The diffusion of the Internet is reaching a level between 80% and 90% in Western societies. Yet, while the digital divide is closing for young cohorts, it is still an issue when comparing various generations. This study focuses specifically on the so-called ‘grey divide’, a divide among seniors of age 65+ years. Based on a representative survey in Switzerland (N = 1105), it is found that Internet use is strongly skewed in this age group leading to a partial exclusion of the old seniors (70+). Logistic regression shows that gender differences in usage disappear if controlled for education, income, technical interest, pre-retirement computer use and marital status. Furthermore, the social context appears to have a manifold influence on Internet use. Encouragement by family and friends is a strong predictor for Internet use, and private learning settings are preferred over professional courses. Implications for digital inequality initiatives and further research are discussed.
BonfadelliH (2002) The Internet and knowledge gaps. European Journal of Communication17(1): 65–84.
3.
CharnessNBootWR (2009) Aging and information technology use: potential and barriers. Current Directions in Psychological Science18(5): 253–258.
4.
CompeauDRHigginsCA (1995) Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly19(2): 189–211.
5.
DemunterC (2005) The digital divide in Europe. Statistics in Focus38: 1–7.
6.
DewanSRigginsFJ (2005) The digital divide: current and future research directions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems6(12): 298–337.
7.
DiMaggioPHargittaiENeumanR. (2001) Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology27: 307–336.
8.
DobranskyKHargittaiE (2012) Inquiring minds acquiring wellness: uses of online and offline sources for health information. Health Communication27(4): 331–343.
9.
DuttonWHBlankGGroseljD (2013) Cultures of the Internet: the Internet in Britain. Oxford Internet Survey 2013 report. Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.
10.
FriemelTN (2012) Network dynamics of television use in school classes. Social Networks34(3): 346–358.
11.
FriemelTNSignerS (2010) Web 2.0 literacy: four aspects of the second-level digital divide. Studies in Communication Sciences10(2): 147–170.
12.
GilleardCHiggsP (2008) Internet use and the digital divide in the English longitudinal study of ageing. European Journal of Ageing5(3): 233–239.
13.
GillyMCCelsiMWSchauHJ (2012) It don’t come easy: overcoming obstacles to technology use within a resistant consumer group. Journal of Consumer Affairs46(1): 62–89.
14.
GuntherA (1991) What we think others think: cause and consequence in the third-person effect. Communication Research18(3): 355–372.
15.
HakkarainenP (2012) ‘No good for shovelling snow and carrying firewood’: social representations of computers and the Internet by elderly Finnish non-users. New Media & Society14(7): 1198–1215.
HargittaiEHinnantA (2008) Digital inequality: differences in young adults’ use of the Internet. Communication Research35(5): 602–621.
18.
HelsperEJ (2010) Gendered Internet use across generations and life stages. Communication Research37(3): 352–374.
19.
HsiehPAJRaiAKeilM (2011) Addressing digital inequality for the socioeconomically disadvantaged through government initiatives. Information Systems Research22(2): 233–253.
LazarsfeldPFBerelsonBGaudetH (1968 [1944]) The People’s Choice, vol. 3. New York: Columbia University Press.
28.
LeeBChenYHewittL (2011) Age differences in constraints encountered by seniors in their use of computers and the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior27(3): 1231–1237.
29.
LivingstoneSHelsperE (2007) Gradations in digital inclusion: children, young people and the digital divide. New Media & Society9(4): 671–696.
30.
LogesWEJungJY (2001) Exploring the digital divide: Internet connectedness and age. Communication Research28(4): 536–562.
NorrisP (2003) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
PeacockSEKünemundH (2007) Senior citizens and Internet technology. European Journal of Ageing4(4): 191–200.
38.
PearceKERiceRE (2013) Digital divides from access to activities: comparing mobile and personal computer Internet users. Journal of Communication63(4): 721–744.
39.
PfeilUZaphirisPWilsonS (2010) The role of message-sequences in the sustainability of an online support community for older people. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication15(2): 336–363.
40.
RainsSA (2008) Health at high speed: broadband Internet access, health communication, and the digital divide. Communication Research35(3): 283–297.
41.
RiceRE (2006) Influences, usage, and outcomes of Internet health information searching. International Journal of Medical Informatics75(1): 8–28.
42.
RiceREAtkinCK (2013) Public Communication Campaigns. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
43.
RiceREGrantAESchmitzJ. (1990) Individual and network influences on the adoption and perceived outcomes of electronic messaging. Social Networks12(1): 27–55.
44.
RichardsonMWeaverKCZornTE (2005) ‘Getting on’: older New Zealanders’ perceptions of computing. New Media & Society7(2): 219–245.
45.
RiesenSHänggliA (2006) Onliner und Offliner über 50: Ausgewählte Determinanten der Internetnutzung im Alter. Unpublished research report, University of Zurich, Zurich.
46.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.
47.
RotheGWiedenbeckM (1987) Stichprobengewichtung: Ist Repräsentativität machbar?ZUMA Nachrichten11(21): 43–58.
48.
SchellingHRSeifertA (2010) IKT-Nutzung im Alter: Gründe der (Nicht-)Nutzung von Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologie (IKT) durch Menschen ab 65 Jahren in der Schweiz (Zürcher Schriften zur Gerontologie), vol. 7. Zurich: University of Zurich.
49.
SelwynNGorardSFurlongJ. (2003) Older adults’ use of information and communications technology in everyday life. Ageing and Society23(5): 561–582.
50.
ShapiraNBarakAGalI (2007) Promoting older adults’ well-being through Internet training and use. Aging & Mental Health11(5): 477–484.
51.
SlegersKvan BoxtelMPJollesJ (2008) Effects of computer training and Internet usage on the well-being and quality of life of older adults. Journal of Gerontology. Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences63(3): 176–184.
SnijdersTABvan de BuntGGSteglichCEG (2010) Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks32(1): 44–60.
54.
SourbatiM (2009) ‘It could be useful, but not for me at the moment’: older people, Internet access and e-public service provision. New Media & Society11(7): 1083–1100.
55.
SumSMathewsMRPourghasemM. (2008) Internet technology and social capital. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14(1): 202–220.
56.
Van DeursenAVan DijkJ (2011) Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society13(6): 893–911.
57.
Van DijkJHackerK (2003) The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. Information Society19(4): 315–326.
58.
Van EimerenBFreesB (2013) Rasanter Anstieg des Internetkonsums – Onliner fast drei Stunden täglich im Netz. Media Perspektiven 7–8: 358–372.
59.
VicenteMRLópezAJ (2010) A multidimensional analysis of the disability digital divide. Information Society26(1): 48–64.
60.
VicenteMRLópezAJ (2011) Assessing the regional digital divide across the European Union-27. Telecommunications Policy35(3): 220–237.
61.
WagnerNHassaneinKHeadM (2010) Computer use by older adults: a multi-disciplinary review. Computers in Human Behavior26(5): 870–882.
62.
WeiL (2012) Number matters: the multimodality of Internet use as an indicator of the digital inequalities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication17(3): 303–318.
63.
WeiLHindmanDB (2011) Does the digital divide matter more? Comparing the effects of new media and old media use on the education-based knowledge gap. Mass Communication and Society14(2): 216–235.
64.
XieB (2008) Multimodal computer-mediated communication and social support among older Chinese Internet users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(3): 728–750.
65.
YaoMZRiceREWallisK (2007) Predicting user concerns about online privacy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(5): 710–722.
