The Risks of Digitalization: Systematization of the Scientific Field

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The article is devoted to analyzing and systematizing the digitalization risks that are in the focus of the scientific community. The empirical data is comprised of publications in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Scopus in 2010–2024. Four groups of digitalization risks were identified and described: digital inequality, digital addiction, privacy problems and a group of other risks. The specifics of identifying and gauging risks were revealed. It is shown that privacy risks are identified as a subjective sense of threat by individuals, while both subjective and objective criteria are used to measure the risks of digital dependence and digital inequality. It is concluded that there is a tradition of studying risks in some scientific fields that is absent in others. For example, tools from the field of psychology are widely used to identify and measure digital addiction but are almost absent from the field of sociology. Similarly, different vulnerable groups were found to be exposed to different risks. The focus of digital inequality researchers has been on the elderly as the most exposed to this risk. On the contrary, in studies of digital addiction, young people are the most vulnerable group. Age and digital literacy are mentioned as factors influencing different groups of digital threats. Despite attempts to identify a single group of factors behind the spread of digitalization risks, the research field remains highly fragmented.

About the authors

Roman A. Shcherbakov

HSE University

Author for correspondence.
Email: rashcherbakov@hse.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5054-3869
SPIN-code: 1087-2894
ResearcherId: ABH-2975-2022
Postgraduate Student, Research Assistant, Laboratory for Science and Technology Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge Moscow, Russia

References

  1. Варламова Ю.А. Межпоколенческий цифровой разрыв в России // Мир России. 2022. Т. 31. № 2. C. 51–74. doi: 10.17323/1811-038X-2022-31-2-51-74 EDN: LMITQU
  2. Вартанова Е.Л., Гладкова А.А. Цифровое неравенство, цифровой капитал, цифровая включенность: динамика теоретических подходов и политических решений // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 10. Журналистика. 2021. № 1. C. 3–29. doi: 10.17323/1811-038X-2022-31-2-51-74 EDN: LMITQU
  3. Волченко О.В. Динамика цифрового неравенства в России // Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены. 2016. № 5. С. 163–182. doi: 10.14515/monitoring.2016.5.10 EDN: YFOSRV
  4. Груздева М.А. Включенность населения в цифровое пространство: глобальные тренды и неравенство российских регионов // Экономические и социальные перемены: факты, тенденции, прогноз. 2020. Т. 13. №. 5. С. 90–104. doi: 10.15838/esc.2020.5.71.5 EDN: GSPBDZ
  5. Корытникова Н.В. Интернет-зависимость и депривация в результате виртуальных взаимодействий // Социологические исследования. 2010. № 6. C. 70–79. EDN: MNKOAZ
  6. Цой Н. Феномен интернет-зависимости и одиночества // Социологические исследования. 2011. № 12. C. 98–107. EDN: ONGKGP
  7. Abbate J. Getting Small: A Short History of the Personal Computer. Proceedings of the IEEE. 1999. Vol. 87. No. 9. P. 1695–1698. doi: 10.1109/5.784256
  8. Au-Yeung T.C., Qiu J. Institutions, Occupations and Connectivity: The Embeddedness of Gig Work and Platform-Mediated Labour Market in Hong Kong. Critical Sociology. 2022. Vol. 48. No. 7–8. P. 1169–1187. doi: 10.1177/08969205221090581
  9. Cook D. The Freedom Trap: Digital Nomads and the Use of Disciplining Practices to Manage Work/Leisure Boundaries. Information Technology & Tourism. 2020. Vol. 22. No. 3. P. 355–390. doi: 10.1007/s40558-020-00172-4
  10. Cotton S.R., Anderson W.A., McCullough B.M. Impact of Internet Use on Loneliness and Contact with Others among Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2013. Vol. 15. Iss. 2. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2306
  11. Dunn M. Making Gigs Work: Digital Platforms, Job Quality and Worker Motivations. New Technol Work Employ. 2020. Vol. 35. No. 2. P. 232–249. doi: 10.1111/ntwe.12167
  12. Dutton W.H., Rogers E.M., Jun S.-H. Diffusion and Social Impacts of Personal Computers. Communication Research. 1987. Vol. 14. No. 2. P. 219–250. doi: 10.1177/009365087014002005
  13. Ewald F. Insurance and Risk. The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality: With Two Lectures by and an Interview with Michel Foucault. Ed. by M. Foucault, et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991. P. 197–210.
  14. Gershuny J. Web Use and Net Nerds: A Neofunctionalist Analysis of the Impact of Information Technology in the Horne. Social Forces. 2003. Vol. 82. No. 1. P. 141–168. doi: 10.1353/sof.2003.0086
  15. Gimpel H., Schmied F. Risks and Side Effects of Digitalization: A Multi-Level Taxonomy of The Adverse Effects of Using Digital Technologies and Media. Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Stockholm & Uppsala, Sweden, June 8–14, 2019. Accessed 01.02.2025. URL: https://www.wi.uni-bayreuth.de/pool/Dokumente/ECIS_Risks-and-Side-Effects-of-Digitalization.pdf
  16. Kim S. The Diffusion of the Internet: Trend and Causes. Social Science Research. 2011. Vol. 40. No. 2. P. 602–613. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.07.005
  17. Kim W., Ok-Ran J., Chulyun K., et al. The Dark Side of the Internet: Attacks, Costs and Responses. Information Systems. 2011. Vol. 36. P. 675–705. doi: 10.1016/j.is.2010.11.003
  18. Krippendorff K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. 4th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2018. 451 p. doi: 10.4135/9781071878781
  19. Lupton D. Risk and Sociocultural Theory: New Directions and Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 204 p. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511520778
  20. Meng S.-Q., Cheng J.-L., Li Y.-Y., et. al. Global Prevalence of Digital Addiction in General Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clinical Psychology Review. 2022. Vol. 92. Publication No. 102128. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2022.102128
  21. Pirkkalainen R., Salo M. Two Decades of the Dark Side in the Information Systems Basket: Suggesting Five Areas for Future Research. Proceedings of The 24th European Conference on Information Systems. Tel Aviv, Israel, June 9–11, 2014. European Conference on Information Systems. Article 101. Accessed 01.02.2025. URL: http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2016_rp/101
  22. Rizk J., Hillier C. Digital Technology and Increasing Engagement among Students with Disabilities: Interaction Rituals and Digital Capital. Computers and Education Open. 2022. Vol. 3. Publication No. 100099. doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100099
  23. Tarafdar M., Pullins E.B., Ragu‐Nathan T.S. Technostress: Negative Effect on Performance and Possible Mitigations. Information Systems Journal. 2015. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 103–132. doi: 10.1111/isj.12042
  24. Timmermans S., Kaufman R. Technologies and Health Inequities. Annual Review of Sociology. 2020. Vol. 46. No. 1. P. 583–602. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054802
  25. Whiting R., Symon G. Digi-Housekeeping: The Invisible Work of Flexibility. Work, Employment and Society. 2020. Vol. 34. No. 6. P. 1079–1096. doi: 10.1177/0950017020916192
  26. Young K.S. Caught in the Net: How to Recognize the Signs of Internet Addiction and a Winning Strategy for Recovery. N.-Y.: John Wiley & Sons, 1998. 274 p.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).