Communication and Information Technologies Annual †Free Samples

Question: Discuss about the Communication and Information Technologies Annual. Answer: Introduction The present study focuses on the digital gap between the urban and sub- urban in Australia. The research framework based on the theoretical gaps and empirical gaps is outlined in this paper. Four main kinds of variables including -independent variable, dependent variable, moderating and mediating variable as the consistency factor on the relationship between independent and dependent variable are also illustrated in this study. The conceptual framework proposing hypothesized model is also discussed in this research study. These variables are further justified by using journals in the last section of the research study. Australia like several other developed countries is rapidly shifting towards highly digitalized society (Thomas et al., 2016). Despite several policy interventions by the Australian government, the sub-urban areas of this nation continue to be at digital disadvantage. There are several barriers that make it highly difficult for the enterprises as well as rural residents to participate in and attain benefit from increasing digital economy. On the contrary, the urban areas are developing at high rate owing to this digitization. This paper thereby presents evidences about the digital gap between the urban and sub-urban areas in Australia. In fact, mixed methods involving secondary and primary methods are adopted while conducting this research study. Research Framework based on the theoretical and empirical gap The digital gap signifies the gap between the people having accessibility to ICT (information and communication technologies) and those people who do not have. Although advancement in technologies has created huge opportunities to the people of the developing nations, gap still occurs between the people residing in sub-urban and urban areas (Thomas et al., 2016). As a result, this creates imbalance in the economys formation and the loss in the business. It has been stated by the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation Development) that, digital gap is the division between the geographical areas, business and the individuals relating to accessibility of ICT and utilization of internet for huge range of activities (Sarkar, 2012). According to Ragnedda Muschert (2013), there are mainly four types of barriers to access ICT or digital facilities services, which involve- material access, use access, mental access and skill access. In addition to this, another barrier that occurs is th e lack of accessibility owing to shortage of services and equipments such as computer networking, computer hardware etc. Furthermore, skill accessibility concerns with deficiency of the digital skills due to lack of training, education and so on. Another digital barrier that occurs mainly describes lack of few opportunities which undermines utilization of facility. It has been suggested by Imperial Oliver (2012) that, digital gap not only involves technological issues such as capacity, usability, high ICT cost but also is related to socio- economic issues. All these issues including non- technical as well as technical have direct impact on the ICT literacy level, which in turn consequently increases the digital gap. Recent evidences on digital gap in Australia signifies that despite significant rise in utilization level of internet, gap results from these factors involving lack of education, affordability, accessibility, age, digital ability etc (Alam Salahuddin, 2015). Some facts also reflects that even though there has been rise in usage of computer and access of internet across the rural and urban areas, digital gap within these two areas has been increasing. In fact, some researchers identifies that affordability is one of the main barriers to utilization of internet. Affordability involves two components such as Value and relative expenditure. The gap between digitally excluded and included Australians have been widening over the years. van Deursen Helsper (2015) opines that the people residing in this nation with low income level, less education and employment are less digitally involved. Moreover, there are still digital gap between the richer and poorer people residing in this nation. It has been argued by Buckingham Willett (2013) that, age is another division that is related with the digital gap. Recent facts reflect that teenagers are keener to adopt innovations and hence accepted ICT more as compared to older generations. Even in Australia, the internet users are majorly the younger generations residing in urban areas as compared to sub-urban areas. Additionally, accessibility also contributes to digital gap between the sub-urban and urban areas (Thomas et al., 2016). Accessibility mainly consists of three components including internet access, internet data allowance and internet technology. It has been found out by Vrallyai Herdon, (2013) that, few indigenous communities residing in sub-urban areas of Australia still do not have accessibility to Internet at their residence. However, Australia government has taken few measures for improving accessibility of ICT in sub-urban areas. Digital ability is also another factor that contributes to digital gap between the sub-urban and urban areas in Australia. Digital ability includes three components such as- basic kills, activities and attitudes of people. As digital ability in sub-urban areas is lower than that of urban areas of this nation, the government of Australia has adopted several measures in order to bridge this gap. The TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) developed by David is an appropriate theoretical model that predicts acceptance as well as use of ICT (Davis, 1985). It is regarded as one of the most influential model that explains ICT implementation and utilization behavior. These theories basically emphasize behavioral attitudes, individuals rational behavior and actual use. TAM is mainly used in this study for illustrating accessibility, digital ability, internet use, affordability, internet literacy etc. Moreover, this theory helps to conduct the research about the digital gap between the urban and sub-urban areas of Australia. This section reflects the facts of the research study based on empirical evidences. The ADII ( Australian Digital Inclusion Index) measures the extent of digital inclusion or the gap between these two areas of this nation. The score of ADII and the data produced by the ABS ( Australian Bureau of Statistics) reflects that the digital gap between sub-urban and urban areas of this country has been reducing over the last few years. However, the increase in ADII score over the time has been mainly driven by huge improvement in digital ability and accessibility (Thomas et al., 2016). On the contrary, the decrease in affordability score reflects that this aspect has not improved over the years. All the three components of accessibility have improved constantly. Internet accessibility in rural areas increased from 82.7 in the year 2014 to 85.3 in the year 2017. Moreover, the scores of both internet technology as well as data allowance also improved in this area over the last four years. Inte rnet data allowance increased from 41.6 in 2014- 51.2 in 2017 while technology score increased from 62.3 in 2014- 72.1 in 2017 (Thomas et al., 2016). The internet accessibility score in urban areas reflects steady rate during these years. Likewise, components of the digital ability also improved in both sub-urban and urban areas of this nation over time (Jaeger et al., 2012). The score of basic skill component increased from 47.2 to 53.3 while activities score increased from 34.2 to 38.4 during these years. Despite these components enhanced over the years, the improvement rate has slowed down. On the other hand, the decrease in affordability component signifies increasing cost of internet services. Additionally, the expenditure value component increased constantly over the last four years. As a result, the peoples expense on this also increases at high rate. Few recent facts reflect that the people living in sub-urban areas of this country spend less on internet services. Owing to r ise in cost of internet services, these people could not afford to purchase this service. However, the Australian government implemented measures of reducing this internet service cost, which in turn increased the spending of the people residing in sub-urban areas. Henceforth, the digital gap decreased slightly over these years (Allington McGill-Franzen, 2012). As stated above that gender also contributes to digital gap, it has been seen that females in this nation use less internet as compared to males. The data given by ABS also supports this fact that near about 53% of the males utilize internet in comparison with 47% of females. Other factors that the researcher identifies contributes to this digital gap involves income, location, education, culture, age etc (DiMaggio Hargittai, 2001). As suggested by Allington McGill-Franzen (2012), the education as well as income level is the vital determinants of the society accessibility to internet. In fact, the data provided by the ABS signifies that the household in this nation that are less likely to connect with internet have some special features involving low income of households, children under the age of 15 years and being situated in remote sub-urban areas. Variable is anything which takes varying values and might differ at different times for same person or object. In this study, four vital variables are illustrated, which includes- independent, dependent, moderating and mediating. Independent variables refer to the variable that affects the dependent variable either positively or negatively. Therefore, for per unit rise in independent variable, there is either increase or decrease in dependent variable. In this study, the independent variables are affordability, accessibility, gender, age, digital disability, income, education and so on. Dependent variable is considered to be as the major variable, which lends itself to make investigation as viable factor. Independent variables are mainly based on the dependent variable. In this study, the dependent variable is the ICT at which the independent variables are based. A moderating variable is the variable that has strong impact on the relationship between the dependent and independent variable. The existence of this variable basically modifies the relation between the dependent and independent variable. In this case, the moderating variable is the influence of the independent variables including- affordability, accessibility, digital ability, income, education, gender, age etc on the ICT, which is taken as dependent variable. Mediating variables are the one that occurs between the time independent variables begins operating to impact dependent variables and that time its impact is felt. This variable occurs as function of independent variables that operates in any circumstances and facilitates to conceptualize as well as explain influence of independent variable on dependent variable. In this study, it has been highlighted that accessibility to ICT is the mediating variable that leads to digital gap. The hypothesis has been proposed in order to test the validity of the research study that aligns with digital gap between sub-urban and urban areas in Australia. The hypotheses that are proposed for this study are given below: Justifying the above mentioned variable of the research study It has been opined by Beena Mathur (2012) that, social as well as economic factors including income, education and age are more closely linked with accessibility and utilization of ICT as compared to other factors. Imperial Oliver (2012) suggests that the teenagers and students have the potentiality to bridge this digital gap. Some researchers have found out that the students in the sub-urban areas of this nation are not furnished enough with the basic ICT skills. However, their ICT capabilities are basically low as compared to the students of urban areas. According to Fraillon, Schulz Ainley (2013), ICT skills are vital prerequisites for the information literacy and learning. Macdonald Clayton (2013) opines that education also widens the digital gap between the urban and sub-urban areas. Recent evidences reflects that the total number of people living in urban areas receive proper education with internet access as compared to people living in rural areas. It has been stated by W illis Tranter (2006) that, the existence of digital gap owing to age is also apparent in sub-urban areas as compared to urban areas. Relatively the younger generations in sub urban areas are found to use internet more than that of older generations. Recent study highlights that in few sub-urban areas of this nation, accessibility of internet services increased and digital ability also improved. At the same time, it has been found out that affordability remains vital problem in these areas of this nation. The Australian government has taken few measures in order to bridge the gap between the urban and sub-urban areas. The policymakers have introduced education programs on ICT in the sub-urban areas in order to reduce this gap (Lopez, Gonzalez-Barrera Patten, 2013). Buckingham Willett (2013) found out that rapid development of information society has basically innovated new imperatives for the policymakers for bridging the digital gap. However, it can be predicted that the digital gap between these two areas will reduce in future. Conclusion The above research framework reflects that while utilization of internet has been increasing significantly, digital gap persists between urban and sub-urban areas of this nation. It has been evident from the empirical evidences that the digital gap has been decreasing between these two areas despite ICTs affordability of people decline over the last few years. However, it will be difficult for the policymakers to reduce the digital gap between urban and sub-urban areas if the problems such as ICTs affordability, literacy and people income remain unresolved. Furthermore, increasing ICT cost to rural users due to low power of earning and deficiency of training resources widens the digital gap. However, it is necessary for the Australian government to provide more support in order to reduce the gap. References Alam, K., Salahuddin, M. (2015). Assessing digital divide and its determinants: a case study of households perception in the Western Downs region of Queensland. Allington, R. L., McGill-Franzen, A. (Eds.). (2012).Summer reading: Closing the rich/poor reading achievement gap. Teachers College Press. Beena, M., Mathur, M. (2012). Role of ict education for women empowerment.International Journal of Economics and Research,3(3), 164-172. Broadbent, R., Papadopoulos, T. (2013). Bridging the digital dividean Australian story.Behaviour Information Technology,32(1), 4-13. Buckingham, D., Willett, R. (Eds.). (2013).Digital generations: Children, young people, and the new media. Routledge. Davis, F. D. (1985).A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results(Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology). DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E. (2001). From the digital divideto digital inequality: Studying Internet use as penetration increases.Princeton: Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University,4(1), 4-2. Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., Ainley, J. (2013). International computer and information literacy study: Assessment framework. Imperial, C., Oliver, G. (2012). New Digital Literacies Research in High Schools A Review of Literature. Jaeger, P. T., Bertot, J. C., Thompson, K. M., Katz, S. M., DeCoster, E. J. (2012). The intersection of public policy and public access: Digital divides, digital literacy, digital inclusion, and public libraries.Public Library Quarterly,31(1), 1-20. Lopez, M. H., Gonzalez-Barrera, A., Patten, E. (2013). Closing the digital divide: Latinos and technology adoption. Macdonald, S. J., Clayton, J. (2013). Back to the future, disability and the digital divide.Disability Society,28(5), 702-718. Ragnedda, M., Muschert, G. W. (Eds.). (2013).The digital divide: The Internet and social inequality in international perspective(Vol. 73). Routledge. Sarkar, S. (2012). The role of information and communication technology (ICT) in higher education for the 21st century.Science,1(1), 30-41. Thomas, J., Barraket, J., Ewing, S., MacDonald, T., Mundell, M., Tucker, J. (2016). Measuring Australia's Digital Divide: The Australian Digital Inclusion Index 2016. van Deursen, A. J., Helsper, E. J. (2015). The third-level digital divide: Who benefits most from being online?. InCommunication and information technologies annual(pp. 29-52). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Vrallyai, L., Herdon, M. (2013). Reduce the digital gap by increasing e-skills.Procedia Technology,8, 340-348. Willis, S., Tranter, B. (2006). Beyond the digital divide Internet diffusion and inequality in Australia.Journal of sociology,42(1), 43-59.