Interconnected But Underprotected? Parents' Methods and Motivations for Information Seeking on Digital Safety Issues

Abstract

Parents need information and skills to meet the demands of mediating connected technology in their homes. Parents' methods and motivations for learning to protect children from digital risks were reported through a survey. This study explores relationships between information seeking, parents' concerns, risks children have experienced, and access to connected devices, in addition to the use and satisfaction of various digital safety resources. Three types of information-seeking behavior were identified: (a) protective information seeking, to protect children from being confronted with harmful content; (b) problem-solving information seeking, to help children who have been negatively affected by connected technology; and (c) attentive learning, by attending to media resources passively encountered on this topic. Friends and family are the dominant source of digital safety information, followed by presentations and the Internet. Parents' top concerns for their children using connected technology were accidental exposure to pornography, and sexual content in Internet-based entertainment. Higher numbers of risks experienced by children were positively associated with parents' problem-solving information seeking and level of attentive learning. Parents who were more concerned exhibited more problem-solving information seeking; but despite the high level of concern for children's safety online, 65 percent of parents seek information on this subject less than twice per year. Children have access to a mean of five connected devices at home; a higher number of devices was correlated with increased risks experienced by children, but was not associated with increased concern or information seeking from parents.

Introduction

Connected devices such as computers, cell phones, and gaming systems have exposed children and teenagers to developmentally inappropriate and harmful threats in many forms, including pornography, sexting, cyberbullying, and sexual solicitation.^1–6 These risks pose a challenge for parents, who generally did not face these particular hazards in their youth, but are now responsible for the protection of their children.

Digital safety refers to precautions parents take to protect their children from risks of using devices that connect people through the Internet or through cell phone technology. Parents' methods and motivations for learning how to mediate children's use of connected technology are the focus of this study.

Literature Review

Parents' mediation of connected technology

Parents struggle with contradictory beliefs about the Internet. They hope their children will use the Web to be prepared to take their place in the world; yet they worry about the problems that come with connected technology.⁶ This leaves parents in the difficult position of wanting “both to facilitate and to restrict their children's use of the Internet.”⁷

While parents have experienced the challenges of mediating TV and movies, that experience does not completely transfer to mediating connected technology. TV and movies are often a shared family experience, or permit a “walk-by” inspection in progress, allowing discussion and termination of the program if needed.⁸ Small, single-user screens with quickly changing content are more challenging to mediate.⁸

In addition, some adolescents actively keep their online pursuits away from parental intervention. A 2010 survey found that 56 percent of teenagers believe their parents do not know everything they do online, 26 percent reported minimizing the browser when parents are around, 20 percent admitted deleting or hiding text messages, and 21 percent had cleared the browser history.⁹

Parents' knowledge and skill

Parents are expected to be tech-savvy in a continually progressing digital environment; able to negotiate children's constant push to make independent media choices; aware of what is happening on screens that are easily concealed; diligent in enforcing unpopular rules; and teach their children to be ethical digital citizens by the time they leave home. Yet, parents feel less adept at using this medium than their children.⁷ Parents are not adequately prepared to teach children how to be safe on the Internet.¹⁰

Information seeking

Clearly, parents are in need of information and skill-building to meet these demands. Knowledge about digital safety, combined with parenting skills, should help parents be more effective in managing connected technology. There is some evidence that parents' knowledge in this area is increasing. In the span of 1 year, teens reporting that their parents know “little” or “nothing” about what they do online decreased 8 percent, while teens reporting that parents know “a lot” or “everything” about what they do on the Internet increased 4 percent.¹¹

Information seeking is motivated when an issue is relevant to problems an individual faces.¹² It is a principal strategy people use to cope with challenges and uncertainty.¹³ Uncertainty exists when people lack confidence in their own level of knowledge.¹⁴ When faced with uncertainty, people evaluate how vulnerable they are to the threat.¹⁵ Moreover, people decide whether more information will help them manage the risk.¹⁴ If a need for more information is determined, “people seek information to add knowledge they lack…and they use that information for strategic purposes.”¹⁴

Some basic assumptions of information seeking are the following: “(a) individuals are active information seekers and initiate source selection, (b) information source use is goal directed, (c) individuals select different sources to fulfill felt needs, and (d) multiple sources satisfy individual informational needs and any one source must compete with others for this need satisfaction.”¹⁶

There are a variety of approaches to gather information, reflecting a range of behavior that depends on the purposes and motivations of the individual. Information acquisition ranges on a “continuum of intent” with unintentional, passive receipt of information on one end and purposeful, active search for information at the other end.¹⁷

Information channels

Parents have a wide variety of information sources to turn to. Mass media channels such as books, newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, and the Internet are available.¹³ Parents may also receive information from interpersonal sources, such as friends, family, or presentations by local organizations. Interpersonal channels are some of the most common and have attractive characteristics such as immediacy and interactivity.¹⁷

Parents must compare the benefits and drawbacks of each source to decide which to use. Perceived differences in efficiency, availability, and familiarity will attract people to particular channels.¹⁴

The Internet is an easily accessible resource for parents to utilize. It is often used in a consultation manner, where people search for information from a central source.¹⁸ Because there is more information on the Internet than what is available through traditional sources, information seekers have more control in acquiring information online.¹³ Appealing features of Web information include extensive access, anonymity, interactivity, and social support.¹⁹

A variety of organizations provide digital safety information on the Web. Some Web sites target parents or educators. Blogs share news of technology, legislation, and social trends. Other Web sites have interactive features to directly teach youth with features such as videos, games, and quizzes. Are parents using these Web sites?

The intersection of parents' need for information and the variety of sources offering information raises some important questions. Currently, there is no research investigating parents' information seeking concerning digital safety.

Research Questions

The following research questions consider the extent, motivation, and effects of parents' search for information about digital safety.

RQ1: What resources do parents use to learn about digital safety?

RQ2: Is parents' digital safety information seeking associated with their level of concern about digital safety issues?

RQ3: Is parents' digital safety information seeking associated with the number of risks that have affected their children?

RQ4: Is there an association between parents' digital safety information seeking and the number of different types of connected devices children have access to?

RQ5: Are parents satisfied with the information they find?

RQ6: How is information seeking associated with parents' perception of their knowledge about digital safety issues?

Methodology

Participants and procedure

Parents with at least one child aged 8–18 were invited to respond to an online survey. Respondents were recruited through a snowball sample via email. The final survey sample consisted of 260 parents, with 79 percent (n=193) mothers. The responding parents had children in the following age groups: 64 percent 8–10 years old, 60 percent 11–13 years old, 49 percent 14–16 years old, and 28 percent 17–18 years old. As well, 61 percent of the participants had a 4-year college degree or higher.

This study utilizes data from these sections of the survey:

Home connected technology profile

Parents reported the number of different types of connected devices their children have access to.

Risks

Participants reported their concern level for 12 potential digital risks affecting their children. They also reported whether their children had experienced any of these risks.

Digital safety information seeking

Participants reported their most frequently used sources of information and their perceptions of the usefulness of the information. Parents also rated their own level of knowledge about digital safety issues.

Parents reported how often they used three approaches to learning, which were defined by the following statements: (a) “I use media resources to learn about digital safety to protect my children before they are confronted with these problems,” (b) “I find media resources for help when I discover my child is engaging in risky behavior using connected technology,” and (c) “I pay attention when media resources come my way (such as a TV news spot about sexting while I am watching the news).” The first two situations could be described as active searching, while the last is a more passive way of learning. For brevity, these three approaches will be identified in this study as (a) protective information seeking, (b) problem-solving information seeking, and (c) attentive learning.

Results

RQ1: What resources do parents use to learn about digital safety?

Figure 1 summarizes the sources that parents learned the most from, used to learn some or a few things, or had never used to learn about these issues.

FIG. 1.

Percentage of parents indicating they have learned a lot, learned some things, or never learned from a source.

To assess awareness of digital safety Web sites, participants marked if they had visited any of 18 specific Web sites. There was low recognition for any of them. In fact, 61 percent of parents had never visited any digital safety Web site. The most visited Web sites were commonsensemedia.org (9 percent), combatingpornography.org (9 percent), netsmartz.org (6 percent), and ikeepsafe.org (5 percent). Some parents (12 percent) indicated they had visited other Web sites that were not on the list.

RQ2: Is parents' digital safety information seeking associated with their level of concern about digital safety issues?

Table 1 shows parents' level of concern for 12 digital threats. Parents had a mean overall concern level of 3.63 (SD=1.17, α=0.95). Parents' overall concern level was investigated for correlations with the three approaches to digital safety information seeking. Only problem-solving information seeking was associated with parents' concern level, r_s(149)=0.175, p=0.031.

Table 1.

Mean Levels of Parent's Concerns

Concern	M (SD)
Accidental exposure to pornography	4.56 (0.89)
Sexual content in Internet-based entertainment	4.36 (1.04)
Sexual solicitation from strangers	3.96 (1.30)
Receiving sexy photos from people	3.92 (1.37)
Sharing private information with strangers	3.76 (1.25)
Intentionally viewing online pornography	3.75 (1.49)
Managing online reputation	3.63 (1.33)
Inappropriate sexual conversations	3.45 (1.51)
Being the target of cyberbullying	3.30 (1.42)
Arranging to meet someone they know only online	3.18 (1.60)
Sending sexy photos of themselves	2.98 (1.62)
Initiating cyberbullying	2.67 (1.53)

Scale: 1=not at all concerned, 5=extremely concerned.

RQ3: Is parents' digital safety information seeking associated with the number of risks that have affected their children?

Table 2 shows the frequency of specific risks that parents were aware of their children experiencing. Parents reported a mean of 1.82 (SD=1.94, α=0.74) for the number of risks experienced. Overall, 35 percent of parents reported no risks experienced, 18 percent indicated one risk, 28 percent reported two to four risks, and 10 percent had experienced five or more risks with their children.

Table 2.

Percentage of Parents Reporting a Child Experiencing Risks

Risk experienced	Percentage of parents
Accidental exposure to pornography	53.4
Sexual content in Internet-based entertainment	49.6
Intentionally viewing online pornography	27.7
Posting information that could damage online reputation	16.5
Sharing private information with strangers	10.4
Receiving sexy photos from people	10.4
Inappropriate sexual conversations	8.9
Being the target of cyberbullying	4.8
Sending sexy photos of themselves	3.2
Sexual solicitation from strangers	2.8
Initiating cyberbullying	2
Arranging to meet someone they know only online	0.8

Analysis showed positive associations between the number of risks children have experienced and both problem-solving information seeking, r_s(150)=0.236, p=0.003, and attentive learning, r(232)=0.227, p=0.001, but not protective information seeking. In addition, statistics showed an association between risks encountered and overall concern level, r(248)=0.287, p=0.001.

RQ4: Is there an association between parents' digital safety information seeking and the number of connected devices children have access to?

Children had access to a mean of 5.07 (SD=2.36) different types of connected devices at home. Table 3 shows the number of devices children have access to. Interestingly, a higher number of devices did not raise parents' level of concern about risks, r(246)=0.091, p=0.151. However, children with access to a greater number of devices did show higher levels of experiencing risks as reported by parents, r(258)=0.331, p=0.001. No significant relationships were found between the number of devices and the three approaches to learning.

Table 3.

Number of Types of Connected Devices Children Have Access to at Home

Number of devices	Percentage of children
None	3.8
1–2	18.5
3–4	38.1
5–6	26.1
7 or more	13.4

RQ5: Are parent's satisfied with the information they find?

Descriptive statistics concluded that presentations had the highest mean on the satisfaction scale at 4.04 (SD=0.69), followed by the Internet (M=3.95, SD=0.69), and printed resources (M=3.85, SD=0.62). Slightly lower agreement was reported for whether the information was easy to understand; presentations also had the highest mean (M=3.98, SD=0.736), while printed resources (M=3.67, SD=0.712) and the Internet (M=3.66, SD=0.738) reported similar results. Parents reported whether the information was encouraging. Presentations, once again, had the highest mean (M=3.69, SD=0.89), with the Internet (M=3.59, SD=0.77) and printed resources following (M=3.41, SD=0.789). It appears that parents are generally satisfied, although there is room for improvement.

Parents were likely to agree that they used the information they gained to take some kind of action such as checking the browser history or talking with children (n=143, M=3.74, SD=0.64, α=0.75).

RQ6: How is information seeking associated with parents' perception of their knowledge about digital safety issues?

Frequency of information seeking

Parents reported how often they engage in protective information seeking; 48 percent of participants (n=115) responded “2 times a year or less,” 25 percent (n=59) reported “3–7 times a year,” 17 percent (n=40) answered “never,” and 11 percent (n=24) did more than eight times a year.

Only parents who had a child who experienced a risk were asked how often they engage in problem-solving information seeking (n=152). Forty-eight percent of participants (n=73) responded “2 times a year or less,”40 percent (n=60) reported “never,” 10 percent (n=15) answered “3–7 times a year,” and 2 percent (n=4) did eight times per year or more.

To measure attentive learning, parents indicated where they were between “never” and “always” paying attention to media resources. The mean for attentive learning was 4.06 (SD=1).

Correlation between different approaches

Parents who are high information seekers in one approach are often high in other approaches also. Those who frequently use protective information seeking were also significantly more likely to exhibit problem-solving information seeking, r_s(150)=0.427, p=0.001 and attentive learning, r_s(230)=0.155, p=0.018.

Information seeking and knowledge

Parents self-reported knowledge level scored a mean of 3.5 (SD=0.82). Parents' knowledge level was correlated with protective information seeking, r_s(213)=0.185, p=0.006. There was no association, however, with knowledge level and either problem-solving information seeking or attentive learning.

Parents who reported they had learned a lot from more types of resources also had the highest frequencies of all the approaches including protective information seeking, r_s(236)=0.301, p=0.001, problem-solving information seeking, r_s(150)=0.244, p=0.002, and attentive learning r(232)=0.259, p=0.001.

Parents who used more types of resources rated their own knowledge level higher, r(221)=0.211, p=0.002. Conversely, knowledge level was lower for parents' who reported never using more types of resources, r(221)=− 0.160, p=0.017.

Summary of variables with approaches to information seeking

Table 4 summarizes the correlations of four variables that are possible motivations for information seeking with the three types of information seeking.

Table 4.

Correlations of Variables with Approaches to Information Seeking

	Information seeking
Variable	Protective	Problem-solving	Attentive
Concern level	^*	0.175	^*
Risks experienced	^*	0.236	0.227
Number of devices	^*	^*	^*
Knowledge level	0.185	^*	^*

Not significant, p>0.05.

p<0.05.

Discussion

Apprehension about accidental pornography exposure and sexual content in online entertainment clearly tops the list of parents' concerns. This supports previous research finding that the top parental anxiety about the Internet was “I am concerned that children might see sexually explicit images on the Internet.”¹ These concerns likely stem from negative experiences and awareness of threats, and these two are the top risks that parents report actually affecting their children.

The correlations in Table 4 suggest that awareness that a child experienced a risk acts as a trigger that raises concern, motivates active information seeking, and sensitizes parents to attend to relevant media information. However, problem-solving information seeking is not highly practiced behavior even for parents with the highest concern or risk levels. Further, the lack of association between protective information seeking and risks encountered invites research exploring the possibility that precautionary learning by parents may not reduce the risks that children encounter.

The low frequency of information seeking raises concern that many parents may not be keeping up with the continually changing threats that children are exposed to every day. However, it's possible that parents feel they receive adequate information passively from media. Parents' attentive learning could be considered quite high, and their perception of their own knowledge was slightly above average.

Young people have access to a sizable number of connected devices. More devices were associated with greater risks; yet, these parents did not indicate increased concern levels or more information-seeking behaviors. These findings may remind parents that more technology requires more mediation to protect children.

Finding that friends and family are the top source of information introduces the question of how media organizations can be most helpful to parents. Parents may feel that friends and family are credible sources, and they likely share frustration and advice on this subject with each other. Social relationships often excel at alleviating uncertainty and understanding particular personal concerns.²⁰ Information providers would be wise to tap into these relationships through social media.

Presentations were a strong source of information. This is surprising, considering that attending a presentation takes time and effort. Perhaps an event signifies that this issue should be taken seriously. The interpersonal element of presentations allows for more interaction, such as Q&A sessions, which may be attractive. Some presentations may take place where parents would be attending already, such as during church services.

While the Internet was the third most frequent source of information, the featured Web sites were often unknown. This raises the question of how effective these Web sites are, and how they can attract their intended audience. Considering the advantages of the Web, it appears that parents are underutilizing digital safety information on the Internet.

Magazine articles, TV, and newspapers were frequent sources of information, and have the advantage of being current on a continually progressing topic. Although books provide depth of information, they were among the least used resources, possibly because books become outdated on technology issues and require time to read.

The ultimate goal of gaining digital safety information is to increase parents' ability to mediate technology and teach their children safe online practices. Parents in the top 11 percent of protective information seeking had higher knowledge levels, showed greater problem-solving information seeking and attentive learning, and used more types of resources. These parents illustrated a profile of active involvement to protect their children.

A limitation of this study is that the data for parents' information-seeking behavior and knowledge were self-reported. Greater insight could be gained by using more objective measures. However, it is important to recognize that it is parents' perceptions of risk incidence and knowledge that motivate information seeking.

Future research could investigate the types of information that parents search for. Do they seek technical information, parent-child communication advice, or news about trends in risky behavior? Such research would help information providers meet the needs of families as they navigate the changing world of connected technology.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Vauna Davis recognizes the support of the Brigham Young University Graduate Research Fellowship while completing this article.

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References

Berson

, Berson

. Challenging online behaviors of youth––findings from a comparative analysis of young people in the United States and New Zealand. Social Science Computer Review, 2005; 23:29–38.

Peter

, Valkenburg

. Adolescents' exposure to sexually explicit Internet material, sexual uncertainty, and attitudes toward uncommitted sexual exploration: is there a link? Communication Research, 2008; 35:579–601.

Trisnadi-Rages

. An ecological systems approach to reduce children's encounters with obscenity on the Internet. Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, 2007Available from ProQuest database.https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/handle/10355/4887

Wolak

, Mitchell

, Finkelhor

. Unwanted and wanted exposure to online pornography in a national sample of youth Internet users. Pediatrics, 2007; 119:247–257.

Mesch

. Social bonds and Internet pornographic exposure among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 2009; 32:601–618.

Livingstone

, Helsper

. Balancing opportunities and risks in teenagers' use of the Internet: the role of online skills and Internet self-efficacy. New Media and Society, 2010; 12:309–329.

Livingstone

. Strategies of parental regulation in the media-rich home. Computers in Human Behavior, 2007; 23:920–941.

Eastin

, Greenberg

, Hofschire

. Parenting the Internet. Journal of Communication, 2006; 56:486–504.

McAfee, Inc., Harris Interactive. 2010. The secret online lives of teens: the youth online behavior study for McAffee 2010. http://us.mcafee.com/en-us/local/docs/lives_of_teens.pdf. 2010 Nov 15.

10.

Olagunju

. Harmonizing the interests of free speech, obscenity, and child pornography in cyberspace: the new roles of parents, technology, and legislation for Internet safety. The Scientific World Journal, 2009; 9:1260–1272.

11.

Surratt

. 2007. Cox communications teen internet safety survey, wave II–in partnership with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children^® (NCMEC) and John Walsh 2007. www.cox.com/takeCharge/includes/docs/survey_results_2007.ppt. 2010 Nov 15.

12.

Johnson

, Donohue

, Atkin

et al. A comprehensive model of information seeking: tests focusing on a technical organization. Science Communication, 1995; 16:274–313.

13.

Rains

. Perceptions of traditional information sources and use of the World Wide Web to seek health information: findings from the Health Information National Trends Survey. Journal of Health Communication, 2007; 12:667–680.

14.

Brashers

. Communication and uncertainty management. Journal of Communication, 2001; 51:477–497.

15.

Kahlor

. PRISM: a planned risk information seeking model. Health Communication, 2010; 25:345–356.

16.

DeLorme

, Huh

, Reid

. Source selection in prescription drug information seeking and influencing factors: applying the comprehensive model of information seeking in an American context. Journal of Health Communication, 2011; 16:766–787.

17.

Afifi

, Weiner

. Toward a theory of motivated information management. Communication Theory, 2004; 14:167–190.

18.

Bordewijk

, Van Kaam

. Towards a new classification of tele-information services. Intermedia, 1986; 14:16–21.

19.

Cline

, Haynes

. Consumer health information seeking on the Internet: the state of the art. Health Education Research, 2001; 16:671–692.

20.

Johnson

, Meischke

. Differences in evaluations of communication channels for cancer-related information. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 1992; 15:429–445.