IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v10y2020i1p2158244020914573.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Young Adult Perceptions of Internet Communications and the Grooming Concept

Author

Listed:
  • Amy C. Wood
  • Jacqueline M. Wheatcroft

Abstract

Research of young people shows a lack of understanding of the term grooming in online communications and that internet risks are taken because internet literacy is poor for this group. However, limited research has investigated the perceptions of young adults in this context. The aim of this study was to understand young adults’ perceptions of risk, their internet behaviors, and understanding of the grooming concept. Furthermore, to understand the types of risk behaviors young people engage in online, whether they perceive these behaviors as risky, and what implications this has for vulnerability to negative experiences. An examination of internet communication perceptions and the grooming concept focused on 10 young males and females aged between 18 and 23 years. Semi-structured interviews were conducted at open access youth organizations in the North West of England, UK, and the duration of each interview was approximately 30 min. The data were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Emergent themes were (a) grooming as a concept, (b) virtual lives, and (c) perception of risk. The findings concur there is limited understanding of the term grooming but that explanations may not be simply confined to literacy. Risks being taken online were not always perceived as risky. Recommendations include the need for a more nuanced definition of the term grooming and that more information is available to children and caregivers. Further work should focus on younger participants’ perceptions of grooming to address wider issues, together with a focus on risk taking behaviors among other vulnerable groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy C. Wood & Jacqueline M. Wheatcroft, 2020. "Young Adult Perceptions of Internet Communications and the Grooming Concept," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440209, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:1:p:2158244020914573
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244020914573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244020914573
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244020914573?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sonia Livingstone, 2008. "Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers' use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27072, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elisabeth Staksrud & Kjartan Ólafsson & Sonia Livingstone, 2013. "Does the use of social networking sites increase children’s risk of harm?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 45016, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Malissa Maria Mahmud & Shiau Foong Wong, 2021. "Social Media Blueprints: A Study of Self-Representation and Identity Management," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 11(6), pages 286-299, June.
    3. Francisco Javier Ballesta Pagán & Josefina Lozano Martínez & Mari Carmen Cerezo Máiquez, 2018. "Internet Use by Secondary School Students: A Digital Divide in Sustainable Societies?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    4. Denise E. Agosto & June Abbas & Robin Naughton, 2012. "Relationships and social rules: Teens’ social network and other ICT selection practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(6), pages 1108-1124, June.
    5. Ellen Helsper & Monica M. Gerber, 2012. "The plausibility of cross-national comparisons of internet use types," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 42956, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Mª Victoria Bordonaba-Juste & Laura Lucia-Palacios & Raúl Pérez-López, 2020. "Generational differences in valuing usefulness, privacy and security negative experiences for paying for cloud services," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 35-60, March.
    7. Prasanta Bhattacharya & Tuan Q. Phan & Xue Bai & Edoardo M. Airoldi, 2019. "A Coevolution Model of Network Structure and User Behavior: The Case of Content Generation in Online Social Networks," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 117-132, March.
    8. Laura Lucia-Palacios & Victoria Bordonoba-Juste & Raúl Pérez-López, 2021. "Consumer-to-consumer reselling adoption among European countries: differences between old and young millennials," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 15(2), pages 253-279, June.
    9. Montgomery, Kathryn C., 2015. "Youth and surveillance in the Facebook era: Policy interventions and social implications," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 771-786.
    10. Ash Watson & Deborah Lupton, 2022. "What Happens Next? Using the Story Completion Method to Surface the Affects and Materialities of Digital Privacy Dilemmas," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 27(3), pages 690-706, September.
    11. Tamara Shepherd, 2012. "Persona rights for user-generated content: a normative framework for privacy and intellectual property regulation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59450, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Sonia Livingstone & Jessica Mason, 2015. "Sexual rights and sexual risks among youth online: a review of existing knowledge regarding childrenand young people’s developing sexuality in relationto new media environments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64567, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Sonia Livingstone & Anke Görzig, 2014. "When adolescents receive sexual messages on the internet: explaining experiences of risk and harm," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 55630, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Gila Cohen Zilka & Chen Goldberg, 2021. "Watching of Scary TV Shows by Children and Youth, Identification With Characters, and Resulting Fears and Nightmares," Review of European Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(1), pages 1-1, March.
    15. Van Royen, Kathleen & Poels, Karolien & Vandebosch, Heidi, 2016. "Harmonizing freedom and protection: Adolescents' voices on automatic monitoring of social networking sites," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 35-41.
    16. Ellen Helsper, 2014. "Offline social identity and online chat partner selection," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51116, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Tosti H. C. Chiang & Chih-Shan Liao & Wei-Ching Wang, 2022. "Impact of Artificial Intelligence News Source Credibility Identification System on Effectiveness of Media Literacy Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, April.
    18. Daria J. Kuss & Mark D. Griffiths, 2011. "Online Social Networking and Addiction—A Review of the Psychological Literature," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-25, August.
    19. Joyce Vissenberg & Leen d'Haenens, 2020. "Protecting Youths’ Wellbeing Online: Studying the Associations between Opportunities, Risks, and Resilience," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 175-184.
    20. Hector Gonzalez-Jimenez, 2017. "The self-concept life cycle and brand perceptions: An interdisciplinary perspective," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(1), pages 67-84, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:1:p:2158244020914573. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.