Theoretical framework and research questions

Over the last decades, technology users gathered in interaction creating a digital society, which emerged due to intense digital connections. In this designated context, the concept of digital citizenship is referring broadly to norms of appropriate, responsible behaviour regarding technology use, particularly in engaging in social and civic activities (Ribble & Bailey, 2007). Due to being raised in a digital society that has provided new opportunities for education, social interaction, and even employment, students were considered digital natives who hold all technology-related knowledge and skills, including digital citizenship. However, digital citizenship is a complex construct which needs to be addressed.  Recent studies show that an individual’s extent of experience using the Internet is not a factor that affects the level of knowledge and practice of digital citizenship among undergraduate students.  One of the aspects that are being developed in civic education in the era of digital citizenship is civic literacy (Al-Abdullatif et. al., 2020). Several empirical studies on digital citizenship in higher education have been conducted in recent years (e.g., Al-Zahrani, 2015; Kara, 2018); nevertheless, coherent digital citizenship education in the university curriculum is most probably seen as a ‘natural’ outcome of efforts invested in developing students’ digital competences and, thus, is rather neglected in policy papers and programme contents. Given the profound changes undertaken by universities for better preparing students for future societies, it is reasonable to assume that digital citizenship will further enrich the meaning of digital competence development and fully enter the academic debate on transversal competences in higher education. While education programmes in this area are focused more on increasing students’ digital skills, public concern regarding the potential risks to youth online has prompted a quick response to provide internet safety education. This process is more than a mean to an end, hence the building blocks of developing digital citizenship must be clarified to develop sustainable programmes that support digital citizenship development. Also, there is evidence that young people’s online behaviour depends on their own narratives, stories, and experiences of digital life (Black et al., 2022). Nonetheless, the most compacted results show that personal values, such as self-transcendence and security, have a vital role in influencing digital citizen participation (Palacin et al., 2021). Deeper understanding of personal values influence on digital citizenship could provide direction or create incentive mechanisms and grasp user experiences in digital communities (Palacin et al., 2021). Moreover, other studies showed that social factors such as identity (Mitchell, 2016) and social status (Wang & Xing, 2018) impacts youth digital citizenship.

This present study aims to identify and analyze the explanatory factors of digital citizenship, as perceived by university students in different European cultural contexts. Four dimensions were followed in exploring the potential determinants of digital citizenship: digital experiences (Internet Political Activism, Technical Skills, Critical Perspective, and Networking Agency), cultural orientations, individual and social identity, and civic attitude. Therefore, the questions we sought to answer are: What are the individual digital experiences that underlie digital citizenship? What are the values that support digital citizenship? What are the effects of social identity and social status? To what extent cross-national variations can be observed?

Methods The main aim of the current research is to explore some determinants of digital citizenship, as perceived by university students in different European cultural contexts. The data were collected using a questionnaire which was administrated to a sample consisting of 329 students enrolled in bachelor and master programmes in two European countries: Romania (N = 210) and Italy (N = 119). The study variables were assessed using different scales, as follows: digital citizenship was measured using the specific scale elaborated by Choi et al., 2017; to assess self-transcendence personal values, the Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ) was used (Schwartz et al., 2001). The instrument is based on Schwartz’s (1992) theory of human values. Further, the digital experience was measured by using the Digital Experience Footprint Scale (Surmelioglu & Seferoglu, 2019), while identity was assessed by using the Social Identity scale (Nario-Redond, 2004). The main objective of the analysis is to explore effects of individual and country-level factors on digital citizenship development. Therefore, structural equation modelling analysis was used to estimate the relationships between individual factors (e.g., personal values, digital experience, social status, identity) and digital citizenship. The research model was examined in detail to determine whether the demographic characteristics of the respondents had an effect on path relationships within the model. To do so, we used the country and the gender as control variables, and then we ran multigroup analysis (MGA) with PLS-SEM.

Expected outcomes Throughout all models we expect to find positive associations between self-transcendence values, digital experience, identity, social status, and digital citizenship. At the country level, we expect a significant effect on the paths from self-transcendence values, digital experience, and digital citizenship. This means that the association between self-transcendence values and digital citizenship is more significant in Italy, while the association between digital experience and digital citizenship to be significant in Romania, mainly due to disparities in access to technology. The results of this study contribute to the increasing body of research aimed at informing the development of strong academic programs for digital citizenship education. Furthermore, the study delves into the significance of the country level in grasping the relationship between values, digital experience and digital citizenship.

Al-Abdullatif, A. M., & Gameil, A. A. (2020). Exploring Students’ Knowledge and Practice of Digital Citizenship in Higher Education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(19), pp. 122–142. Al-Zahrani, A. (2015). Toward digital citizenship: examining factors affecting participation and involvement in the Internet society among higher education students. International Education Studies, 8(12), 203-217. Black, R., Walsh, L., Waite, C., Collin, P., Third, A., & Idriss, S. (2022). In their own words: 41 stories of young people’s digital citizenship. Learning, Media and Technology, 47(4), 524-536. Choi, M., Glassman, M., & Cristol, D. (2017). What it means to be a citizen in the internet age: Development of a reliable and valid digital citizenship scale. Computers & Education, 107, 100-112. Kara, N. (2018). Understanding university students’ thoughts and practices about digital citizenship: a mixed methods study. Educational Technology and Society. 21, 172–185. Ribble, M., Bailey, G. (2007). Digital Citizenship is Schools. International Society for Technology and Education: Washington, DC. Mitchell, L. (2016). Beyond digital citizenship. Middle Grades Review, 1(3), 3. Nario-Redmond, M. R., Biernat, M., Eidelman, S., & Palenske, D. J. (2004). The social and personal identities scale: A measure of the differential importance ascribed to social and personal self-categorizations. Self and Identity, 3(2), 143-175. Palacin, V., Ferrario, M. A., Hsieh, G., Knutas, A., Wolff, A., & Porras, J. (2021). Human values and digital citizen science interactions. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 149, 102605. Surmelioglu, Y., & Seferoglu, S. S. (2019). An Examination of Digital Footprint Awareness and Digital Experiences of Higher Education Students. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 11(1), 48-64. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1-65). Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 32(5), 519-542. Wang, X., & Xing, W. (2018). Exploring the influence of parental involvement and socioeconomic status on teen digital citizenship: A path modeling approach. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 186-199.