Vestnik SPbGU. Seriya 12: Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya. Pedagogika. 2014. № 2. P. 84–95. (In Russian)
7. Karabanova O. A. Sotsial’naya situatsiya razvitiya rebenka (struktura, dinamika, printsipy korrektsii): Dis. … doktora psikhol. nauk. Moskva, 2002. (In Russian)
8. Leont’ev A.N. K teorii razvitiya psikhiki rebenka // Izbr. psikhol. proizvedeniya. Moscow: Izd-vo Mosk. un-ta, 1981. P. 509–518. (In Russian)
9. Soldatova G. U., Nestik T. A., Rasskazova E. I., Zotova E. Yu. Tsifrovaya kompetentnost’ rossiiskikh podrostkov i roditelei: rezul’taty vserossiiskogo issledovaniya. Moscow: Fond Razvitiya Internet, 2013. (In Russian)
10. Soldatova G. U., Rasskazova E. I. Motivatsiya v strukture tsifrovoi kompetentnosti rossiiskikh podrostkov // Natsional’nyi psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2017. V. 1. № 25. P. 3–14. (In Russian)
11. Soldatova G. U., Rasskazova E. I. Rol’ roditelei v povyshenii bezopasnosti rebenka v internete: klassifikatsiya i sopostavitel’nyi analiz // Voprosy psikhologii. 2013. № 2. P. 3–14. (In Russian)
12. Soldatova G. U. Shlyapnikov V. N., Zhurina M. A. Evolyutsiya onlain-riskov: itogi pyatiletnei raboty linii pomoshchi “Deti onlain” // Konsul’tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya. 2015. V. 23. № 3. P. 50–66. (In Russian)
13. Bronfenbrenner U. Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development / Ed. by U. Bronfenbrenner. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, 2004.
14. Elsaesser C., Russell B., Ohannessian C. M., Patton D. Parenting in a digital age: A review of parents’ role in preventing adolescent cyberbullying // Aggression & violent behavior. 2017. V. 35. P. 62–72.
15. Henson R. K. Effect-size measures and meta-analytic thinking in counseling psychology research // The counseling psychologist. 2006. V. 34. № 5. P. 601–629.
16. How technology changes everything (and nothing) in psychology: 2008 annual report of the APA Policy and Planning Board // American psychologist. 2009. V. 64. № 5. P. 454–463.
17. Johnson G., Puplampu K. A conceptual framework for understanding the effect of the Internet on child development: The ecological techno-subsystem // Canadian journal of learning and technology. 2008. V. 34. P. 19–28.
18. Livingstone S., Haddon L., Görzig A., Ólafsson K. Risks and safety on the internet: The perspective of European children. Full Findings. LSE, London: EU Kids Online, 2011.
19. Shin W., Kang H. Adolescents’ privacy concerns and information disclosure online: The role of parents and the Internet // Computers in human behavior. 2016. V. 54. P. 114–123.
20. Shin W., Lwin M. O. How does “talking about the Internet with others” affect teenagers’ experience of online risks? The role of active mediation by parents, peers, and school teachers // New media & society. 2017. V. 19. № 7. P. 1109–1126.
21. Soldatova G., Rasskazova E., Zotova E., Lebesheva M., Geer M., Roggendorf P. Russian Kids Online Key findings of the EU Kids Online II survey in Russia // Moscow: Foundation for Internet Development, 2013. URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/research/EUKidsOnline/ParticipatingCountries/PDFs/RU-RussianReport.pdf  (дата обращения 26.06.2018).
22. Srivastava L. Mobile phones and the evolution of social behavior // Behavior and inform. technology. 2005. V. 24. № 2. P. 111–129.
23. Symons K., Ponnet K, Emmery K., Walrave M., Heirman W. Parental knowledge of adolescents’ online content and contact risks // Journal of youth and adolescence. 2017. V. 46. № 2. P. 401–416.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up