Gender Equality and ICT in the Context of Formal Education: a Systematic Review

MEDIA EDUCATION RESEARCH JOURNAL REVISTA CIENTÍFICA DE COMUNICACIÓN Y EDUCACIÓN

ISSN: 1134-3478 / DL: H-189-93 / e-ISSN: 1988-3293 n. 63, vol. XXVIII (2020-2), 1th Quarter, April, 1st, 2020

INDEXED INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL https://www.revistacomunicar.com/index.php?contenido=ranking-indexaciones&idioma=en

JOURNAL CITATION REPORTS (JCR) JCR 2018 (2019-20): Q1. Impact Factor: 3.338. 5 Year Impact Factor 3.785. Inmediacy Index: 1.750; Eigenfactor Score: 0.00076; Communication: Q1 (10th position from 243, top Iberoamerican journal;; Education: Q1 (9th position from 88), the first Spanish and Iberoamerican journal SOCIAL SCIENCES CITATION INDEX: The top journal in Spanish in Communication since 2007

SCOPUS CITESCORE 2018 (2019-20): (2.79): Q1 en Cultural Studies (5th position from 890) (percentile 99). Q1 in Communication: 26th from 312 (percentile 91). Q1 in Education (79th position from 1040) (percentile 91). SCIMAGO JOURNAL RANK: SJR 2018 (2019-20): 0.851: Q1 in Cultural Studies: The top 10% journal. Q1 in Communication: The 10% top journal. Q1 in Education: The 10% top journal

RECYT (FECYT-MEC) FECYT Ranking 2020: Education: 1st of 56 journals (99.82 points out of 100) (top 1%); Communication, Information and Scientific Documentation: 1st of 16 journals (99.82 points out of 100) (top 1%). FECYT 2016-2019 Seal of Quality Excellence (12 indicators) (Official Bulletin of State). Renewal until 2020.

GOOGLE SCHOLAR 2019/20: Top 100 de Google: 1st position (from 100) in the Spanish ranking of all research journals areas. H5: 38. Mean H5: 50. In 2019-09-23: H: 69; H5: 62 (30.912 accumulated citations) H5 Index (2013-2017), acording EC3 Reports, 2018 (UGR): 1st position in Education (out of 165; H5: 38); 1st position in Communication (out of 51; H5: 38)

DIALNET METRICS Q1: COMMUNICATION 2018 (2019): 1st position (from 223); IF: 3.275 (655 cites) Q1: EDUCATION 2018 (2019): 1st position (from 55); IF: 3.275 (655 cites)

CIRC (INTEGRATED CLASSIFICATION OF SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS) (EC3 Metrics) 2019, Level A+ (highest rated)

REDIB (CSIC) (Ibero-American Innovation and Scientific Knowledge Network) 2019: 1th position among 1,039 select journals from all areas. Rating: 54.188

ERIH+ Level INT2 (2019)

PUBLISHED BY: GRUPO COMUNICAR EDICIONES INTERNATIONAL CO-EDITIONS • www.comunicarjournal.com • www.grupocomunicar.com • ENGLISH EDITION: University of Chester, MMU (Manchester) (United Kingdom). Tecnologico de Monterrey (Mexico) • Administration: [email protected] • Staff: [email protected] • PORTUGUESE EDITION: University of Brasilia (Brazil) • Mail box 527. 21080 Huelva (Spain) • CHINESE EDITION: University of Southern California (USA) • COMUNICAR is a member of CEDRO (Spanish Centre for Hong Kong Baptist University (China) Reprographic Rights). • LATIN-AMERICAN EDITION: Technical University of Loja • COMUNICAR is a quarterly scientific publication, published in (UTPL) )Ecuador) January, April, July and October. • COMUNICAR journal accepts and promotes online institutional PRINTED BY: Estugraf. Madrid (Spain) exchanges with other scientific journals. © Reproduction of any text in COMUNICAR requires authorization © COMUNICAR is a patented trademark registered at the Spanish from CEDRO or the publisher. Patents and Trademarks Office, n. 1806709, E-SHOP: www.revistacomunicar.com/index.php?contenido=tienda 3

C O N T E N T S Comunicar, 63, XXVIII (2020-2)

Gender equality, media and education: , 63, XXVIII, 2 020 A necessary global alliance unica r

Igualdad de género, medios y educación: Com Una alianza global necesaria

DOSSIER

THEMATIC EDITORS Dr. Francisco-José García-Ramos, Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) Dr. María-Soledad Vargas-Carrillo, Pontifical Catholic University of Valparaíso (Chile) Dr. Alexandra Wake, RMIT University (Australia)

01. Gender equality and ICT in the context of formal education: A systematic review ...... 09-19 Igualdad de género y TIC en contextos educativos formales: Una revisión sistemática María-Paz Prendes-Espinosa, Pedro-Antonio García-Tudela & Isabel-María Solano-Fernández (Spain) 02. Gender studies in Communication Degrees ...... 21-30 Los estudios de género en los Grados de Comunicación Francisco-José García-Ramos, Francisco-A. Zurian & Patricia Núñez-Gómez (Spain) 03. Women on YouTube: Representation and participation through the Web Scraping technique ...... 31-40 La mujer en YouTube: Representación y participación a través de la técnica Web Scraping Uxía Regueira, Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro & Sergio Da-Vila (Spain) 04. Influence of Instagram stories in attention and emotion depending on gender ...... 41-50 Influencia de las historias de Instagram en la atención y emoción según el género Joan-F. Fondevila-Gascón, Óscar Gutiérrez-Aragón, Meritxell Copeiro, Vicente Villalba-Palacín & Marc Polo-López (Spain) 05. Victims and perpetrators of feminicide in the language of the Mexican written press ...... 51-60 Víctimas y victimarios de feminicidio en el lenguaje de la prensa escrita mexicana Elizabeth Tiscareño-García & Óscar-Mario Miranda-Villanueva (Mexico)

KALEIDOSCOPE

06. SEO and the digital news media: From the workplace to the classroom ...... 63-72 SEO y cibermedios: De la empresa a las aulas Carlos Lopezosa, Lluís Codina, Javier Díaz-Noci & José-Antonio Ontalba-Ruipérez (Spain) 07. Influence of family and pedagogical communication on school violence ...... 73-82 Influencia de la comunicación familiar y pedagógica en la violencia escolar Miguel Garcés-Prettel, Yanin Santoya-Montes & Javier Jiménez-Osorio (Colombia) 08. To-friend or not-to-friend with teachers on SNSs: University students' perspectives ...... 83-92 Ser o no ser amigos de los profesores en redes sociales: Las perspectivas de los estudiantes universitarios Zeynep Turan, Levent Durdu & Yuksel Goktas (Turkey) 09. Domesticated voices and false participation: Anatomy of interaction on transmedia podcasting ...... 93-102 Voces domesticadas y falsa participación: Anatomía de la interacción en el podcasting transmedia David García-Marín & Roberto Aparici (Spain) 10. Problematic Internet uses and depression in adolescents: A meta-analysis ...... 103-113 Usos problemáticos de Internet y depresión en adolescentes: Meta-análisis Raquel Lozano-Blasco & Alejandra Cortés-Pascual (Spain)

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

GENERAL INFORMATION “Comunicar”, Media Education Research Journal is publi shed by Grupo Comunicar Ediciones (VAT: G2111 6603).

, 63, XXVIII, 2 020 This established non-profit pro fessional group, foun ded in 1988 in Spain, specialises in the field of media education. The journal has been in print continuously since 1994, published every three months. unica r Contents are peer reviewed, in accordance with publication standards established in the APA 7 (American

Com Psycho -logical Association) manual. Com pliance with these re quirements facilitates indexation in the main databases of inter na -tional journals in this field, which increases the dissemination of pu blished papers and therefore raises the profile of the authors and their centres. “Comunicar” is indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Journal Citation Reports (JCR), Scisearch, Scopus and over 788 databases, catalogues, search engines and international repertoires worldwide. Each issue of the journal comes in a print (ISSN:134-3478) and electronic for mat (www.comunicarjournal.com) (e-ISSN: 1988-3293), identifying each submission with a DOI (Digital Object Identifier System).

SCOPE AND POLICY Subject Matter: Fundamentally, research papers related to communication and education, and espe cially the in tersec - tion between the two fields: media edu cation, educational media and resources, educational technology, IT and electronic resources, audio vi sual, tech nolo gies... Reports, studies and experiments relating to these subjects are also accepted. Contributions: “Comunicar” publishes research results, studies, state-of-the-art articles and bibliographic re views es pecially in relation to Latin America and Europe and re garding the conver gence between edu ca tion and commu-nication, preferably written in Spanish although sub missions are also accepted in English. The contri butions to this journal may be: Research papers, Reports, Studies and Proposals (5,000-6,500 words of text, refe rences in clu ded), State-of-the-art articles: (6,000-7,000 words of text, including references). Unsolicited manuscripts sent in by authors are initially placed in the Miscellaneous section of the journal. The Topics section is organized by an editor through a system of call for papers and specific commissions to experts in the field. If we receive manuscripts within the deadline for a particular topic, the journal editor can refer the manuscript to the Topics editor for assessment and possible publication in this monographic section. The deadline for each Topic section is at least nine months before publication.

EDITORIAL PROCESS “Comunicar” confirms receipt of all articles submitted by authors and keeps the au thors informed of the accep -tance/rejection process, as well as the editing process, in the event of acceptance. The webpage www.comunicar -journal.com also provides in for mation about manuscript editing procedures, full guidelines for publication, as well as the Annexes: review protocol prior to submission, manuscript structure protocol, ex ternal review protocol… In general, once the external reports have been reviewed, the criteria that justify the editors’ decision to accept or reject submissions are as follows: a) Topical and new. b) Relevance: applicability of the results to the resolution of spe-cific problems. c) Originality: valuable information, repetition of known results. d) Significance: advancement of scientific knowledge. e) Reliability and scientific validity: verified methodological quality. f) Organisation (logical coherence and material presentation). g) Presentation: good wri tting style.

PRESENTATION AND STRUCTURE OF ORIGINAL PAPERS Manuscripts must be sent exclusively through the Journal Management Centre (www.revistacomunicar.com/ojs/). These publication guidelines are based on the standards of the American Psycho lo gical Associa tion (APA 7): (http://goo.gl/1sS7Ax). Structure: The following two files must be sent together: manuscript (main text), and cover letter / title page.

ETHICAL COMMITMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES Each author must submit a statement of authorship and text originality. Previously published material will not be accepted. The cover letter must specify the transfer of co pyright ownership of the manuscript for its publication in “Comunicar”. www.comunicarjournal.com

ASSISTANT EDITORS • Dr. Rosa García-Ruiz, University of Cantabria, Spain • Dr. Rafael Repiso, UNIR / EC3, University of Granada, Spain • Dr. Amor Perez-Rodriguez, University of Huelva, Spain ADVISORY BOARD • Dr. Ana Pérez-Escoda, UNIR, University of Nebrija, Spain • Dr. Octavio Islas. Pontificia Catholic University, Ecuador • Dr. Luis-Miguel Romero-Rodríguez, URJC, Spain • Dr. Don Shin, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea • Dr. Angel Hernando-Gómez ,University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Moisés Esteban-Guitert, University de Girona • Ms. Arantxa Vizcaíno-Verdú, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Patrick Verniers, Conseil Sup. Medis Education, Belgium • Dr. Agueda Delgado-Ponce, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Domingo Gallego, National Distance University, Spain THEMATIC EDITORS • Dr. Manuel Area, La Laguna University, Tenerife, Spain • Dr. Francisco-J. García-Ramos, Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) • Dr. Ramón Reig, University of Seville, Spain • Dr. María-S. Vargas-Carrillo, Pontifical Catholic University of Valparaíso (Chile) • Dr. Gustavo Hernández, ININCO, Central University, Venezuela • Dr. Alexandra Wake, RMIT University (Australia) • Dr. Isabel Cantón, University of Leon, Spain • Dr. Juan de Pablos, University of Seville, Spain INTERNATIONAL COEDITORS • Dr. Gerardo Borroto, CUJAE, La Habana, Cuba • English: Dr. M. Gant, Univ. Chester and Dr. C. Herrero (MMU), UK • Dr. Manuel Fandos-Igado, UNIR, Zaragoza, Spain • Portuguese: University of Brasilia, Brazil • Dr. J. Manuel Pérez-Tornero, Autonomous University, Barcelona • Chinese: Dr. Yuechuan Ke (USA) and Dr. Alice Lee, Hong Kong • Dr. Jorge Cortés-Montalvo, UACH/REDECA, Mexico • Iberoamerican: M. Soledad Ramírez, TEC Monterrey, Mexico and • Dr. Carmen Marta, University of Zaragoza, Spain Abel Suing, University T. Part. of Loja, Ecuador • Dr. Silvia Contín, National University of Patagonia, Argentina • Dr. Begoña Gutiérrez, University of Salamanca, Spain ADVISORY BOARD • Dr. Ramón Pérez-Pérez, University of Oviedo, Spain • Dr. Ismar de-Oliveira, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil • Dr. Carlos Muñiz, Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon, Mexico • Dr. Miguel de-Aguilera, University of Malaga, Spain • Dr. Carmen Echazarreta, University of Girona, Spain • Dr. Guillermo Orozco, University of Guadalajara, Mexico • Dr. Evgeny Pashentsev, Lomonosov Moscow University, Russia • Dr. Manuel Ángel Vázquez-Medel, University of Seville, Spain • Dr. Fahriye Altinay, Near East University, Turkey • Dr. Cecilia Von-Feilitzen, Nordicom, Sweden • Dr. Jesús Valverde, University of Extremadura, Spain • Dr. Joan Ferrés-i-Prats, Pompeu Fabra Univer., Barcelona, Spain • Dr. Yamile Sandoval, University of Santiago of Cali, Colombia • Dr. Agustín García-Matilla, University of Valladolid, Spain • Dr. Pilar Arnaiz, University of Murcia, Spain • Dr. Cristina Ponte, New University of Lisboa, Portugal • M. Paolo Celot, EAVI, Brussels, Belgium • Dr. Pier Cesare Rivoltella, Catholic University of Milano, Italy • Dr. Victoria Tur Viñes, University of Alicante, Spain • Dr. Javier Marzal, Jaume I University, Castellon, Spain • Dr. José-María Morillas, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Jesús Arroyave, University of the Nord, Barranquilla, Colombia • Dr. Jorge Mora, California, USA • Dr. Francisco García-García, Complutense Univer., Madrid, Spain • M. Jordi Torrent, ONU, Alliance of Civilizations, NY, USA • Dr. Alberto Parola, MED, University of Torino, Italia • Ms. Kathleen Tyner, University of Texas, Austin, USA • Dr. Teresa Quiroz, University of Lima, Peru • Ms. Marieli Rowe, National Telemedia Council, Madison, USA • Dr. Concepción Medrano, University of País Vasco, Spain • Dr. Claudio Avendaño, University Santiago of Chile, Chile INTERNATIONAL REVIEWERS BOARD • Dr. María Luisa Sevillano, National Distancie University, Spain • 680 Reviewers of 48 countries (2020-2) • Dr. Mar Fontcuberta, Catholic University, Chile ww.revistacomunicar.com/index.php?contenido=evaluadores&idioma=en • Dr. Julio Cabero-Almenara, University of Seville, Spain • Dr. Manuel Cebrián-de-la-Serna, University of Malaga, Spain BOARD OF MANAGEMENT • Dr. Ana García-Valcárcel, University of Salamanca, Spain • D. Francisco Casado-Mestre, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. M. Soledad Ramírez-Montoya, Monterrey Institute, Mexico • Dr. Patricia de-Casas. Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Spain • Dr. Jesús Arroyave, University of Norte, Colombia • Mgtr. Daniela Jaramillo-Dent, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Donaciano Bartolomé, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain • Dr. Isidro Marín-Gutiérrez, UTPL, Ecuador • Dr. Samy Tayie, University of Cairo, Mentor Association, Egypt • Dr. M. Carmen Caldeiro, University of Santiago, Spain • Dr. Javier Tejedor-Tejedor, University of Salamanca, Spain • Dr. Paloma Contreras-Pulido, UNIR, Spain • Dr. Sara Pereira, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal • Dr. Mar Rodríguez-Rosell, UCAM, Murcia, Spain • Dr. Gloria Camarero, Carlos III University, Madrid, Spain • Mgtr. Mónica Bonilla-Del-Río, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Armanda Pinto, University of Coimbra, Portugal • Mgtr. Carmen Baldallo, University of Huelva, Spain • Dr. Pere Marquès, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain • Dr. Xosé Soengas, University of Santiago, Spain • COMMERCIAL MANAGER: Alex Ruiz, Spain

GLOBAL MIL AWARDS © UNESCO, 2019 ComunicarComunicar MARIANO CEBRIÁN TOP PRIZE Quality criteria University of Zaragoza/Aragon-Radio, 2015

Registered in the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, with the code1806709 TOP PRIZE IN COMMUNICATION Carlos III University, Madrid, 2007 , 63, XXVIII, 2 020

unica r QUALITY CRITERIA Com

Quality criteria of “Comunicar” Media Education Research Journal are the indicators of our commitment to a rigorous and professional publishing process. They constitute the endorsement for authors, reviewers, collaborators and readers that the final product offered meets the highest standards and academic rigour expected from a publication of national and international reputation. • Impact and prestige are guaranteed by being in the first quartile among the most recognised journals: Q1 in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) in Communication and Education; Q1 in Scopus (SJR) in Cultural Studies and Q1 in Scopus (CiteScore) in Communication and Education. • Visibility and access are safeguarded by an open and shared access policy that makes all published manuscripts available to any reader in a bilingual version: Spanish and English. • Punctuality and formality contribute to an efficient flow of manuscripts within established timeframes, facilitating quarterly publi-cation thanks to highly effective schedule compliance. • A rigorous process is supported by an International Reviewers Board of nearly 680 highly qualified researchers in the fields of education and communication from almost 48 countries all over the world. • Ethics and commitment that ensure the upholding of rights and duties that protect the whole academic community: authors, reviewers, readers and editors. Our Code of Ethics is based on the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ensuring guidance for authors. • High quality Editorial Management is accomplished throughout the OJS Platform, from the Science and Technology Foundation (FECYT), complemented by reviewers´ contributions and stylistic department work in English and Spanish languages. • Our scientific community is fostered and increased by an influential academic community of authors (1,677), reviewers (600) and readers all over the world. This Community is supported by a committed editorial group composed of: an Editorial Board, an Academic Committee, an International Reviewers Board, an Advisory Board and a Technical Board. • Use and development of emergent technologies encourages the diffusion and impact of the journal, continuously adjusting the access formats, communication models and academic platforms for academic diffusion (ResearchGate, AcademiaEdu...). • The originality and progress of the outstanding research contributions from the research areas of communication and education are guaranteed by plagiarism controls (CrossCheck), applied to all manuscripts accepted before being published to preserve the originality and progress of research. • At last but not least the author is our priority, since after all, authors uphold and give sense to entire process. Every manuscript is available in the Journal website with accurate information about citation, statistical data, references, impact metrics and inter - action in social media. Quality criteria are, in summary, a set of standards that guarantee the whole process, ensuring a professional treatment for every person involved in the publishing, reviewing, editing and spreading processes of the manuscripts. Information on evaluators, acceptance/rejection rates and internationalisation in Comunicar 63

• Number of research works received: 219. Number of research works accepted: 10. •Percent of manuscripts accepted: 4.57%; Percent of manuscript rejected: 94.98%. • Received manuscripts internationalisation: 33 countries. • Numbers of Reviews: 319 (update: www.comunicarjournal.com). • Scientific Reviewers internationalisation: 23 countries. • Country of origin: 4 countries (Spain, Mexico, Colombia & Turkey). • International databases in COMUNICAR 63: 788 (2020-02) (update: www.comunicarjournal.com).

S pecial Topic Issue

Gender equality, media and education: A necessary global alliance

Igualdad de género, medios y educación: Una alianza global necesaria 8 0 2 0 , 63, XXVIII, 2 r unica m o C

www.comunicarjournal.com

Gender equality and ICT in the context of formal education: A systematic review Igualdad de género y TIC en contextos educativos formales: Una revisión sistemática

Dr. María-Paz Prendes-Espinosa is Full Professor of Teaching and School Organization at the University of Murcia (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8375-5983) Pedro-Antonio García-Tudela is Predoctoral Researcher of Teaching and School Organization at the University of Murcia (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0405-923X) Dr. Isabel-María Solano-Fernández is Degree in Teaching and School Organization from the University of Murcia (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3760-8899)

ABSTRACT This article focuses on gender equality as one of the most relevant objectives of the educational system to alleviate gender violence and combat stereotypes. At the same time, ICTshave become a very important educational tool in a digital society like the one where we live. Around these two topics we conducted this research whose purpose is, from the scientific production of the last six years, to analyze the educational practices in formal contexts that deal with gender equality and ICTs(infant, primary, secondary and higher education). The research design is a systematic review, based on the PRISMA statement and the PICoS strategy, using the 2013-2019 search period. After a screening process of a total of 90 documents, 18 papers were found that cover both study topics (gender and ICTs). A content analysis supported by semantic networks was performed, using Atlas.ti v.8. Among the main results, we highlight that most of the good practices in the different educational levels are related to the use of web 2.0. and STEM competences. Finally, we recommend the design of proposals that work on gender through ICTs, with the “smart classroom” as an interesting suggestion that is part of the emerging pedagogies.

RESUMEN Este artículo centra su interés en la igualdad de género, como uno de los objetivos más relevantes del sistema educativo para paliar la violencia de género y combatir los estereotipos. Paralelamente, las TIC se han convertido en una herramienta educativa muy importante en una sociedad digital como la que vivimos. En torno a estos dos tópicos llevamos a cabo esta investigación cuyo propósito es, a partir de la producción científica de los últimos seis años, analizar las prácticas educativas en contextos formales que trabajen la igualdad de género y las TIC (educación infantil, primaria, secundaria y superior). El diseño de investigación es una revisión sistemática, sustentada en la declaración PRISMA y la estrategia PICoS y usando el periodo de búsqueda 2013-2019. Tras el proceso de filtrado de un total de 90 documentos, se han encontrado 18 trabajos que contemplan ambos tópicos de estudio (género y TIC). Se ha realizado un análisis de contenido apoyado en redes semánticas, usando para ello Atlas.ti v.8. Entre los principales resultados, destacamos que la mayoría de buenas prácticas en los diferentes niveles educativos se relacionan con la utilización de la web 2.0. y con las competencias STEM. Por último, se recomienda el diseño de propuestas que trabajen el género a través de las TIC, siendo la «smart classroom» una sugerencia de interés que forma parte de las pedagogías emergentes.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Coeducation, feminism, gender equality, educational technology, childhood education, primary education, secondary education, higher education. Coeducación, feminismo, igualdad de género, TIC, educación infantil, educación primaria, educación secundaria, educación superior.

1 10 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ecnie tmaigest s h emeult ihu eern oteerirfmns movement. feminist earlier the to referring without equality term the use to meaningless it consider We ihngtv osqecsfrwmn(err&Bsh 03 áce-aae,21;Ee,2019). Egea, 2014; Sánchez-Casales, 2013; Bosch, & (Ferrer women for consequences negative with hc ute grvtsseetpn Rdíuz&Mrfoe,21)adi a endmntae how demonstrated been has it and 2018) Miraflores, & (Rodríguez stereotyping aggravates further which established be should relations egalitarian favors that structure a out, points planning urban gender as why, ”#MeToo been has movements cyberfeminist worldwide Slaa 08.O h otay utr htdfeetae ewe edrbsdepcain,skills expectations, gender-based between differentiates that culture a contrary, the On 2018). (Saldaña, from far equality, gender total from benefits that socialization a seek must feminism Today’s 2017). (Pino, eedne n bdec,wihagaaeieult,sbriaigtefmnn otemasculine the to feminine gender passivity, the term as subordinating The such inequality, stereotypes 2010). (Torres, aggravate involves countries which also all and obedience, in components is Health and World present social violence dependence, (WHO pandemic and gender origin social biological that of a between culture highlighted is differentiates the have It of WHO regardless 2013). the problem, Organization, health as public such imperative organizations an However, currently rights. human of Introduction 1. https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-01 in technologies However, of integration 2019). the (García-Aretio, With “digital” labeled classroom. been the have in serve institutions can equality educational This many gender 2016). classroom, promoting Sánchez, the in enriched & situations Solano point in 2016; starting classrooms al., a in et change as Serrano promote 2017; to Román, ways for how & the (Prendes and basis expanded technologies technologies, has the by work with as recent learn education, well can formal we as of which context content, in the of us In expression allowed technologies knowledge. has and which of in technology representation construction 2003), shared of communication, (Cabero, field for view the methodological resources in more ideal perspective a are global with more vision role instrumental a (Escudero, key an to curriculum the replace micro school recognize to a the to from of necessary improvement transition is the The it and sexist 2014). action, innovation transmit educational for unwillingly, in proposals albeit play various could, technologies the teachers that Amongst future 2019). students. of Gallardo, their % & teacher 75 (Gallardo to of training that beliefs improvement continuing reveal and the (2019) favoring 2019) Nolasco through al., education, and made et Carretero hierarchical (Bejarano be training inevitably a initial stereotype-free will in in to both achievements essential sexism training, These attitudes overcome be and 2017). to values must (Pino, Gallardo, and work growth & school acceptance, can Gallardo and coeducational 2019; one socialization al., of development, et measures personal (Bejarano model these problem the With a to this approach also 2019). transversal a even combat but a methodology; To of and and disadvantage, content extent mindset of in transformation a the a 2018). change to and at arrangements, (Carrer, bullying, spatial general specific transphobic suicide by in supported & and for developed, students (Pacheco-Salazar homophobic cause equal by the curriculum for a affected only hidden Institute students being not (Women’s so-called of this puts group the of situation a practice, example specifically This good In a 2015). are 2019). textbooks opportunities, and continues, al. 2019) et 2019). López-Yáñez, al., Ugalde et 2019; (Ugalde forms Egea, subtler new, into transformed although present, still activities, various is for schools gender by in students inequality divide to tendency a been (Igbo, always a has success be There academic even preventing ). and 2015 2013), classroom, Obiyo, Navarro, & the & Onu in Larrañaga, Yubero, relationships sexual (Ovejero, in with harassment difficulties centers of educational cause cause in can begins and This children 2013). towards (Cordero, discrimination perpetuated be to continues plans life and is which ago, decades five did they as organization and social spatial Despite space) same the same opportunities). maintain the same schools in the Spanish sexes sexes many both (both changes, offer school to current mixed inequalities the (eliminating the school spaces), coeducational separate of segregated the in the One students 1997): female (Bonal, and organization 2019). (male classroom of school (Mérida, models three education been have Sánchez in Traditionally there 2017; potential 2018). (Catalán, great values, has social which and and internet 2017) the technology, Fernández, links & that concept a Wheat, cyberfeminism, & Cala, García-Jiménez, 2007; (Solís, stereotypes and myths from 2016). results which image, false its ”All oeuainrmisacalnefrtesho LpzPsul 07 uias 06 oé 2017; Tomé, 2016; Subirats, 2007; (López-Pascual, school the for challenge a remains Co-education through is inequality gender denounce and awareness raise to means widespread a present, At ua ensaebr readeuli int n ihs.Ti stefrtatceo h declaration the of article first the is This rights”. and dignity in equal and free born are beings human • ae 9-19 Pages ”, samast eotsxa bs (Thissen, abuse sexual report to means a as Gne qaiyMtes(E) akigGne-ae Violence”. Gender-Based Tackling (GEM): Matters Equality ”Gender GM rjc:Tcln edrBsdVoec,fne yteRgt,Eult n iiesi program Citizenship and Equality Rights, the by funded Violence, Gender-Based Tackling Project: (GEM) and , 2004) Gurumurthy, 2006; (Boix, 2006) UNESCO, 1995; WOMEN, UN 2015; Nations, (United work which initiatives several are there Although Mathematics) and Engineering Technology, (Science, 0.Uigti esetv,w aeteojcie fti eerho hs eeoe ihnteproject the within developed those on research this of objectives the base we perspective, this Using 10). fteErpa no,wihi ob eeoe nte21-00biennium. 2018-2020 the in developed be to is which Union, European the of 2010: Arras, & (García-Valcárcel collaboration” online for opportunities the and us offer they masculine a flexibility being as competence technological organizations of 2012). international stereotype al., numerous the et combat by (Gil-Juárez to important quality need as the seen of of awareness is role raises women This and 2002). girls Pérez-Sedeño, of & tudents (González-García education female ICT with the use, of not in can do potential teachers ICT STEMs the and that by students so both empowered employed necessary that content, being is tools teaching it even as a why and (Saéz as is inequalities, participants This terms: gender female parallel 2018). to of in al., contribute ICT et absence (Pinedo of the training usefulness 2010), teacher the lack al., long-term highlight a of et to of lack (Hill stereotyping a including and technology. various, 2016), with are Clavero, work this & to of 2019; causes (Calvo, females marked The technology in of a 2019). ability use still Berki, of the is & to Tiainem there subjects reference 2016; in 2018), STEM al., fields al., et academic to et Holth and Rheingans women professional 2018; the Some and both Hirata, in men ; research. gap 2010 for gender our (Chamorro, access in ICT’s of through demonstrate gender inequality we on relative as the ICT’s, to by limited engaged are greatly proposals been our yet of not has equality gender naseigti usinorojciei oaayeeuainlpatcsi omlcnet htwork that contexts formal in practices educational analyze to is objective our question this answering In 2. Methodology ecnie httcnlge r ale navnigeulopruiis ie h space-time the given opportunities, equal advancing in ”allies are technologies that consider We u eerhqeto s o sgne qaiywrigtruhIT nfra dctoa contexts? educational formal ICTs in through working equality gender is how is: question research Our Matters Equality Gender the of framework the within out carried procedures of part is research This © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 9-19 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 11 12 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 eetknit con,bsdo h rpslb acnli(00 n h RSAsaeet(Urrútia statement PRISMA the and (2010) Tacconelli by proposal the on based account, into taken were 1. fifraino h eetddcmns et h 8cttoscetdaelne ote4fe oe that sample codes Analyzed free 2.2. 4 the to linked levels. units are educational significant created the most citations of the 18 each the categorizes to Next, and correspond analyzed encodes documents. is selected It analyzed the problem v.8. of sample research Atlas.ti information The of with of the generated type investigated. study, network the levels the semantic educational both of a different phase demonstrate using last the that round the within models a In distribution After quantitative its documents. two 18 obtained. and was was using search sample documents first analyzed final 90 a were the of After sample criteria, results 1. initial above Figure an the in descriptors, using A shown above filtering, is the of experiences. strategy of study PICoS use longitudinal The the the The or by on specific supported based university. coexistence. analyze process to gender review that years) of the articles 3 of improvement qualitative flowchart (from the and education ensure quantitative pre-school to prioritizes from design education, try formal or is issue context the research referring address studies directly 2013, that to proposals prior years regarding scarce. in documents relatively that, current were found most education was the equality it reference gender addition, to and ICTs In seeks to years addressed. six problems last research the and the to and selected chapter review Scopus) and the book the Science All Limiting of (article, (Web databases Sciences). document Dialnet. multidisciplinary (Social of international main area technology; type the and and from (2013-2019); come Spanish) ICT years documents and 6 education, (English last coeducation, language the communication); equality, of to conference gender events use limited the keywords population, was criteria: the timeframe search strategy: of first our The PICoS the English is the and Population descriptors. is Spanish 2019). bilingual al., in applied (Pertegal-Vega et and design were operators study description, criteria and Boolean data context aforementioned interest, validity, of the study application which relevance, bias, from exclusion, of and axis risk inclusion duplication, were: of criteria elimination The 2010). Bonfill, & favoured. Process is 2.1. information the which of facilitate in selection to set created, order and was indications in editing sample corpus re-reading, the selected documentary of the following a of process generate used, (http://bit.ly/2o1tdjJ) the to database been need a has the this, regarding accomplish To method (2003) review. (SLR) al. review et literature Conn by systematic forth the field, this in on https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-01 edreult ihteueo Cs nodrt eeec n nlz h otsgiiatstudies significant most the analyze and reference to order In ICTs. of use the with equality gender h ifrn cetfcpbiain nlzdi h ia apeaepeetdcrnlgclyi Table in chronologically presented are sample final the in analyzed publications scientific different The those is, That ICTs. through equality gender in educating on based is review this of focus The criteria several validity, their guarantee thus and productions scientific for search optimal an out To carry • P gs9-19 ages 7.Frty nIfn dcto,gne qaiyhsbe xmndi w ifrn as nteone the On ways. different two in examined been has equality gender Education, Infant in Firstly, W7). ,7 0 2ad1 nTbe1,a hw nFgr 3. Figure in shown as 1), Table in 18 and 12 10, 7, 4, 4 5ad1)i einn ogi popularity. gain to beginning is 17) and 15 14, sadces 2.8)cmae oscnayeuain(88%.Ti sdet h atthat fact 16). the and 3 to (works selected due those of is cases two STEM This in to except related 1), Table those in mostly (38.89%). 13 are and education technology 11 through 9, secondary equality (works gender to competencies on educate compared that courses (27.78%) university decrease a is ae oilraiy(ok1) nPiayEuain taeykona erttrn a lobeen also has tutoring peer as which known schoolchildren, 6). among strategy gender- (work program a mentoring stereotypes transform digital Education, gender and a deconstructs Primary learn through play, In equality to gender addressing which 15). developed, the with (work in environments reality web and social of 14), relevant based development (work very and, the robotics 17) initiative, (work about schools this proposals between to groups found discussion digital have with We cyberactivism, of technology. development and engineering in interest in interest 5), female arouse No. and (work encourage resources which competencies digital 8). STEM other (work the and possibilities through these games hand, images, other develops the regularly on and that project a through hand, probable. an considered 2019, is to years prior coming rise the the in account ICT be into Taking equality in gender should 2016. for jobs it of education in exception with databases, increase dealing the national documents with ICT, of and number through international the nonviolence in in and increase samples steady a of is number there that limited noted the Despite frames. time 3. nteohrhn,i rmr dcto,gne qaiyadistetettruhtcnlg ppr 6, (papers technology through treatment its and equality gender Education, Primary in hand, other the On nlssadresults and Analysis ept hr en rda rwhi eaint h dctoa tg,i ihreuainthere education higher in stage, educational the to relation in growth gradual a being there Despite h nlso fSE optnisi rmr dcto spooe nodrt norg female encourage to order in promoted is Education Primary in competencies STEM of inclusion The 2, 1, (works Education Secondary of level the at evident most are developed practices teaching The different the within consulted document of type the as sample the shows 2 Figure in chart bar The ehv eeoe eatcntoki re ovsaietersls(iue4 http://bit.ly/2rxYo 4: (Figure results the visualize to order in network semantic a developed have We 10). and 8 (works minority a are but non-existent, completely not are education Pre-school in Proposals © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 9-19 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 13 14 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 hc ake eim(ok12). (work sexism tackles which wrs2ad4,o iatcpooasbsdo oielann,truhambl hn application phone mobile a through learning, mobile on based proposals didactic or 4), and 2 (works ieso ak wr 6.Teueo pcfcporm hc eeo TMcmeece nuniversity in competencies STEM develop which programs specific of use The 16). (work talks or videos ftepooasw nlzdaebsdo uhln-empoet,sc s“edr@C”(Ferreira, @ICT” “Gender as https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-01 such projects, long-term many such since on done, being based already are is analyzed this cases we most proposals In the role- interventions. of isolated readings, only directed not and as projects long-term such “analog”, mostly remain issues gender with games playing dealing for used levels, resources educational previous the (2009). from is González inherited this and been that (2014) has Pastorino fact classroom the by the to indicated in related as violence directly gender be which may in 2019). which stage (Calvo, (38.89%), a fields Education academic Secondary the is in criteria, and professional established the in both alleviating - to gap contribute gender greatly would the that as tools such are problems These social technologies. through examined as education in an during and Conclusions 4. 3), (work programme undergraduate an must in 13). we integration (work Finally, course of technology-related 11). engineering certain consist develop and and specifically 9 females These at (works specifically viewing samples aimed skills. selected are after schemes the place the in of take two examined which that also emphasize debates, is digital engineering, through as such 2.0, studies, web of use the to related proposals also are class inverted or classroom different flipped on the based projects as other such are strategies there different 5 environments, co- lines, virtual by 1, a on same complemented (works from based subjects tools forums the schemes on discussion technological Along to work and addition which In activities 18). spaces, with 7). (work social feminism and cyberfeminism digital addressing or case, explicitly blogs this perspective, by in educational supported or schemes, similar cyber-activism, are address there to used also is svroswrsidct Sbrt,21;Tm,21) oeuaini eesr,truhteueof use the through necessary, is co-education 2017), Tomé, the 2016; (Subirats, given, indicate works been various As have institutions educational that 2019) the (García-Aretio, meet label “digital” that the and Despite codes), (7 associated are proposals more which with level educational equality The gender on literature scientific of lack the is research our of findings significant most the of One there Education Higher in Education, Secondary in presented proposals the to relation close in Finally, Similarly, ooeo h rpsl mlmne nPiayEuain nScnayshos e 2.0 web schools, Secondary in Education, Primary in implemented proposals the of one to or rdtoa trtlig(óe-aca,20;Sls 2007). Solís, 2007; (López-Pascual, storytelling traditional • ae 9-19 Pages hc owr nasbetfo oeuainlprpcie(argn&Rí,21) rtecreation the or 2013), Ruíz, & (Barragán perspective co-educational a from subject a on work to which 1%.Hwvr ti osdrdt eoeo h seta tgsfritresnldvlpet Here, development. interpersonal for stages essential the of one be to considered is it However, (11%). odvlpSE optniso C kls rmete ie e rsll eaeperspective. is female it Firstly, solely aspects. or certain on sex expand mixed to necessary a be to either seems from it study, skills, our proposals of are ICT conclusions there the investigated, or at levels competencies Looking the all STEM at stereotypes Similarly, develop deconstruct inequality. would to gender which to students, related between issues collaboration confront a and promote to and intended are Carretero and to 2.0, according educators seminars, of mandatory training the through analyze equality to gender necessary (2019). on is Nolasco proposals training it no Therefore, specific are this. offer there counteract However, and to 2015). Education Opportunities, of Equal faculties for in and Institute (Women’s has students (2019) stereotyping their years, recent al. in et but positive, Ugalde be may (Cordero, 2019). methodologies López-Yáñez, curriculum co-educational occurred. hidden terms & sight the in first Pacheco-Salazar in at imbalance 2018; latent that an inequality state Miraflores, of to & idea contributing Rodríguez the and gender, perpetuating 2013; each Offering thus of imbalance. sexism, capacities gender foster the of could of aspect an females as for competences exclusively technological and training digital of terms in not problematic do course degree specific (Acuña, one education gap. only Hirata, university gender in 2018; digital any competencies the in digital al., reduce implement necessities et to are (Barros proposals competence However, courses technological the 2014). technology-related to and related on literacy initiatives engineering Digital found in also 2018). skills have We STEM 2019). of (Martínez-Romera, a development talks found or have debates we through 2018). 2012), equality al., (Villanueva, et people, (Navarro-Pérez young behaviour for sexist reduce use to smartphone designed of application risks mobile the despite (2016). and, Badilla 2017) and Galindo to according inverted level, the this that at potential socializing have and can to academic class the opposed demonstrate studies as various that and participants, is 2017) Maldonado, and initiative institution this of the aspect of “ remarkable as character such A individual campaigns the social & 2019). public represent (Barragán Mérida, often created, 2017; are forums Stuchi, inequality these gender 2017; examine Ferreira, which 2013; newspapers Ruiz, digital or groups, be network can diversity social where classroom as inclusive known 2019). an al., foster also digital et to strategy, Molina is levels This 2011; educational innovation (Moliner, various important 2017). addressed at (Permoser, an used stereotyping addition, is gender In tutoring, eliminate peer 2019). to (Aguilar, which cyber-activism with to mentoring introduction an is 2019). there (Calvo, will gap” represents which gender which competencies “digital and STEM the 2017), reducing the (Savinskaya, in education to of leap introduction stages significant an links later a few is the are during there there expanded However, stage and et this 2019). continued Sánchez Oltra, At be 2019; 2019; aspects. Sanahuja, Esteve, & two & (Broch these (Bel co-educate between devices to electronic as well using as educate 2019), to al., predisposition widespread a is there 2018) tdnsaeas omn neapeo hsls aecudb h osrcino e pcswith spaces web of construction the be 2019). could (Mérida, case newspaper. digital last a this of of and teachers example both An by activities common. long-term also addition, are In students 2017). (Permoser, Education Primary in stereotypes ssae bv,tevs aoiyo ehooyrltdpooasaebsdo h oilwbo web or web social the on based are proposals technology-related of majority vast the above, stated As to beliefs sexist transmit may Education in degree a for studying people of 75% around that striking is It be may that 2018) al., et Rheingans 2015; Faheem, & (Pär-Ola analyzed been also have Two proposals gender teach to Education Higher in used also is 2.0 Web stages, educational previous (Alises, the population in school As Secondary the for useful proven has that strategy a also is learning Mobile 2014; (García-Vázquez, class, inverted the use which methods are also there Education Secondary In this, of because and schools, Secondary in initiative important an is cyberfeminism or Cyber-activism and 2018) Umaschi, & (Sullivan developed be to continue competencies STEM Education, Primary In nlsn h aeilb dctoa tgs r-coleuaini h n hc slatexamined least is which one the is education Pre-school stages, educational by material the Analysing , ITG-il”(acaVzuz 04;dgtlmnoigporm hc eosrc gender deconstruct which programs mentoring digital 2014); (García-Vázquez, “ICT-Go-Girls” # eo”(hse,2018). (Thissen, MeToo” © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 9-19 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 15 16 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 eaaye a ev seape fgo rciewt Csi eaint edrinequality. gender to relation in ICTs with practice good of examples as serve can analyzed we 2006). UNESCO, 2015; Nations, ICTs (United through women of empowerment the for working of ways ln hs aelns ozlzGrí n ée-eeo(02 testeiprac fredefining of importance the stress (2002) Pérez-Sedeño and González-García lines, same these Along Slaa 08.I diin nitlietlann pcs ehooyi olwihcudla othe to lead could which tool a is technology spaces, learning intelligent in addition, In 2018). (Saldaña, G21 E-DPGVA-07,fne ytecl Rgt,eult n iiesi rga 06(22 rga fthe of program (H2020 2016 Program Citizenship and equality ”Rights, call the by funded REC-RDAP-GBV-AG-2017), / AG-2017 -5 http://bit.ly/2kMwW3A 1-15. gia,NJ 21) ieatvsoyeuainpr acuaaí uda:uaivsiainacó atcptv o dos con participativa investigación-acción una mundial: ciudadanía Bogotá. la de para educativas educación experiencias y Ciberactivismo (2019). universitaria. N.J. formación Aguilar, de contextos los en digital Alfabetización (2014). S.R. Acuña, References University. City Dublin by coordinated and Union) European equality. social and coexistence Agency better Funding a of benefit the for and discrimination science combat of will areas experiences contribute the in can courses 2017). acquisition education Puy-Rodríguez, University 2010; the formal at al., that students of et and among (Elizondo beginning gender, occuring technology the inequality of from gender regardless reducing learned students, to means competencies exclusively all This technological equality directed for universal. be existing be gender vital should not of of but are should 2018), technologies benefit skills al., Bdiwi digital et that the Rheingans 2018; of understanding to 2015; development Faheem, al., space & The et (Pär-Ola physical gap. females (Sumadyo towards gender the class digital of the smart restructuring of or narrowing a ” implies expand guidelines classroom to this way, smart research since this new “ In out 2019), the carrying al., on suggest proposals. et based also these We proposals of contexts. teaching originators educational on other the for with developed interviews be can using by studied, proposals gender addresses explicitly which methodology 2019). a al., also et but (Bejarano practices, equality transversal develop to necessary only articles 18 The technology. and science of field the in methodologies our reviewing and content us curricular give documents Conference” Women’s official ”World subsequent 1995 and the events of international conclusions ICT. Other the and 1995). practices on in teaching WOMEN, based evidenced co-educational (UN is as on Beijing idea work ICT), in this to and (2006), need (gender work the topics us Boix’s these shows In on presented, literature have of we lack review The the contexts. educational formal all essential https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-01 educativa]. tecnología la [Replanteando age. global a in https://doi.org/10.3916/C21-2003-04 technologies de New cuento (2003). del J. través Cabero, a coeducación la Trabajando (2019). A. Sanahuja, & D., Broch, attention. classroom assessing in role teacher´s environment: learning Smart (2019). A.A. Techonology Cherif, Learning & in gender S., Research Faiz, a C., of Runz, implementation R., to In Bdiwi, perspective participation. positive and A time (2018). design, I. https://doi.org/10.1109/fie.2018.8659112 of Ramos, question & A L., plan: Amaral, equality E., educación. Araújo, en R.M., sociales Vasconcelos, redes V., las Barros, de potencial El (2013). http://bit.ly/2mkS4Oy secundaria. E. de Ruiz, música & de R., aula Barragán, el en learning mobile del https://doi.org/10.15198/seeci.2017.43.29-51 pedagógico Potencial (2017). M.E. Alises, investigación-acción. (1997). X. una Bonal, de desarrollo y Diseño Infantil: http://bit.ly/2OCVUNO de aula (2006). el M. en Boix, computacional pensamiento y la Robótica educativa. para intervención (2019). feministas F.M. pedagogías Esteve, las & desde M., Reflexiones Bel, hoy. Coeducar currículum. (2019). del M. despatriarcalización Blanco, & I., Martínez, M.T., Bejarano, hsrsac spr ftepoet”edrEult atr GM:Tcln edrBsdVoec”(e.810447-GEM-REC- (Ref. Violence” Gender-Based Tackling (GEM): Matters Equality ”Gender project the of part is research This ehv ogwyt oi omleuain h edakbtenrsac n eleducational real and research between feedback The education. formal in go to way long a have We the broaden qualitatively to is them of One research. of lines prospective two propose we not is Finally, it 2016), al., et (García-Jiménez feminism in rooted stereotypes and falsehoods the of result a As odsg rpsl ntefr fpoet htfvu edreult rmadgtlprpciein perspective digital a from equality gender favour that projects of form the in proposals design to uvstcooísd aIfrainyl ouiain rad une nr a mujeres las entre puentes creando Comunicación: la y Información la de tecnologías Nuevas a ciue e rfsrd nel odccó:pousa eintervención de propuestas coeducación: la ante profesorado del actitudes Las ednisPedagógicas Tendencias udrsdigitals, Quaderns • ae 9-19 Pages , aar Clave, Palabra 27 ednisPedagógicasTendencias , https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v27.2072 . 88 , 48.http://bit.ly/2mejzJU 74-89. , 34 6-8.https://doi.org/10.15366/tp2019.34.013 169-182. , 22 2,13.https://doi.org/10.5294/pacla.2019.22.2.10 1-31. (2), nttt feetia n lcrnc engineers electronics and electrical of Institute 34 75.https://doi.org/10.15366/tp2019.34.004 37-50. , Profesorado aCenicienta » «La eit Luciérnaga-comunicación , Revista , Comunicar 17 1,309-323. (1), Graó. . eit el SEECI la de Revista ed npoeode proceso un desde , 23-30. 21, . uee nRed. en Mujeres . , 43 6(12), 29-51. , AAUW. .. ,ESR (Eds.), E.S.R. ., & J.S., eria .(08.Gne n C:Sho n edrseetps nJã-iv,M,Pne . oeo .(Eds.), M. Dodero, & C., Ponte, M., João-Silva, In stereotypes. engineers gender electronics and and electrical School ICT: of and Gender schools. in (2018). stereotypes E. gender Ferreira, tecnología ICT la and de gender cómo of https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v22i10.7062 el eco-production y The dónde (2017). ¿El E. educativa: Ferreira, innovación de procesos y educativa? contenidos Contextos, (2014). J.M. Escudero, (2010). M. Silvestre, & A., Novo, género. A., de Elizondo, violencia la contra primaria. ”protégete y https://doi.org/10.6018/iQual.347361 intervención: infantil de escuela Proyecto la (2019). en M.T. coeducación Egea, la de abordaje Literature el for 201-221. para MEDLINE Barrera Beyond (2013). (2003). Y. L.M. Dash, Cordero, & R., Wad-Hawan, P., Jantarakupt, S., Searches. Rath, Primaria. S., Educación Isaramalai, V.S., en Conn, coeducación la trabajar para actividades http://bit.ly/2kHYFlP de Propuesta (2010). vínculos.net. M. y Chamorro, Enlaces Ciberfeminismo. profesorado. (2017). del P. inicial Catalán, formación y Sexismo educativa. (2019). comunidad https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.903 A. una Nolasco, en Voces & R., transfóbico: Carretero, y homofóbico escolar acoso cuentos. de los Infancias dispositivo de El través (2018). a C. inventoras Carrer, e Científicas (2019). M.E. Calvo, atnzRmr,DD 21) eiim ecpindlsxsomdat I neuainspro.U sui ecaso. de estudio Un superior. educación Sociales ., en y J.R.P., Experimentales TIC ., Ciencias mediante In las sexismo ESO. de del Didáctica en percepción Revista ciencias y de Feminismo bilingüe (2019). enseñanza D.D. la Martínez-Romera, en TIC con coeducación Primaria. y Educación classroom de Flipped ciclo primer (2017). M.P. el Maldonado, en informe género general de Diagnóstico igualdad la igualdad: 261-265. sobre en Actividades Educación (2007). (2015). (Ed.) A. López-Pascual, Oportunidades academic de and Igualdad self-concept la students‘ para school previo. y secondary Mujer on la stereotype de gender Instituto of Impact sector. ICT (2015). Swedish N. the achievement. Obiyo, in & V., emancipation Onu, dual J., and Igbo, availability Gender, (2017). Society R. and Mackenzie, Employment & A., Bergman, L., (Eds.), Holth, N. Venkatarayalu, ... SDGs (TALE) L.C.U., of Engineering Lei, part https://doi.org/10.1109/tale.2018.8615349 for J., as Learning Shen, development and M., technological Teaching, Assesment, Ros, in on S., differences Conference Nikolic, gender M.J.W., Mathematics. for Lee, and accounting In Engeneering Technology, practices Science, achievement. Education in Higher Women Few? (2018). So S. Why Hirata, (2010). Rose A & & C., Corbett, C., Hill, (2004). A. Gurumurthy, género. y tecnología Ciencia, Sociedad (2002). y E. Pérez-Sedeño, & M.I., González-García, learning género web-based de climate igualdad for act of (2009). support F. the González, género. with de change digital climate brecha and la environment. rights a children´s Teaching torno En (2018). TIC: D. y Gkotzos, Género (2012). A. Vitores, https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/athenead/v12n3.1137 & J., Feliu, A., Gil-Juárez, A.J., López, In ICT. (Eds.), http://bit.ly/2l3sMod through E. entrepreneurship Aguayo, grils & School A., secondary González, Promoting ICT-Go-Girls! (2014). S. García-Vázquez, Salamanca. de (2010). Universidad A.M. feminismo. Arras, el & hacia A., actitudes García-Valcárcel, y Conocimiento (2016). M.E. Trigo, https://doi.org/10.20318/femeris.2016.3229 & M.J., digital. Cala, mundo M., un García-Jiménez, en adolescencia. digital la educación en una género https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.22.2.23911 de de Necesidad violencia (2019). la L. de Prevención García-Aretio, igualdad: docentes de en Percepción Educar Hekademos Classroom: educativa (2019). P. Flipped Gallardo, metodología & la de J.A., agenda través Gallardo, la Secundaria. a en Educación docente emocional de Innovación coeducación estudiantes (2016). una y Para M.G. género. Badilla, de & violencia J.J., la Galindo, a romántico amor Del educativa. (2013). E. Bosch, & V., Ferrer, Mujer. http://bit.ly/33eqNxl diitainGnrldlEtd.http://bit.ly/2ldDico Estado. del General Administración , http://bit.ly/2ldiYI0 https://doi.org/10.18002/cg.v0i8.887 http://bit.ly/2kI8nVr ora fNrigScholarship Nursing of Journal 2 , Profesorado oecaeInvestigación e Docencia 211-232. , 2 . Prospects aeOpen Sage http://bit.ly/33gKBzU nvria eExtremadura. de Universidad . eim ilni egnr nl olcó soa eEteaua netdoscoóiopr la para sociológico estudio Un Extremadura: de escolar población la en género de violencia y Sexismo , , https://doi.org/10.5209/SOCI.59456 , noaindcneyuod a I neducación en TIC las de uso y docente Innovación 26 1 47 éeoyTIC y Género , , 1) 105-122. (17), 5 31-39. , 31 12,133-147. (1-2), 1,1-10. (1), http://bit.ly/2nRCP0C 2,230-247. (2), http://bit.ly/2kL1faT IXraaUiestraGlg nXénero en Galega Universitaria Xornada II , 24 p.1-6). (pp. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015573934 Bridge. . Didasc@lia 13-37. , https://bit.ly/2RjM2vf , https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017016651378 35 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-018-9421-5 optnise I edmet nl nvria:Dfrnisprgénero por Diferencias Universidad: la en rendimiento y TIC en Competencias 2,177-182. (2), https://doi.org/10.1109/siie.2017.8259672 gaddd uee obe nlsuiesddsespañolas universidades las en hombres y mujeres de Igualdad http://bit.ly/2D9aKWL http://bit.ly/2KK5Wv5 http://bit.ly/2mJZqLY , 7 6,153-172. (6), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2003.00177.x ir Pensamiento Libre , 36 3-16. , http://bit.ly/2kLoL7C IQUAL https://doi.org/10.7203/dces.36.12634 M Editorial. UMA . p.207-214). (pp. , 2 147-170. , , p.1510.Uiesddd Coruña. A de Universidad 135-140). (pp. 91 © eit braeiaad ini,Tecnología Ciencia, de Iberoamericana Revista 43-51. , Educar RIED SN 1134-3478 ISSN: IQUAL , , 22 https://doi.org/10.6018/iqual.340701 is Monday First 55 http://bit.ly/2l3pKQR http://bit.ly/2mGriAs 2,9-22. (2), 1,293-310. (1), , 2 73-92. , usinsd Género de Cuestiones • eaoí Magna Pedagogía -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: tee Digital Athenea Femeris 08IE Internacional IEEE 2018 1) 22-22. (10), , dal Mancha la Idea , nttt ela de Instituto . 1 12,95-112. (1-2), oidde Sociedad Revista , • 12 , ae 9-19 Pages Work, 9 3,3-9. (3), Institute , 27-34. , 8 . , , 4 ,

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 17 18 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 soito o eeomn fteIfrainSociety Information the of Development for Association 1-3.http://bit.ly/2mfOlC2 112-133. 8-9.https://doi.org/10.12795/habitatysociedad.2018.i11.11 185-199. emsr .(07.R-etRvremnoiga a odcntutgne eae troye nIT In ICT. in stereotypes related gender deconstruct to way a as mentoring Re-ment-Reverse (2017). K. Permoser, áce,MM,&Sln,IM 21) eesnoe s emtdlga neuainifni nstainserqeia con enriquecidas situaciones en infantil educación en metodologías de (Ed.), uso R. el Roig-Vila, Repensando In Prácticas (2016). tecnologías. I.M. digitales: Solano, colectiva & acción M.M., de Sánchez, repertorios y feminista Twitter. Subactivismo social. en transformación (2017). ciberfeministas la D. Fernández, para & colectivo J.M., proceso Sánchez, un escuela, la textos. de de patio uso el del Reorganizar través (2018). a D. primaria Saldaña, en en interdisciplinar normas propuesta las Una https://doi.org/10.25267/rev_eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2016.v13.i3.09 de Adaptaciones (2016). 628-642. N. Física: Clavero, Educación & en M.J., género Saéz, de igualdad de Propuesta (2018). fútbol. E. In Miraflores, Technology. & in L., diversity Rodríguez, gender increasing for model A https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159533 (Eds.), (2018). D. D. García, Ireland, & T., & Barnes, C., Diaz-Espinoza, E.D., http://bit.ly/2QKTcbr eramo, P., Universidades. Rheingans, y Innovación Ciencia, de Ministerio (2017). Ceuta A. de Puy-Rodríguez, Primaria y Infantil Educación Octaedro. de tecnologías. (2017). educativos M.M. centros Román, los & en M.P., Prendes, género en http://bit.ly/2mD15CO de género Granada]. igualdad de de la desigualdad Universidad de de Doctoral, [Tesis tratamiento situaciones El de Detección (2017). educación: A.M. y Pino, Género (2018). I. redes educativos. Berzosa, sobre contextos & investigación M.J., la Arroyo, de on R., panorama research Pinedo, del of uso. sistemática state de [Revisión current experiencias use. the sobre Taxonomía of of sociales: experience review on Taxonomy Systematic Networks: (2019). Social A. Online Rodríguez-Meirinhos, & A., Oliva-Delgado, M.A., Pertegal-Vega, Secundaria. Educación de aulas las en género an de Violencia Asía: South (2014). in M.J. Pastorino, program ICT Women´s a through Countries (Ed.), Equality Developing P. Gender Nielsen, on In Impacting study. (2015). exploratory H. Faheem, & Z., Pär-Ola, adolescentes. en escolar acoso escolar. (2019). de J. comportamiento López-Yáñez, y & Sexismo B., Pacheco-Salazar, (2013). R. Navarro, & Conductual, E., Psicología Larrañaga, S., Yubero, A., Ovejero, áce,MM,Sln,IM,&Rco .(09.E trtligdgtlataé evdo ne otxod aEuainInfantil. Educación la de contexto el en vídeos de través a digital storytelling El (2019). S. Recio, Pixel-Bit, & I.M., Solano, M.M., Sánchez, http://bit.ly/2rp24c5 Octaedro. 3002-3015). es mujer la contra violencia la que destaca OMS la epidémicas de proporciones Informe http://bit.ly/2KPaIHR de (2013). global Beijing. (Ed.) salud de Salud Acción la de In de Plataforma Mundial igualdad. y Organización en Declaración educar (1995). para (Ed.) espacio MUJERES como ONU ficción de mundos Los http://bit.ly/2DbOmvW infantil: Blanch. (Eds.), literatura en M. Talavera, la sexismo & en el H., diversidad reducir Rausell, y para Género psicoeducativa (2019). app una M.A. de Oltra, Eficacia (2018). A. Oliver, Teseo.adolescentes. & sostenible. A., desarrollo Carbonell, el J.J., para Navarro-Pérez, 2030 y agenda secundaria la primaria, mundo: educación nuestro la http://bit.ly/34i0TtC Transformar en (2015). iguales (Ed.) entre inclusivas. Unidas http://bit.ly/2mfXuuk tutoría interculturales Naciones la I]. aulas de Jaume las través Universitat en a Doctoral, [Tesis clave inclusivas universitaria elemento aulas Un Construyendo iguales: (2011). entre L. tutoría Moliner, La Educación, (2019). de A. Complutense Doménech, Revista & A., Benet, M., Molina, Mérida, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-01 http://bit.ly/2mlWa97 e-SpacioUNED. UNED]. proposta Doctoral, [Tesis una Comencini TIC: Cristina delle e l’uso Aleramo attraverso Sibilla Secondaria di nell’Istruzione opere genere le di con letteratura didattica della escolar. Introduzione aula el (2017). en M. género Stucchi, de igualdad la fomentar para https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.10-1.6 metodológica Propuesta (2007). Y. Solís, Educativa Tecnología (2016). technological M.P. la Prendes, successful a & Russia’s I., determining Gutiérrez, factor J.L., a Serrano, as programs STEM preschool in development. equality Minerva. Gender Compostela]. de (2017). Santiago O. de Savinskaya, http://bit.ly/2mKm8DF Universidad USC. Doctoral, [Tesis da agresión Institucional y Repositorio género Sexo, (2014). A. Sánchez-Casales, Retos, eit eIvsiainEducativa Investigación de Revista ..(09.Cbreiim:Uaprpciadselsaulas. las desde perspectiva Una Ciberfeminismo: (2019). J.A. 54 6-8.https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2019.i54.09 165-184. , eit ePsicodidáctica de Revista 33 usa dcto Society, & Education Russian 9-9.http://bit.ly/2l1bJmF 293-297. , otxo dctvs eit eEducación de Revista Educativos. Contextos p.3141.Uiest fOl.http://bit.ly/2mD4ZLY Oslo. of University 391-401). (pp. 1,1711 http://bit.ly/2lexkYO 157-171. 21(1), dfra http://bit.ly/2pJU5Gc Eduforma. . lPoeinld aInformación, la de Profesional El saítcseidcdrsd a(e)gaddd éeoe afrainypoeincientífica. profesión y formación la en género de (des)igualdad la de indicadores e Estadísticas rceig fte4t C ehia nCmue cec Education Science Computer on Technical ACM 49th the of Proceedings • ae 9-19 Pages enlga noaineivsiaine o rcssd enseñanza-aprendizaje de procesos los en investigación e innovación Tecnología, éeoyddcia:Uamrd rtc,uaarxmcó práctica aproximación una crítica, mirada Una didácticas: y Género 30 rceig fte1t nentoa ofrneo oilIpiain fCmuesin Computers of Implications Social on Conference International 13th the of Proceedings 1,2722 https://doi.org/10.5209/RCED.57271 277-292. (1), , » nonsProae eArniae n iinata ecm pedrcon aprender cómo de actual visión Una Aprendizaje: de Personales Entornos 24 http://bit.ly/2kIal8h . , 1,91.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2018.07.002 9-16. (1), 37 59 2,3338 https://doi.org/10.6018/rie.37.2.321371 363-378. (2), 34,2626 https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2017.1399758 206-216. (3-4), Comunicar, lal provocó lo «Ella nentcm eus aaesñryarne:Uaarxmcó práctica aproximación Una aprender: y enseñar para recurso como Internet p.1114.IIGOA.http://bit.ly/2mLqrP7 GLOBAL. IGI 131-134). (pp. 27 26 19.https://doi.org/10.3916/C60-2019-08 81-91. , 9-0.https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2017.sep.11 894-902. , lefqed éeoe acmrnind aviolencia la de comprensión la en género de enfoque el »: , 55.https://doi.org/10.18172/con.3306 35-51. 21, , Íber Revisata eit eEtdo Socioeducativos Estudios de Revista 94 15.http://bit.ly/2mLZESV 51-56. , Educare, eit Eureka Revista p.1124.Trn lo Tirant 191-224). (pp. 1,103-122. 10(1), áia Sociedad y Hábitat p.4944.ACM. 459-464). (pp. International npolm de problema «un (pp. , , 13(3), 2, , 11, e dnisPedagógicas Tendencias rúi,G,&Bnil .(00.DcaainPIM:Uapousapr eoa apbiaind eiinssseáia y sistemáticas revisiones de publicación la Educativos. mejorar Sistemas para los propuesta en Una Comunicación PRISMA: la Declaración y (2010). Información metaanálisis. XXI. X. la siglo Bonfill, de Tecnologías del & las escuelas G., de las Urrútia, integración para La reto Un (2006). (Ed.) Coeducación: UNESCO género (2019). de H. violencia Mendiguren, la & de B.G., prevención Garay, P., la Aristizabal, para experiencias A.I., general. y Ugalde, mirada Iniciativas Una coeducativa. aulas: escuela las la en para retos Nuevos (2010). a escuelas. L. in Torres, las recruitment en through coeducativos professors proyectos ICT elaborar Feministas of para case Estrategias A (2017). bias: A. gender Tomé, of process re-Production social? country. The cambio gender-neutral al (2019). social E. campaña Berki, la & T., ¿de Tiainem, #Metoo: care. (2018). health L. in Thissen, reviews undertaking for guidance https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(10)70065-7 CRD’s environment. Reviews. learning Systematic smart in (2010). components E. Tacconelli, Metacognitive (2018). D.I. Sensuse, early Physics & during H.B., engineering Santoso, in M., interest Sumadyo, girls’ increase to robotics of https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9483-y use the Investigating School. (2018). elementary sexismo. M. del Umaschi, caso & El A., educación: Sullivan, la en selectivos Educación dispositivos la los De (2016). M. Subirats, ilnea .(02.Porm epeecó e bs adpnecadltlfn ói npbainaoecne[Tesis adolescente población en móvil teléfono del dependencia la RODERIC. y Valencia]. abuso de del Universidad prevención Doctoral, de Programa (2012). V. Villanueva, , 978 , 2 . , eiiaclínica Medicina 1,89-116. (1), https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/978/1/012025 9 22-36. , nentoa ora fTcnlg n einEducation Design and Technology of Journal International , tde nHge Education Higher in Studies http://bit.ly/2mM6ec5 34 https://doi.org/10.17979/arief.2017.2.1.1979 16-36. , , 135 TABANQUE 1) 507-511. (11), https://doi.org/10.15366/tp2019.34.003 , http://bit.ly/2kLvCxS 23 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2010.01.015 15-44. , , 44 1,170-184. (1), http://bit.ly/2lfHyrJ ea aae Debate el para Temas https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1351428 , 29 © tátcsRvsaItrainld Estudios de Internacional Atlánticas-Revista 5,1033-1051. (5), SN 1134-3478 ISSN: eit el scaind oilgade Sociología de Asociación la de Revista , 54 285-286. , h Lancet The • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: http://bit.ly/2o2ilCd , 10 ora of Journal 4,226. (4), • ae 9-19 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 19 20 , 63, XXVIII, 2 020 unica r Com

www.comunicarjournal.com

Gender studies in Communication Degrees Los estudios de género en los Grados de Comunicación

Dr. Francisco-José García-Ramos is Assistant Professor in Advertising and Audiovisual Communication Studies at Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) ([email protected])

(https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1805-650X) Dr. Francisco-A. Zurian is Senior Assistant Professor in Advertising and Audiovisual Communication Studies at Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3734-6879) Dr. Patricia Núñez-Gómez is Professor in Advertising and Audiovisual Communication Studies at Complutense University of Madrid (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3028-9429)

ABSTRACT This paper is the result of a research carried out under the umbrella of the “UNESCO UniTWIN Network on Media, Gender, and ICTs” Project, and it tries to determine the presence of subjects with a specific focus on gender in the current Communication Degrees offered at Spanish universities. The inclusion of subjects about gender equality in relation to media follows the suggestions of the IV World Conference on Women in Beijing (1995). The main objective of this research will be to investigate the presence of these subjects in Communication Degrees, identifying the elements that define them at a thematic, methodological and relevant levels within the curriculum. A mixed methodological design is proposed based on ex-post-facto research, with a descriptive orientation and the search for improvement, a qualitative analysis of study plans using ATLAS.ti and a panel of experts. The results reveal a scarce presence of this type of subjects, with a higher percentage in public universities than in private ones, and also a minimal relevance as compulsory subjects. This research study reveals the current formal training in gender studies of future generations of media professionals and serves as an endorsement for forthcoming changes of curricula in the European Higher Education Area context.

RESUMEN El presente trabajo es fruto de una investigación desarrollada en el marco del proyecto «UNESCO UniTWIN Network on Media, Gender, and ICTs» para determinar la presencia de asignaturas con un contenido específico en estudios de género en los actuales planes de estudio de los Grados españoles en el área de comunicación. La inclusión de asignaturas que aborden la igualdad de género en relación a los medios y procesos de comunicación obedece a lo establecido en la IV Conferencia Mundial sobre la Mujer de Beijing (1995). El objetivo principal de este trabajo será la indagación del nivel de presencia de estas asignaturas en los Grados en comunicación identificando los elementos que las definen a nivel temático, metodológico y relevancia dentro del plan de estudios. Se plantea un diseño metodológico mixto partiendo de una investigación ex-post- facto, con orientación descriptiva y de búsqueda de la mejora, un análisis cualitativo de planes de estudio mediante ATLAS.ti y un panel de expertos. Los resultados inciden en una escasa presencia de este tipo de asignaturas, con mayor porcentaje en la universidad pública respecto a la privada y una mínima relevancia como materia obligatoria. Un trabajo que vislumbra la actual formación reglada en cuestiones de género de las futuras generaciones de profesionales de los medios y que sirve de apoyo para futuros cambios de planes de estudios en el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Equality, gender, communication, journalism, ICT,university, Degree, curriculum. Igualdad, género, comunicación, periodismo, TIC, universidad, Grado, currículo.

1 22 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 oe’ ei onain 2011). Foundation, Media Women’s okr n ei fiil ml n eae n cest dcto n riig nldn ngender on including training, and education to access and female) and (male officials media and workers women. mn t taei betvs(52 st otrgne qaiyaaeesaog“orait,ohrmedia other “journalists, among awareness equality gender foster to is (A5.2) objectives strategic its Among Gender for Institute (European organizations” media in decision-making in equality gender Advancing fOgncAt120,o 8Dcme,o opeesv rtcinmaue gis gender- against measures protection comprehensive on December, 28 of 1/2004, Act Organic of 7 rcie(alg,20;Brádze l,20,Mtde l,21;Mrí aar-etá 2012), Navarro-Beltrá, & Martín https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-02 2012; al., et Matud 2008, al., et Bernárdez 2004; (Gallego, practice generations Sustainable new the for equality. train Agenda Action gender to project “2030 in Equality inter-university studies the Gender an UnitWIN communication as and “Priority pursuing UNESCO conceived 2030” was the International This Education of 2015). for “The framework (UN, Declaration of Padovani,Development” the “Incheon & 2017 under the ICTs” Ross in 2014-2021, and creation 2015; Plan Media, Gallagher, the Gender, to 2011; on rise Hafner-Burton, Network gave & Pollack 2016), Padovani, 2010; 2016; North, 2005; Rees, also 2005; REACU) university Universitaria”, official of Calidad verification for de protocol 2011). Evaluation Agencias the (REACU, of de Degrees Network introduction on Spanish the Española March, in The 22 (“Red concerns regulations. these of Agencies addressed implementing Section 3/2007, regional Quality 4, Act all Organic Chapter University and of men, I, of 25, and Title Article women on II, for Title equality based incorporate effective by also to confirmed was need subsequently demand urgent violence, the This based the at to held curricula. Postgrados”), attention university y draw all Grados 2006, in in Feministas. studies y (UCM) gender Género Madrid de of all Mujeres, University for las Complutense agencies sobe verification Estudios and (“Los objectives Degrees” gender develop to inequality. was gender EHEA ending of the in 2010). Preamble of universities (Saldaña, the drivers of Degrees (EHEA), key role Area pivotal the Education the of Higher stressed regards One European already As the Communiqué 2017). of Berlin (UniTWIN, creation 1993 countries the the 116 and in institutions reform 700 Bologna than on the more Alliance “Global involves the Gender” under initiative and This Media worldwide. linkages inter-university 40). and cooperation 2014: promote (UNESCO, media” the in men and women for issues, related Media.” for 2012 of Indicators in Plan “Gender-Sensitive curricula launch the Action the Journalists and Equality of in development Federation Gender International particular “Priority its the its in helping with together In recommendation, programs, and this educational 56-59). reaffirmed all 1995: UNESCO in Women, 2008-2013”, emphasized perspective (UN Declaration gender institutions the 83), education a (Action higher include taken be to to need actions (International the the media” Among news B.4). objective the (strategic in training” women of status the on report media. “Global the or and Women 2013b), states: member 2013a; EU Equality, the in Action for “Review and Platform states” Beijing member the EU and of Union implementation European the the the into of of in gender institutions men “Mainstreaming the 2018b), of and programmes 2018a; women the Commission, and between (European Worldpolicies equality age” has “The digital on media the “Report others, the in “Women 2003), among in and (EEES, EU” including, equality Society” reports gender Information that annual on the achieving debate and on in international Summit 2014) media the (Grizzle, mass then, literature of Since extensive importance generated the 57). stressed 1995: 1995, against Women, in (UN discrimination Beijing goal of in form held Women any on eradicate Conference areas helping different in in role specialized key colleges a and play Universities to agenda. called UNESCO are the Communication on priority of a is media the Introduction 1. nteSaihcs,nmru tde ofr h oraheeeto hs betvsi professional in objectives those of achievement poor the confirm studies numerous case, Spanish the In (Verloo, Declaration Beijing 1995 the of J Section in forth set objectives the of implementation poor The Postgraduate and Graduate Studies. Feminist and Gender “Women’s, on conference the Spain, In to Program (UNITWIN) Networking” and Twinning “University the launched UNESCO 1992, In and education non-discriminatory “develop to proposed Declaration Beijing the universities, Regarding World Fourth the at adopted Action”, for Platform and Declaration “Beijing the of J Section The eeomn fa nerlpa opooegne qaiyadwmnsepwretthrough empowerment women’s and equality gender promote to plan integral an of development • ae 21-30 Pages hl pns nvriysse ae nsvnobjectives: seven on based system university Spanish whole higher governing framework regulatory the and recommendations EHEA’s for case the also is which T be1). (Table universities. public/private and communities) (autonomous independent the over control no with “has researcher 2005), the al., that et Given Latorre 2000; occurring. Calderero, still is & or Bernardo 2004) 1998; (Bisquerra, al., et Buendía 2005, al., et (Latorre 95 6) h ou spae n“eiig h dcto hnmnnb nwrn usin about questions answering by phenomenon education the “defining” on placed is focus the 268), 1975: oraim ei,adITCriuus n1 onre:Asrla hl,Eudr pi,United Spain, Ecuador, Chile, Australia, countries: 11 in Curriculums” ICT and Media, Journalism, aibe eas hi aiettoshv led curdo r neetynnmnplbe (Kerlinger, non-manipulable” inherently are or occurred already have manifestations their because variables h ulttv aaaayi otaeALSt.Toepiaydcmnswr rue yregions by grouped using were them documents processed primary we Those and university, ATLAS.ti. each We software of analysis websites Degrees. data official Communication qualitative the Commu- Social the from Communication, and curricula Audiovisual Communication the Advertising, Digital downloaded Journalism, Communication, in system Cultural university nication, Spanish the in year situation. its dcto ntefedo omncto,teridpnec,gorpia ped n emokskills teamwork and spread, geographical independence, their Communication, higher of and equality field gender in the experience in their on education based selected universities syllabi. international those and national in from equality identify gender to and of results, inclusion the the assess promote and discuss to UNESCO- to for actions 2018 report and April final needs in the convened the of was recommendations experts the of improve panel in qualitatively a codes to UniTWIN, relevant order the In included Degrees names. different 21 own to their corresponding subjects 22 those, field Among the corresponding universities. to the relation in their verifying in central by and sample objectives the main of their of part communication. one as of was on validated equality based were gender “Auto-Coding” subjects whether subsequent syllabus The their and codes. “diversity,” Degree and the “equality,” “women,” “gender,” terms the occurred already has event the research, of type this In improvement. towards orientation descriptive a 2. studies. communication in subject. the of name the ICTs—including and the media covering the study a of developed (2018), importance the al. et of Guarinos Aware on Rica. based UCM, Costa the and mapping, Republic this Dominican to Mexico, contributing Italy, India, Gender-sensitive Ethiopia, Creating States, for 2011; Strategies Educational 2014; al., “Mapping project 2013; et the (Menéndez, 2018 Bosch in Communication launched UniTWIN of 2012; field Ferrer, the & in Bosch particularly 2018). and 2009; al., et 2014), Guarinos Ballarín, al., 2005; et Castellsagué 2000; (López-Díez, education aeil n methodology and Materials srgrsifraingteig h apeicue l fiilcriuafrte21/8academic 2017/18 the for curricula official all includes sample the gathering, information regards As h ae a aeu f4 xet mn ecigadrsac tf PIfrisiiil nSpanish) in initials its for (PDI staff research and teaching among experts 42 of up made was panel The private 25 and universities public 30 comprises consideration under Degrees 165 of sample final The listing finder word a Degrees, relevant the of name the including codes used strategy sampling The hssuyapisamxdmtoooybsdo ne-otfco o-xeietlapproach non-experimental facto, ex-post an on based methodology mixed a applies study This equality gender promote to UNESCO-UniTWIN by taken be to actions case. strategic Spanish the recommend To assess 7) to and data the faculty. analyze To the 6) of subjects. composition those gender for the references identify To universities. bibliographical 5) private and vs. methodology public contents, in the subjects describe To those 4) of presence subjects. varying those the of determine To nature 3) compulsory or in optional the equality determine gender To 2) promoting explicitly curricula studies communication in subjects the identify To 1) UNESCO- 2020, March for scheduled process Beijing+25 the of light in and context, this In © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 21-30 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 23 24 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 l h ujcsofrdi naui 4,CsieLo 2 n h aqeCuty()aeoptional. are (2) Country Basque the and (2) Castile-Leon (4), Andalusia in offered subjects the All offers Communication Audiovisual and (40%) 5 total the of out subjects compulsory 2 offers Advertising 1.3) n atl-enadteBsu onr ih2ec 91) oeo h te ein offer regions other the of None (9.1%). each 2 with Country Basque the and Castile-Leon and (13.63%), https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-02 (33%). 3 of out 1 with Madrid and (33.33%) 6 of out 2 with Catalonia by followed offer), its of 80% (i.e., 5 3 with Madrid (18.18%), 4 with Andalusia subjects. (22.72%), these 5 with Social Valencia Communication, by in followed offered (27.27%), subject offered single The 50%. i.e., (25%). 6, optional. 8 of is Degrees total out Communication 3 the Digital of and subjects: Communication out compulsory nature subjects of compulsory compulsory number or 2 highest optional the the offers regards As Journalism subjects, Communication (4.55%). 22 Social each the subject Communication, of 1 and offer (22.72%), Communication subjects Digital 5 their and offers in Advertising included (27.27%), explicitly 1). (Figure subjects content culture equality audiovisual gender and technologies, specific new had in media, subjects the reflected to 22 as relation only in Degrees), those, Communication, name Communication Of Communication, Social sample. and Audiovisual the Communication Advertising, Digital Communication, Journalism, Cultural (including communication of features below. General presented 3.1. are 2018 in universities private and public Spanish in Degrees Communication Analysis 3. hni oe otecmusr rotoa aueo h ujcs aecarnsfrtwt u of out 4 with first ranks Valencia subjects, the of nature optional or compulsory the to comes it When subjects 6 with ranking the leads Catalonia communities), (autonomous distribution regional of terms In 6 offers Journalism (36.36%), subjects 8 offers Communication Audiovisual Degrees, field by the Ordered in Degrees 165 of total a offered universities Spanish 2017/18, year of academic syllabi the official In the in subjects equality gender specific of presence the regarding results The n results and • ae 21-30 Pages eeofrdbt ytepbi n rvt ewr,wiesbet nCmuiainadDigital and Communication in subjects while network, private and public the by both offered were uivsa raina nvriyo aaac UA)ad1i detsn tUiest fValladolid of University at Advertising in 1 and (USAL) Salamanca of University at Creation Audiovisual Ua.Ctlnaofrd1sbeti uivsa omncto,Junls n detsn at Advertising and Journalism Communication, Audiovisual in subject 1 offered Catalonia (UVa). ujc nAdoiulCmuiainad1i oraima nvriyo h aqeCuty(UPV). Country Basque the of University at Journalism in 1 and Communication Audiovisual in subject 1 oraima opues nvriy(C)ad1i uivsa omncto n h Double the and Communication Audiovisual in 1 and (UCM) University Complutense at Journalism oraim nAvriigad1i uivsa omncto tUiest am UI Fgr 2). (Figure (UJI) I Jaume University at Communication Audiovisual in 1 and Advertising in 1 Journalism, omncto eeol fee ypiaeisiuin.O h oa 6 ere,7 eeofrdby offered were 73 Degrees, Communication 165 total Audiovisual the Of in institutions. Subjects private by offered Cultural only universities. and were Advertising public Communication Journalism, in by Subjects offered (13.64%). only one private were the by Communication 3 and (86.36%) network and Communication the in subject in Communication 1 1 Audiovisual offered (UPO); in Castile-Leon Olavide 1 de (EUSA-US). and Pablo Sevilla Andalucía, University of of the Loyola EUSA-University at Universidad at Communication at Digital Degree in Communication 1 the (US); Sevilla of University erei oraimadHmnte tUiest alsII(CM.TeBsu onr offered Country Basque in The subject (UC3M). 1 III offered Carlos University Madrid at (UdG). Humanities Girona (ESRP- and Barcelona of Journalism of University in University at 1 Degree to (UAB), Communication affiliated Barcelona Cultural Relations, of Public in University for Autonomous 1 School at and Superior Journalism UB), in at 1 Relations (URV); Public Virgili in i Rovira de Universitat ial,Vlni fee ujc nAdoiulCmuiaina nvriyo aèca(V n in 2 and (UV) València of University at Communication Audiovisual in subject 1 offered Valencia Finally, osdrn h ulco rvt aueo h nvriy 9sbet eeofrdb h public the by offered were subjects 19 university, the of nature private or public the Considering the at Communication Audiovisual in subject specific 1 offered Andalusia level, detailed more a At © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 21-30 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 25 26 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 Gne n omncto”i h he ere fee tUV ue hoyi nymentioned only is theory Queer URV. at offered Degrees three the in Communication” and “Gender the of 18.75% variations; negligible with names different 12 of total a for “communication” and “gender” el ioed euor eead arts on .Hrwy ihlFual,Sur al n Ann Enn Hall, Stuart Foucault, Michel Haraway, J. Donna Lauretis, Teresa de Beauvoir, de Simone Weil, uivsa omncto erea Vad“detsn n qaiy nAvriiga V.The UVa. at Advertising in Equality” and “Advertising and UV at Degree Communication Audiovisual 4,LuaMle 4,MraZmrn 4,AnteKh 3 n ilaCliz 3,floe ySimone by followed (3), Colaizzi Giulia and (3) Kuhn Annette (4), Zambrano María (4), Mulvey Laura (4), aln sninBrádzEllaLeóadEos o lá 2ec) te uhr rreferences, or https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-02 authors Other each). (2 Aldás Nos Eloísa and Lledó Bernárdez,Eulàlia Asunción Butler Kaplan, Judith (5), Muraro Luisa (6), Garretas Rivera Milagros María entradas), (9 Ayala Gallego Juana being by diversity, functional angle. and theoretical studies this gender the adopts on in that block specific one Theory” a only Discourse incorporates the subject and latter Policies this “Gender of syllabus Only approach: UC3M. postcolonial at Humanities a Communication and by Audiovisual Journalism in informed the subject Degree are Double in the the subjects Communication” in in two Studies” Audiovisual included “Gender in are and US, Studies studies at “Gender Degree masculinity New instances: two syllabi. in the all in approach dominant the is theory markedly 2). (Table only women The of names. history different 3 the to on rise subject giving the “equality” is of case concept different the on based named are subjects approach methodological and Name 3.2. Journalism Equality”, in for World” “Communication Contemporary the cases: in two UPV. Culture in Mass at except and teachers, Gender women “Communication, to and refer ESRP-UB at syllabi the all faculty, the of public h otctdbbigahcrfrne ntewoesml fslaiudrcnieainaeworks are consideration under syllabi of sample whole the in references bibliographic most-cited The of concepts the combine subjects the of 75% syllabi: the in names different 16 have subjects 22 The F o iutdkoldeprpcie(aaa,19) tsol entdta eiitcritical feminist that noted be should it 1991), (Haraway, perspective knowledge situated a rom nvriis(42% n 2b rvt ns(57%.Fnly okn notegne composition gender the into looking Finally, (55.76%). ones private by 92 and (44.24%) universities • ae 21-30 Pages edrsuisi oeefcieadseii anr nldn naed oue nteojcie set objectives the Declaration. on Beijing focused 1995 agenda the an of including manner, J specific Section and in effective forth more a in studies gender subjects. these include to opportunity LGBTIQ+. and studies, men’s/masculinity year. studies, fourth or third the in one optional an least at offer the reduce never should subjects. subjects Optional compulsory of activities. complementary and mainstreaming to prejudice professional different in contributions perspective—and women’s male conceal a not aspects. to does and that limited areas education practice—not academic professional an of build view help broader to a foster to (2013; values, Menéndez equality were as recommendations such and studies UNESCO-UnitWIN: conclusions previous by following at requested The look report (2018). we the al. if for the et reached so in Guarinos more subjects Andalusia, the equality in all gender and, specific is 2014) incorporate This to Communication. curricula of Degree field of modification or elaboration the cited 3.3. are reports UNESCO or Zecchi Barbara Rubin, S. once. Gayle only Wittig, Monique Woolf, Virginia as such esseii rmwr hnScinJo h 95BiigDcaainrgrigwmnadms media, mass and women regarding Declaration and Beijing reduced 1995 more a the 5 of this objective J In its Section society. in than Framework establishes gender-diverse framework Education Development” and specific Sustainable egalitarian less 2030 for just, the Agenda more to “2030 a according for the especially values regard, generations is promoting future This effectively train Declaration. thus Beijing to Action, 1995 for intend the of universities J Spanish Section if in down so laid objectives the subjects. of achievement compulsory the more offers Journalism if even Advertising, and develop Journalism and than analyze subjects professionals future sensitive how the and affect aware in imagination. will sufficiently studies collective area not gender our this still and in to is discourses training attached field information, poor relevance this Also, in little issues. perspective the gender hegemonic shows to the which Hence, Degrees, Spain. 165 in of media out subjects universities. 22 private only to contrast in universities, public subjects in the online on accessible focuses easily are study this since problem, students’ major the each curricula. a as official vary well pose current as may not faculties, in subjects do and included since departments Optional aspects teaching considered, these the students. However, are of university needs Degrees demand. the for Graduate course, training the Only on common depending and Communication. year basic of the field constitute the they in 2017/18 year academic limitations the indicate will we Before, work. this universities. in Spanish encountered by offered Degrees communication different 4. icsinadconclusions and Discussion )Teei nugn edt rwu WiePpr opooeeuainplce integrating policies education promote to Paper” “White a up draw an to provide need curricula urgent official an is for There programs 6) (Modify) “Modifica” and (Verify) women’s “Verifica” and feminist new studies: The gender 5) by addressed and aspects year second all or cover first should the subjects in Compulsory offered be 4) should subject compulsory one least at Degrees, without 4-year syllabi, In and 3) curricula official in included subjects through out carried be should Training 2) gender promote to important particularly is Degrees Communication in studies gender in Training 1) EHEA—in the of creation the after decades progress—two little revealed results the on discussion The h atta hs ere nyicue6cmusr ujcsi hi urcl asscnen about concerns raises curricula gender-related their in more subjects compulsory 6 offer include only Degrees Degrees these Communication that fact Audiovisual The that remarkable somewhat is It ICTs: and media the in equality gender promote syllabi explicitly and that curricula subjects that few observed offer have universities we Spanish April, 12 of 4/2007 Act Organic of 35 Article to Pursuant the in offered Degrees of curricula official in the included in subjects studies the to gender limited of is presence study of the object regarding The aspects relevant most the out point now us Let eut fteepr panel expert the of Results © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 21-30 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 27 28 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 oe’ nttt “nttt el ue” srfetdi h rceig fte“7 the of proceedings the in reflected as Mujer”) la de (“Instituto Institute Women’s ihrsett ulcuieste,woecriuasol nld tlatoecmusr ujc n an and subject compulsory one least at include should curricula whose universities, public to respect with which h eut fti eerhcnimsc edadse ih ntestaino pns nvriisfacing universities Spanish of situation the on light shed and need such confirm research this of results The antb fee ntesottr.Ol fw dp uhagoa n nlsv esetv a we may perspective inclusive https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-02 and equality. global gender a in trained such and adopt subjects educated we new are if professionals specific media Only if of important generations term. particularly future short is are that This the contents ensure in these curricula. that offered the so be of diversity cannot subjects and the equality gender all on into each focused mainstreamed members to faculty content for proposed programs the training adapting by subjects specific circumstances. the of social for design and material political the discussion educational, guide provided institution’s to Training” (UniTWIN, also Paper & research has Education, White this Research, It a for frame Approaches countries. 2019), New to American ICTs. & GECA, Latin served Media, in “Gender, Género,” has of studies network de drafting UNESCO-UniTwin future Congreso Violencia for the model la through (“VII a contra results as Violence” Lucha the y Gender-Based Sharing Educación against 2018). Representación, Fight GECA: and de Education, Internacional Representation, Conference: ee.Frhroe h xetpnlsrcmedtosadrqet aebe umte othe to submitted been have requests and recommendations panel’s expert the Furthermore, level. concern particular of is one. This optional Degrees. communication of curricula official the in theory subjects critical these of feminist presence in figures major include experts, to panel order the enrich in by and studies. update syllabi gender concern to Spanish and need with urgent in highlighted an references is was There bibliographic This countries. the English-speaking studies. the gender from coming of those field especially the on in based works subjects reference new and design gender to on relevant studies be UNESCO. including may by also but promoted indicators minority, case, the inclusive a latter the are and the certainly Audiovisual US Uva—in These in at at approaches diversity. postcolonial Journalism Communication functional are and remarkable Audiovisual and Also UV studies in exception. at LGBTIQ+ an Subjects include Communication are explicitly syllabi, which their subjects. UC3M, in at the theory Humanities queer all and Journalism in in element Degree Double core these the teach is to men theory encouraging thus composition faculty, gender entire the the of to light extend In should equality. subjects. commitment gender this promoting faculty, in media the the of of role points key and the curricula, acknowledging current of Degrees graduate shortcomings 73 the the shows change. of which of out ICTs universities, direction and the public media in some at the studied instance, to network. For be relation private in can the universities. studies by that private offered gender issue at only include are significant subjects taught Communication 19 are curricula—a Digital Only field and their Communication this as in in such Degrees studies Degrees new the gender of incorporate 55.76% to that considering institutions private facing subjects. such challenge no offering Humanities by and Journalism behind in lag Degree regions and Double other Country the Basque The for the UC3M. except Madrid, at optional, Andalusia, compulsory as field. of subjects this these number in offer university highest Castile-Leon leading the Spanish the offers is subjects—Valencia UJI gender-oriented and subjects, of number largest the offer process. necessary. Beijing+25 more upcoming the the all from are stemming particular changes in potential system university the of and general in actors social of cooperation ntematm,w a nyhp htSaihuieste,fclis n eatet,promote departments, and faculties, universities, Spanish that hope only can we meantime, the In h nufcettann ngne tde al o h lbrto faWiePpra national at Paper White a of elaboration the for calls studies gender in scarce training the insufficient with The hand in hand goes syllabi the in students to offered training theoretical poor The key some cite barely which syllabi, the in recommendations bibliographic few show results The critical feminist that show results the references, bibliographical and methodology content, the indicators, for UNESCO As by defined framework theoretical the into fit subjects these names, their In great the about lot a says universities public by offered are subjects these of 86.36% that fact The regions two These committed. most the are Catalonia and Valencia in universities regard, this In a eidctv fteaed’ rda epltzto.I htcnet h omtetand commitment the context, that In de-politization. gradual agenda’s the of indicative be may • ae 21-30 Pages th EAInternational GECA e eiin(TE nttt el Mujer. la de Instituto e (RTVE) Televisión ond einvcó nxénero en innovación de Xornada ilni eGénero. de Violencia (Eds.), R.M. Ballesteros, & M.T., Vera, Muralla. atlsgé . ia . ua,M 21) nrdced ataseslddd aprpciad éeoe uvsformatos nuevos en género de perspectiva la de transversalidad la Introduciendo (2014). In M. Pujal, docentes. & M., Rifa, A., Castellsagué, (1998). F. https://bit.ly/2LHlyQF Hernández, & M.P., Colas, L., In Buendía, género. (2011). de V. perspectiva Grado Ferreiro, en una & género desde C., propuestos Capilla-Navarro, Cambios V., Ferrer, universidad: E., nueva Bosch, la y vieja La (2012). V. Ferrer, & E., Bosch, (2004). R. Bisquerra, (2000). J.F. Calderero, (2008). & S. J., de González, Encuentro Bernardo, & III I., académico. García, ámbito España. A., el Lleida, Bernárdez, en igualdad, oportunidades de de oficinas igualdad y de unidades políticas en internacionales Jornadas presentation] (2009). P. Ballarín, References Netherlands. the ICTs,” with and and Gender, UNESCO Media, on of Network financing UniTWIN and International support “The Project the UNESCO the of framework the under Culture) Agency Funding eédz ..(04.E sai uoe eEuainSpro nEpñ:Icroaind otndsymtdlga de metodologías y contenidos de Incorporación España: en Superior Educación comunicación. de en Europeo género Audiovisual. Espacio Comunicación El en (2014). género M.I. de Menéndez, perspectiva La docente: Social Comunicación battle innovación y to de How Metodologías perspective: (2013). literacy M.I. media Menéndez, In critical gender workplace. and and media gender media the a on in alliance with nacional harassment professionals prensa sexual media la and Educating de discrimination noticias (2014). gender las M. en Farah, hombres & y J., mujeres Melki, de Representación (2012). Protección I. española. de Espinosa, Medidas & de C., Wanguemert, Orgánica M.P., Ley Matud, la de Eficacia España: Género. https://doi.org/10.18002/cg.v0i7.913 en de sexista Violencia publicidad la La contra (2012). Integral M. Navarro-Beltrá, & M., Martín, (2005). P. López-Diez, (2005). J. (2000). P. Arnal, López-Diez, & D., Del-Rincón, A., Latorre, (1975). F.N. Kerlinger, La https://bit.ly/2LCrlqv (2011). Comunicación: (Ed.) Foundation en Media Grado Women’s de International estudios los en (1991). género D.J. de Haraway, igualdad La (2018). In imaginaria. gender S. transversalidad and empowerment. Cobo, media & women’s F.J., on and Alliance Caro-González, equality V., Global gender the Guarinos, for for agenda literacy scholarly informational A la and contra gender: media Lucha Enlisting y (2014). Educación Representación, A. Grizzle, GECA: Internacional Congreso VII Congreso. de In Resoluciones género. (2018). de (Ed.) estereotipos GECA de transmisión y Málaga. informativa de producción Universidad mecanismos: los a recomendaciones las De (2004). J. Gallego, organizations media (2015). in M. Gallagher, decision-making Union. in equality European gender the Advancing of media. office the and Women (2013b). states: (Ed.) member Equality Gender for states Institute member European EU and Union European (2013a). the (Ed.) of Equality Gender for Institute European https://doi.org/10.2759/526938 (2018b). (Ed.) Commission European educación Union. la European de responsables (2018a). ministros (Ed.) de Commission conferencia European la de Comunicado europea. superior. superior Educación (2003). (Ed.) EEES rsnain edradmda rtclaayi fe 0yaso h PAfrm México. forum, BPfA the of years 20 after analysis critical A media: and Gender Presentation] hssuywscridotb ru frsaceso h opues eerhGopGC Gne,EteisadAudiovisual and Esthetics (Gender, GECA Group Research Complutense the of researchers of group a by out carried was study This https://bit.ly/349N6EC https://bit.ly/34hTUB8 usinsd éeo el gaddyl Diferencia la y Igualdad la De Género: de Cuestiones I ond einvcó nxénero en innovación de Xornada III nvria elsIlsBaleares. Islas las de Universidad . https://doi.org/10.2838/168837 ondsitrainlse oíia eiula eootnddse lábt académico ámbito el en oportunidades de igualdad de políticas en internacionales Jornadas eoooí el netgcó dctv.Mnae emtdlgad netgcó educativa investigación de metodología de Manuales educativa. investigación la de Metodología h otBiig2 gnao ei,gne n oraim h vrl eiitagenda feminist overall The journalism. and gender media, on agenda Beijing+20 post The , ºIfre ersnaind éeoe o nomtvsd ai televisión y radio de informativos los en género de Representación Informe. 2º auld nomcó ngénero en información de Manual netgcó e comportamiento del Investigación ini,cbrsymjrs arivnind anaturaleza la de reinvención La mujeres. y cyborgs Ciencia, 18 eit nencoa nCmnccó Desarrollo y Comunicación en Internacional Revista 699-710. , rsaSocial Prisma https://doi.org/10.2839/73389 p.8-2.UNESCO. 87-92). (pp. p.3-9.Uiesdd eVigo. de Universidade 31-49). (pp. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_HICS.2013.v18.44000 eoto qaiybtenwmnadmni h EU the in men and women between equality on Report oe ntedgtlage digital the in Women uee eisd ouiain mgns esjsydiscursos y mensajes Imágenes, comunicación. de medios y Mujeres usinsd éeo el gaddyl Diferencia la y Igualdad la De Género: de Cuestiones ped netgre educación en investigar a Aprendo , 22 https://bit.ly/2LDUQbN 296-325. , ulctosofc fteErpa Union. European the of office Publications . ae eooóia el netgcó educativa investigación la de metodológicas Bases ilni egnr ne ieespañol cine el en género de Violencia p.5-6.Uiesdd eVigo. de Universidade 57-76). (pp. éoo eivsiaine psicopedagogía en investigación de Métodos antemn edrit oiisadteporme fteinstitutions the of programmes the and policies into gender Mainstreaming eiwo h mlmnaino h ejn ltomfrAto nteEU the in Action for Platform Beijing the of implementation the of Review https://bit.ly/38ldPS2 https://bit.ly/2PwJQhf lblrpr ntesau fwmni h esmedia news the in women of status the on report Global nttt fca eRdoyTlvsó RV)eIsiuod aMujer. la de Instituto e (RTVE) Televisión y Radio de Oficial Instituto . Interamericana. . ulctosofc fteErpa Union. European the of office Publications . , noprcó elscneio niula eootnddsy oportunidades de igualdad en contenidos los de Incorporación 7 9-24. , https://bit.ly/36hESMj ei n edr coal gnafrteglobal the for agenda scholarly A Gender: and Media p.9-0) UNESCO. 93-108). (pp. https://doi.org/10.18002/cg.v0i7.900 RIALP. . https://bit.ly/2E5vWxA , 1 © 0,23-34. (0), SN 1134-3478 ISSN: Cátedra. . https://bit.ly/2LFrXvU https://bit.ly/36hESMj nvria Complutense. Universidad . https://doi.org/10.2839/43849 , https://bit.ly/2I9nb57 ulctosofc fthe of office Publications . 7 https://bit.ly/38tfZzh 247-267. , McGraw-Hill. . • dcoe Experiencia. Ediciones . -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: https://bit.ly/2YxKS0I nttt fca eRdoy Radio de Oficial Instituto . p.151-170). (pp. Publications . [Paper . ei and Media . [Paper . • La . ae 21-30 Pages Historia II

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 29 30 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 7 elo .(05.Dslcmn n moemn:rfetoso h ocp n rcieo h oni fErp approach Europe of Council the of practice and equality. concept https://bit.ly/2LER4yQ gender the and training. on mainstreaming & reflections gender education empowerment: to research, and for Displacement approaches New (2005). ICTs. https://bit.ly/2KiIcQ5 ICTs. M. & Verloo, and media, Gender, media, gender, (2019). on (Ed.) network UnitWIN UnitWIN UNESCO (2017). (Ed.) UnitWIN https://bit.ly/2YxKS0I mediáticos contenidos y (2014). operaciones (Ed.) las UNESCO en género de materia en Women. on Conference (2012). World (Ed.) Fourth UNESCO Action. https://bit.ly/2mej03a for Sostenible. Platform Desarrollo and el Declaration https://bit.ly/2tkGoME para Beijing 2030 (1995). Agenda del (Ed.) La enseñanza Women la mundo: UN de nuestro Transformar curricular Superior. (2015). diseño Educación (Ed.) un de UN para Europeo Propuestas Espacio https://bit.ly/357pMsH Derecho: el en en 1-23. Grados género 3, de los perspectiva en con género constitucional de derecho estudios Los (2010). N. Saldaña, (2016). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315709024 C. Padovani, Europe. & in K., mainstreaming Ross, gender of development uneven the Politics, on Reflections (2005). T. Rees, https://bit.ly/2QMkcYj Union. (2011). European (Ed.) the REACU in gender Mainstreaming (2011). E. Hafner-Burton, & M.A., Pollack, aoai .(06.Gneigteerpa iia gna h hleg fgne antemn wnyyasatrthe after years twenty mainstreaming gender of challenge The Women. on agenda: Conference digital World european Beijing the Gendering (2016). C. Padovani, North, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-02 3,4246 https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760050086116 432-456. (3), .(00.Tegne problem. gender The (2010). L. 7 4,5554 https://doi.org/10.1080/14616740500284532 555-574. (4), ANECA. y Máster. Grado de universitarios de títulos verificación la para evaluación de Protocolo niaoe egnr aamdo ecmnccó.Mrod niaoe aaeaurl sensibilidad la evaluar para indicadores de Marco comunicación. de medios para género de Indicadores UNESCO. . gender and media on alliance global the for agenda scholarly A gender: and Media • edreult n h ei:AcalnefrEurope for challenge A media: the and equality Gender ae 21-30 Pages ora fIfrainPolicy Information of Journal utai oraimEducation Journalism Australia oilPolitics, Social 3,3435 https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxi019 344-365. 12(3), NSO http://bit.ly/2qWKlZN UNESCO. . , 6 0-3.https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.6.2016.0403 403-435. , , 32 2,1315 https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2015844 103-115. (2), Routledge. . ora fErpa ulcPolicy Public European of Journal nentoa eiitJunlof Journal Feminist International eit eEuainyDerecho y Educación de Revista , , Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

Women on YouTube: Representation and participation through the Web Scraping technique La mujer en YouTube: Representación y participación a través de la técnica Web Scraping

Uxía Regueira is Predoctoral Researcher in the Faculty of Education Sciences at the University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2738-182X) Dr. Almudena Alonso-Ferreiro is Professor in the Faculty of Education Sciences at the University of Vigo

(Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9438-2681) Sergio Da-Vila is Postgraduate Student in the Faculty of Mathematics at the University of Santiago de Compostela (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7446-5316)

ABSTRACT YouTube is the favourite entertainment platform for teens and pre-teens. It is configured as a space for interaction and collaboration that coordinates collective creativity as a generator of meaning. Because of this, nowadays the platform constitutes an enabling environment for subjectivation. Women and men participate by sharing or consuming videos, although the visibility and experiences are different for each gender. The aim of this study is to analyse the presence of women in the new spaces of participation, both from the perspective of producers and consumers of content. An analysis based on Web Scraping of the Instagram profiles of the 50 most successful Youtubers in Spain was carried out. The data obtained was analysed with the statistical software R. The results show a low representation of women among the channels with the highest number of views and subscribers. In addition, there is a lower presence of a female audience. Both roles, women as content creators and as consumers, are mostly associated with stereotypically feminine content such as beauty, drawmylife and fitness sports. The study shows that YouTube, the platform representing the new online participation spaces, reproduces the gender power structures of traditional media. An analytical approach to media education is needed to fight against sexist representations, stereotypes and under-representation of women in public spaces.

RESUMEN YouTube es la plataforma favorita de entretenimiento de adolescentes y pre-adolescentes. Se presenta en esta etapa como un entorno propicio para la subjetivación, al configurarse como un espacio de interacción y colaboración, que coordina la creatividad colectiva como generadora de significado. Mujeres y hombres participan compartiendo o consumiendo vídeos, aunque la visibilidad y las experiencias son diferentes para unas y otros. El objetivo de este estudio es analizar la presencia de la mujer en los nuevos espacios de participación, tanto desde una perspectiva de productora como de consumidora de contenidos. Se ha realizado un análisis basado en Web Scraping de las 50 cuentas de youtubers de mayor éxito en España, a través de sus perfiles de Instagram. Los datos obtenidos se han analizado con el software estadístico R. Los resultados evidencian la escasa representación femenina entre los canales con mayor número de visualizaciones y suscriptores. Además, existe una menor presencia de público femenino. Ambos roles aparecen asociados mayoritariamente a contenidos estereotipadamente femeninos como belleza, drawmylife y deportes fitness. El estudio pone de manifiesto que YouTube, plataforma representativa de los nuevos espacios de participación online, reproduce las estructuras de poder de género de los medios tradicionales. Es necesaria una educación mediática crítica para luchar contra las representaciones sexistas, los estereotipos y la insuficiente representación femenina en espacios públicos.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Gender, stereotypes, audience, teens, pre-teens, youtubers, YouTube,web-scraping. Género, estereotipos, audiencia, adolescentes, preadolescentes, youtubers, YouTube,web-scraping.

1 32 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 htsca rcie hyrpoue hti,t eiwwa spiiee n hti otoe nthe in postponed is what and privileged is what review to is, that reproduce, they practices social what identities. alternative create to freedom the and constructs gender from break to power the with media the throughout and in inequalities gender of transformation the of pace leisurely almost the with h iue eelso rgeso hsise hc sfrhragaae ytepreuto fonline of perpetuation the by aggravated further is which issue, this on progress slow reveal figures The lhuhti damyb peln rmagne esetv,i ssmwa av,a tpsuae that postulates it as naïve, somewhat is it perspective, gender a from appealing be may idea this Although Fec ta. 2019). al., et (French https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-03 content to limited those as well as framework social roles, new prosumer this and of consumption. producer part are with From women those extent 2012). considering what Livingstone, to entertainment, & establish for to (Haddon is pre-teens YouTube (Berzosa, purpose and our people platform: standpoint, young gender entertainment by a visited largest most today’s space leisure on the specifically, 2017), — spaces participation online 2011). (Byerly, Internet the of architecture and pressures creating thus imposes assume, structure they This responsibilities 2019). and al., roles et the (French and relations behave expectations. power people gender how impacts media on that the while rules the way neutral, challenge a nor not this naïve in do neither In structured Technology is but is decentralisation 2015). 2016). with and (Macharia, (Ficoseco, media tool democratisation the power social of of and a hint nature patriarchal a as reason with and prestige, emerge media with media as associated digital technology context, imaginaries of which binary of part the in system constitutive or relations a patriarchal narrative, technological is social a the them, the in of women expressing expression of stereotyped agents, absence and The open 2006). and (Haraway, contingent integrated are as they themselves female define of shortage and a produce is there them 2012), of al., channels. et some visited (Rainie most and new equality 50 platform acquire of the the terms among but on in referents women similar are results of there favourable are participation obtain although results to and that, manage presence determined the (2014) the spaces, McMillan on and participation investigations YouTube, Wotanis numerous of new case In the In expressions. 2015). (Macharia, trends media 2015). result, (Macharia, a women As are either. refers them content by by this occupied involved whom not positions promoted to are the people media studies that the the evident in the of is produced as 24% As content it only such the power, Similarly, regarding of Spain). decisions identity. places the in in in (<20% gender especially councils a under-represented, management or are attributed government women are show, 2011), they (Byerly, and UNESCO the visible to associated becomes alien is corporeality space disembodiment a as as consideration, universal into interpreted and taken is democratic not web a way, is the same 2016), socialisation that the (Ficoseco, gender mean in rights that socialised would and or been This fabric actions not social goods, achieved. have same that be the groups would to to participation access offered imposed. had are or access have of attributed nor opportunities been same have imply the that would if those which avoiding corporeality; identities, to linked alternative constraints constructing imposed of or possibility barriers the the participation. overcome and also access can of processes culture terms these in Furthermore, 2015) 2008). al., (Jenkins, whilst et it, it (Jenkins to use relate democratisation who we potential which those a in for way forecast implications the and profound media to of leading perception the also of transformation the in resulted 2012) clashes advance socio-technological rapid This in variations reality. to perceive led and has relate change, cultural communicate, and we political way economic, the social, by characterised context complex Introduction 1. ae ntecretraiydsrbdaoe hssuysest sestepeec fwmnin women of presence the assess to seeks study this above, described reality current the on Based and appear devices power gender how examine critically to necessary is it perspective, gender a From mutually society and technologies these that given fabric, social the of part are technologies Digital 2014). (Grizzle, stereotypes by influenced and limited are representativeness and representation Female their when spaces these in women of presence scarce a reveals media traditional on Research participatory where space a as web the of understanding the to led have transformations These al., et (Ayuste intelligence collective and culture participatory convergence, media of processes The a in (ICT), Technologies Communication and Information and media digital of development The n urn ttso research of status current and • ae 31-40 Pages oe neti h ult fitrcin Pesn 2015). (Pierson, interactions of quality the in invest women h,i un rvd edak hsrltosi,cntttdi eeatsca otx (Pérez-Torres context social relevant a in constituted relationship, This feedback. provide turn, in who, their to something teach can they that thinking mentoring, informal perform frequently latter the where oT b iiga h ue foln ltom,ue y9%o 21 erod Hdo Livingstone, & (Haddon year-olds 12-15 of 90% by used platforms, online of queen the as YouTube rising a enfudta ocue qa atcpto,wihrvastetae fapriiaoygp(Jenkins, gap participatory a of traces the reveals which participation, 2009). equal concludes that found been has fmn(oyeu ta. 08 áce-lo iag-aí 06,dsietegetrefr that effort participation greater active the more despite a 2016), and Hidalgo-Marí, videos & to of Sánchez-Olmos according reception 2008; content and al., of production et conditioning (Molyneaux the the men in with of imbalance Along the an to 2018). is conform Mohseni, there not gender, domination do & YouTubers masculine that (Döring female as the gender well by of as received 2014); expectations comments McMillan, in & visible (Wotanis figures sexism, evident the by is between characterised platform referents feminine the of on lack reach conditions. The greater explicit identities. of existing of power presence no unequal gender despite the and platform, determine environment the the inevitably on play 2016), women (Ficoseco, that issues role the access other as and among well socialisation as Therefore, rights, paradoxically relations, 1994). and but (Foucault, chosen actions individual not the goods, is that of to discourse existence such a the in on desire; sustains dependence its and of of initiates trajectory precisely the consists and submission existence 2010). its (Butler, that of conduct way condition of a the norm with it a provides configuring subject, 1977), the (Lacan, forms Power intelligibility cultural of schemes available the subject also are they which within these platform, understand the socialisation. must on political gender we participate socio-economic, a who time, the people to and same thus young media the the subject, the of At of the reality convergence interest. cultural of the and of by construction focus characterised the context the a for in in spaces opportunities opportunities these new in of referents promotion the the placing in resulting configured, collective are 2016). coordinates Hidalgo-Marí, that & collaboration (Sánchez-Olmos and meaning interaction of for space generator environment a a enabling as as an configured creativity YouTube constitutes the is 2018). it for comes as al., it decision-making subjectivation et when environment relevant for (Aran-Ramspott the and of identity influence their individuality the to constructing of susceptible to more development & pre-teens and the teens (Mascheroni makes in This games moment future. key video a to with coinciding related content and videos humorous 2014). consume Ófalsson, mainly who 2012), 1.1. mle eeainladscotmoa atr hc nal t w a fgnrtn n consuming and generating of way own its YouTuber entails phenomenon The which factor, 2015). socio-temporal al., civic and et opportunities, generational Lenhart learning a 2014; users, implies other (Lange, with construction interaction identity collaboration, and of commitment elements involves 2018), al., audience, et their YouTubers question the creates bidirectional: which is community, community this the community to in A belongs interaction herself The time. or YouTuber over symbols. himself the them identity and support figure, who this followers around of formed masses is large generate is who which young, mostly audience, 2015). people, the al., et to (Jenkins belongs background culture and space experiences today’s a their Therefore, in in rooted audience, contributions. often the their and value Youtubers who between followers, connection participatory of social kind a a is by characterised There field YouTubers, a of 2009). field (Jenkins, the culture in evident especially is which 2017), 1.1.1. edrde o emt eacniinn atrt epr ftepafr.Hwvr oresearch no However, platform. the of part be to factor conditioning a be to seem not does Gender h tde hthv nlsdtepafr rmagne esetv aietteaporainof appropriation the manifest perspective gender a from platform the analysed have that studies The and language the symbolic, the in subject the situates that ideal an instill education and Socialisation expression of forms new and subjectivation into out branch figures mediating the context, this In success, greater shows platform the which in stages the are adolescence and Pre-adolescence with Europeans, young among habits entertainment widespread most the of one is videos Watching h emYuue eest otn raoso oTb Broa 07 a-ik 06.Te are They 2016). Van-Dijk, 2017; YouTube (Berzosa, on creators content to YouTuber refers term The (Dussel, media digital with interaction the to due mainly changed have culture with dealing of ways The edradiett osrcino YouTube on construction identity and Gender oTbr:mdaigfgrsi h osrcino identity of construction the in figures mediating YouTubers: © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 31-40 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 33 34 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 hl tesocp h eihr ihu xoue nti epc,mnsbciet h eus fthe of request the to subscribe men respect, this In exposure. without periphery the occupy others while hyae”oemdl”a olwr dniywt hi icus n osqetybcm ”subscribers” become consequently and discourse their with identify followers as models” ”role are They PrzTre ta. 08 7.Ti satnec hw ntewr fGwr n Alonso-Ferreiro and means Gewerc by please of to work someone YouTubers become the the in evident: is shown models tendency these a of power is the This where (2019), 67). 2018: al., (Pérez-Torres et challenge who and accessible, and close are who people are These 73). 2018: al., et (Aran-Ramspott )a xmlso eaiu;hneterlvneo h iiiiyo eaerfrns )a iue of figures as 2) referents; female of visibility the of relevance the hence behaviour; of examples as 1) values. h erigo tia om uigteoln xeine utemr,i eae oise fnetiquette of issues https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-03 to relates it Furthermore, experience. online the during norms ethical ethical of implies learning that this the behaviour in a women — of web the situation on the behaving for of concern way their they requires of perspective participate consideration how gender to as opportunities 2009; a well and work, as (Jenkins, from media scenario, gap gap to media access participatory this in produced the of Examining inequality are consider to fully. should they refers forms which we how 2016), context, how and al., this world et profoundly In the Robles-Morales represent 2019). and they (Buckingham, how used critically relationships, and understand in intervene to and for communicate and space a 2017) YouTube as of Dussel, potential the of advantage equality. gender take that and and so 2008) 2009), culture (Gutiérrez, (Jenkins, write digital social consumers and in and read producers participate to of people actively role young they dual preparing the this about To addressing (Gutiérrez, is approach 2007), methods. It creative (Buckingham, and production stereotypes. media reflexive and gender critical, a images confronting from and other expansion process breaking to learning the 2008), this to accustomed address contribute become to to essential them images, is help it at end, look to to and how worlds, and their produce of to how students with analysing et school, century. Jenkins 21st 2009; the Jenkins, for 2008; competence Gutiérrez, essential 2019; an al., as et 2015) French al., 2007; (Buckingham, necessary is literacy participation critical and full for type. education any Media 1.2. of content generate nor comments passive leave become unrepresented, voice, don’t feeling the that women, having observers while of participants, 2019); responsibility by Alonso-Ferreiro, the & conditioned (Gewerc assumes is figure that dialogue referent group the a that Namely, way a space. this such are form in There who spaces, participation. individuals same occupying online The the of and spaces unease. appropriating new cause of these can exposure to forms their transferred different which are identity within reality the interaction, social and of constitute spaces community that the schemes the in configuring 3) to and group; contribute and the that of values, communication jargon, in including identified principles; and elements knowledge other of transmission the to contributing empowerment, YouTube. as such platforms construction the online of on mediators socialises become they who videos this, individual to Like them the leading discourse. of teens, their and of pre-teens power of the YouTubers preferences with other the of guiding consumption, media of mediators as demands. their to response in channel their to subscribing of people. young for of in reference retention social results the a This and on influencers relies them 2017). Success makes (Berzosa, which repeatedly. videos, expectation channel their creates given view that and the masses visits audience large that the audience connects the that media from way engagement traditional a of in logic videos the of from far is that privacy. and way intimacy a of in margins the surprise”, ”the to as well and as change, characters, the to with improvise, empathy and to identification ability of processes construction, identity success: content h tia hleg Jnis 09 oue nteiprac ftesho otx n eesto refers and context school the of importance the on focuses 2009) (Jenkins, challenge ethical The 2007; (Buckingham, classroom the outside media with experiences their deepen to necessary is It in networks other YouTube and in circulates what tackle to necessity vital the out points (2017) Dussel media critical people, young among place prominent a YouTube occupies where setting, media this In act: who 1994), (Foucault, others of mediation the via produced is subject the of construction The themselves position them makes 2016) al., et YouTubers (García-Jiménez by generated admiration The publication the in periodicity the on based is web the YouTuber on the of strategy the of uniqueness The Broa 07.Teatiue htcaatrs oTbr r,i un hs htpoiit their propitiate that those turn, in YouTubers are, characterise that attributes The 2017). (Berzosa, • ae 31-40 Pages h eodms sdpafr nteaegop(aceoi&Óaso,21)—i h YouTube the in — 2014) Ófalsson, & (Mascheroni group age the in platform used most second the — ves n sbcies,etbihn akn htcniesterahcpct fte5 consthat accounts 50 the of capacity reach the considers that ranking a establishing ”subscribers”, and ”views” 21)pit u,ti nomto a eifre rmtenmsotie rmIsarmwt h Web the with Instagram from obtained names the from inferred be can information this out, points (2018) 2.1. 2. to create related to consideration factors into as instill taken be them to must reveals fundamental topics spaces. These research is participation 2015). democratic although it (Macharia, forgotten the web, women of often In the participation are on low 2010). the that feedback (Jenkins, topics give and identity empathy, and fun own and participate for one’s respect who are of users they construction prosumers, if the of even in education technologies, important 2.0 Web are with purposes, practices entertainment since management, identity digital and h oTbr’adec,terpeeecsrgrigcnetadtegneo h hne.A Thelwall As channel. the of genre the and content regarding simple preferences a their YouTubers’ through audience, the users, any 50,000 whereby eligible. and sample, equally the 40,000 represent was between that audience profiles the of the of chose names profile randomly the program extract the to sampling: and accessible indiscriminate tab data “followers” public the obtaining on websites, from information of amount large technique This a list. anyone. extract initial the to constitute that us accounts the allowed of each Ófalsson, with procedure the & Scraping Web this a (Mascheroni YouTube for performs In after chosen people presence. platform young decision. maximum by the methodological and our preferred was visibility justifies platform which greater Instagram 2014), the cross-platform for policy, is of allows importance Instagram this it the respect, as to highlights convergence) (2016) Due Van-Dijck (media Furthermore, interconnection audience. channel. the of given exploration that of subscribers content. to and possible scope it their made as list well complete as 2.2. The referents, main reach. the greatest among was the women generated content with of of presence accounts type the ten the ascertain and the creators includes the months. 1 Table by 5 expressed last genre added. the the in Furthermore, comment list. last the its comprise received f) and months; 5 last the account in Instagram video an last the shows its of d) shared one content; e) in children’s profile; content generate following generates not The does b) context. the c) Spain; Spanish in and country; the the located the videos in with of is adolescents their accordance languages a) in YouTube framed: in official channel is the delimited views study was considered: total this list were of which This criteria in number 2018). group largest age Green, the and & housed situation (Burgess 2019, subscribers of 1st, number August highest of as that accounts gender a from addressed was (in channels reach their to greater subscribe a that with audiences users the spaces content-generating perspective. of participation of and the study context) in the Spanish women purpose, of the this presence For the YouTube. illustrate on and generated investigate to 2018) (Thelwall, analytics h aenm nteopst ru,teascaino adnm ihtegne ftefrtgopwas group first the of gender the with name with said associated of one frequency association in the name the than a group, greater of opposite times frequency the hundred the in context one If name Spanish was found. same the masculine) be the in or can 2017, registered (feminine gender 1, names groups each the the concerning January name of Here, of the as Spain. of Statistic prevalence of Register the Institute and Continuous Statistics the National to the by compared published be can which technique, Scraping Method codn otepooe betvs esuh odtrietegne ftepol h aeup make who people the of gender the determine to sought we objectives, proposed the to According click examination, to subject profiles Instagram the to go to programmed was process a study, this For which (https://bit.ly/2OeUF8e), 1 Figure in represented created, was loop a R, software free the Using the not but account, an by followed channels the see to possible it makes policy data YouTube’s variables the of normalisation the from generated variable a to according ordered was list resulting The those selected we purpose, this For created. was accounts largest 50 the of list a collection, data For network social uses that method descriptive a employing study quantitative a proposes project This apigui:adec profiles audience unit: Sampling profiles YouTubers’ unit: Sampling © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 31-40 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 35 36 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ihasml ieo ,0 o h con ihtegets ubro olwr.Attlsml of sample total A followers. of number greatest the with account the for 9,603 of size sample a with l fte r aae ymn h pera h raosadiaeo hi otn.I h aeof case the In content. https: their 2: of (Figure image scene humour. and international to creators the linked the on them as entertainment positions appear or reach who games their men, elrubiusOMG, video by and to VEGETTA777 managed related are them is of content All main whose channels AuronPlay, o Tbr,cmae o4 aeYuues utemr,teeae2acut hrdb oa and woman a by shared accounts 2 are there YouTubers. Furthermore, male 41 to YouTubers, compared //bit.ly/2rxQrzO). rfl,dfnda eaeo ae hrb ofdnelvlo 5 n nerro %i achieved is 1% of error an and 1). (Table 95% collected of was level names analysed confidence n=904,939 a whereby male; or female as defined profile, information. relevant provide not accepted. a,ad3acut ikdt asmdaadisiuin uha otalclubs. football as such institutions and mass-media to linked accounts 3 and man, a content produce and create who women of presence YouTubers: Female 3.1. (Instagram) network social second Results a 3. to resorts it YouTube channel. as each bias of of perspective certain subscribers binary a the a assume recover of do easily assumption to not we the profiles Besides, which locating to added. of issue impossibility is an the gender names, in masculine analysis limitations or the its provides feminine on finds which with based R, sampling, identifiable technique, software random This the simple gender. using a of under networks terms social performed in of is YouTube audience it the as of selection view its comprehensive in a bias no is There data. of etwmnt pero h it(akd2t)de oudrti aecniin oehrwt man, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-03 a with together The condition, same this tutorials. under (DIY) so Draw). (TikTak does videos do-it-yourself draw-my-life 27th) and and (ranked experiments content list entertainment the to generating on linked appear entertainment to generate woman next who man a and fe oprn h apewt h eitr naeaeo 500ueswsotie o each for obtained was users 15,000 of average an Register, the with sample the comparing After h is ieacut orsodt EET77 luisM,Teilrx ilrxand Willyrex TheWillyrex, elrubiusOMG, VEGETTA777, to correspond accounts female 4 five of first total The a are there reach, largest the have to considered YouTube accounts 50 the Among The h is oa oapa nternigi xCsrs(akd1t) nacutsae yawoman a by shared account an 13th), (ranked ExpCaseros is ranking the in appear to woman first The e-ae caigmtoooyfclttsacs oadmngmn fa nrosamount enormous an of management and to access facilitates methodology Scraping Web-based fti a o h ae h aewsctgrsda eta n a lmntdbcuei did it because eliminated was and neutral as categorised was name the case, the not was this If • ae 31-40 Pages egt(yvrul n ya con oue nmku LzP.Ti en httecnetthat content the that means This (LizyP). makeup on focused account an by and (Gymvirtual) weight YouTubers male no with beauty, to linked content the in reproduced also is stereotype gender The weight). it. generate who etranetlne ohumour). to linked (entertainment conssae ewe a n oa h raenurlcneti em fgne stereotypes gender of terms say, in to content is neutral that the create creators, than who the by woman influence expressed a are and greater genders two man a the audiences a which balanced between present in most shared those stereotypes the accounts are obtain men gender that and women channels to of the terms However, link in creator. its content the and by content expressed gender The male of audience. domination the female to 15%. due Sarinha of list and type the subscribers down this female lower of 14% are has creators they Female Dragona Patty but audiences, entertainment. creators. male and mostly gameplay have to also related content content consumes that cannot and audience plural is content whose channels, mass-media stereotype. by a followed to man, linked a and be and Adexe woman of a account women. by official 82% managed of the audience as beauty an category, of has content singers, perpetuation important teenage and losing male most reproduction Spanish on the next two to the focused Nau, subject is tutorials is content extent sports Music greater with a norms. account to audience an female by the created impacts is content valued this most audience. male In the mostly these, a YouTubers women. have among Most 25.9% account. and into men content the 74.1% the taking to of audience, according YouTube their channels up of of breakdown made gender the is illustrates (https://bit.ly/35HxrNX) studied 3 sample Figure regard, the that therefore, noteworthy, 48th. ranking and list the entering 3.2. woman one (lose only “adelgazar” with shares and word mainly content the of She include type frequently this position). sharing which (28th of alone titles content the exercises, generate 49th. aerobic that and concerning 8 women 33rd in content rank the content (2) of among gamers category women woman primary contrast, positioned the In is reach. it greatest as the positioned, with best accounts the 10 also top is the Gameplay of accounts. the of women 54% the by by occupied not are positions ”masculine” these as although stereotyped content positions, while privileged position; most 28th the the from holds starting ”neutral” rank or they as gameplay. reach, or greater sports a entertainment, have includes that content sports, create entertainment, creators as male such the content that while create meaning gameplay, women 10, These or top beauty the reach. reach inferior to notoriously manages a them has of gender none female Moreover, persons. physical visible of number oe h raecnetlne otefml edrseetp e rae eonto rmthe from recognition greater get stereotype gender female the to linked content create who Women male largely a have study this in examined YouTube channels the of most 3, Figure in accounts seen shared be the can As are audiences their among balance gender a reaching to closest accounts The and, women, 50% than more of audience an gather that reach greater of (6) accounts few are is There It YouTubers. male and female with mediation through identity gender its builds audience The best- the is and list the enters YouTuber female one only content, sport-related to comes produced it YouTube community, When the by valued best content of type the is gameplay list, overall the that In those among valued less are stereotypes gender female to related contents the that evident is It total the of 12.2% represent accounts 50 of list the in be to manage who content of creators female The h eainhpbtengne n h uine ftems a-ecigYuuechannels YouTube far-reaching most the of audiences the and gender between relationship The © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 31-40 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 37 38 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 h olwti yeo otn rframl eeet spoe nrsac odce yGwr and Gewerc by conducted research in proven as referent, male a prefer content of type this follow who lnoFrer 21) hi idnsso htwe ie h potnt oflo aih’ profile, Sarinha’s follow to opportunity the given when that show findings Their (2019). Alonso-Ferreiro Bel,21;Fec ta. 09 ahra 05.I h aeo hssca ei ltom hr the where platform, media social this of case the In 2015). Macharia, 2019; al., et French 2011; (Byerly, 97,tu eemnn h om htgvr hi eaiu Bte,21) h vdnehglgt a highlights evidence The 2010). (Butler, behaviour their govern that norms the determining thus 1977), odvlpatost ih gis eitrpeettosadi aoro qa cesadpriiainof participation and https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-03 access equal of favour in and representations sexist pre- against fight female to of of actions subjectivation develop construction to the the mediates mediates way that same men the for in female and and the by audiences, to teens. majority created linked content their content democratic minority, of in the of devaluation or Namely, masculinity consumption the majority, the emerge. stereotypes; the concerns and by represent educational conditioned stereotype; who major not women, regard, women, of this of up In participation made content. audience the broad on a depending indeed is there ranking as value. positions, by less privileged generated attributed less are content in disseminate the themselves they when find interests they Even and stereotypes, knowledge (Lacan, gender counterparts. the is their male intelligibility women to their successful cultural corresponds to more women of the compared these of influential schemes presence and available the decisive Furthermore, the less participation. in female of subjects presence the education, peripheral and situates socialisation that Through peripheries. fostered the is to relegated ideal be an values, platform. to the and continue on principles they participation nevertheless, content, critical and, and knowledge, a active of free, as transmission on example, 3) absence given the and the on represented; visible on 2) not 1) its are men; impacts women by into This which extent among subject. translates greater the 2016), a of construction to (Ficoseco, the shaped for power mediator the and and by referent reason potential recommended prestige, Luh, with follow to associated decide they tricks, some videos. her learned in have YouTuber herself female pre-teens the which from pre-teens because by is This overshadowed 2018). are Mohseni, they & who (Döring although Women platform followers, the shape. dominate in male who staying counterparts, have or male videogames around beauty their assembles as with audience such them associated female stereotypes, makes the content gender that content, to produce place of linked visible kinds a content all occupy publish of they who creators as those as women (2018), pre-teens, are al. by there et recognised While Aran-Ramspott most referents. of the research also the are in They out occupies. football. pointed space and this humour, in gameplay, that acquired content: place have stereotyped the they being knowledge these spaces the of these that relevant In place most The the spectators. and learnings. as to valuable themselves belong very amusing the they kinds, or around all standing groups of the playgrounds, small learnings Martínez-García, play acquire of in where 2005; other they periphery playing Ruiz, is to the chatting, & transfer This occupy while (Cantó will to field studies they tend football playground. other that 2018), in the al., codes explained et and on as Castillo-Rodríguez and rules space pre-teens, 2018; context the female privileged Spanish learn and and the and Girls image interact in central spaces. familiar they sport a The where hegemonic in place, the an takes situated organisation. to field, action usually school similar football the is web, the by on the which pre-teens on planned one male generated not and been time boys has and illustrates space space leisure recreational a a YouTube platform: schoolyard, the to space physical gender to linked is representation participation. female low participation, for and spaces stereotypes has subject but the passive on necessarily work not UNESCO’s is audience by revealed as media, traditional in network, happens the what on of sphere trend public the the continuing in figures female of under-representation the (YouTube), reveals platform Discussion 4. gis hsbcdo,mdaeuainpeet tefa nopruiy n ti,teeoe essential therefore, is, it and opportunity, an as itself presents education media backdrop, this Against the in accounts the all among male, is audience the of majority the that illustrate figures the Whilst space this of point central symbolic the occupying from women young prevents barrier physical No imaginaries of system patriarchal the in circumscribed environment, woman’s the of appropriation The share who men are ranking, the of top the at scene, media the of core the at YouTubers Those the from relations power of transfer the suggests environment the of appropriation differentiated The entertainment main the on scene, media new the in women of role the investigates which study, This n conclusions and • ae 31-40 Pages oe ndgtlmdai hc hyhv nisfiin rsne(rnhadohr,21) nthis In 2019). others, and (French presence insufficient an have they which in media digital in women Síntesis. UNESCO. 28-45. (2011). C.M. Beyerly, (Ed.), L. audiovisuales García-Aretio, In pedagógica. (2017). Perspectiva M. conocimiento. Berzosa, del educación Sociedad y (2012). conocimiento S. del Valdivieso, Sociedad & B., Gros, A., preadolescencia]. Ayuste, la pre-adolescence. en on influencia influence su their y and https://doi.org/https://doi.org10.3916/c57-2018-07 youtubers functions YouTubers’ los social de (2018). sociales A. Tarragó, [Funciones & M., Fedele, S., Aran-Ramspott, References and EDU2015- code Economy with of Agency Research Ministry State Spanish the the of by R+D+i financed challenges and (CDEPI)”, 67975-C3-1-P. research for proposals plan e-inclusion national the and in processes Competitiveness, appropriation environments, family and Agency Funding aa,J 17) letdodlepj oofrao el ucó e otlcm ensrvl nl xeini psicoanalítica. experiencia la en revela nos se como tal yo del función la de formador (Ed.), como J. espejo Lacan, del In estadio El (1977). (2015). J. J. Lacan, Green, & S., Ford, H., Jenkins, syllabus. annotated An entertainment: and https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2010.510599 storytelling Transmedia (2010). H. Jenkins, https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8435.001.0001 (2009). H. Jenkins, https://bit.ly/2suUnBM J., Weiss, In (2008). H. Century. Jenkins, 20th Late the in (Eds.), socialist-feminism P. Trifonas, Springer. and & technology, J., Science, Hunsinger, J., manifesto: Nolan, cyborg A (2006). D. Haraway, Science. Red. Political sociedad (2012). and la S. en Livingstone, 2.0 & digital L., alfabetización Haddon, como Sociedad medios y Tecnologías los Nuevas para de educación Revista La (2008). A. Gutiérrez, In digital. (2014). competencia A. la Grizzle, de desarrollo y Videojuegos (Eds.), Royale? E. Clash Martínez-Piñeiro, al & ¿Jugamos A., (2019). Gewerc, A. Alonso-Ferreiro, and & participation YouTube: Creation, A., and Gewerc, Adolescents (2016). M.C. López-De-Ayala, consumption. & B.A., García, A., García-Jiménez, (2019). C. Padovani, esta & de A.V., análisis Montiel, el L., para French, género de estudios (1994). los M. de Foucault, campo del Antecedentes digitales. tecnologías confluencia. y Mujeres A., (2016). Alonso-Ferreiro, V.S. In Ficoseco, perspectivas. y experiencias social Significados, (Eds.), inclusión S. escuela: Dorado, la & desde A., digital analyses. Rodríguez-Groba, inclusión content La three of (2017). YouTube: results I. on Dussel, sexism and dominance Male (2019). Studies conflictos M.R. de Mohseni, resolución & como N., recreo Döring, del físico-deportivas. Dinamización actividades (2018). en P. participación Gil-Madrona, y & las C.C., de Picazo-Córdoba, Análisis escolar. G., recreo escolar: Castillo-Rodríguez, el recreo durante de espacio patio del el ocupación en la espontáneo en motor género Comportamiento por (2005). diferencias L.M. Ruiz-Pérez, & R., Cantó-Alcaraz, (2010). J. Internet. (2018). Butler, the J. of Green, age & the J., in Burgess, education media Rethinking Education International literacies: and media Digital (2007). D. Buckingham, https://bit.ly/2KPhQGF create to order in education media in train to is, participation. that equal emerge, for opportunity opportunities and an spaces and challenge a context, hssuyi ato h eerhcridotb h rjc Dgtlcmeec mn oployeuainsuet:social students: education compulsory among competence “Digital project the by out carried research the of part is study This , https://doi.org/10.5232/ricyde2005.00103 19 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-3803-7_4 4,512-524. (4), https://bit.ly/2nl9Kdz eit Extraprensa Revista Ariel. . rsaSocial Prisma p.1-0.. 13-30). (pp. eaimspíucsdlpoder del psíquicos Mecanismos srts1 Escritos niaoe egnr aamdo ecmnccó (GSIM) comunicación de medios para género de Indicadores ofotn h hlegso atcptr utr:mdaeuainfrte2s century 21st the for education media culture: participatory of challenges comunicación the Confronting de medios los de convergencia la de cultura La Culture: Convergence otbr ta seis lfnmn u acmid amnr eetne o contenidos los entender de manera la cambiado ha que fenómeno El especies. otras y Youtubers https://goo.gl/iSvn5z https://bit.ly/2LcguU0 emnuiadlsujeto del Hermenéutica lblrpr ntesau fwmni h esmedia news the in women of status the on report Global https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1467945 , oue1(p 69) il XXI. Siglo 86-94). (pp. 1 volume , , 1 2 60-89. , 1,43-55. (1), oT b:Oln ie n atcptr culture participatory and video YouTube: Online , 9 2,87-87. (2), ukd nie ainlprpcie.Ekd online Eukids perspectives. National online: kids Eu https://bit.ly/2L5L5CF nvria ainld dccó Distancia. a Educación de Nacional Universidad . , utr rnmda acecó ecneioyvlre n utr nRed en cultura una en valor y contenido de creación La transmedia. Cultura ondsItrainlsIcúeT unol optni iia aoeela favorece digital competencia la Cuando Inclúye-T: Internacionales Jornadas I https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2007.2.1.43 optni iia raoecni.Lsdsfo el e-inclusión la de desafíos Los preadolescencia. y digital Competencia 51 17-41. , Endymión. . h nentoa adoko ita erigEnvironments Learning Virtual of Handbook International The Educare https://doi.org/10.11606/extraprensa2016.107719 Cátedra. . edr ei Cs e prahsfrrsac,euain&training & education research, for approaches New ICTs: & Media Gender, https://doi.org/10.17231/comsoc.13(2008).1147 , 1 1-22. , https://bit.ly/2LdL7bS https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.22-2.14 Comunicar eit nencoa ececa e deporte del ciencias de internacional Revista nentoa oe’ ei Foundation. Media Women’s International . UNESCO. . © oiyPress. Polity . SN 1134-3478 ISSN: , Continuum 26 5) 71-80. (57), h odnSho fEconomics of School London The . https://bit.ly/2Zd4ta6 , • 24 -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: eerhi Comparative in Research 6,943-958. (6), udrsdigitals: Quaderns Paidós. . h I Press. MIT The . p.117-158). (pp. eiitMedia Feminist p.121-137). (pp. • ae 31-40 Pages Gedisa. . , 1 (1), .

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 39 40 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 atnzGrí,L 21) oilzcó ieecaaprrznd éeoe dccó natl netdoetnográfico. estudio Un infantil: educación en género de Educación, razón de por Complutense diferenciada Socialización (2018). In L. Center. Martínez-García, Research Pew (2015). (2015). S. A. Macharia, Perrin, & M., Duggan, https://pewrsr.ch/2OunfBM M., friendships. Anderson, A., Smith, A., Lenhart, Pragmatics, P Lange, oae,JMR,Atn,M,Mro .. oea ..(06.L uv rnead adsgadddgtl abrecha la digital: desigualdad la de frontera nueva La (2016). the J.A. of Lobera, analysis & YouTube: An S.D., on participativa. Marco, divide M., gender Antino, the J.M.R., Exploring Morales, (2008). vlogs. J. of Singer, reception & and K., creation Gibson, S., O’donnell, H., (2014). Molyneaux, K. Ólafsson, & G., Mascheroni, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-03 https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2014.882373 adolescente]. identidad identity. la adolescent de of construcción construction la the y and youtubers YouTuber videos [Los (2018). S. Abarrou-Ben-Boubaker, & Y., Pérez-Torres, Pastor-Ruiz, V., a-ik .(06.L utr el oetvdd n itracíiad a ee sociales. YouTube. redes on las Gender de Performing crítica (2014). historia L. Una McMillan, conectividad. & la L., de Wotanis, cultura La (2016). limitations. J. en and Van-Dijk, social potential red YouTube comments: la for Methodology en analytics Research interacción media la Social sobre (2018). género españolas. M. de TV Thelwall, YouTube: Estudio de a series sofá las Del a torno (2016). T. Hidalgo-Marí, & C., Computing Sánchez-Olmos, Social In & Work Times. York Cooperative New Supported the https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675134 Computer in on commenters Conference Female ACM 18th well-spoken: the but Outnumbered (2015). E. Pierson, G 21) omnigo oTb at:Pretoso nprpitns rcvcengagement? civic or inappropriateness of Perceptions YouTube rants: on Commenting (2014). .G. 73 eit saoad netgcoe Sociológicas Investigaciones de Española Revista 36.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.004 53-65. , AC https://bit.ly/2ojGJzk WACC. (GMMP). project monitoring media Global news? the makes Who , 3,3336 https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2017.1381821 303-316. 21(3), 29 3,3-2 https://doi.org/10.5209/rced.54263 35-52. (3), mrcnCmuiainJournal, Communication American • ae 31-40 Pages omncto Society & Communication Educatt. . opportunities and Risks mobile: go children Net Comunicar, , , 29 156 2,1712 https://doi.org/10.15581/003.29.2.sp.117-132 117-132. (2), 716 https://doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.156.97 97-116. , 2,11.https://bit.ly/2sum3H8 1-14. 10(2), eiitMdaStudies, Media Feminist 26 5) 17.https://doi.org/10.3916/c55-2018-06 61-70. (55), il XXI. Siglo p.1201-1213). (pp. nentoa ora fSocial of Journal International 6,912-928. 14(6), en,tcnlg and technology Teens, SW‘5Poednsof Proceedings ‘15 CSCW ora of Journal Revista Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

Influence of Instagram stories in attention and emotion depending on gender Influencia de las historias de Instagram en la atención y emoción según el género

Dr. Joan-Francesc Fondevila-Gascón is Professor in Blanquerna at the University Ramon Llull, Barcelona

(Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6587-939X) Dr. Óscar Gutiérrez-Aragón is Professor in the Mediterranean University School at the University of Girona

(Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4417-6310) Meritxell Copeiro is Professor in the Mediterranean University School at the University of Girona (Spain)

([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5255-5724) Vicente Villalba-Palacín is Researcher at the Barcelona University (Spain) ([email protected])

(https://orcid.org/000-0003-0284-3004) Dr. Marc Polo-López is Professor in Blanquerna at the University Ramon Llull (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8729-4325)

ABSTRACT The impact of media and social networks on users is growing. The fact that commercial activity is flooding most social networks motivates us to enquire about the success factors of posts, and to try to determine if the impact is greater or lesser depending on gender. Attracting attention and exciting the user or customer are the main objectives of advertising, especially interactive advertising. This quantitative research measures the psychophysiological signals of the attentional level and the emotional level of people taking into account gender, through Sociograph, when they visualize Instagram stories of real influencers. Tomeasure the electrodermal activity by means of two electrodes, a measurement instrument is used which integrates the traditional register of the Electrodermal Activity (EDA) and processes the information of the individuals. A questionnaire, the screen to display the Instagram story, the Instagram stories of the influencers, a registration protocol and a record sheet of the activity sequences are used. We observed that a greater number of followers implies greater emotional activation, although it translates into negative emotions, and a greater emotional activation in men than in women, although it is they who show positive emotions towards the video and would make an act of purchase through Instagram.

RESUMEN El impacto de los medios y las redes sociales sobre los usuarios es creciente. El hecho de que la actividad comercial esté inundando la mayor parte de redes sociales motiva a indagar sobre los factores de éxito de las publicaciones, y a tratar de determinar si el impacto es mayor o menor en función del género. Llamar la atención y emocionar al usuario o cliente son los principales objetivos de la publicidad, especialmente la interactiva. Esta investigación, de carácter cuantitativo, analiza los datos de las señales psicofisiológicas del nivel atencional y del nivel emocional de las personas teniendo en cuenta el género, a través de Sociograph, cuando visualizan Historias de Instagram de «influencers» reales. Para medir la actividad electrodérmica mediante dos electrodos, se utiliza un instrumento de medición que integra el registro tradicional de la Actividad Electrodérmica (EDA) y procesa la información de los individuos. Se utilizan un cuestionario, la pantalla para la visualización de la Historia de Instagram, las Historias de Instagram de los influencers, un protocolo de registro y una hoja de registro de las secuencias de actividad. Se observa que un mayor número de seguidores implica mayor activación emocional, aunque se traduce en emociones negativas, y una mayor activación emocional en hombres que en mujeres, aunque son ellas las que muestran emociones positivas hacia el vídeo y realizarían acto de compra a través de Instagram.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Sociograph, gender, Instagram, influencer, EDA, emotions, neuromarketing, attention. Sociograph, género, Instagram, influenciador, EDA, emociones, neuromarketing, atención.

1 42 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ERo hsclvladELo oi ee) D niae aeieatvto ees(teto) and (attention), levels activation baseline indicates EDL level). tonic or EDL and level phasic or (EDR and pleasure memorisation, attention, the know to possible it’s that proved (HR) Rate Heart and (EEG) 2019). (CECABLE, 5,adi sas h is hiewe eeoig“rnig n eggmn”mreigstrategies marketing “engagement” and “branding” developing when choice first the also is it and 15%, orltv u oiscneto oeoin rua n teto Dwo ta. 07.I re to order In instrument measurement https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-04 2007). a al., Sociograph, et use (Dawson physiopsychological we attention as electrodes and indexes two arousal psychophysiological through used emotion, activity most to the electrodermal the connection time measure the of its at one to values is due emotion EDA and correlative attention individual’s performed. the is provides activity This response. emotional the 1988). al., EDR, et (Cosculluela moods to related permeability is the EDA in 2013). variations al., to due et properties (Aiger and electrochemical membranes glands in cell exocrine changes of of psychophysiological cause secretion the register that on to structures depend to parameter skin EDA refers a other registering constitutes It in and originated (1888). changes surface) Fere The (skin by skin measurements. the discovered Fernández, of phenomenon & activity psychobiological (Monge bioelectric based a the is is research this Activity which Electrodermal on Fernandes, foundation & 2012). analysis (Rego psychological approaches the critical about is despite more Magnetic EDA discover relationships, Functional and and 2005). as study behaviour to on such us influence technologies, allow and which activity and brain EDA, tools Tracking or methods, Eye EEG, research (FMRI), new Imaging Resonance of incorporation the to (Vecchiato due are fragments stimulating most the which as well 2014). Electroencephalogram as al., using ad, et the ads seeing TV while with experienced experiment emotion An product. the (Fondevila- Television) customises Broadband 2015), Broadcast al., memory, (Hybrid et a HbbTV Gascón on become 2005). broadcasts and al., interactive stronger et during be (Keil example, stimuli can visual emotion through perception, brain the of (Plichta can stimulus of degree this the areas that this of other observed level to to emotional been According similarly the has to to it emotion according 2011). although activated an al., 1993), is for cortex et al., auditory possible et The (Hatfield it’s online. another Physically, occur to also person behaviour). one human from of shared influence be of degrees (three and relationship content the positive and less produce contacts people personal 2014). these their al., reduced, of et is (Kramer outside timeline expressions someone their negative with on interact content individuals emotional of two amount if that proven been has perception. their determine contagion to emotional them and to Stimuli is 1.1. “influencer” an suggest also what We or them. habits attentional) sees addition that consumption and subject in user the (emotional negative, know of or of gender to positive the getting amount is to activation according the differences their activation verify if potential determine to the to that to us and influencers follower allows real the This of over generated Stories followers. influence Instagram of see they amounts when different subjects have of Sociograph, through levels, emotional is and This emotion Sociograph. attention, through (EDA). variables: measured Activity three be Electrodermal least can at the emotion control registering and can called Attention we 2012). attention. ad, audience’s al., an the et attract (Torreblanca sees and that memory move individual to Internet an the analyse by we provided options If the of by most the make users to lengths active of number the offline in surpasses Facebook communication surpasses online Instagram fact, In media. social consumers. by and led businesses communication, between relationship the Introduction 1. lcrccnutnei sdt esr h hne neeti rnmsinbtentoelectrodes two between transmission electric in changes the measure to used is conductance Electric especially considerable, is stimuli external to reactions human of study the and neuroscience in Progress for audience, or client the Moving useful. advertising and marketing makes emotion Therefore, third-degree a to extends individual each of influence the (2007), Fowler and Christakis to According it Facebook, On users. among appears contagion emotional media, social of appearance the With and attentional of signals psychophysiological the measure to is research this of goal essential The great to goes marketing, and relations public advertising, particularly sector, communications The changing are Internet the and media social 2013), (Fondevila-Gascón, Society Broadband The n ttso h issue the of status and • ae 41-50 Pages ihScorp,adte td o h otbr ihtems olwr nSanifunethe influence Spain in followers most the with Youtubers the how study they and Sociograph, with h nlssi efre ihScoa software. Sociolab with performed is analysis The Ree 94 esa netdUrltosi ewe ciainadpromne hnatvto is activation when performance: and activation between relationship U inverted an sets 1994) (Reeve, eyhg rvr o,promnedcess vrg auspooepromneadconcentration. and performance promote values Average decreases. performance low, very or high very ies n r nysonfr2 or ntecetrspoie n hyaetescn otviewed most second the are they and profile; creator’s the on hours 24 for shown only are and videos, effectiveness the verify to used technology a tracking”, “Eye through viable is users over content or videos that characters create and plots change to them allowed This data. objective obtain to pieces visual ciiyrltdt teto n mto uigteatvt hog oigah hc a esr groups. measure can which Sociograph, registers through strips EDA activity Velcro Therefore, the with 2012). during the skin Palacín, emotion & the register and (Aiger to attention correctly finger to attached ring to related and and order activity forefinger hand the In non-dominant of phalanges activation). the medial attributed of on the activity placed degree on uncontrolled be the the must to is electrodes linked this the response Palacín, (NSA): data, (situation & activity cause (Aiger spontaneous known to attention a related and to is activation variable less third resistance, A greater 2012). activation, greater entails resistance Less and Kiloohms in expressed 2016). are al., values et The (Aiger activity an 2012). of Palacín, with index behaviour, & activation human general (Aiger and of falsify emotional validations the to non-verbal quantify hard and objective are allows that This responses (Aiger, Sociolab 2013). through Cornejo, information individual & processes Palacín, and registration EDA traditional the integrates that ftepafr’ sr epn oteescoeorpi ris h omncto tl n content age. and 60.4% to style linked men. preferences communication mostly and 24, The tastes and that their traits. 18 group match of sociodemographic the must ages these users, users the connected to to between the respond shown users of The users of all daily). group platform’s of the in the Out is log of trillion. online users one activity all around most of is the (60% month amasses interaction per of users Facebook) (2016), active (after Smith of level to number surveys, According Stories the highest location, followers). second on Instagram options, 15,000 the filter content than other has vertical more users. adding with Instagram launch mobile shared, accounts to (for photos for links and first or compatible videos the mentions the countdown, of perfectly adapt one and available is include is is which to service that you and This allow content smartphones Instagram add published. The to can been adapted you has scope. where market, it and platform after visits a hours profile 24 Snapchat, posts, for adapting saved from sharing, emerged post option comments, Stories likes, are 15-second (KPIs) are Indicators which Stories, created Instagram p.m.) 11 2016 and In users). of p.m. p.m.). (50.2% 9 (9 option (between image traffic updates, an peak new share of incorporating to hours is time the it show Likewise, ideal statistics the study. Instagram and of object inserts. intriguing ad an and is services 2012, in Facebook by acquired authors These marketing. in consumers. use attracts to 1.2. food photos of food effect creating aesthetic the is, know that to actions, 2017), tracking of al., eye effects use et psychological (Jaromír the to styling” Access “food of 2018). al., et (Alonso them watch who users of measured perception is phenomenon the where strategies marketing in with dealt YouTube. also on are facial Influencers ING of company communication. lack the the by check used to videos coding the facial in used sadness) (2015) receive and Lewinski and (happiness research sense, audio- market expressions this of do In to EDA us consumers. the allows about Sociograph analyse information 2019). to (Sociograph, allowed more were audience the and interested subjects monitored they this, For programming. the TV to on a attention obtains subject’s EDR the affects ads positively comical-style change in sound that a determined that They and ad. styles ads. other of for set than a average watched higher they while subjects 30 of D niae aeieatvto ees(teto) ri ciiy xlie yteYre-osnLaw Yerkes-Dodson the by explained activity, Brain (attention). levels activation baseline indicates EDL o otn raos ntga tre trc rfi otecetrspoie h anKyPerformance Key main The profile. creator’s the to traffic attract Stories Instagram creators, content For and 2019 in users active million 900 than more with 2010, in launched Instagram, reason, this For media social of field the within research much as or studies many as not are there contrast, In ahead staying of goal their reach to measurements emotion and attention requested España Mediaset (EDR) level emotional and (EDL) level attentional the verified (2017) Martín-Guerra Tapia-Frade and ntga n trcigattention attracting and Instagram © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 41-50 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 43 44 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 a nubaddbtl fwtr eta rdc,uifune yfeig n fvtlnecessity. vital of and feelings by uninfluenced product, neutral a water, of bottle unbranded an was h aaetatdfo h D eitainofr uniaiedt eadn h ciainlvlof level activation the regarding data quantitative offers registration EDA the from extracted data The Pwra)t rcs h D hog acatsfwr.Ti plcto losu ocnetagraphic a convert to us allows application This software. Labchart through EDA the process to (PowerLab) ui fet,ec) nti aorbeevrnet hs aibe eentcnrle ntestudy. the in controlled filters, not effects, were (visual variables tactics These audio-visual environment. of favourable kind least any this at use in by could etc.), seen influencer effects, was Each audio video each for women. influencer that five individuals an so and to 10 gender, similar men of subject’s result five sample the the minimum between make a differentiating to obtained video, We way influencer the each campaign. was conventional This a within media. strategy social marketing on character usual their as traits 2019), (IAB, followers of range to according 2). Table types and different 1 (Table of influencers category four and with gender touch in got we data, the methods to and commitment effectiveness. Material greater triggers 2. a and represents engagement 2017) (Levy, which high influencer) loyalty, above but an audience users, than followers, gaining of more less and 85% (9.7% have for theme consumer effective a Micro-influencers marketing most targeting the by Influencer 2018). word-of-mouth, ratios, (Augure, is branding. media (82%) a or marketing social conversion). actions than engagement on create visibility, influencer less sales strategies greater to main for generates and the agencies brand them of The followers influencer using One influencers. specialised been new these to have used recruiting companies businesses brands connects strategies, of of 29% (brand 46.8% while campaigns businesses years, of 2018). three 37.1% (Brandmanic, 2009). for (Aviva, year them education inclusive using of notion been the have influencers account into with take collaborate must people. Spain, or and young and (IAB intriguing critiques among medium media especially their this communication, social of for that on means strategies brands given growing build follow a advisers, it that people making brand companies of increases, of 83% as number Since act the Influencers respected. consume 2018), they are so products steps, 2016). their on follow (Campillo, comments and 2017). them which Meana-Peón, products like collaborations, & be same brand to (Santamaría-de-la-Piedra want from the effectively influencers comes to more income interests and similar financial with faster their Followers audience of Most target their media. reach social on activity their to tpi ocnetteEclflsit li et(tt,i re otettesga ihEetosoftware. Electro with signal the treat to order in following https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-04 (.txt), The text sheets. plain registration into the files on Excel written fourth the a cuts and convert EDR the EDL, to inserting time, with is by columns coded step shows file manually This converter is Excel. analogue-digital in which an it column store through to runs signal it numerical a registered, into signal is signal EDR and EDL the etc.). the Once influence, during of EDR. out range and filled emotion, EDL of one (type the data with qualitative together sample’s the that, determine questionnaire to a used supplied was registration, we EDA, the registering Before hsrsac,promddrn 09 olw uniaiemtoooy oclettenecessary the collect To methodology. quantitative a follows 2019, during performed research, This is followed be to path the although grows, strategies marketing in influencers of role and use The W The W euse 5scn ie nvria omtfo h nlecr,wt h aecommunication same the with influencers, the from format vertical in video 15-second a requested e ti oilmda n“nlecr ssmoewohsahee eti oilrcgiinthanks recognition social certain achieved has who someone is “influencer” an media, social ithin ie’ betv a otasi o odtepooe rdc a,wih nti case this in which, was, product promoted the good how transmit to was objective video’s • ae 41-50 Pages ihsmlrlvl fdsrcini h aa h ee fsgiiateoinlrsos ER (2, F (EDR) response emotional significant of level The data. the in distraction of levels similar with processing after sample, final The individuals. 42 of total a registered We concluded. was subject the with h niersac apecnitdo dls(ewe 8ad2 er fae.Pireprec with experience Prior age). of years 24 and 18 (between adults of consisted sample research entire The 2 83)=11.6getrtree teto EL ntehg ee,adls ntemdu level medium the in less and level, high the in (EDL) attention targeted greater 1010.06 = 18731) (2, 3 77)384,eoinl(D)o tetoa EL eciiydfeecswr bevdin observed were differences reactivity (EDL) attentional or (EDR) emotional 17670)=338.41, (3, 83)6.7wsgetri h ihlvladlwri h eimlvl o-ee nlecr have influencers Low-level level. medium the in lower and level high the in greater was 18731)=65.07 ainewsapidt h oigahrslswt iko p=5. of risk a with results Sociograph the to applied was variance eeae oehtrgnoseoinlrsossi oprsnt h eimadhg levels. high and medium the to comparison in responses emotional heterogeneous more generated were study the of hypotheses The processing. EDA after rejected following: records the the included that distribution a could that applied, them between was influences code which avoid ethics (n=34) to research results. randomly non-university women A the chosen with and affect individually, variable. more (n=8) called average gender women, men were an the of between participants regarding with 44.12% and mismatch conclusions women (87.50%; a minimised and degree was and 22 university There affected of a 52.94%). age had studies, average men Most an secondary with were 21). members (men of Sample variable age account. age into taken the not regarding was level homogenous socioeconomic their and required was Instagram of analysis or Anova registered). minutes (156.11 records 187,336 of total a generating 37, was EDA, the aoaoya h nvriyo acln ihteidvda.Idvdaswr lcdi rn fa of front in registration EDA the placed completed, were were modules Activity were Individuals the modules Once activity several perform. individual. Sociograph, to with individuals the registration the for the with developed During Barcelona registration. with Psychology of proceed Social to the University screen accessing the by continued at and Instagram, Laboratory on to data behavioural transferred and explanation are social the demographic, and and route (.res) processing files signal output the of in end viewed instruments. the research are is of This XLSTAT). that or results (SPSS the software statistics generates software this Finally, rcin(D)frifune ra hc a infcn 3 77)2.0 osgiiatF significant No 17670)=24.90. (3, F significant was which Aroa, influencer for (EDR) traction 3. nlssadresults and Analysis D a nymaue nepridvda o h td.Ec ujc iwdadfeetvdowith video different a viewed subject Each study. the for individual per once measured only was EDA information. qualitative the from removed were processing EDA the pass not did that records five The h ujcs xeietto rcs ea ypoiiga nta usinar oprovide to questionnaire initial an providing by began process experimentation subjects’ The h eea eciiyrsl codn oifune Fgr )soe rae mtoa dis- emotional greater a showed 2) (Figure influencer to according result reactivity general The F significant revealed 1) (Figure level) high and medium (low, influencer of type per results General • • • 3 h nlec favsr ntecnue slimited. is consumer the Stories. on are advisers Instagram of campaigns. on influence marketing elements The Stories most-viewed in H3: the women campaigns, in marketing attention In and H2: emotion more activate Men H1: © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 41-50 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 45 46 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 oe nSoismreigcmags,wt nepai nattention. on emphasis an with campaigns), marketing Stories in women were differences major no and ranges all in similar quite was signal the women, For homogeneous. was similar quite was reactivity emotional Moreover, influencers. four all in heterogeneous significantly were significantly attention, less generated Abi activity, viewing the For 4883)=6064.71. (4, F significant was b hmgnossadr eito) eadn D 7 34=0.2 eosre greater observed we 1304)=107.92, (7, F EDL Regarding deviation). standard (homogeneous Abi mr eeoeeu)ta nwmn hscnimdH Mnatvt oeeoinadatninin attention and emotion more activate (Men H1 confirmed This women. in than heterogeneous) (more men. in attention targeted beyond observed were ranges significant no Diego, influencer For (EDR). 01=439.Frtets ciiy eosre infcn 4 93=227 rae targeted greater 4913)=2242.73 (4, F significant observed we activity, task the For 7041)=0473.91. iwn hnAo hrdsrcinwshtrgnos.Ao rdcdgetrtree teto,which attention, targeted greater produced Aroa heterogeneous). was distraction (her Aroa than viewing https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-04 observed. women. in heterogeneous attention was of which significance deviation, mild standard a homogeneous noted more We high a The with noteworthy. together emotion. was for men (standard emotion differences in men registering significant in for observe range not men attention did in We mild heterogeneity a women). for observed We than influencer. greater same was registration the deviation for emotion women for and men distraction between greater generated Aroa Alberto. watched that influencer men for men the in in range emotional targeting large a detected we 1304)=148.51 (7, F EDR for gender, subject’s deviations). standard distractions (heterogeneous attention Task influencers four averages. all similar in with (4, Alberto, and F Aroa significantly watched distraction, that subjects attention the heterogeneous in more attention a registered Diego 5985)=2474.14. (4, F modules. activity comparison nlecr oprdt iue3 nlecrDeorvae rae vrg mtoa eciiyduring reactivity emotional average greater low-level a both revealed between Diego 7041)=0473.91) Influencer (4, 3. F Figure Diego to and compared 48883)=367.98 influencers (4, F (Aroa 11928)=8837.15 differences and mild (4, EDR F viewing a significant observed for more a we level Greater with (EDL), high although reactivity viewing, the task. during attention distraction. in level and heterogeneous Regarding low observed viewing in average homogenous. were for greater was averages mainly but deviation EDR modules, Standard 4913)=552.24 activity in (4, task. differences F average significant identify and to aimed level hnwthn let,w bevdagetratninsa nmn h iprini lgtyhigher slightly is dispersion The men. in span attention which greater a men, observed we in Alberto, watching emotion When of range clear the revealed Abi influencer for gender to according Viewing differences significant observe to aimed influencer individual to according modules viewing The the to according influencer per module viewing the for deviations standard and averages the Regarding The eadn D scohsooia epne natvte o ahifune,w bevdsignificant observed we influencer, each for activities in responses psychophysiological EDA Regarding mtoa epneadtree teto aao h ifrn ciiisacrigt influencer to according activities different the of data attention targeted and response emotional oFgr .Tegoa aao h inlrqie oeseii nlssacrigto according analysis specific more a required signal the of data global The 1. Figure to • ae 41-50 Pages oe pn oetm nIsarm n h ecpino h oto nlecr a a average. was had influencers control the of perception the and Instagram, on time more spent Women eeslt5/0btenaueetadidfeec,wiewmn ept h rvlneo boredom of prevalence the despite women, while indifference, and amusement between 50/50 split were would who women of 25% the from diverges influence limited This average. it considered who women about thing striking most The emotion). or friendliness (amusement, emotions positive expressed women product. the purchased have would confirmed This last. TV Instagram and place second in posts with place, first took Stories app, the within standard homogeneous a presented who men, among Diego for except heterogeneous, quite were h apesrato oAbrosSoyfrbt edr a osi to ev t xetfrasmall a for except it, leave or it skip to was genders both for Story Alberto’s to reaction sample’s The rasSoywshrefadtewysecmuiae.RgrigAo’ ee fifuneoe the over influence of level Aroa’s Regarding communicated. she way the and herself was Story Aroa’s 4.4) lotogto redieso msmn,wtotfretn bu nifrne htstood What indifference. about forgetting without amusement, or friendliness of thought also (44.44%), women). of 66.67% and men of (half communicated she how and women) of 22.22% men, of (50% teto rue ntesbet,frbt e n oe,rfetdpstv n eaiefeig.Men feelings. negative and and positive emotion reflected The women, product. and the men about both content for more subjects, see the to in up aroused swiped Instagram. attention have on would him who follow men of not percentage do they although men, by recognised was He women. and men between product. the purchased have however, negative; were video Aroa’s regarding men by expressed emotions The information. more subjects the for of none that over observed influence We of impact. level more Diego’s slightly with accent). women, his in (probably except sounded low Diego’s although was and in emotions, subjects communicated attention the regarding positive he thing women, way remarkable the for aroused most more was The and, most watch Story annoyance emotions boredom). would or and The (frustration women amusement genders. emotions men, of negative both also for 20% by were, unknown subjects profile. was the product influencer including in the or women, although the influencer content, nevertheless, the Diego’s Stories; to of his gone dismissed have have would would him exceptions, watched who men the Diego, limited. be sample’s to the tended Regarding it Stories). influence, are influencers’ elements Instagram the on most-viewed of elements the perception most-viewed Regarding the campaigns, followed marketing food. (In most and H2 sample’s animals The music, humour, categories. content friends, multiple to were related There influencers were classified trends but celebrities. Subjects or sample). men, the creators for to content according Alberto Instagrammer as the in of perception observed or viewed was content average EDR highest heterogeneous. The very was range. deviation standard average his low a and deviation u h ott ohgneswr let’ omncto tl n i h aeo oe)hscharacter his women) of case the (in and style communication Alberto’s were genders both to most the out of 12.5% for except modest, was it Story, product Abi’s the regarding were subjects Story (11.11%), by Abi’s surprise described about and influence out (66.67%) the stood the amusement Regarding most boredom) to of that to through source factors (associated clicked a The men women as in (11.11%). her of negative peculiarity low described percentage was also a who main a subjects although the women, was the although that in in There Story, observed positive aroused We the but emotion influencer. skip Instagram. The the of to profile. recognised use was ample influencer’s subjects video and of Abi’s leaders 50% to opinion of reaction platform, influence the the on of the perception spent buy time to inclined of more amount were which women, of case the for except limited, product. it considered we subjects, deviations standard in all deviation 8952)=30.21, standard (7, heterogeneous F a EDR attention Regarding with The but groups. influencers. most significant, aforementioned other the was the of to to women one comparison comparison was among in men Alberto deviation among was standard influencer Diego deviation lower for for (standard a attention subjects with average male The averages, with significant women). Aroa in influencer than for homogeneous 8952)=137.03 more (7, F averages attention eadn nlecrAbro eosre ormral ifrne nteyaso ntga use Instagram of years the in differences remarkable no observed we Alberto, influencer Regarding profile product the accessed timidly women whereas Story, the left men Aroa, influencer Regarding to came it when questionnaire, post-viewing the from obtained influencer each on data the Regarding of (type users Instagram of trend the reflected questionnaires the from extracted data psychosocial The eadn nlecrAi hr een ifrne ewe e n oe hni aet the to came it when women and men between differences no were there Abi, influencer Regarding significant observed We attention. targeted of terms in ranges significant were there activity, task the In © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 41-50 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 47 48 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 let eeae mto nbt edr n teto nyi e.Atvto rnltdit positive into translated Activation men. in only attention and genders both in emotion generated Alberto ee oprn hmsnhoosy,o ifrn ei ult,sc sitrcieHbV(Fondevila- HbbTV interactive as such outlets, media different on synchronously), them comparing (even and ol soitdt ermreig(E rEetakr a ept eietesuc feoinand emotion of source the define https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-04 to other help of can use The tracker) journey. Eye customer’s or media the (EEG of social neuromarketing moments different different to and on associated ages campaign, different tools at of 2015), type al., to et Gascón according sectoral, research: of types varied different more and suggests studies. larger future a standardised in obtaining follow been and to have standards guidelines visual which are videos’ and influencers in the be attention of effects into and sample also visual delving or emotion Therefore, could was clothing affect study. influencers effects, sample can this sound of that for the as number factors such Thus, the account, videos, into Likewise, influencers’ taken the be limitations. improved. could research variables be Other could various optimised. participation presented male Stories and Instagram limited, in (EDA) fluctuating activation observed we Therefore, genders. both emotion. in and attention purchase of potential Influencer ranges likely purchase. a a into produced and convert and emotions not emotions positive did expressed it greater, her, was in activation interest although from manage men, more not achieved In showed did were Women purchase. he/she content and the with women, his attention. made in interacted in subject’s Women less interest and the men men. or attract in of purchases in emotions to more No attention strong raised of viewing it. Abi level Influencer about men, gender. higher positively in either a more or, Diego spoke only Influencer product and and content. the Story emotion, the purchasing his arouse with of sympathised to women act manage the of not the percentage in emotions, did in small negative emotion a interest became Nevertheless, generate activation of This content. to lack her genders. manage Story, both the not of attention of did the dismissal Aroa attract did influencer she registered, although subject, activation a emotional and greater individuals to activation, of sample attention extendable and an emotion of greater circumspection revealed observed the We experiment. Men all scalable level). with (high gender. attention, Alberto subject’s regarding influencer especially the in as activation, to 2013) emotional according al., and differences level) et (low (Aiger Aroa EDA influencer of in effectiveness the and 2017), al., This Martín- et Tapia-Frade & 2015; technology. (Jaromír Santamaría-de-la-Piedra al., measurement activation. sector et 2018; (Fondevila-Gascón attention and advertising al., of and 2017), et terms Guerra, emotion in Alonso impact less 2018; its 2018), (Augure, influence, attention Meana, strategy and & the marketing emotion lower greater influencer the the the individual, confirms However, the over generated observed. influence more activation The influence. is of content users range platform a over or advisers celebrity of a influence is the “influencer” and an states, that (2016) limited. Campillo considered confirms friends what by sample created with The is contrast content in fashion. elements followed creator, or most most-viewed The music the humour, (2018). that Brandmanic about confirm with We or line case. in Stories, this are in Instagram Instagram on media, social on campaigns marketing on conclusions advisers and of Discussion influence 4. (The H3 Therefore, followers confirmed. over attention. was the generated and limited) influence that emotion is of Stories, of consumer degree are the the activation Instagram that the and on to limited campaigns proportional is marketing is consumer Based most-viewed the product. on the promoted advisers that the of consumed confirm influence perhaps we have would results, they the that stated on women the of 25% and men nti es,teifuneadeoinlla eeae ysca ei otn ntepopulation the on content media social by generated load emotional and influence the sense, this In attention and emotion of nature the describe to Sociograph with registration the of application The lesser from arranged So, gender. subject’s the and influencer to according differences detected We higher was activation Attentional influencer. the to according differences activation observed we So, influencer’s the to according different are they activation, attention and emotion of levels the Regarding of use the in emotion and attention analyse to businesses for relevance the reflects research The h rdc.Abrosrneo nlec vrsbet a o o ohgnes lhuhhl fthe of half although genders, both for low was subjects over influence of range Alberto’s product. the • ae 41-50 Pages Valladolid. (MINECO/FEDER). ie’ ouaiyoe time. over popularity video’s ie,M,Plcn . iar,P,Loat . ió .(06.Efcieeso eaaintcnqe eoediagnostic (2018). before L. techniques Costa, relaxation & of D., Effectiveness Braojos, T., (2016). Alonso, M. Simó, patients. la & cancer medir M., of para Llopart, screening P., metodología Pifarré, Sociograph: M., Palacín, mediante M., electrodérmica Aiger, señal La (medida Sociograph (2013). grupal. mediante J.M. actividad interdependencia Cornejo, la & a M., Palacín, relación M., en Aiger, grupal actividad CSO2017-88895-R de Medición grupal). reference electrodérmica (2012). M. Palacín, Competitiveness, & M., and Aiger, Industry Economy, References of Ministry the by financed project, HbbTV” on Agency the Funding is between ads companies. through dialogue for impact challenge attentional the and monetizable by emotional especially and of stimulating advertising, triggered types a of and is both categories field pairing Establishing the brands. within emotion-attention and take audience the can where actors (HbbTV), that decisions interactively future for fundamental attention, eo . enne,C 20) neiêcaeoinl otiuo dcoaspr aiaã eu ntuet emedida. de instrumento um de validação a para adicionais Contributos emocional: Inteligência (2005). Psicología C. Fernandes, & A., Rego, is (1994). activation J. cortex Reeve, Auditory study. (fNIRS) (2011). spectroscopy A.J. Fallgatter, near-infrared ... https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.01.011 functional S., A Brill, W., emotion: Harnisch, by G.W., modulated Alpers, A.B.M., Gerdes, M.M., Plichta, Alicante]. de Universidad thesis, [Degree’s Publicidad. (2016). la M. Pensar Pérez-Conde, Retos. y Mercado Tecnologías, Publicitarias Neuromarketing: Investigaciones de (2012). V. predict Fernánde, YouTube videos & banks’ S., in Monge, speakers of expressions facial of Patterns https://doi.org/10.1037/npe0000046 sad: or happy, 2017. blank, influencers look de Don’t marketing el (2015). P. sobre Lewinski, estatus social El through (2017). contagion emotional A. massive-scale Levy, of Spatial evidence and Experimental Content Emotional (2014). J.T. of networks. Hancock, Effects & J.E., Additive Guillory, (2005). P.J. A.D.I., Kramer, Lang, Facilitation. & Electrocortical M.M., on Bradley, Attention D., Selective Sabatinelli, S., styling. Moratti, food A., efficient Keil, to approach Neuromarketing (2017). Research M. Lenka, & R., Pavel, T., Jaromír, (2019). (Ed.) Spain IAB (2018). (Ed.) Spain IAB contagion. Emotional (1993). R.L. 96-100. Rapson, & J.T., Cacioppo, Internet E., the Hatfield, of (2015). ancha. times S. banda in Seebach, la options Teaching & de possibilities: M., sociedad Carreras-Alcalde, la P., en Mir-Bernal, necesario J.F., Fondevila-Gascón, flujo emotions. un des journalism: et Hombre cloud sensorielles y y excitations Comunicación ciudadano des Periodismo I’influence (2013). sous J. electrique Biologie Fondevila-Gascón, de resistance Société la la de de modifications Radus les Comtes sur Note Tassinary, J.T., (1888). Cacioppo, C. In Fere, system. electrodermal The https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107415782.010 (2007). (Eds.), G.G. G. Berntson, Berntson, & & D.L., L.G., Filion, estrés. A.M., y Schell, personalidad M.E., (EDA), Dawson, electrodérmica Actividad years. (1988). 32 J. over Malapeira, network Psicología & social F., large Guillén, a A., in Cosculluela, obesity of spread The Medicine (2007). J.H. Fowler, & N.A., Christakis, (2019). (Ed.) CECABLE europea inclusiva]. [Aproximación (Ed.). conocimiento society. Brandmanic del knowledge sociedad inclusive una an hacia toward Avanzando Moving https://doi.org/10.3916/c32-2009-01-004 medios: literacy: en media educación to la approach a european A (2009). S. Aviva, (2017). (Ed.) Augure hsrsac spr fte“e om fitrcieavriigo eeiin nentaddgtlmda elapplications Real media. digital and Internet television, on advertising interactive of forms “New the of part is research This https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770953 , , , , 7 rceig fteNtoa cdm fSciences of Academy National the of Proceedings 357 https://bit.ly/37BzvZZ 19 38 1,3-5. (1), 12,139-167. (1-2), 107-116. , 4,370-379. (4), eit ePiooí Social Psicología de Revista oiainyemoción y Motivación Estudio sobre marketing de Influencers en España Influencers de marketing sobre Estudio https://bit.ly/2OK01Yu nom eIfune.Mreig2017 Marketing Influencer. de Informe eit braeiaapr aIvsiainye earloEducativo Desarrollo el y Investigación la para Iberoamericana Revista ir lnod aktn einfluencers de marketing de Blanco Libro sociales redes de anual Estudio , https://bit.ly/2QR6pj8 nom or s erdssociales redes de uso sobre Informe nlecreggmn,uaetaei ecmnccó u oet o agnrcó milenial con lageneración conecta que de comunicación estrategia una engagement, Influencer 9 9,25-25. (9), ora fNuocec,Pyhlg,adEconomics and Psychology, Neuroscience, of Journal adoko Psychophysiology of Handbook https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa066082 uaPsicológica Suma https://doi.org/10.17575/rpsicol.v19i1/2.401 , 5 2,19-42. (2), https://doi.org/10.32466/eufv-cyh.2013.9.163.25-41 , McGraw-Hill. . 40 https://bit.ly/2qK0jGO 217-219. , aktn eifunes aeiai el ac personal marca dela La eficacia influencers: de Marketing , https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_pepu.2011.v5.n2.37862 28 , 23 3,333-347. (3), eerlCortex Cerebral 2,133-140. (2), ncec Press. InScience . A Spain. IAB . https://bit.ly/33fzHdP Augure. . CECABLE. . , p.1711.CmrdeUiest Press. University Cambridge 157-181). (pp. 111 https://doi.org/10.1174/021347413807719102 2) 8788-8790. (24), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sumpsi.2016.06.002 A Spain. IAB . , https://bit.ly/2QVqtRF 15 https://bit.ly/2KMiS3V Brandmanic. . 8,1187-1197. (8), https://bit.ly/2KPhzku https://bit.ly/2KNpD5c urn ietosi scooia Science Psychological in Directions Current NeuroImage https://bit.ly/2DaTHUn © , SN 1134-3478 ISSN: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111 8 https://bit.ly/2QI09tQ 4,241-249. (4), bT itr n t educational its and history HbbTV Comunicar https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhi001 , 55 ora fInterdisciplinary of Journal 3,1200-1207. (3), , 9 , • 1-23. , 32 -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: 19-20. , e nln ora of Journal England New nvria de Universidad . eit Internacional Revista https://bit.ly/2QU8qeD nai de Anuario • ae 41-50 Pages , 2 (3), .

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 49 50 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 psicológica. Santamaría-De-La-P ereetia ontv n mtoa aibe uigteapeito fT commercials. of TV analysis of Cross-cultural appreciation (2014). https://doi.org/10.7358/neur-2014-016-vecc the F. during 23-29. Babiloni, variables & emotional A., al Trettel, and P., orientadas cognitive Cherubino, creatividad neuroelectrical A.G., la Maglione, y W., emocionalidad Kong, La G., Vecchiato, Neuromarketing: (2012). consumidor. A. del en Mengual, comportamiento emoción & F., y Sempere, atención D., sobre Juárez, experimento F., Torreblanca, Un publicidad. y Neurociencia televisiva. publicidad (2017). E. Martín-Guerra, & Tapia-Frade, A., (2019). (Ed.) Sociograph (2016). K. Smith, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-04 iclnaComillas, Miscelánea 9Iceil ntga ttsisyune oknow to need you statistics Instagram Incredible 49 er,E,&MaaPó,R 21) ee oilsyfnmn nlecr elxoe ed n perspectiva una desde Reflexiones influencer. fenómeno y sociales Redes (2018). R. Meana-Peón, & E., iedra, Innovar, nom eactividad de Informe 27 • 6) 19.https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v27n65.65063 81-92. (65), CEpea netgcó esmet Crítico , Pensamiento y Investigación Empresa, 3C ae 41-50 Pages 75 4-6.https://bit.ly/33hfzYK 443-469. , oigah https://bit.ly/2RquZaV Sociograph. . rnwth https://bit.ly/2KN9H36 Brandwatch. . 03.https://bit.ly/2QLlO4E 20-30. 6, erpyhlgclTrendsNeuropsychological , 16, Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

Victims and perpetrators of feminicide in the language of the Mexican written press Víctimas y victimarios de feminicidio en el lenguaje de la prensa escrita mexicana

Elizabeth Tiscareño-García is Researcher in the School of Humanities and Education at the Tecnológico de Monterrey in Monterrey (Mexico) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5465-2472) Dr. Oscar-Mario Miranda-Villanueva is Professor and Researcher in the School of Humanities and Education at the Tecnológico de Monterrey (Mexico) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3180-889X)

ABSTRACT This study investigates the language used by national newspapers in Mexico: “El Universal”, “La Jornada”, “Milenio”, and “Reforma”, when addressing the issue of feminicide regarding victims and perpetrators, as well as their relationship with the gender of the reporter and with each newspaper. The research is based on the analysis of qualitative content and the theoretical framework of framing. Categories were built on the type of language in cases of feminicide of 360 journalistic texts published during 2017: 1) Narrative of feminicide; 2) Justification of the perpetrator or alleged perpetrator; 3) Social issues; 4) Blaming the victim. The analysis yielded cases of victim blaming to a lesser extent than those of the perpetrator’s justification. Aspects of the narration of feminicide stood out both by the gender of the reporter and by the media in the four newspapers, from two perspectives: 1) The fact, the follow-up, or the context; 2) The fact, legal aspects, and statistics. Reporters, men and women, tend to justify the perpetrator; male reporters blame the victim more than female reporters; and female reporters contextualize feminicide through social issues: social violence, impunity, and failures in legal processes. “La Jornada” is inclined towards social issues, while “El Universal” tends to justify the perpetrator.

RESUMEN En este estudio se investiga el lenguaje que utilizan los periódicos de tirada nacional en México: «El Universal», «La Jornada», «Milenio» y «Reforma», al momento de abordar el tema del feminicidio con respecto a víctimas y victimarios o presuntos victimarios, así como su relación con el género del reportero y con cada periódico. La investigación se apoya en el análisis de contenido cualitativo, y el marco teórico-conceptual del «framing». Se construyeron categorías sobre el tipo de lenguaje en casos de feminicidios de 360 textos periodísticos publicados durante 2017: 1) Narrativa del feminicidio; 2) Justificación del victimario o presunto victimario; 3) Problemática social; 4) Culpabilización de la víctima. El análisis arrojó casos de culpabilización de la víctima en menor proporción que los de la justificación del victimario. Sobresalieron aspectos de la narración del feminicidio tanto por el género del reportero como por el medio en los cuatro periódicos, desde dos perspectivas: 1) El hecho, el seguimiento o el contexto; 2) El hecho, los aspectos legales y la estadística. Reportero y reportera tienden a justificar al victimario; el reportero culpabiliza más a la víctima que la reportera; y la reportera contextualiza más el feminicidio a través de la problemática social: violencia social, impunidad y fallas en los procesos legales. «La Jornada» se inclina por la problemática social, mientras que «El Universal» tiende a la justificación del victimario.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Violence, woman, victim, perpetrator, feminicide, qualitative research, framing theory, digital press. Violencia, mujer, víctima, victimario, feminicidio, investigación cualitativa, teoría del encuadre, prensa digital.

1 52 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 Broiz&Lu 04.I sntrosta nasafo eotr hr r oemnta oe,and women, than men more are there reporters of staff a in that notorious is It 2014). Liu, & (Berkowitz 2013). (Segato, oaientr flv,t h looi rtedu dit(ao,20) rt h raino tragic a of creation the to or 2008), (Lagos, addict drug the or alcoholic the to love, of nature volatile 2010). (Rodríguez, media the from victim The (LGAMVLV, 2007). spheres private and public in happens which and rights, human their of violation ietywt navrepoie alr orpr rvosasut,ifdlt,o nprpit behaviour inappropriate https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-05 or infidelity, assaults, previous report to failure profile: adverse in an involvement with our directly and events of social the definitions govern and The that reports the principles 2015). 2007). news of Tewksbury, organizational (Ardèvol-Abreu, problem the & by them a in Scheufele constructed defining 2004; language are allow (McCombs, that situation of macro-attributes causes a study as its the interpreted interpreting are propose and frames to event The by used news. gender is the of of approach issue context theoretical the a of as neglect the 2015) highlights Platform 1995). Beijing (UN, the media the of Pitkanen, in J & stereotypes Point Niemi persisting 2017; this, the (Danés, to reporters writer addition male the In by predominantly of 2016). informed orientation are sexual feminicide and on articles education the ethnicity, gender, the by and permeated prejudices is by writing mediated An the is gender, which 1990). are, (Lagarde, one world crazy bad patriarchal a and and a 2008). failed, woman Lagos, in rare, good 2014; disabled, (Alcocer, a feminicide: assessments sick, what of between women, victims poverty, created bad the as is equivocal, to image such as Factors relation defined in 2014). mysteries, are Smith, mentioned as they & are or Gillespie, passivity homicide-suicides (Richards, and violence ambiguous irrationality, gender-based as or explained domestic are as feminicide-suicides not Many hero. cultural 2008). social (Rodríguez, a prevails as cases presented individual not on cannot is information woman content only dead This instead, the 2010). public, press; the (Monárrez, the to facts explained to the interest talked are of of and out, version problem victim carried her the are give knew murders or who herself the witnesses defend which by for or nature, perpetrator subjective the a by of 1999). reasons (Foucault, The control (Segato, social discrimination. organization maintain pyramidal to the power a represents of and which webs discourse, language the androcentric of hierarchical an consolidation with a and congruent is domain values and There represented attitudes and reflects trials 2006). which court 2013) (Radford, in ratified media are the which 2002) in Vallejo, 1987; the (Caputi, masculinity stigmatize of or construction blame that messages acts of the elimination for the responsible demanding those of on the punishment than perspective, of and women, persecution result legal against of a violence strategies a as on of occurs From more that focuses women Mexico 2010). against in violence law Monárrez, variety gender wide 1992; of a form Russell, includes extreme that & an terror as (Radford anti-female defined abuse of is continuum feminicide physical a and of end verbal the men of represents are it scene and the 1990) dominate Russell, who those identify and to piece, possible is disposable it the situations, process, both this In in 2011). waste Wright, parts is 2014; different (Gallur, victim in garbage thrown the were and that case they killed if paradigmatic were as the women city 12 and the 1993, 1990), of during Lagarde, Mexico: 1992; Chihuahua, (Amorós, Juárez, Ciudad violence of gender of 2018). (SESNSP, identification with respectively the reasons counted through related were gender 588 for and men 389 the of 2016, 2017, hands and in the later, 2015 at years Ten in women while feminicide. against address crime 671cases, to in sought increase State an the showed which statistics with strategy legal a published, Introduction 1. nfaigadgne ilne ees(94 eerhfnig hwdta h itmwsblamed was victim the that showed findings research (1994) Meyers violence, gender and framing On Iglesias, & Miranda 2012; McCombs, & Tien, Guo, 1976; Frazier, & (Benton framing case, this In journalist’s the by conditioned is presentation article’s the (1996) Reese and Shoemaker for addition, In the to attacker, angry and drunk a to dysfunction, individual to attributed gender is violence without such Commonly, society a towards change of strategists as role fundamental a play media The social the and sexuality, sadistic misogyny, women: against violence in converge factors Several & (Caputi woman a is she because man a of hands the at woman a of murder the involves Feminicide patriarchy confronts feminism how contexts: two on based is Mexico in feminicide on Research In 07i eio h eea a nWmnsRgtt ieFe fVoec LAVV was (LGAMVLV) Violence of Free Life a to Right Women’s on Law General the Mexico, in 2007 • ae 51-60 Pages Rfra.Apoiaey 4 nomto ae nttl ntecsso Mlno n L Jornada”, “La and “Milenio” of from cases (17.46%) the 64 In and total. “Milenio” in from pages (31.02%) information 110 742 Universal”, Approximately, “El from “Reforma”. (37.12%) 134 Jornada”, “La 99,827 “Milenio”, and; 131,355, Jornada”, “La 119,429; Universal”, “El 1,388,875; prints “Reforma”, od.A a ese,tredfeetsac ehd eeapid h esaeswr o accessible not were newspapers the applied, were methods search different three seen, be can As words. library. digital Monterrey’s de Tecnológico through accessed was which “ProQuest”, via gathered were or concepts, objects, or subjects of classes groups, all include should census A 1). (Table selected were Cubbert and Bullock aggressor. the of attributes positive highlighting by blame: indirect as also, men; with Jnay21 eiiie a h erhpop.Sace eecridotec ot ihdifferent with month each out carried were Searches prompt. search crime). the OR was feminicide Feminicide) OR (January.2017 dead OR homicide OR (murdered AND Young) OR girl OR (Woman 2019). (PNMI, only violence people: of kind different a as perpetrators the portrayed reporters that investigated (2002) 2. ad o vr esrpr rmterqie ae a vial rm“aJraa n “Milenio” and Jornada” “La other from the available On was dates subscription-based. required are the Universal” from ”El report and news “Reforma” every and not hand, platform, same the through AND 2017) (Jan. were: was adopted website criteria newspaper The Autonomous the National bit.ly/2r16GoB). the in // of was website (https: the covered that through (UNAM) search link engine Mexico Search a the Google of the Jornada”, crime); University to “La OR you took access feminicide To turn in OR months. which OR dead (Woman used, by AND OR and (47,134) homicide OR PUBID general OR dead in was: OR (murdered search 2017 the homicide AND Universal”, OR young) ”El (murdered OR of AND case girl the young) In OR crime). girl OR OR feminicide (Woman AND (32,652) (PUBID) “Reforma” tion and Universal” “El from those websites; respective their from selected were from reports articles news were the (14.4%) 52 which of 360, analysed, were criteria the met which those only however, 2011). Dominick, & (Wimmer population or universe a of phenomena run: print daily to relation In 2007). (Nájera, an national centre Muñiz, represent & left are (Rodelo They moderate right These the “Milenio”, 1968). “Reforma”, and; centre; 1). (Merrill, 2009) (Table Universal”, “El newspapers Durán, (100%) left; elite 2016; the texts of Jornada”, 1,679 “La qualities about (31.3%), plurality: the ideological 525 were have “Milenio”, There and (32.7%), newspapers 549 Universal” (15.3%). circulation “El 257 (20.7%), notes “Reforma”, 348 and published Jornada” “La 2017. n edrvoec a are u.Fo hr,tetxsta oue nvcisadperpetrators and victims on focused that texts the there, From feminicide to relating out. reports news carried the was all of violence census a gender beginning, the and In feminicides. 2006). of (Krippendorff, perpetrators approach alleged qualitative 2011); a Dominick, from & information (Wimmer analyse variables to certain communication: used measures of also and method is the analytical quantitative, it from and and study information objective, a with systematic, is categories is analysis analysis Content it construct questions. to research and priori, reports a news approach, inductive an through 2011) feminicide. a language of of perpetrators type the the and to victims relates the it how report and newspapers journalist these to the How use of 3) journalists gender language and, The What used; 2) 1) perpetrators; and investigate: victims we particular, to in refer perpetrators, or alleged or mental perpetrators to and due it perpetrator so, the doing in on passion, feminicide focus of present reports crime news the drug (Taylor, a 2009). The on illness as was than physical classified relationship. there past is causal et criminal violence class; stereotyped Gillespie the gender a social that on self-defending. becomes lower argues as more (1994) excused a focuses Fagoaga were reporting of While perpetrators the and case. the that cultures violence; identified of other (2013) act of al. the part before are use alcohol who and people certain to happens aaadmethodology and Data h dacdsac olfo Rfra a sdwt h erhpops ulcto Identifica- Publication prompts: search the with used was “Reforma” from tool search advanced The collected; was universe the of criteria the met which texts the all of information the case, this In in published violence gender and feminicide to related reports news all includes studied universe The ihrsett Mlno,tesac a oedrcl niswbie(tp:/i.y3V8l,and (https://bit.ly/32Vg8al), website its on directly done was search the “Milenio”, to respect With or perpetrators and victims mention which reports news as defined was study the of analysis of unit The Dominick, & Wimmer 2005; Frederick, & Lacy, Riffe, 2004; (Krippendorff, used was analysis Content victims about feminicide of issue the on language address texts journalistic how analyse we study, this In © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 51-60 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 53 54 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 a nwihvcisadprertr r rsne nteMxcnwitnpesi eiiiereporting. feminicide in press written Mexican the in presented are perpetrators and victims which in way “eom” eebr26 December (“Reforma”, via h et l h nomto olce a nlsdwt h vv 2software. 12 Nvivo the search with to analysed capacity the was without collected version, information printed the the All were platform text. its the via accessible files the mid-2017; after oee ihbakt,a fsewr sep n e ubn,tepeue upi,hdarayescaped” already had bed culprit, the presumed on the lying husband, body was her lifeless and body asleep, Carmen’s The were found marks. she relatives if strangulation “Her as with blankets, process. District, with Pantitlán judicial covered Juárez the at of bedroom part her or inside facts the mention only articles Narrative 3.1.1. are which (3%), victim 1). the (Figure blaming subcategories and of (16%) series a issues justifying of social (48%), up (33%), feminicide made of perpetrator narrative alleged emerged: or categories perpetrator four texts, the journalistic the of analysis the From Journalistic 3.1. Results 3. httesnecdpro utpy3520pssfrdmgsad432pssfrfnrlexpenses” funeral for informed pesos Justice https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-05 4,382 of and Court damages Superior for City’s pesos “Mexico 365,200 it. pay about feminicide, must states committing person for law sentenced punishment the the the what that mention and which process, language legal legal the include articles The penalties. Pous” h raetdfiut a ih“aJraa eas t iiaiainpoesbegan process digitalization its because Jornada” “La with was difficulty greatest The “ProQuest”. )Tefc:Temre fawmna h ad famnad risflo-p nti es,some sense, this In follow-up. its or and/ man a of hands the at woman a of murder The fact: The 1) the regarding mind, in topic research the with articles news reading after developed were Categories )Tefc n/o h olwu oti lmnssc ssaitc,ohrcss as acin or sanctions laws, cases, other statistics, as such elements contain follow-up the or and/ fact The 2) agaeadtexts and language ffeminicide of • th ae 51-60 Pages 2017). , oa sas obae hshpeswe h rilshglgtpstv set fteprertr which perpetrator, the of aspects positive highlight articles the when happens This blame. to also is woman cases, recent the all of recount a is there where those or mentioned, are committed was crime the where “iei” pi 27 April (“Milenio”, “lUiesl,Otbr30 October Universal”, (“El 3.1.2. htaeclual ecie xlsvl o ae.Teei rtcs fteatoiisadtewythey way the spaces and into authorities women the of of incursion criticism the is and question. There into roles males. put gender is for of acted exclusively mention widespread perceived a by culturally is as are well there that as extent, women-trafficking, lesser or a To drug-dealing him general, impunity. in have violence and to even relating permissiveness may let-downs the the they under violence, or widespread responsible institutions. of other is and atmosphere who authorities an the know in by contextualized may normalization is they it though custody, even in violence, social general 3.1.3. police” the to dad in my myself to turned went and I anymore terrible; it felt take I not done, could had I I happened. what had saw what I him “When to explained fleeing. and first after justice, to surrendering four for lived had he whom had with had old, they years that 22 and Lesby, Chemistry called of 05 was School man May victim the (“Reforma”, 29-year-old the near Office months” the that drugs General drunk, added taken while He Attorney and because, argument. “The alcohol All an drunk feminicide. disease. had out mental he rule that not and does admitted abuse, still alcohol and Luis, use, Jorge drug suspects reporting by followed are question. into responsibility his put society Universal”, civil (“El to year” According this who far home... partner, so her entity romantic at Oaxaca her 30th, the April was in showed Sunday, attacker registered 07 woman on been May the “The seen have testimonies, feminicides event. last first 42 isolated was an organizations, Griselda the just to house. than according the complex more fled and as violence, problem of the present marks to done is this ymdaotesta aeitriwdhma h et‘ktr ntecptl “iei” coe 18 October (“Milenio”, capital” the in ‘skater’ Sáenz best considered the Mario Martínez… as Salas seeks Pamela him City Victoria interviewed Mexico girlfriend, have in his that Police of outlets Investigative murder media the “The by in responsibility crime. alleged a his such for committing of incapable be (“El neck” his on The wounds two crime. self-inflicting the by noticed suicide they commit arrived, to agents the tried neighbours when woman’s had 1 and the and November Police, houses Universal”, knife Municipal the Port’s a of the had one to husband “According in people acts other hero. violent with suicidal, reported behavior failed his or of suicidal, account of on person normal given a is as perpetrator the described Here victim. is the alternative. he besides other (“El and no had news” image, and the positive problems him a economic had give he to because time woman history a last a one was him there approach although to and her pregnant, 17 allowed months November they two Universal”, them, over between just violence was of Damaris Anayetzin jealousy... of 2017). h rilsfcso h alrst rvd euiyfrtepplto n h nso ea processes; legal of ones the and population the for security provide to failures the more on a focus articles of The part as justified are women against crimes the issues, social of category the Concerning finally for merit of man a as mentioned is perpetrator the reports news the in hand, other the On these fight; or quarrel argument, an of because justification a are out stand that the features indirectly, the However, of Some woman. a of murder the for responsible is man the that acknowledged is It oeprertr r hw safgr fnraiy iebeadscesu,smoewowould who someone successful, and likeable normality, of figure a as shown are perpetrators Some kind a as presented is he life; his take to tries woman a killing after who man the is there addition, In murdered he shown: are crime the commits who person the about characteristics other category, this In out her killed “He perpetrator. the justifying for themes recurring are jealousy and love, rage, Anger, oilissues Social perpetrator the of Justification th 2017). , th 07.Fmncd ttsista u ncnettestaino h municipality the of situation the context in put that statistics Feminicide 2017). , st th 2017). , th 2017). , th 2017). , 2017). , © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 51-60 Pages th ,

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 55 56 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 rte rs n h edro h oraiti lopeetd ssoni al 2. Table in shown as presented, also is Journalist the of gender the and press written a ne h nlec fachlo rg,o h eevdi o okn nabdplace. bad a in working for it deserved she or drugs, or alcohol of influence the under was does Office] General [Attorney PGJ the of opinions expert the of conclusion the that shown is it which 8.Fml eotr 7)adml eotr 6) swl stemda(%,poie1%o the of 16% provide (3%), media the as well as (6%), reporters male and (7%) reporters Female 48%. eypsesv fhm.H atdt ev e eas ewne ogtmridadhv aiy but family, a have and married get to wanted he because her leave to wanted He him’. of possessive very https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-05 of 46.5% is, that (18.5%), category. given this name on author’s content the without reports news the and (14%) reporters female the in used language the between connection the perpetrators, alleged or perpetrators and victims about use they language the to connection its and gender Reporter’s 3.2. otmyrmree i ieadtrwtebd noarvn nMneoeo,adidctdta he that indicated and 21 Montemorelos, December in (“Milenio”, ravine unfaithful” a been into had body she the suspected threw and wife his murdered Montemayor was she 2 because July her Universal”, of rid (“El get it” to allow court, ‘wanted not criminal would man: the she the in but stated relationship, “As a had out. teachers singled two are the that years two aspects for are introversion or dependence, alcoholism, temper, bad a had unfaithful, was She mentioned. are circumstances mitigating however, her; murdered victim 07 the this November Blaming in 3.1.4. Universal”, that, (“El arose Sociology” tension in Professor man’, the their said to outbursts rage, tend with into but not with, turned do 2017). live have ‘they not they to that reflected women the is seems complaint of partners case, the achievements [romantic] Besides the their of of them. because success jealous then discrediting economic are condition, and they “The physical that professional women. lesser in some the against a only at crime in to men lead or some that partner mechanisms of patriarchal romantic anger of activation co-worker the their of remarks than are position there higher a have they 31 October Jornada”, this (“La solve impunity” to Verónica (FGJEM) to of Mexico blanche’ colleagues of ‘carte and State give “Relatives the not of authorities. and General the feminicide, Attorney by the played demanded role Vega... the Benítez by Guadalupe generated fatigue last social October the from of 3 crime, March organized Jornada”, of (“La from style dead” city the 800 the in to by after homicides up suffered in add Chihuahua, violence year, increase Juárez, of one this the wave Ciudad March with the this to in date, that and to home explained protagonist 2016 He their of the at yesterday... March early both dead brawl shot becomes family were atmosphere a daughter raising violent and the “Mother and responsible. background, the in 4 August disappears (“Reforma”, found” was 22-year-old in the yesterday which video in a position the released with organization] coincide civil not Mexican [a Observatory Citizen in National death, 3 The May Lesvy’s on that Campus Office. out City ruled University violence in gender booth in telephone specialized a lawyers and experts “Criminal demands. the nti radw tcnb enhwtenraino h ati oue nbt ae(4)and (14%) male both on focused is fact the of narration the how seen be can it breakdown this use In they language the to relation in feminicide address articles the which in way the identifying After h rm gis oe o en natflsad u ntectgr fbae Glet Morales “Gilberto blame. of category the in out stands unfaithful being for women against crime The possessiveness, addiction, violence, of topics the percentage, lower a shows trend who one this the was Although man the that recognized is it case, this In death. her for responsible is woman The when or husbands, their than presence and relevance greater with politics in women are victims When part as to referred is It impunity. frequent of reflection a as seen is investigations in haste of lack The perpetrator the thus forms, its all in crime, organized of damage collateral as considered is Feminicide Activist rus pcait,eprs aiymmesadaqanacso h itm rsn otof most present victims the of acquaintances and members family experts, specialists, groups, • ae 51-60 Pages nd 2017). , rd a ucd,a ttdb h tonyGeneral Attorney the by stated as suicide, a was , st 2017). , rd 2017). , st 2017). , th 2017). , th , L ond”(1nw eot)hsahge niec n rtcs rvisrgrigteeise,while issues, these regarding prevails criticism and incidence higher a has reports) news (21 Jornada” “La in category, this In total. 34% total the of 7% has “Reforma” (2%), Jornada” “La above are (11%) “Milenio” hc scnetdt h otx fvoec,iscrt,sotcmnsi h utc ytmadimpunity, and system justice the in comings short insecurity, violence, of context the to connected is which 3) ngnrl h ornwppr rsn agrtnec nti atctgr fcmae othe to compared if category last this in tendency larger a present newspapers four the general, In (34). 9 epciey,wihmasta oemtgtn atr hc eei h itmzraementioned, are victimizer the benefit which factors mitigating more that means which respectively), 79, poe oti,“eom”()hsvr e esi hsctgr.Fnly ntectgr fblaming of category the on Finally, category. this in news few very has (4) “Reforma” this, reports) to news (58 opposed problems social of category the In jealousy. and and (48 fights, higher arguments, is quarrels, number the the Universal” as ”El such in (163) mentions and (118) reports news both of relation the news “Reforma” (134 and Universal” (27) Jornada” “El “El “La feminicide, than are of more narrative narrative present census the also of of the (50) category category “Milenio” in the and the in reports) density news in 30.5%); (60 highest reports, fall Universal” news the which (110 “Milenio” with 40% and (182) newspapers 37%) reports, mentions The and 47% feminicide. represent of (172) reports news the This alcoholic. 3.3. an or are unfaithful, her reports. addicted, news about possessive, the aspects in negative was 3% and she covers judged, because category is re-victimized victim is the she (0.5%); mentioned; reporters female than percentage higher te he Tbe3). (Table three other ntectgr utfcto fteprertr eadn h esrprs E nvra”(4)and (14%) Universal” “El reports, news the regarding perpetrator, the of justification category the In of total the that follows it categories, four the with newspapers four the of connection the From a have (1%) media the and (1.5%) reporters male blamed, is victim the where reporting the In a nwihnwppr eotvcisadperpetrators and victims report newspapers which in Way © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 51-60 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 57 58 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 E nvra” n Rfra edt utf h fedr )“aJraa oue nsca sus the issues, social on focuses Jornada” “La 3) offender; the justify to tend “Reforma” and Universal”, “El h rt hs esrprspnigi re oko h set htte osdrwe addressing when consider they that aspects the know to order in pending reports news these write who importance the indicates which prevails, 1995) (UN, Platform Beijing the of recommendation the workers, crime [sensationalist roja” “nota considered being of and section, crime the from connected away be them could takes facts which the of narratives why reason The facts. the of narratives as identified also were 20) eas h detvsue ytenwppr hnbaigtevci r e,btteeare there but few, are victim the blaming when newspapers the by used adjectives the because (2008), )alnwppr aeahg ecnaeo h aeoyrltdt artvso h at;2 “Milenio”, 2) facts; the of narratives to related category the of percentage high a have newspapers all 1) nepe n s tt ee oteiseo eiiieadvcisadprertr,adtu eal to able be thus and https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-05 receive. perpetrators, readers and that victims information they and the how to feminicide connected and of is information issue text this the journalistic receive those the to audiences of much refer how how interview to know know the it to leaves interesting use That be and also information. interpret would the It writing of issues. time these female the media and of at male why effect way causes negative certain the the regarding a clues counteract in 4) no to are act directly; There regulations reporters victim and or women. releases; the of laws press re-victimization by blaming international through the of out of on done media coverage effect mainly carried mention voices, the the constant constantly official diminish the by is from to of self-censorship come that 5) helps could a work perpetrators iterative is the the is justifying 3) there that of extent directly; and part some victims feminism the to of blames 2) current which which attributes the studies; of language other set certain another on omit of emphasis conformation to an the to present contributing not be could do newspapers the of profile the investigations. the Lagos of and most (2014) in Alcocer out of pointed works of perpetrators the findings the from the of different perpetrator many but the (2017), justifying Danés and of the victim those because the to limitation blaming similar a On their are was aspect. relatively to study that this connected this present study, into is this Universal” reporting get for newspapers not ”El however, that does issues; and suggests research social This “Milenio” in category. while especially that spectrum, to “Reforma”; ideological as is far so least in the numbers similar this does that newspaper produce to ability, analytical and judgment critical with perspective, journalists. gender better a with media the the about students for however, about critical educating trend; more of writing feminist are a when with suggest identified is could be there could which and but impact, system, judicial difference more tendency, the gender different have and highest no issues reporters to security the is Female according there with case, category. categories information this issue’s the write In social between reporters 1996). reporter Reese, female & the and Shoemaker of 2014; Male Liu, & 2016). (Berkowitz contexts Pitkanen, & Niemi primary 2017; the because be victim; could the with which perpetrator, dealing the when caught directly justifying official. This re-victimization are through 2017). avoid sources indirectly (Danés, media it works the do other that of they from said justification mentions: nevertheless, reports be the (1994) with could and coincides It Meyers 3%, that is language attention. figure blame our the a of ratio of 34%, the is aspects handbooks however, perpetrator perpetrator, perspective dichotomous the the gender the justifying “Metropolis”, the and find what or victim of we the “City” part paper, blaming outlets. is “States”, this which news as In issue, elite interest such social recommend. sections considered a in and as them published circulation presenting are news], national articles of the are because which be of also all could It profile, others but newspaper’s Taylor, 2009), 2014; the al., et to Richards 1994; Meyers, 2017; 2013; Danés, al., 2002; et Cubbert, Gillespie & 2011; the (Bullock al., justifying approached victim, et were the Gillespie women blaming against as crimes such the identified, how facets or explored perpetrator, previously were only Not reports. news conclusions and Discussion 4. Universal”. the itm h odmaoyefc nwmndsiebigtevci,9txsoto 2apae n“El in appeared 12 of out texts 9 victim, the being despite women on effect condemnatory the victim, nsmay h agaeo h et bu itm n eptaoscudb hnigbcue1) because changing be could perpetrators and victims about texts the of language the summary, In that found was it categories, identified the and reports, news the in used language the of analysis the In (Danés, prevails figure male the that indicates literature the gender, journalist’s the of category the On the within characteristics of range the open that categories several provided texts the of language The • ae 51-60 Pages d nutt Injury? to Insult Add aui . usl,DE 19) eiie paigteunspeakable. the Speaking Femicide: (1990). D.E. Russell, & J., State. Washington Caputi, in newspapers by (1987). fatalities J. violence Caputi, domestic of Coverage & Violence (2002). R., Interpersonal Fortner, J. In Cubbert, meanings. & making C., to Bullock, work doing From news: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118591178.ch17 holding’. of ‘information construction of social-cultural The levels (Eds.), three M. (2014). Fackler, at Z. media Liu, mass & the D., of Berkowitz, function setting España. agenda en Research The actual Communication panorama (1976). P.J. y Frazier, desarrollo & Orígenes, M., comunicación. Benton, en Social Comunicación encuadre de del Latina teoría patriarcado. Revista o feminicidio: del Framing de nominalista (2015). víctimas teoría las A. una sobre Ardévol-Abreu, para prensa Notas la (1992). en C. género de Amorós, México. prejuicios Guerrero, y de Juicios caso drogadictas”. el y infieles “Prostitutas, (2014). M. Alcocer, References at studies gender funded that 2019). scholarship (January-June Santander Madrid the of and University Monterrey, Conacyt-Tecnológico Autonomous de the the from scholarship Ph.D. the by Agency Funding ihrs . ilsi,L,&Sih .(04.A xmnto ftemdaprrylo eiiesiie:A xlrtr frame exploratory An femicide-suicides: of portrayal media the of examination An (2014). M. analysis. Smith, & L., Gillespie, T., (1992). Richards, D.E. Russell, & (Eds.), J., J. Radford, Radford, & D.E., Russell, CEIICH-UNAM. In 33-53). Introducción. journalism. (2006). news J. Finnish Radford, in gap gender the of https://bit.ly/37f1qhO Analysis media: (2019). the N. in Padrón, experts informativas of Science notas use of de Gendered Understanding discurso Public (2016). del V. UNAM]. Análisis Pitkanen, grado, nacionales: & de [Tesis diarios M., Diario’ dos Niemi, ‘Milenio en y ‘Jornada’ cultural la noticia Beijing. en la de publicadas de acción Manifestaciones de (2007). plataforma L. y Nájera, Declaración In (1995). 1993-2005. (Ed.) Juárez, O.N.U. (Eds.), Ciudad Mujeres, R. en Salas, mujeres & de M., asesinatos Juárez César, los F., Ciudad y Flores, feminicidio C., del Gómez, representaciones M., droga. Fragoso, diversas las Las contra (1993). guerra J. la Monárrez, en medios de ‘Agenda-setting’ (2015). Periodístico A. Iglesias, & O., Miranda, battering. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1994.tb00676.x of News (1994). M. (2007). Meyers, Sección §Primera Violencia (1968). de J.C. Libre Merrill, Vida maestría, una de [Tesis a (2004). mujeres. Mujeres M. las las McCombs, contra Chile. de violencia de Acceso de Universidad de forma la General Otra de Ley académico chilena: Repositorio prensa Chile]. la de según Universidad feminicidio El (2008). C. Lagos, femenina. Identidad (1990). M. Lagarde, (2006). K. effects. Krippendorff, setting agenda (2004). on K. perspective Krippendorff, expanded An (2012). M. Mccombs, 51-68. & News L., the Tien, Reporting L., Does Guo, Femicide: of Coverage (2010). News S.G. Exploring in González-Rodríguez, matters (2011). spin S. media’s Dwayne, the & Why L., Kirkland, violence: T., domestic Richards, deadly L., Framing Gillespie, (2013). femicide. M. of Smith, coverage & newspaper E., Givens, T., Richards, L., Gillespie, https://bit.ly/2OjK5f4 (1999). S. Gallur, (1999). de [Tesis M. México Foucault, en prensa mujeres. la las de contra https://bit.ly/2rPe8nq conceptual violencia mapa Comunicando Monterrey. un (1994). de Tecnológico para C. del propuesta Fagoaga, Institucional Una Repositorio medios: Monterrey]. los de Tecnológico en Monterrey]. Maestría, Ideología de Tecnológico La maestría, de [Tesis (2009). regiomontana G.M. prensa Durán, Monterrey. la de Tecnológico en del feminicidio Institucional del Repositorio representación La (2017). S. Danés, h ril a rte ihntepoet“agaeo h eia rte rs nvcisadprertr ffmncd”funded feminicide” of perpetrators and victims on press written Mexican the of “Language project the within written was article The https://bit.ly/2OiFVnD eiitCriminology Feminist , 21 403-420. , p.3338.E oe Porrúa. y Colef El 353-398). (pp. IA acbruadlfmncdod iddJáe,1999-2009 Juárez, Ciudad de feminicidio del cobertura la y CIMAC h g fsxcrime sex of age The h adoko ei n ascmuiaintheory communication mass and media of handbook The oslad eis arnNcoa eMdo mrss(PNMI) Impresos Medios de Nacional Padrón medios. de Consulta eiitCriminology Feminist h lt rs n ra esaeso h world the of newspapers great and press elite The séia tc hermenéutica y ética Estética, , etn h gna h asmdaadpbi opinion public and media mass The agenda: the Setting 17 h eatctr.Anwfudto o design for foundation new A turn. semantic methodology The its to introduction An analysis. Content 5,475-499. (5), , https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_esmp.2015.v21.n1.49102 3 3,261-274. (3), Antípoda , 9 , 1,24-44. (1), ilneAantWomen Against Violence 26 usse ldesierto el en Huesos eiie h oiiso oa killing woman of politics The Femicide: 3,355-368. (3), h oua Press. Popular The . , , ora fCommunications of Journal https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260502017005001 20 70 OMNIA https://doi.org/10.1177/009365027600300302 , 97-118. , 423-450. , 6 https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085113501221 3,178-202. (3), https://bit.ly/2DRgMvB , https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515621470 6 Paidós. . 2) 51-83. (20), https://doi.org/10.7440/antipoda20.2014.05 https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-2015-1053 https://bit.ly/2rRsBiR Anagrama. . , https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085111409919 19 2) 222-245. (22), suissbee esj Periodístico Mensaje el sobre Estudios ilni otalsmjrseisgrddcuaaaen ciudadana inseguridad e mujeres las contra Violencia , 44 Asparkía Pitman. . eiiii.L oíiadlaeiaod a mujeres las de asesinato del política La Feminicidio. 47-63. , Ms. alr&Francis. & Taylor . https://bit.ly/35awvlg p.34-47). (pp. , wyePublishers. Twayne . p.3133.WlyBlackwell. Wiley 301-313). (pp. aePublications. Sage . https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801213476457 https://bit.ly/2OqNs3T oiyPress. Polity . , © 1 41-58. , SN 1134-3478 ISSN: ertrad Gobernación. de Secretaría . nvria Autónoma. Universidad . https://bit.ly/32PHdfd suissbee Mensaje el sobre Estudios https://bit.ly/2qYLrno https://bit.ly/355Ui5G eit eComunicación de Revista https://bit.ly/2OUGHc0 • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: , 1 67-90. , ora of Journal • ae 51-60 Pages , 11 , (pp.

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 59 60 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 4-4.https://doi.org/10.1086/657496 141-141. ora fCommunication, of Journal if,D,L D., Riffe, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-05 Border. Mexico-U.S. the on violence Gendered femicide: and narcopolitics, Necropolitics, (2011). In J.W. Wright, approaches. Research two. Part la Learning. desde (2011). Cengage Fabra]. Pompeu Mundo’) J. Universidad ‘El Dominick, Doctoral, / [Tesis & País’ medios R., (‘El Wimmer, los española de prensa androcéntrico la discurso en del https://bit.ly/2D9CxGL mujer crítico la análisis contra Un news. violencia crítica. crime la perspectiva in de femicide Representación of (2002). portrayal C. the Vallejo, of analysis content https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767908326679 A 21-49. slandered: and Slain (2009). Taylor, R. https://bit.ly/2QnwNAO extorsión. y https://bit.ly/2r36JAg (1996). secuestro S. homicidio, Reese, de & víctimas P., Shoemaker, de Informe (2017). (Ed.) SESNSP models. effects media estado three segundo of evolution (2013). The R. priming: Segato, and setting, agenda Framing, periodístico. tratamiento (2007). y D. Tewksbury, Evolución & género: asuntos D.A., de y Scheufele, violencia encuadres la de a presencia pasional la https://doi.org/10.12795/ambitos.2008.i17.11 crimen en Del influencia su (2008). y C. periódico Rodríguez, del política noticias. orientación las de La dentro (2017). C. Muñiz, & F.V., Rodelo, https://bit.ly/37gmqFg Erlbaum. c,S,&Feeik .(2005). F. Frederick, & S., acy, it ió.https://bit.ly/2RsO4co Limón. Tinta . aeciuae lcep elsmjrsaeiaa nCua urz ertro oeaí rmnsde crímenes y Territorio,soberanía Juárez. Ciudad en asesinadas mujeres las de cuerpo el en escritura La suissbee esj Periodístico Mensaje el sobre Estudios 57 1,92.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x 9-20. (1), • ae 51-60 Pages eitn h esg:Tere fifune nms ei content media on mass influences of Theories message: the Mediating nlzn ei esgs sn uniaiecnetaayi nresearch in analysis content quantitative Using messages. media Analyzing , 23 1,2127 https://doi.org/10.5209/esmp.55594 241-257. (1), asMdaResearch Media Mass p.1418.Wadswort 114-148). (pp. oiieStudies Homicide Ámbitos Longman. . Signs , 171-188. 17, Lawrence . , , 36 13(1), (3), Comunicar 63

K aleidoscope

Research Investigaciones Studies Estudios Proposals Propuestas 62 0 2 0 , 63, XXVIII, 2 r unica m o C

www.comunicarjournal.com

SEO and the digital news media: From the workplace to the classroom SEO y cibermedios: De la empresa a las aulas

Dr. Carlos Lopezosa is Researcher in the DigiDoc Group in the Department of Communication at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8619-2194) Dr. Lluís Codina is Associate Professor in the Department of Communication at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7020-1631) Dr. Javier Díaz-Noci is Full Professor in the Department of Communication at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9559-4283) Dr. José-Antonio Ontalba-Ruipérez is Associate Professor in the Department of Audiovisual Communication, Documentation and History of Art at the Polytechnic University of Valencia (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2071-6108)

ABSTRACT The constant struggle to attract new readers has led the digital news media to adopt search engine positioning strategies within their newsrooms. Given that readers are increasingly opting to consume their news via search engines, such as Google or Bing, this study explores perceptions and applications of search engine optimization (SEO) in the online news media and identifies the future training needs of journalists in this sector. Todo so, 33 semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals representative of three professional profiles: professional journalists, SEO consultants, and academics. Based on the data collected, we created five semantic categories – with 25 subcategories – and we correlated the perceptions of the SEO experts employed by the news media with those of the academics. The results highlight varying degrees of convergence and divergence in perceptions across these three professional profiles. Similarly, the results confirm the sector’s pressing need to attract readers by implementing search engine positioning techniques and, hence, its need to ensure future journalists are well trained in technical SEO, on-page SEO, off-page SEO, in the use of SEO analytics and audit tools, and in the ability to identify search trends so that they have the necessary skills to win the struggle for more readers.

RESUMEN La lucha de los cibermedios para atraer nuevos lectores ha motivado el uso de estrategias de posicionamiento en buscadores en el seno de las redacciones periodísticas. Dado el consumo, cada vez más frecuente, de noticias a través de buscadores como Google o Bing, este trabajo explora la percepción y la aplicación de la optimización en buscadores (SEO) en los medios de comunicación online y determina las diferentes necesidades formativas de los futuros periodistas que quieran trabajar en este campo. Para ello, se realizaron 33 entrevistas semi-estructuradas a personas que representan tres perfiles profesionales diferentes: periodistas profesionales, consultores de SEO y profesores universitarios. A través de los datos recogidos, creamos cinco categorías semánticas –con 25 subcategorías– y correlacionamos las percepciones de los expertos en SEO que trabajan en empresas periodísticas con las percepciones de los profesores en el contexto académico. Los resultados confirman los diferentes grados de convergencia y divergencia entre estos tres perfiles profesionales. Asimismo, se reafirma la creciente necesidad de atraer lectores a través de técnicas de posicionamiento en buscadores, por lo que señalamos la necesidad de formar a los futuros periodistas en SEO técnico; en SEO On Page; en SEO Off Page; en herramienta analítica; en auditoría SEO; y en la capacidad de identificar tendencias de búsqueda para que estén cualificados con las competencias necesarias para afrontar la lucha por los públicos.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Digital news media, search engine optimization, online journalism, web visibility, journalism training, University, SEO training, Google. Medios digitales, posicionamiento en buscadores, periodismo online, visibilidad web, formación periodística, Universidad, formación SEO, Google.

1 64 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ofrhrorudrtnig h ancaatrsiso h erhegn oiinn taeisemployed strategies positioning engine search the of characteristics main the understanding, our To further le ízNc,21)drn 08ad21 ihSOpoesoaswrigi h iia news digital the in working professionals SEO with 2019 and 2018 during 2019) Díaz-Noci, & Alves 2016). Codina & (Iglesias-García readers of number greatest the attracting of means a is 2017), Arroyo, CbinHreo,20;LpzGrí,21;Grí-vlse l,21;Cmnr Sánchez-García, & Caminero 2018; al., et García-Avilés 2015; López-García, 2009; (Cebrián-Herreros, .Introduction 1. https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-06 the of (Valles, one criteria employed critical so-called we of Next, application the cases, details). such specific in for procedures recommended below frequently (see most above described SEO. categories in professional training university providing teachers with and consultants SEO with media, methods and Material 2. students. journalism for training media. news the to applied being SEO of elements success the promoting in media cyber the to applied journalism. as optimization digital engine of search by played role the about education. university to goals: relation specific in following positioning methodology engine the a search ourselves of interviews, SEO study set semi-structured the implement we to of to applied Specifically, series be able to a are yet conduct has they we date, to guarantee this, that, do to To journalism newsroom. of the in students strategies of needs training corresponding professionals. the future sector’s of university the positioning Spain’s for the in training address changes better propose best to ensure can us can sector enable that journalism should the be curricula information how this can obtaining just needs Ultimately, of and made content. limitations be its shortcomings, diagnosis any a simultaneously, that and, so described identified be to need (Dick, newsrooms pressing by be optimal to seek continues to practices need SEO the best newsrooms, recognize in the some 2014). Sire experts while and & And SEO journalism Smyrnaios find 2011; best 2018). to the Codina, Veglis, common & between & increasingly Lopezosa convergence (Giomelakis become 2016; SEO has of Charlton, it those 2016; that and al., routines et journalistic Codina between 2015b; convergence the improve to scholars. done Gonzalo- of 2012; attention Ellcessor, the 2007; require (Carlson, that techniques role’ developments ‘social SEO 2015), developing of al., dependence the adoption et growing and Penela the the 2016), with triggered Arias-Robles, coinciding number 2015; has journalists (Smyrnaios, a which of engines face news, search to online on having in editors is news increase journalism of the traditional including scenario, 2012; in challenges Alonso- Google, emerging employed 2015a; major this & be Veglis, of In & to Orduna-Malea Giomelakis 2018). need 2011; 2012; Harry, strategies (Maciá-Domene, 2019b; positioning media al., 2019a; news engine et digital search the Enge means of way routines 2006; the this (Davis, in visibility web etc. Maximizing Bing, Google, of rankings the of top the becoming with are together media (SEO). news which, optimization digital 2008), engine the that search Richmond, fact on 2008; the dependent for al., increasingly accounts et information, (Machill for competitiveness searches in their increase to response specifically, in more content 2009). and, Rebillard, platforms & digital (Smyrnaios via engines news search disseminating via news for disseminating modes for new to mainly, related, 2018), The ntal,dsrdifrat eeslce ntebsso ro einta nlddalthree all included that design prior a of basis the on selected were informants desired 2002; Valles, Initially, 2000; (Coller, interviews semi-structured 33 conducted we study, this SEO out of carrying part In be should that skills and competencies the of terms in different recommendations the make about To professionals 3) of groups these among consensus a is there whether determine To 2) think universities and firms consulting media, news the by employed experts SEO what explore To 1) identify to and journalism in SEO by played role the examine to is study this of aim overall the short, In unknown. largely remains media news digital the in SEO of today made use the research, this Despite be still can much that confirm media news the and SEO between relationship the examining Studies the at appearing of chances greatest the has content web ensures that techniques of set the relevant SEO, most the select users helps Bing, and Google as such engines, search of development The edfrjunls oaatt h nenthsldt eiso hne njunlsi routines journalistic in changes of series a to led has Internet the to adapt to journalism for need • ae 63-72 Pages ewr bet odc oa f3 interviews. 33 of total a conduct to able were we h atrealdu oietf eatcntok rmwihw rae aeoisadsubcategories. and categories created we which from networks semantic identify to us enabled latter The fpoesoas codn oteciei icse bv Vle,2002). (Valles, above discussed criteria the to according professionals, of NVivo. tool research qualitative the using and manually both work. table analyzed they then The which were SEO. in results teach university The or that transcribed. firm professors platform, university news or digital consulting, specific digital the of the about field in information the SEO includes in for also responsibility experts with SEO journalists/professionals media, are news they whether to according classified oilyadpyial cesbe eems iln opriiae n etal ocmuiaetheir way, this communicate in to identified experts able SEO best to invitations and out participate, sending After to precision. willing necessary most most the were with were information, responses relevant accessible, most the physically to and access had socially professionals which identified we whereby 2002), plcto ntenw ei,aayi ftedn oisaditrcin nsca ewrsadtheir and networks social in interactions and topics trending media. of news analysis the in media, application news the in application practices. SEO worst practices, SEO best change, tools. other and (CMS) training. systems SEO and analytics web analysis, trend search SEO, for specifically corresponding their into down these break we obtained, responses the subcategories: of exploitation subsequent the for a l hw h pcfcfntoso h xet eetdfritriwi aho h he groups three the of each in interview for selected experts the of functions specific subsequently the and shows recording 1 Table sound digital by or email by either recorded are were subjects responses the Interview where http://bit.ly/2OdmZYJ, at consulted be can interviewees 33 the of list A )SOtcnqe:O-aeSO f-aeSO ehia E,tedn oi nlssadits and analysis topic trending SEO, technical SEO, off-page SEO, On-page to resistance techniques: convergence, SEO technological newsroom, 4) the in SEO of developed management Importance content routines and perception: plugins SEO tools, journalist, 3) own Google’s the tools, SEO by paid tools, SEO performed Free tools: routines SEO 2) SEO routines: production News 1) and, interviews the by addressed analysis of categories or dimensions specific five the outline we Below © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 63-72 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 65 66 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-06 iia esmedia: news digital analysis data manual in operated NVivo using subcategories and mode. categories given the of networks semantic results and Analysis 3. regulation. engine search and techniques )Kyieseegn rmitriw ihjunlsspoesoaswt epniiiyfrSOi the in SEO for responsibility with journalists/professionals with interviews identified from we emerging ideas so, Key do To 1) interviews. the from extracted ideas important most the identify we Below 5) E pnosadvsos oc erh uiesmdl e rfsinlpoie,nwSEO new profiles, professional new model, business search, Voice visions: and opinions SEO E pnosadvsos E n t eainhpwt oraimlosstt estrengthened be to set looks journalism with relationship its and SEO visions: and opinions SEO • with combination in used be to needs Trends Google that confirm Results techniques: SEO • strategy a as newsrooms for SEO of importance the recognize Journalists perception: SEO • is SEMrush Likewise, newsrooms. in today widespread is tools Google of use The tools: SEO • and items newsworthy identify to trends search analyzes editor The routines: production News • tedywe h ubro erhsicess,tedgtlpafr a led rte and written already has platform digital the increases), searches of number the when day (the civn h etviesac akns h iia espafrsta edtewyi SEO in way the lead that of platforms terms in news primarily digital media, The news rankings. digital search the voice and models. best SEO business within the new faced promoting achieving and be readers to attracting have for challenges essential event is New it the as rankings. years, of Google coming best the day the over the for successfully on compete can way, and this etc., story, in news before report, that, days its identified so optimized be publications, can events of all calendar and that on a so worked agenda; creating published and media’s being occur, identified the are be they stories on can news topics not which day’s detect are the to that all daily them stories monitored convert predict be new to to to create employed have and helps be competitors trends to also have track CrowdTangle which and to engagement, NewsWhip networks as content social such tools in reports; hashtags news and into comments of engines). analysis search the through their going of the readers (without of the traffic task of direct social 100% from the that come and believing media reader editors news the some digital SEO to with detrimental exist internalize exceptions are to Finally, acknowledge that it tend practices but journalist. makes certain consideration editors often of into native use format SEO Digital abusive take digital their increasingly to updated. Newsrooms paper better. professionally from much be have transformation strategies Editors to the company. them but media SEO, for the of difficult for about grasp importance them basic strategic informing their fairly editors and for a their SEO provided consume of usually readers elements is many basic training because the In-house widespread and more decline engines. the search becoming on via is is news newsrooms networks in social from positioning traffic engine because Search readers. their attracting functions). optimize CMS for platform extends WordPress that a tool on The (a run plugin media versions. SEO Ranking Yoast news Website free the Alexa digital their with the CMS, use news and for to extensions As preferring Chrome Google tools, software. are audit online tools SEO free paid used companies to media frequently news access most However, have newsrooms. usually in tool not audit do SEO paid used frequently most the they confirm to Finally, journalists engines. and model. search editors business for by new prepared optimized a stories are create news and the and to image confirmed checks plans We brand trends professional content their SEO offer search position. the improve professionals, them of SEO and their help create gained of to efforts can is firms the they outside to understanding thanks that media, an the content news digital way, within new on the about this that analysis reports informed In behavior drafts be user and can general. and positioning editors in users of media by aspects news conducted to digital searches and relation support, image internal in with headline, editors results, have provides of audience professional might position (optimization SEO to they The used used doubts be story. be news to addressing the can have on that engines) actions search etc. SEO for text reports, Basic stories, Google. news on into content them converts and topics, timeless • ae 63-72 Pages )Kyieseegn rmitriw ihepr E consultants: SEO expert with interviews from emerging ideas Key 2) • • • • • ilpeoiaei oc erhs h akp“paal” eeoe yshm.r,should schema.org, by developed “speakable”, markup The searches. voice in predominate will journalism between relationship the Likewise, success. enjoy that ones the be ultimately will o h aebsns ru)t piiepstoig ial,cmuiainbtentehead the between communication Finally, positioning. optimize to group) business same the (of neig(hc ie oeiprac otembl ieta otedstpversion). desktop the mobile-first optimal to than using with site and linking, mobile the technology internal to (AMP) good importance page more have gives mobile structured, (which indexing accelerated well audio employing be for optimize speed, must page to web Finally, loading web a technology. the on TTS sections experience, using appropriate user conversion most (TTS) the questions text-to-speech identify since for to keywords, reproduction able tail is long “Speakable” very used. created precise) be be (very to to and needs respond Schema.org that content questions and optimization, of search incorporated form voice more be the For of to in queries used. needs (search technologies content keywords Action needs audiovisual content tail content Google and while writing long the by words), words, searches searches, is compound semantic three voice optimize synonyms, intent To than with searches, search query. enriched the user’s semantic be optimize the to developed, to to directly way be responding best strategies to if The as positioning, need engine experience. intent search user in search improved trends on account focus into Taking be that will visions: that and possibility opinions a SEO least, at is, it or Google the regulating acknowledged up Respondents training end a will debated. accordingly. as EU adapt included the Google’s to As be that have upgrading. to possibility professional will has ongoing journalists for SEO If space evolve, effectively, constant engines. algorithms a more search and future and practice daily organizations the a media face discipline, between to forged wants links newspaper the a on depend will SEO and fSOadteeioso h iia espafr utb fetv n ao consensus, favor and effective be must platform news digital the of platforms news editors digital the the to and links SEO external of of form thematic the acquire in also authority might and They traffic and time. web linking technical real send in internal out to trending good blogs carry are ensure that to and keywords need technology using media stories AMP basic between news employ of online should aspects all Likewise, they review improvements, and story. indexing report, a news publishing earlier take before these positioning, use optimize renewing SEO to and by engines) content headlines search old ‘OKDiario’, in attractive of users create and by advantage consulted to Mundo’ words need those ‘El platforms is, (that news are keywords Digital etc. strategies Español’, routines: SEO ‘El production País’, best News ‘El ‘ABC’, the Vanguardia’, the ‘La employ interviewed, by those that followed to (techniques platforms According over-optimization news engine optimization). digital search website and manipulate clicks), artificially duplicate generate to of employed to production and only the (headlines sites, designed click-baiting of third-party links use to the flashy plagiarized), links by considers of Google search applied that sale strategies of content massive SEO (copied study content poor the exhaustive following media: the the news highlight and they digital website), contrast, the certain In a (tracking content. to budget create more to Google crawl and trends the by traffic of granted web optimization time more the indexing the content, obtain generally and quality to strategies: of websites SEO platforms creation vertical good the of links, news as purchase authoritative following the digital the technology, highlight AMP have national They of firms media use strategies. the some SEO that acknowledge non-existent that also or they believe poor though etc. WooRank, strategies, experts SEO Moz, good XOVI, tools very The Safecont, other implement include Finally, and degree well. lesser SEMrush perception: works a by SEO to SEO followed ensure experts tool to SEO priority audit the a SEO by a also paid used are used is tools frequently Google website most and Frog. the Screaming on-page a is by Ahrefs followed positioning technical important, tools: and for most SEO SEO the off-page strategy considered SEO, respectively. is on-page best SEO, SEO off-page is, technical the that three, SEO: the that of Of SEO. types is different consensus the of The combination techniques: SEO © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 63-72 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 67 68 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 poesoasepoe ntejunls nuty E oslat/xet o mlyddrcl ythe by directly employed not consultants/experts SEO industry, journalism the in employed (professionals fterprpcie onie ihprevdlvlo gemn ssi oocrwe l he parties https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-06 three all when see occur to to check said semantic is a agreement run of we level identified perceived subcategories high the A of coincide. each perspectives for their Here, if studied. groups three the SEO: teaching professors university with interviews from emerging ideas Key 3) T be2sostemi ovrecsaddvrecso pno sepesdb rfsinl in professionals by expressed as opinion of divergences and convergences main the shows 2 able E ol:Gol ol r h E ol otfeunl nrdcdadue nclass. in used and introduced frequently most tools SEO the are tools Google tools: SEO • based. practically and theoretically both is universities Spanish in training SEO broader techniques: a SEO of • part as transversally provided usually is training SEO routines: in production content News strategic • as incorporated be should SEO of subject The visions: and opinions SEO • perception: SEO • r iigi h s ffe ol rvisoe hto adtos h otfeunl sdfree used frequently most The tools. paid of that over prevails tools free of use the in Training search SEO, of history the following: the are theory SEO to relation in taught items main The ucin ftetostuh ncasaerltdt oiinn erc,itrcinadcontent and interaction metrics, positioning to related are class main in the taught engagement. Finally, tools WooRank. and the GTmetrix, of SimilarWeb, SiteInfo, functions Alexa are tools freemium or media social plugins. SEO in its publications and exploit WordPress use tools, to SEO and use visible SEO, content for make and headlines content to SEO write Trends, create off-page Google use SEO, and keywords, On-page structure select practical to and main following: how the taught the contrast, are comprise In Students SEO SEO. Internet. technical to the of relation vision in in critical professional a taught SEO as elements the SEO of and profile media the news engines, digital search the from flow visitor of study operation, engine tends this courses. programs, undergraduate master’s in on case subject independent the an be as to found not is SEO while short, In subject. to seeking increasingly are firms media that profile professional a recruit. is it since education, university especially ihrgr owiighalnsadtecniuaino aesfrimages. for labels of configuration the and headlines writing to regard with • ae 63-72 Pages ihrsosblt o mlmnigSOtssadta fteSO(o-orait xetepoe in employed expert (non-journalist) journalist/editor SEO the the of of that that profiles: and distinct tasks two SEO for implementing designed for are responsibility models with These graphically. express we eg eatcSO erhitn,ec) iial,suiso iiiiyadSOadtn ple othe to applied auditing SEO and visibility of studies Similarly, etc.). intent, search SEO, semantic (e.g. h esmdacompany. media news the ge,adalwlvlwe l he ate iareo xrs ifrn pnosi eaint h same the to relation in opinions parties different three express the or of disagree two parties when three all level when medium subcategory. level a low ideas, a same and the agree, express professors) university and industry ntenwroso h iia ei n oc erhotmzto n te mrigapcso SEO of aspects emerging other manager and SEO optimization the search of voice work and of the , use of media parcel digital the and the part and of as newsrooms our 2014), trends from the search emerge López, in that of aspects & identification two the include (García-Orosa SEO not namely, do of keywords studies interviews: concept these of 2016), the (Heijmans, use as AMP as such specific such strategies, technologies including the specific 2016), and 2012), Charlton 2016) (Asser, 2015b; al., 2015a; headlines et Veglis, (Codina & frameworks (Giomelakis working SEO distinctive technical and to SEO seem off-page interviews SEO, our of results the contrast, in which, managers aspects SEO journalists, between of established emphasize. teams communication their and relationship and elements, the editors business 2009; or and internal Rebillard, models with & business themselves new Smyrnaios concern as 2007; not such (Carlson, do studies readers such attract however, to 2017); Muerza-Ferrer, positioning engine search of importance profiles. strategies. two SEO the of advanced each and 4. for knowledge optimization of of fields the types show tools, 2 and opportunities, 1 Figures business includes second the Conclusions ae na nlsso h epne bandi h neves ehv ul aiu oeswhich models various built have we interviews, the in obtained responses the of analysis an on Based ieie lhuhnw taeishv rvosybe icse rmtepito iwo on-page of view of point the from discussed been previously have strategies news although Likewise, the highlighting strategy, business a as SEO examining undertaken been already have Studies while SEO, on-page and analysis trend ethics, SEO as such elements includes profile training first The © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 63-72 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 69 70 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 h s fpstoigsrtge ntenw ei sbcmn oeadmr omnlc,although commonplace, more and more becoming is media news the in strategies positioning of use The https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-06 as far as a plugin. Yoast And acquire the to and WordPress tool. students specifically and for complete plugins, SimilarWeb need positioning most on clear specific Alexa, a and the based is CMS SEMrush, considered there overall, of while be understanding However, is predominate, greater to Ahrefs tools consensus scarce. free consultants, appear no concerned, is SEO is tools is use training the preferred there university their for tools the newsrooms contrast, SEO in given, In fact, paid responses Sistrix. In of the case of useful. the analysis most In the an are Console. which Search to better Google as a and obtain Analytics to Google used be all can metrics which learn they that introduce so to users. do need Analytics universities of the Google regard, understanding stress this as media in such and, news tools experience digital to user positioning the improve students better outside to a working specifically digital tools obtain consultants the analytics SEO platforms web in news readers. use working help more experts result, can professionals SEO a that of Specifically, as strategies groups and, business analytics. three proposing web all find reports Likewise, using to draft results company. wants media measure student media to the online need future, an basic the the for the in identify expert if, provide SEO optimization. insufficient today an is education of as training university aspects employment this in however, technical studies journalists; more SEO for that the training stressed SEO with be themselves should it concern tellingly, should Somewhat experts SEO while stories, in opportunities business stories and services. news opportunities customer that publication new ensuring identifying of strategies, and form center SEO the engines, should advanced search experts SEO and for of optimization optimized work the content are while about analysis, trend editors search advising those need and journalists SEO and on that content teams is of professionals editorial basics SEO by the of apply implemented perception to The routines experts. SEO or the professionals SEO between by drawn implemented is distinction clear a the Indeed, concerning debate political or voice regulation including engines. emerge, possible search to the and likely and media are models news challenges business new new major analytics. optimization, although SEO search years, all of forthcoming use Similarly, effective the studies. make over university to strength in newsrooms area for subject need broader the of much speak a professionals of however, of part newsrooms; groups forms for three typically SEO editor of recognize field the importance also this and the They in recognize department/manager also training digital authority. SEO professors the web main university between greater The their communication obtain consultants journalists. to internal and and optimal links SEO readers foster more authoritative expert to attract send need Likewise, to the to order order in sites content. in media websites news news vertical with third-party working buying when recommend techniques SEO. positioning technical and engine SEO off-page SEO, on-page is, that optimization, engine search its promoting study drawn: for this be support initiating can when the out that is set conclusions SEO objectives and that media the results on and of the reflect vital, managers & discuss to is SEO and return García-Orosa practice we and Next, journalistic 2012; editors/journalists good expansion. Asser, that and that training dissemination mind 2016; the in al., consider bearing not et need, do platforms Codina they 2015b; but 2014), 2015a; the López, Veglis, whether & verify to (Giomelakis fail content. newsrooms they news yet position engines, and search analyze in to media studies tools digital case these comprise the using to of are tend rankings newsrooms they visibility however, & 2019); on Lopezosa al., focus 2016; et to Lopezosa al., and 2018; et al., García-Carretero et 2012; Lopezosa 2010; 2018; al., Codina, et (Rodríguez-Martínez others among MOZ, digital sfrtos hs fee yGol r emdesnilb l he ruso rfsinl,above professionals, of groups three all by essential deemed are Google by offered those tools, for As news their to SEO basic a apply to able be should editors that believe consultants SEO Generalist medium. to high is professionals of groups three the between agreement of level perceived The 2) to strength from go will journalism with relationship its and SEO that believe interviewees the Finally, in search account strategy into of take to types need same strategic the the confirm implement houses media to news need in working the managers SEO identify professionals of groups three All 1) for recommendations make media news digital the to applied SEO of studies of number a Finally, esmdarpr h s ftemi ol icse ee ..SMuh hes aetc Alexa, Majestic, Ahrefs, SEMrush, i.e. here: discussed tools main the of use the report media news • ae 63-72 Pages hl hssuyhscnimdteaeuc fsm-tutrditriw o bann eeatinsights relevant obtaining for interviews semi-structured of adequacy the confirmed has study this While o-ae f-aeadtcncl,dgtlnw ltom n nvriishglgtteeegneo new of emergence the highlight universities and platforms news digital technical), and off-page (on-page, ih aoal eaotd nldn h epitcnqe xetpnl,o osnu methods. consensus or panels, methods expert qualitative technique, other Delphi insights, that the these conducted including be gain To to adopted, need be relationship. analyzes favorably new this future might of the in development media, continuing news digital the the address in SEO by played role the into can: platform they news ensuring digital is, a of that department strategies, SEO the advanced in more jobs on find to focus want should who students for training the contrast, In ensuring on can: news all they above within that specifically, focus working more should experts and, journalists SEO SEO and on-page for editors of strategies for essentials SEO the training acquire on SEO teams and other. these hand, the on one houses, the media on spectrum. that training journalists, given this sector, newsroom, and of the journalism teams ends for the opposite have for should at expert themselves professionals SEO find future an engineer training skills the and for and profile content journalist what subject strategic the clear a yet as as not SEO least, of is exploit teaching at it voice the to or, although position consolidating able right about to set be work own to should necessary need its universities the they in the undertake believe this, and to they experience parallel Likewise, In user improve searches. content. full, their the to to this content of semantic apply and analysis positioning. intent the better search obtain and user’s Trends to stories Google new via write searches to order trending in strategies of interactions SEO identification media of that, social the types stressed same including be the should strategies, of It SEO importance news stories. the optimizing news recognize that their professionals think of even of visibility who groups the and three improve change the not to although does resistant engines remain search that for journalists content of minority a is there alo,M 20) re essacs:Nw erhegnsadtecalnet rdtoa oraitcroles. journalistic traditional to challenge the and engines search News digitales. access: nativas Society versus redacciones Order en (2007). ciberperiodista M. del Carlson, formación y perfil El Hipertext.net (2018). P. News. Sánchez-García, BBC & in L., optimisation Caminero, engine Search (hiper)textos. (2012). e M. Asser, redes SEO, Catalunya. TV3-Televisió ciberperiodístico. de de lenguaje cas del Comunicación de práctica Estudi y Teoría activa: (2016). audiència F. i Arias-Robles, televisió de Informatius (2019). Comunicació J. Díaz-Noci, & K., Alves, (RTI2018-095714-B-C21). References Competitiveness and Economy of Ministry the by financed journalism” structured and Agency Funding hsatcewswitnwti h rmwr ftepoet“neatv trtligaddgtlvsblt nteitrciedocumentary interactive the in visibility digital and storytelling “Interactive project the of framework the within written was article This )SOtann ed ofcso rvdn E taeisseiial eindfrnw editorial news for designed specifically strategies SEO providing on focus to needs training SEO 3) a recognizing of capable be should experts SEO that believe here interviewed individuals the Finally, , 29 • • • • • • • • • 6,1014-1030. (6), eststa a eprhsdi re ooti oewbtafcadauthority. and traffic web more obtain to order in purchased be can that websites osdrteehc eae oteueo erhegn oiinn taeisi eaint the to relation in strategies positioning engine search of journalists. use of the role to social related ethics the Consider and practices; SEO best Identify trends; search recognize and engines; Analyze search for stories news Optimize efr f-aeSOatos pcfclyta hysuysrtge oietf hmtcvertical thematic identify to strategies study Ahrefs; they and that SEMrush and specifically as Analytics actions, such (Google SEO tools, off-page Google paid Perform by the developed as those Console) including Search tools, Google analytics and web voice and both SEO optimizing experience; Use user intent, optimizing search and optimizing searches, on semantic focused actions SEO technical Perform NewsWhip as opportunities; tools business paid Identify such use and how interactions CrowdTangle. learn media and to social need analyze Trends, students this, Google To do use trends. to search on based opportunities publication Identify , 1) 4-15. (16), , 36 , 7 1,9-29. (1), 2,177-194. (2), https://doi.org/10.31009/hipertext.net.2018.i16.04 https://doi.org/10.2436/20.3008.01.176 https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443707084346 https://doi.org/10.14198/medcom2016.7.2.8 https://bbc.in/2J8TzIR © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • eit eiernade Mediterránea Revista -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: utr & Culture • ae 63-72 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 71 72 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 e eiin&NwMedia New & Television nlssd aitrcinyd aaocó el e 2.0. Web la de adopción la de y interacción la de Análisis mrao,N,&Sr,G 21) h esacrigt ogehwde loihi noeito rm h oko French of work the frame infomediation algorithmic does how Google to according news en The In l’information (2014). sur journalists? G. recherche Sire, de & moteur N., principal Smyrnaios, du L’emprise Google selon L’actualité (2009). ligne. news. F. of Rebillard, infomediation & algorithmic N., the Smyrnaios, and Google (2015). N. Smyrnaios, https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2012.1.858 https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-06 (2002). M. Valles, cibermedios: en calidad la de evaluación la para de Indicadores resultados (2012). y R. análisis Pedraza-Jiménez, de & Modelo L., 2.0: Codina, web R., y Rodríguez-Martínez, Cibermedios (2010). R. Pedraza-Jiménez, aplicación. & L., Codina, R., Rodríguez-Martínez, journalism. changing is https://doi.org/10.1177/0956474808100865 SEO How (2008). S. Richmond, Publishing. (2017). Chandos A. Alonso-Arroyo, Radio & de E., Análisis Orduna-Malea, periodística: convergencia marca.com. la y de Marca https://doi.org/10.5209/esmp.59979 contexto con el sinergias en sus radiofónicas y noticias Marca de Producción (2018). A. Muerza-Ferrer, an (2011). of F. systematization Maciá-Domene, and overview European-American A https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443708094010 field. research: research Search-engine international (2008). and M. Zenker, interdisciplinary & M., Beiler, M., buscadores? Machill, en posicionamiento mejor (2019). un C. cabo Rovira, a & L., Codina, C., Lopezosa, https://bit.ly/2PUFbI5 Cobertura (2018). SEO. Digidoc-EPI. P. herramientas Freixa, demanda. con & comunicación L., de Codina, medios C., 2017. en Lopezosa, OSCAR posicionamiento premios de los Análisis de (2018). informativa L. Codina, & negocio. C., de Lopezosa, modelos y (SEO). audiencias buscadores Redes, en https://bit.ly/2FPA59Y posicionamiento digital: Periodismo del estratégica (2015). importancia G. la López-García, https://bit.ly/2J5vceZ y SEO. cibermedios for Los site (2016). news Opción, L. your Codina, optimize & to M., https://bit.ly/2L4OUtN do Iglesias-García, to pages. What web rank (2016). engines M. search Heijmans, How https://bit.ly/2TZssH7 (2018). guidelines. D. rating Harry, quality Search https://bit.ly/1axVR8p https://bit.ly/2XqybY9 (2019b). (Ed.) operators. help. Google Search news easier. Google even Categorización (2019a). searches SEO: (Ed.) making y Google Web. guide usuario la Google el en en (2012). centrada búsqueda (Ed.) información de Google de intenciones Greece. Recuperación las of de (2015). case determinación C. the y Rovira, websites, & media L., in Codina, factors C., Gonzalo-Penela, optimization engine search Investigating Journalism, (2015b). Digital Articles. A. Veglis, News & Online D., in Techniques Giomelakis, Optimization Engine menos Search y Communication Employing funcionales and (2015a). Media Más A. europeos: Veglis, cibermedios & principales D., los Giomelakis, en titulares Los (2015). conceptuales. X. López, & y B., Características García-Orosa, SEO: indicadores e Herramientas las https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2016.may.19 (2016). cibermedios. de M. de Análisis Iglesias-García, análisis & españoles: para J., cibermedios aplicación Díaz-Noci, los L., en Codina, innovación L., la García-Carretero, de Implantación periodistas. (2018). los F. de Arias, percepciones & (2012). M., J. captioning. Carvajal, Stricchiola, closed & online A., in García-Avilés, R., Fishkin, optimization S., engine Spencer, search E., and Enge, Accessibility online: TV, on off, on, Captions (2012). E. production. Ellcessor, news UK in optimization https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2010.551020 engine Search (2011). M. Dick, (2006). H. Davis, https://bit.ly/2NjqLPZ (2000). https://bit.ly/2QR08nA https://bit.ly/1UIOyp5 X. DigiDoc-UPF. Coller, (2016). SEO? L. SEO-RCP. about framework know García-Carretero, El to & need R., periodísticas: Pedraza, editors M., and Iglesias-García, journalists L., do Codina, much How (2016). G. Charlton, eismóviles]. medios y Cebrián omncto Langages & Communication Hreo,M 20) e om fcmuiaini h yemda Nea omsd ouiain Cibermedios comunicación: de formas [Nuevas cybermedia. the in communication of forms New (2009). M. -Herreros, 32 9,9994 https://bit.ly/2J8Skcu 929-944. (9), lPoeinld aInformacion la de Profesional El , Periodístico Mensaje el sobre Estudios S-CE 04Cneec,Thessaloniki Conference, 2014 JSS-ECREA erhegn optimization engine Search sui ecs.Clcincaensmetodológicos cuadernos Colección caso. de Estudio nrvsa ulttvs oecó udro metodológicos cuadernos Colección cualitativas. Entrevistas Comunicar, 4 3,3940 https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2015.1046992 379-400. (3), , 4,3932 https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476411425251 329-352. 13(4), ny Multimedia. Anaya buscadores. en posicionamiento de avanzadas Técnicas , 1,2-3 tp:/o.r/0114scvi.8,https://dx.doi.org/10.11114/smc.v3i1.683 https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v3i1.683, 22-33. 3(1), 17 eit aiad ouiainSocial, Comunicación de Latina Revista • ae 63-72 Pages 3) 01.https://doi.org/10.3916/c33-2009-01-001 10-13. (33), , 59.https://doi.org/10.4074/S0336150009002087 95-95. 160, lPoeinld aInformación la de Profesional El https://bit.ly/2NFsjmo Digidoc-EPI. , 1,3-4 https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2010.ene.05 35-44. 19(1), ’elyMda https://doi.org/10.4016/32139.01 Media. O’Reilly . suissbee esj Periodístico Mensaje el sobre Estudios E ouiainadoiul nlsscmaaiod otlsd íe bajo vídeo de portales de comparativo Análisis audiovisual: comunicación y SEO iiiia e eprae etlvsó ai nEpñ:¿u eisllevan medios ¿Qué España: en radio y televisión de portales de Web Visibilidad ei,Clue&Society & Culture Media, yemti ehiust vlaeognztosuigwbbsddata web-based using organizations evaluate to techniques Cybermetric iio-P.https://bit.ly/2pyKbHC DigiDoc-EPI. 2,8387 https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_esmp.2015.v21.n2.50887 833-847. 21(2), rts oraimReview Journalism British eit saoad ouetcó Científica, Documentación de española Revista h r fSEO of art The https://bit.ly/33bA5tN . Index.Comunicación oraimPractice Journalism etod netgcoe Sociológicas. Investigaciones de Centro . , 73 25 ei ilsJournal Fields Media , ’elyMedia. O’Reilly . 30 6-8.https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2018-1260 369-384. , 3,497-497. (3), iiiia oiinmet e einformaciones de web posicionamiento y Visibilidad 5,591-608. (5), etod netgcoe Sociológicas. Investigaciones de Centro . , 5 3,1-7 https://bit.ly/2qmjwha 19-27. (3), , 4,51-55. 19(4), , eit eInterculturalidad, de Revista 24 1,758-795. (1), , 5 4,462-77. (4), , -0 https://bit.ly/2XJIMN7 1-10. 10, 35 1,61-93. (1), tde in Studies 175-176. 10, . Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

Influence of family and pedagogical communication on school violence Influencia de la comunicación familiar y pedagógica en la violencia escolar

Dr. Miguel Garcés-Prettel is Associate Professor in the School of Social Communication at Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, Cartagena de Indias (Colombia) ([email protected])

(https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6391-3147) Yanin Santoya-Montes is Assistant Professor in the School Psychology at Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, Cartagena de Indias (Colombia) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6098-2398) Javier Jiménez-Osorio is Assistant Professor at University of San Buenaventura, Cartagena de Indias (Colombia) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5762-7758)

ABSTRACT School violence alludes to peer bullying and aggression in school. The field of communication has studied school violence by analyzing the influence of media and interpersonal relationships on aggressive behaviors. This article provides a perspective on school violence and concentrates on determining the influence of interpersonal communication with parents and teachers on adolescent aggressors and victims in school contexts. A non-experimental correlational-transverse design was used with a sample of 1,082 adolescents (M=15,61; DT=0,90). Three reliable scales were implemented to assess adolescent aggression and parental and pedagogical communication. Findings indicate that aggressions among adolescents at school and the interpersonal communication with parents and teachers present differences associated with gender (p=0,00). At the family level, it was found that offensive communication among parents and children (β=0,225; p=0,00) predicts an increment on school victimization. At the pedagogical level, it revealed that teacher communication intended to discipline students (β=−0,297; p=0,00) and make them see the importance of school and learning (β=−0,120; p=0,04) predicts a decrease in aggressive behavior among adolescents and school victimization. These new findings in education evidence the need to strengthen students’ interpersonal communication with their parents and teachers to obtain better results when implementing strategies to intervene and prevent school violence.

RESUMEN La violencia escolar hace alusión al acoso y agresión entre iguales en la escuela. A nivel comunicacional, se ha estudiado este problema analizando la incidencia de los medios y las relaciones interpersonales en las conductas agresivas. Este artículo aporta una perspectiva de la violencia escolar centrada en determinar la influencia de la comunicación familiar y pedagógica en adolescentes agresores y víctimas en la escuela. Se usó un diseño no experimental de tipo correlacional- transversal con una muestra de 1.082 adolescentes (M=15,61; DT=0,90). Se aplicaron tres escalas confiables que evaluaron las agresiones entre adolescentes y la comunicación parental y pedagógica. Los hallazgos indican que las agresiones entre adolescentes y la comunicación que estos tienen con sus padres y profesores presentaron diferencias asociadas al género (p=0,00). La comunicación ofensiva entre padres e hijos (β=0,225; p=0,00) predijo el aumento de la victimización escolar. Pedagógicamente, se encontró que la comunicación del profesor orientada a generar disciplina en los alumnos (β=−0,297; p=0,00) y hacerles ver la importancia de estudiar y aprender (β=−0,120; p=0,04) predicen respectivamente, la disminución de los comportamientos agresivos entre adolescentes y la victimización. Estos hallazgos novedosos en materia pedagógica evidencian la necesidad de fortalecer la comunicación interpersonal de los estudiantes con sus padres y profesores para lograr resultados eficaces en la implementación de estrategias de prevención e intervención contra la violencia escolar. KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Violence, family communication, teacher-student communication, adolescent, school, teachers, family relationships, pedagogical practices. Violencia, comunicación familiar, comunicación profesor-estudiante, adolescente, escuela, docentes, relaciones familiares, prácticas pedagógicas.

1 74 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ihlwrlvl fvoetbhvo tsho r hrceie yhvn oiiecmuiainwith communication positive having by characterized are school at behavior violent of levels lower with hrb hsclhrsmn sacmo rcieaogby,adpyhlgclhrsmn smore is harassment psychological and that boys, indicate among studies practice common example, a for is speaking, harassment Demographically physical whereby varied. are occurs violence school why been have proportion similar a and peers, by threatened been have students three in one since worldwide, D-o-io ozlz 02.I n ae omncto a rvnt ea fetv eoreto resource effective an be to proven has communication case, any In 2012). González, & (De-los-Pinos Piee l,21) codnl,teeaescesu xeine uha h “ the as such experiences successful are there Accordingly, 2019). al., et (Price school the that found been also has It 2005). (Pérez, skills social students’ and 2005) Ortega, & (Rey 2019). al., et (Cerda iln otn ntemdapeitda nraei grsiebhvosadadces nprosocial in decrease a and behaviors aggressive in increase an predicted media the in content violent ervoec tsho u oterefc ntesho niomn n mah.I te words, other In empathy. and environment to related school https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-07 are the practices on teaching effect that their indicated to have due turn, administrators in school school (2018), as at such violence al. authorities peer et institutional Valdez-Cuervo towards adolescents attitudes that faculty. favorable revealed and they more when and (2007) parents al. their et Estévez by confirmed is This to violence. and school peacefully prevent conflicts resolve to 2005). learn (Jalón, to discrepancies students or allows tensions it their as express long adequately students as amongst violence to interaction alternatives and develop communication of reinforcement the through 2018). improved al., et is (Del-Rey-Alamillo coexistence friendships safe up setting towards network’s strategic communication criteria in the the media, intervening social and by on rules, students cyberbullying amongst coexistence against communication of faculty modes of the as work such the areas strengthening on focuses that program odnuc ervciiain(egre l,21)adipeetciia aeplce ospotvictims support to policies care clinical implement and 2017) community al., educational the et within (Berger confidence victimization of peer levels greater denounce of generate to to case issue this the by impacted In schools for violence. school victimization prevent of predictor help a 2018) is self-esteem al., academic adolescence. that build et in detected they Valdés-Cuervo (2016) relationships al. 2018; the et and Ortega-Barón al., cyberbullying, 2019), et al., (Jain et (Varela school well-being in students’ with associated is environment in role protective a play parents can for they important that is so it content, that broadcast behavior. consider and children’s media (2018) their about al. knowledge et their Al-Ali enhance Hence, to year. school the throughout behaviors adolescence. in behaviors hostile aggressive and influence all 2016) 2019) al., Castañeda al., 2018; et et Sasson, (Ortega-Barón Romero-Abrio & conflicts 2019; Boniel-Nissim al., 2018; intrafamily et (Aguirre, 2018), children al., and parents et between Xia communication 2018; 2008). general Masten, al., et In & (Cid Labella violence 2018). school influence al., all et environments maternal school (Gómez-Ortiz cyberbullying, and in control media roles psychological as family, such terms, and variables related discipline other inductive and 2017) communication, al., et (Baldry cyberbullying and 2019). (UNESCO, reasons girls The among 2018), Garaigordobil, frequent & Machimbarrena (cyberbullying). 2018; al., devices et (Jain digital differences gender-related internet-ready has violence of school types other and media, social through students of performance academic the physical reduces a and because 2018) on problem al., troubling offense et a (Ruiz-Ramírez or is rates it harassment dropout and school of 2013), raises form (Leganés-Lavall, it school any at to peers among refers level violence psychological and violence School school aggressions. of cases physical the to in subject increase an reveals that report a Forum, Education World 2019 the at forth, Introduction 1. hrfr,srnteigitresnlcmuiainbtensuet sa seta taeyto strategy essential an is students between communication interpersonal strengthening Therefore, and promoted are principles tolerance when decreases violence school that suggest experiences Other ihntefaeoko nevninpoesso colvoec,eprshv salse h need the established have experts violence, school on processes intervention of framework the Within norms school to related is violence school that indicates research environment, school the to Regarding exposure children’s how demonstrate to able were (2011) al. et Gentile media, 2018; of field al., the et In (Calvete environment family that reveals evidence empirical context, family the In schools between link overlapping the within differences gender-related identified have studies Other online, or basis face-to-face a on generated be can students among behaviors bullying and Aggression brought 2019) (UNESCO, Organization Cultural and Scientific Educational, Nations United The n tt fteissue the of state and • ae 73-82 Pages Asegúrate B Safe) (Be ” ihu eln a runcomfortable or bad feeling without ilneItniySae(E)b iée n iée 21) h aetAoecn Communication Parent-Adolescent the (2018), Jiménez and Jiménez by (VES) Scale Intensity Violence violence. ilne h vrl nenlcnitnyo hssaedslyda cetbeCobc’ lh f0.75. of alpha Cronbach’s acceptable an displayed scale this of consistency internal overall The violence. tesi col hs tak mn dlset xli,a aeo 6,tettlvrac fschool of variance total the 66%, of rate a at explain, verbal adolescents and among against physical generated attacks often), and These (very by by 5 suffered school. (ECD) insults) to in and (never) Scale comments others 1 mocking of Student-Teacher Communication blows, range shoves, the a example, within (for and identifies, aggressions (1982) scale VES Olson The and (2004). Gauna Barnes by (PACS) Scale school of 2. victims Determine and 2) adolescents aggressive gender; on to communication related pedagogical differences show and teachers family and of parents influence communication their the interpersonal with the communicational and established a adolescents have from among empirical violence violence they novel school school offers of whether analysis article Identify the This 1) to can supply. perspective: contribute short communication) that and in the objectives (family teachers are two in between school through children at evidence communication teachers and behaviors how of aggressive parents on over role studies between influence communicational addition, jointly However, and In the communication) 2019). on scarce. (pedagogical al., still evidence students et is of empirical violence (Jiang level literature, school students the of of of face that between flow behavior relationship known altruistic high the the is this influence students and It despite their sensitivity with victims’ interaction harassment. treated their and and unfairly victimization environment faculty school the reducing positive Research by a to imparted violence. that justice school contributes level, of pedagogical faculty a prevention at by the shows, in fostered precisely role (2018) important Midgett an and play Doumas general, by in school, the and teachers tm vlaeoe aiycmuiain(o example, (for communication offensive evaluate family which open of three evaluate used, was items items example, seven (for of comprised communication version family a study, this In children. and sociodemographic the and out carried reducing sampling in of interest type the the reflected 2.2. to size of sample due selection The 3%, The to population. schooling. this 5% of of of terms levels from characteristics violence. in as margin school representativeness well error seeking with as thus the age associated basis, and conglomerate is gender a on both variable intentionally this made was (2019), participants UNESCO violence. school to of VM=0,25) identified, cases frequent according schools (Z=1,96; by attended impacted adolescents institutions adolescents as 1,082 These (2018), Jiménez of SD=0,90). and quotas Jiménez (M=15,61; of age by work of the selected per years was 18 Ministry sample and Colombia’s 14 A to between according students, Education. 4,709,538 National approximately to of comes which Colombia, in levels 2.1. design. cross-sectional and ftevra eaoia omncto ecie yaoecns hs clswr hsnbased chosen were scales These adolescents. by perceived communication pedagogical verbal the of mistakes not achievements, of highlighting the on based example, is (for classroom explain the factors in communication Both teacher’s factor. communication family open 61%. the by for communication 0.85 parental and factor, communication family Methodology h ASsaeeauts ihnarneo nvr o5(las,cmuiainbtenparents between communication (always), 5 to (never) 1 of range a within evaluates, scale PACS The School The scales: reliable three by comprised questionnaire a through gathered was information The since, women), 50% and men (50% equally sample the split to established quota the was Gender education school middle and secondary the at adolescents were study this of population subject The analytical non-experimental, a following correlational; and exploratory was out carried research The h vrl nenlcnitnyo hssaews07.Teiesepan y6% h oa variance total the 61%, by explain, items The 0.78. was scale this of consistency internal the overall agree), The (totally 4 to disagree) (totally 1 of range a within assess, that items seven has scale ECD The Instruments Participants » « .Teitra ossec fti cl a .1frteoffensive the for 0.71 was scale this of consistency internal The ). yprnstl etig hthr me hurt that things me tell parents My « » h ece’ omncto ihtestudents the with communication teacher’s The ). « a akt yprnsaotwa think I what about parents my to talk can I © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: » ,adtermiigfour remaining the and ), • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 73-82 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 75 76 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ela h hry(3)adsvny(7)percentiles. (P70) seventy and (P30) thirty the as well in as well as adolescents, among violence school in differences gender determine to order in applied were h ASSae oprdt tes a rae o h dlsetpplto n a enue in used been has and population adolescent the for created was others, to compared Scale, PACS The dlset eetando o ofl u h usinar,ad nta rcs,altercnen were concerns their all process, that in and, questionnaire, the out fill to how on trained were Adolescents aibe htsoe infcn orlto a mlmne.Tesaitclpoeuecridout carried procedure statistical The implemented. was correlation significant a showed that variables ilneadteaoecns edr e ee naeae oefeun itm fpyia n verbal and physical of victims frequent more average, on were, Men gender. adolescents’ the and violence ditdt aigasutdtercasae tlatoc.Termiig3%camdt aenever have school. at to peers claimed other 30% assaulted remaining having or The attacks verbal once. or least physical at of victim classmates the their been assaulted having to admitted pedagogical and family and violence school between differences Gender-related 3.1. Fidell, Results This & (Tabachnick 3. effects included. medium-sized estimating were for predictors and seven size sample tests, 2001). the collinearity for applying appropriate requirement first is After the number is the association statistical causality. of that claims establishing comprised who (2015), towards analysis the Hill by regression set between criteria multiple causality test the A matches correlation Spearman’s evaluated. applying aggressions by the achieved and factors was communication victims and as values adolescents dispersion offending (MAX) (low, maximum communication and of (MIN), minimum levels the three on indicators Similarly, based the set from added. were scores high) the were suffered and and communication aggressions averaged, moderate pedagogical the previously of and were levels school family The in of adolescents teachers. the and by parents generated their and with maintain they communication the analysis the Data 2.4. with processed were obtained data The software. statistical face-to-face. v23 administered SPSS was questionnaire The tackled. studied. widely been has which Procedure 2019), 2.3. al., et Jiang the 2010; in al., teacher-student communication the et pedagogical on (Zapata focus teacher’s traditionally relationship the that 2019; interpersonal questionnaires on al., other focuses et from itself Castañeda Scale differentiating 2007; ECD thus al., classroom, The et 2019). (Estévez 2018). al., behavior Jiménez, et statistical & good Romero-Abrio (Jiménez showing study violence under school population on the studies to adapted been has it that is advantage greatest on D06) ieie e eotdbigmr grsieo vrg M23;S=09;p=0,00; 0,92; https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-07 SD= (M=2,35; average on aggressive (M=1,69; women more to being compared reported d=0,28) men Cohen’s Likewise, p=0,00; 0,74; SD=0.67). SD= (M=1,89; school in aggressions hi eiblt,adteoiia vlainfr a anand ntecs fteVSSae its Scale, VES the of case the In maintained. was form evaluation original the and reliability, their hssuyfudta 0 faoecnshdsfee hscladvra grsin tsho and school at aggressions verbal and physical suffered had adolescents of 70% that found study This section. this in out laid are study this in outlined objectives two the from achieved findings The on communication pedagogical and family of influence the determines that objective second The test U Mann-Whitney the and test T Student the investigation, this of objective first the achieve To school. each of directors and parents the of consent informed the with collected was information The Upon communication mlmnaino h tdn et infcn ifrne eefudbtenschool between found were differences significant test, T Student the of implementation • ae 73-82 Pages oe crdhge 5.% hnmn(24) eadn pnfml omncto,atog there although r-Rosenthal= communication, (p=0.09; family differences open gender-related Regarding significant (42.4%). no men were than (57.6%) higher scored women communication verbal of level r-Rosenthal= the (p=0.00; at (35.1%) teachers men their than with (64.1%) lower significantly scored women that was a l niaeta h omncto fprnsadtahr ihaoecnshpesms frequently most happens adolescents with teachers and parents of communication the that indicate Table 1 p00)adngtvl ihteagesossfee sho victimization). (school suffered aggressions the with negatively and this (p=0,00) Within school. in others against adolescents by generated aggressions the with negatively and (p=0,00) victimization. ilneaogadolescents. among violence obigotsuet’aheeet n o hi itks(=,4 n omk hmraiethe realize them make to violence. and school with (p=0,04) victimization. significantly with mistakes negatively and their significantly correlated not (p=0,04) and learning and (p=0,00) achievements studying teachers classroom of by students’ the communication importance within of out use students The in bring caused. discipline aggressions to instill the with to negatively order and in significantly correlated teachers by communication of use with positively and significantly correlated (p=0,00) things harmful them telling and (p=0,04) children to aefco,i a on htprns ilnns opyatnint hi hlrncreae significantly correlated children their to attention pay to willingness parents’ that found was it factor, same 3.2. in data the communication, of context the Within DE=0,87). (M=1,93; women than 0,24) d= Cohen’s loe st dniytepeitr ffml n eaoia omncto htifuneschool influence that communication pedagogical and family of predictors the identify to us allowed finding the case, this In between communication. pedagogical differences and significant family identified of test levels the U and Whitney adolescents Mann of The gender the levels. moderate and low between oe 4.% hnmn(52.4%). men than (47.6%) lower h olwn mg Fgr )sosteidctr o h aibe ne td htcorrelated that study under variables the for indicators the shows 1) (Figure image following The the within setting, educational the In nthe In ersinaayi ple oteaoevrals hc edasgiiatcreain significantly correlation, significant a held which variables, above the to applied analysis regression A the In r-Rosenthal= (p=0.00; children and parents between communication offensive of terms In nlec ffml n eaoia omncto nofnigteaesadvictims and teenagers offending on communication pedagogical and family of Influence « fesv aiyCommunication Family Offensive « pnFml Communication Family Open − « » eaoia Communication Pedagogical » 0.08). atr twsetbihdta h c fsekn aggressively speaking of act the that established was it factor, atr h rdblt fprnscreae significantly correlated parents of credibility the factor, © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: − .5,aoecn oe scored women adolescent 0.05), » atr twsfudta the that found was it factor, • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 73-82 Pages − 0.07),

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 77 78 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 hc aiyadclua susascae ihsxs n edrieulte oxs eidcyberbullying behind coexist inequalities gender and sexism with associated issues cultural and family which mn dlset,peitn .%o iln eairad1.%o itmzto.Seiial,i was it harmful Specifically, saying by victimization. characterized children, of and ( 11.6% parents things and between communication behavior offensive violent that of determined 8.5% predicting adolescents, among eraei itmztos omncto ewe ecesadsuet ie tisiln good instilling at aimed students and teachers between Communication (β discipline victimizations. (β in learning and decrease studying of a importance the perceive adolescents making on https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-07 the with towards associated value is essential gender an because as especially relevant 2019), is Gallardo, equality and & of (Gallardo family terms violence in gender of education preventing in context, field manner this the In the to point adolescents. permeate who among (2019), differences al. et gender Linares in that present are show aspects Such also 2018; al., communication. findings et pedagogical Jain such 2018; Garaigordobil, 2019); & (Machimbarrena UNESCO, women and other men amongst the parents differently teachers. On exercised their their from victims. with insults and communication receive offenders of to be level men lower to than likely a women terms exert more than in to were likely women and differences more level, were significant communication men the displayed at case, teachers hand, a and such In parents gender. their of with maintain reduction they the communication to contribute effectively 2018) al., families et of (Valdez-Cuervo aggressions. involvement violence the peer and of school aimed 2005) of communication studies (Jalón, 2018), prevention conflicts when al., their the et truthful resolve in (Jain peacefully more school to even in how students adults is need teaching and schools above at students affected between The and ties parents emotional students. reason, that with this reveal For communication this violence. within interpersonal school deficient improve is of communication issues to pedagogical by and affected family is is, which That context, levels. moderate to low from ranges contributions similarities, out point to order in studies other limitations. of out empirical laid those and hereinafter and is findings discussion own A study’s violence. this school between of victims and adolescents offending on communication Discussion 4. behavior. The h ersinaayi eeld ytesm oe,ta eces eaoia omncto focused communication pedagogical teachers’ that token, same the by revealed, analysis regression The u idnsrltdt edrmthtoeo aiu tde htrva o colvoec is violence school how reveal that studies various of those match gender to related the findings Our and school in adolescents amongst aggressions that identified have we hand, other the On pedagogical students’ adolescent and with teachers and family parents of communication of the that found influence was it terms, the general In determine to was study our of objective main The β ausi al on u htfml n eaoia omncto nlecssho violence school influences communication pedagogical and family that out point Table 2 in values 02*)adhsiesec (β speech hostile and =0.22**) = .9*)wsteol infcn rdco htsoe euto nvoetschool violent in reduction a showed that predictor significant only the was −0.29***) • ae 73-82 Pages .6) infcnl oeat nicesdvictimization. increased an forecasts significantly 0.16*), = .2)sgiiatypredicts significantly =−0.12*) hc aiychso,aaei efete,fml ofit setvns n ece upr predict support teacher and assertiveness conflict, family self-esteem, academic cohesion, family which a lie yBgio(05,wo drsigtepeeto fsho ilne rpsdorganizing proposed violence, school of prevention the addressing who, (2005), Boggino by claimed was hsrsl scnitn ihtesuyb oeoAroe l 21)ta soitsvciiainin victimization associates that (2019) al. et Romero-Abrio by study the with consistent is result This Otg-aó ta. 06.Teeoe hlrnwt o efete r oepoet eoevictims become to prone more are self-esteem low with children Therefore, 2016). al., et (Ortega-Barón and father the both with communication open how out point that (2019) al. et Castañeda and (2018) 2018). al., et (Gómez-Ortiz ilnewslw(ewe . n 16preto h oa aine,i ssmlrt hto te related other of that to similar is it variance), total the of percent 11.6 and 8.5 (between low was violence yeblyn itmzto ewe .%ad9.7%. and 6.2% between victimization cyberbullying t4 ftettlvrac swl sta fOtg ta.(06,wihpit u h anrin manner the out points which (2016), al. et Ortega of that as well as variance out: total stand victimization predicts following the communication the family of above, how shows 4% the that From (2018) at Sasson phenomenon. and Boniel-Nissim this of of work the nature multicausal the confirming studies atcpto n h eeaino ocps ausadsca norms. social and values concepts, active of issues, contextualized generation and the specific and addressing by participation learning student meaningful favor to training teacher Aguirre of works the with coincides this Accordingly, communication. family problematic with adolescence infcn erigta ae tdnsaaeo h motneo dcto.Ti srltdt what to related is This education. of This generates importance it the learning. when of and violence aware studying school students of avoid makes importance to that the communication realize learning pedagogical to of significant students relevance leads the it stresses as finding long as victimization school this that 2018). fact al., the et (Van-Geel to victimization harassment due reduces of turn, is in This which, self-esteem, academic victimization. improve to in contributes reduction communication with of a type meetings with and significantly correlated interventions achievements direct as violence. such school strategies curtail in to resources teachers effective of as offenders participation the and practices that studies reduce correlated that 2016). variables are al., as et there role assistance (Ortega-Barón regard, teachers’ essential adolescents and the particular in 2018) reaffirm this cyberbullying al., findings et In Our (Del-Rey-Alamillo rules violence. 2005). coexistence school (Pérez, highlight school counteracting at in behaviors discipline antisocial of as well maintain as to 2012) implement al., teachers that norms 2010). and al., rules et (Valdés-Cuervo procedures, school of behavior aggressive the set reduced in the of order predictor to a refers is Discipline classroom the school. in in discipline violent generating on behaviors. affects focus healthy that a and with system students warmth adaptation provides an be it is if and family them norms prevent the In can that violent life. or their claim accept children in (2018) in victimization to Masten behaviors and likely and aggression of more Labella likelihood respect, were the this increased violence which domestic aggressions, peer to to exposed subject were who adolescents correlates communication parental victimization. offensive while with victimization; positively school with negatively correlates mother family when that rises. victimization indicate of probability correlations the offensive, aggressive adopting Significant is adolescents communication of likelihood when the however, as behaviors; well children. as decreases, victimization and open, is communication parents between communication cyberbullying in participation intervenes and and practices 2017) parental al., of et perception (Baldry adolescents’ interactions between virtual relationship and the face-to-face in both on harassment in played roles ti eeatt oeta,atog h nlec ffml n eaoia omncto nschool on communication pedagogical and family of influence the although that, note to relevant is It aty eetbihdtefc httahrcmuiaini h lsro sapeitrta reduces that predictor a is classroom the in communication teacher that fact the established we Lastly, students’ out bringing on focused communication teachers’ that teaching was finding non-permissive pedagogical of novel Another relevance the underscores (2018) al. et Valdez-Cuervo by work The et (Mayora increase students between conflicts collapses, discipline when that, warn studies and Various teachers between communication that indicate to found were data novel that hand, other showing the by On findings our of understanding better a enables (2018) al. et Xia by Research victimization. of predictor a is communication family offensive that and showed violence analysis school regression The between relationship a found have we objective, main the to reference In © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 73-82 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 79 80 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ihteaesatal evsa rtciefco ordc raodsc ilne hsiseis issue This violence. such avoid or reduce to factor protective a as serves actually teenagers with hspooa sbsdo h td fJage l 21)ta eel o utc rmtahr strengthens teachers from justice how reveals that (2019) al. et Jiang of study the on based is proposal This Opn-aíe ta. 08.Hwvr hsatcei n ftefrteprcldvlpet towards developments empirical first the of one is article this However, 2018). al., et (Ospina-Ramírez (Colombia). ora fAgeso,Mlramn Trauma, & Maltreatment Aggression, of Journal gir,KM 21) eaind acmnccó aiiryl itmzcó soa eadolescentes. de escolar victimización la y familiar comunicación Desarrollo, la del Psicología de Relación (2018). K.M. Aguirre, References violence. school against communication Agency family Funding and pedagogical of contexts role two the those basis, for different joint been a since, has on required, conflict assessing, are armed institutions internal rural the in of violence impact the school case, analyze Colombian that the studies in other altruism. reason, and this sensitivity For victim sample. between relationship the influences and students indiscipline. their of with acts against bond teacher the the by relationships dispensed the justice by the mediated by as when well violence as school students, in and intervention teachers between an as effective more is communication aggressive and content media violent to exposure children’s as between behaviors. intervenes relationship communication the family in open if factor determine protective to a studies new suggest & we violence, (De-los-Pinos school field influence this in strategies programs 2018). intervention intervention al., successful and et some prevention Del-Rey-Alamillo by of 2012; confirmed González, implementation as the violence, in school results for better accomplish to relationship parental between towards behavior. association violent attitude an to students’ is linked and there strongly expectations that is teachers’ which assure between authority, who institutional and (2007), violence, al. school et and family Estévez communication of offensive teachers theories and that the parents infer by to to communication related open us whereas leads violence, school evidence for Empirical factor risk school. a is in communication adolescents of behavior aggressive et against (Berger measures comments alienating corrective making turn, from take teachers’ In abstain explore teachers and that orientation 2018). that their 2017). known sexual Midgett, al., of studies that is basis & new notice the It (Doumas on students study, victimization violence gender when of schools. present which levels increases in the with in low confidence violence of with hold way school gender basis associated students the against the is communication in communication behavior on of antibullying pedagogical difference suggest, type of We a the role makes in the teachers. gender and and that adolescents parents among firstly, their exercised conclude, is to violence us school allow obtained findings Conclusions 5. https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-07 policies bullying orientation-specific (2005). sexual N. and Boggino, general experiences. of victimization role of The reporting https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2017.1387134 report? adolescents’ I on Should behavior cycle teacher (2017). life and J. family Dantas, the (Ed.), across & V.P., D.H. Poteat, families Olson, of C., overlap. In Berger, survey and national scale. Roles a communication Parent-adolescent in girls: used and (1982). Inventories boys D.H. among Olson, cyberbullying & and H.L., bullying Barnes, School (2017). A. Sorrentino, & D., of Farrington, impact A., the Baldry, about beliefs and aggression. knowledge Parents’ children’s https://doi.org/10.1080/01612840.2017.1422201 on (2018). violence N.M. media Al-Shdayfat, to & exposure K.K., Shattnawi, H.S., Yaghy, N.M., Al-Ali, hsrsac okwsspotdb nvria enlgc eBlvradteCraead nisEuainObservatory Education Indias de Cartagena the and Bolívar de Tecnológica Universidad by supported was work research This ehglgt salmtto fti td,tefc htol ra dlset atcptdi the in participated adolescents urban only that fact the study, this of limitation a as pedagogical highlight, We whether assess to out carried is study a that level, educational the at media mass propose, how We indicates which (2011), al. et Gentile by research the and findings our on Based family-school the and communication strengthen to need the reveal study this in indicated aspects All and victimization the influences communication pedagogical and family that conclude we Secondly, The standpoint. communicational a from violence school of analysis the to contributes study Our n recommendations and ooSapiens. Homo escuela. la en violencia la prevenir Cómo 1 1,1918 https://doi.org/10.33064/ippd1637 109-118. (1), • ae 73-82 Pages 26 9,9791 https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2017.1330793 937-951. (9), susi etlHat Nursing, Health Mental in Issues p.3-8.Uiest fMinnesota. of University 33-48). (pp. ora fSho Violence School of Journal 39 7,592-599. (7), aiyinventories: Family netgcó rciaen Práctica y Investigación , 1,107-120. 18(1), itm fCbrulig Ifuni e lm soa aiire dlsets ítmsd ciberacoso]. de víctimas adolescentes, en familiar y escolar clima del [Influencia Cyberbullying. of Victims study. longitudinal short-term A itmzto:I es fsho eogn mediator? a belonging school of sense Is victimization: itmzto:Wa atr o hmaogsimtzdadolescents. stigmatized among whom for matters What victimization: venezolana. 39-48. 943-960. bullying on behavior antibullying teachers’ of perceptions students’ https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2018.1479911 of effects The (2018). A. Midgett, & on D.M., Effects Doumas, Program: ’Asegúrate’ (2018). P. [Programa Elipe, factors. & risk R., its Ortega-Ruiz, and de J., cyber-aggression centro Casas, un J., en Mora-Merchán, violencia R., la Del-Rey-Alamillo, de prevención del la riesgo para de programa https://doi.org/10.5944/reop.vol.23.num.2.2012.11453 factor un como de escuela Eficacia la secundaria. (2012). en enseñanza J.M. violencia González, y & Agresión académico C.C., rendimiento (2008). De-Los-Pinos, el M. Valderrama, con & relación M., su escolar. Torruella, y aprendizaje M., escolar Pérez, Convivencia A., Díaz, (2019). P., R.D. Cid, Primaria. Rey, Educación & de J.A., alumnado Casas, P., la en Elipe, hacia C., actitud Pérez, y G., psicológico Cerda, malestar escolar. padres, victimización los la con en Comunicación influencia https://doi.org/10.15581/004.36.113-134 Su (2019). J. mexicanos: Jerónimo, adolescentes & en G., autoridad Ochoa, S., perpetration Fadda, violence R., dating Castañeda, and violence family to mechanisms. Exposure emotional https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000076 and (2018). problematic T.D. cognitive of Little, Potential factors & adolescents: risk I., in as Orue, parents L., with Fernández-González, relationships E., poor Calvete, and adolescence. victimization in Bullying use (2018). internet H. Sasson, & M., Boniel-Nissim, rc,M,Hl,NE,Lag . eel,J 21) ece eainhp n dlset xeinigidentity-based experiencing adolescents and relationships Teacher (2019). J. Perella, & B., Liang, N.E., Hill, M., Price, convivencia. la de fomento y http://bit.ly/2Cp3iqg escolar rural: Conflictividad lo y Colombia. (2005). V.M. urbano en Pérez, lo posconflicto entre el paz sobre La niñas y (2018). niños J.A. de Madera-Ruiz, paz & de S.B., Imaginarios Burgos-Laitón, S., Adolescents among López-González, Climate D.A., Family Ospina-Ramírez, and Climate escuela School una of en Influence https://doi.org/10.3916/c46-2016-06 clase The de (2016). diarios M. registros Cava, los & de S., partir Buelga, a J., escolar Ortega-Barón, disciplina La (2012). M. García, & estudiantes N., en Rojas, F., sexo Mayora, del función en primaria. Diferencias educación de cyberbullying: https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2018.v25.n2.2 curso y sexto Bullying y (2018). de quinto and online de & versiones M., Nuevas Garaigordobil, adolescentes: J.M., las Machimbarrena, contra femeninas. sexista corporalidades y/o y sexual sexualidades ciberacoso https://doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.n28a11 las El de (2019). patriarcal sociogrupal. M. opresión perspectiva Silvestre, la una & desde R., escolar Royo, acoso E., el Linares, prevenir para Education intervención & de Society violence. Psychology, propuesta and Una aggression (2013). of E.N. development the Leganés-Lavall, on influences Family (2018). Psychology A.S. Masten, & M.H., Mediating Labella, (2018). school: Y. in Jiménez, behavior & altruistic J., and Jiménez, sensitivity Victim relationship. (2019). W. teacher-student https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01077 Hong, and & justice X., teacher T.P., Fu, escuela. of Oei, la Y., effects desde Ding, prevención R.D., su Liu, y S., adolescencia Jiang, la en iguales entre http://bit.ly/2yYrvSl violencia La adolescent physical (2005). and M.J. climate Jalón, School bullying. (2018). and E. status, Miller, socioeconomic https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.05.001 & sex, A., by Chopel, Differences M.A., abuse: Subramanyam, T., relationship Paglisotti, A.K., Cohen, S., causation? Jain, or Association disease: and 32-37. environment The for factors (2015). preventive A.B. or Hill, gender. risk parent as and Health practices Public children Parenting and of Research (2018). Contribution children: R. age cyberbullying: Del-Rey-Alamillo, school in & in involvement R., aggression adolescent Ortega-Ruiz, relational E., and Romera, aggression, O., physical Gómez-Ortiz, violence, Media (2011). D. Walsh, & adolescencia. S., la Coyne, en D., género Gentile, de violencia la (2004). P.J. de Prevención Gauna, institucional igualdad: autoridad en la Educar hacia actitud 26 (2019). P. familiar, Gallardo, comunicación escuela. & de la Estilos J.A., en Gallardo, (2007). adolescente G. del Musitu, violenta & conducta D., y Moreno, S., Murgui, E., Estévez, 31-39. , https://doi.org/10.1177/003591576505800503 https://doi.org/10.3916/c56-2018-04 https://doi.org/10.11600/1692715x.16220 , http://bit.ly/2MUpgaZ 19 eit eInvestigación de Revista 11-16. , ini Enfermería y Ciencia acmnccó neproa asr-lmoye edmet académico rendimiento el y maestro-alumno interpersonal comunicación La eit saoad retcó Psicopedagogía y Orientación de Española Revista https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.028 , optr nHmnBehavior Human in Computers 15 1) 2664. (12), grsieBehavior Aggressive , 5 1,21-40. (1), atrscmnccoae ilni escolar violencia y comunicacionales Factores , eit ePsicodidáctica de Revista 36 7) 33-51. (75), , 14 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122664 2,21-30. (2), « uaPsicológica Suma https://doi.org/10.25115/psye.v5i1.494 Asegúrate Psicothema , 37 http://bit.ly/33rZG2D ora fApidSho Psychology School Applied of Journal 2,193-206. (2), https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-95532008000200004 rnir nPsychology in Frontiers » fco ncbrgeinyssfcoe eriesgo]. de factores sus y ciberagresión en Efectos : , 88 , scooyo Violence of Psychology 19 , 176-183. , 24 , 1,108-113. (1), 25 1,46-52. (1), 2,102-112. (2), oaComunicación Doxa colMna Health Mental School https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20380 eit aiomrcn eCeca Sociales Ciencias de Latinoamericana Revista eit braeiaad Educación de Iberoamericana Revista ora fAdolescence of Journal , ora fteRylSceyo Medicine of Society Royal the of Journal 23 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.041 2,123-138. (2), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2018.05.001 suissbeEducación sobre Estudios http://bit.ly/2NjjDDb © , nvria enlgc eBolívar. de Tecnológica Universidad . 10 SN 1134-3478 ISSN: 1077. , nentoa ora fEnvironmental of Journal International , 8 1,67-75. (1), , 28 , , 201-223. , 35 11 4) 790-806. (42), 1,37-51. (1), nvria Iberoamericana. Universidad . , • Psicothema 66 -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: 71-82. , , Comunicar urn pno in Opinion Current 26 113-134. , , , Comunicar 38 17 4,549-558. (4), 33-52. , Hekademos , , • 24 , 108 16 ae 73-82 Pages 57-65. , (2), (1), , 26 , ,

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 81 82 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 itmzto:A plcto n xeso fteclua ploe hoyi China. in theory spillover cultural the of extension and application An victimization: pares. entre escolar violencia 10 aea .. ilp,D,Mlplá,R,Eplg,D,Gen . umn .(09.Epoigteifunesho lmt on climate school influence the Exploring (2019). well-being. J. subjective Guzmán, adolescent & and J., violence Green, school D., between Espelage, relationship the R., Melipillán, D., Sirlopú, J.J., Varela, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2018.07.001 violencia La (2019). psicosocial. G. análisis Musitu, Un & adolescencia: J.C., la Sánchez-Sosa, en J.E., relacional Callejas-Jerónimo, M.E., Villarreal-González, A., Romero-Abrio, Rey, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09327-z i,Y,L,S,&Lu ..(08.Teitreainhpbtenfml ilne dlsetvoec,adaoecn violent adolescent and violence, adolescent Health, violence, Public and family Research between interrelationship The (2018). T.H. Liu, & S., Li, Y., Xia, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-019-09631-9 or self-esteem, low studies. predict longitudinal victimization on peer Meta-analyses Does victimization? (2018). P. Vedder, peer & predict self-esteem G., low Gini, W., does la Zwaanswijk, a A., respecto Goemans, con M., docentes Van-Geel, la de Percepciones escuela. de la prevención (2010). J.V. en la Vales-García, disciplina en & docentes M.M., prácticas Martínez-Cebreros, las A.A., de Valdés-Cuervo, rol El (2018). E. Carlos-Martínez, & B., Martínez-Ferrer, http://bit.ly/31AV4pI A., Cultura. Valdés-Cuervo, la y Ciencia la Educación, (2019). (Ed.) UNESCO (2001). L.S. Fidell, & en B.G., Tabachnick, escolar bullying-deserción relación La https://doi.org/10.24320/redie.2018.20.2.1527 (2018). A. Ruiz-Martínez, & rurales. F., bachilleratos Ruiz-Martínez, J.L., García-Cué, R., Ruiz-Ramírez, https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2018.v24n1.03 aaa .. óe,MC,&Rjs ..(00.Mdld el eaind ofaz rfsretdat nl docencia la en profesor-estudiante confianza de relación la de Modelado (2010). M.D. Rojas, universitaria. & M.C., Gómez, C.M., Zapata, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-07 2) 0-3.http://bit.ly/34A9l7r 805-832. (26), . rea .(05.Voecaitresnlygsind adisciplina. la de gestión y interpersonal Violencia (2005). R. Ortega, & R., dccó Educadores, y Educación eit lcrnc eIvsiainEducativa Investigación de Electrónica Revista , Iberoamericana Psicología eidtenmes nigsho ilneadbullying and violence school Ending numbers: the Behind 15 eit ePsicodidáctica, de Revista 2,3131 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15020371 371-371. (2), • ae 73-82 Pages 1,7-0 https://doi.org/10.5294/edu.2010.13.1.5 77-90. 13(1), sn utvraestatistics multivariate Using 1,3-7 http://bit.ly/33o7ORE 30-37. 18(1), sclgaySalud, y Psicología 23 1,3-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2017.05.006 33-38. (1), , ly Bacon. & Allyn . 20 2,37-45. (2), 29 1,103-113. (1), hl niaosResearch, Indicators Child eit eiaad netgcó Educativa, Investigación de Mexicana Revista raiaind a ainsUia aala para Unidas Naciones las de Organización . nentoa ora fEnvironmental of Journal International eeomna Review Developmental 5) 1-16. 12(50), , 49 31-40. , Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

To-friend or not-to-friend with teachers on SNSs: University students’ perspectives Ser o no ser amigos de los profesores en redes sociales: Las perspectivas de los estudiantes universitarios

Dr. Zeynep Turan is Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology at Atatürk University (Turkey) ([email protected])

(https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9021-4680) Dr. Levent Durdu is Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology at Kocaeli University (Turkey) ([email protected])

(https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3788-7226) Dr. Yuksel Goktas is Full Professor in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology at Atatürk University (Turkey) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7341-2466)

ABSTRACT A large majority of university students use social networking sites (SNSs) actively. Nevertheless, there are very limited studies examining students’ perceptions about student-teacher relationships in SNSs comprehensively. The purpose of this research was to investigate university students’ perceptions about interacting with their teachers in SNSs, and to this end an exploratory mixed-methods design was utilised. Qualitative data were collected from 21 students via interviews, and quantitative data from 1,324 students in 19 universities in Turkey via a questionnaire. Content analysis, descriptive analysis and principal component analysis methods were used to analyse the data. The content analysis contributed to the formulation of the questionnaire items. The principal component analysis yielded the following four dimensions: perceived utility, perceived barriers, perceived favourable teacher behaviours, and perceived unfavourable teacher behaviours. The most prominent finding is that the students were mostly opposed to their teachers’ sharing their political and religious views; however, they were in favour of teachers sharing information about their personal life. Despite some students displaying some hesitation, especially concerning the level of respect between them, the majority of students had a positive outlook towards teacher- student friendships. The students indicated that being friends on SNSs would increase their motivation towards the course.

RESUMEN La gran mayoría de los estudiantes universitarios utilizan activamente las redes sociales (RRSS). Sin embargo, hay estudios limitados sobre las percepciones de estos con base en la relación estudiante-profesor en RRSS. El propósito de esta investigación fue investigar las percepciones de los estudiantes universitarios sobre la interacción con sus profesores en redes sociales. Para este fin se empleó un diseño exploratorio mediante métodos mixtos. Se recopilaron datos cualitativos de 21 estudiantes por medio de entrevistas y datos cuantitativos de 1.324 sujetos en 19 universidades de Turquía mediante cuestionario. Para analizar los datos se aplicaron análisis de contenido, análisis descriptivo, y análisis de componentes principales. El primero contribuyó a la formulación de los ítems del cuestionario. El análisis del componente principal arrojó cuatro dimensiones: utilidad percibida, barreras percibidas, comportamientos docentes percibidos como favorables y desfavorables. El hallazgo más destacado fue que los estudiantes se opusieron principalmente a que sus profesores compartieran sus puntos de vista políticos y religiosos. No obstante, estaban a favor de que los docentes compartieran información sobre su vida personal. A pesar de que algunos estudiantes mostraron dudas, especialmente con respecto al nivel de respeto entre ellos, la mayoría del alumnado tenía una perspectiva positiva hacia las amistades profesor-alumno. Estos indicaron que ser amigos en las redes sociales aumentaría su motivación hacia el curso.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Social networking, student-teacher relationship, university student, teacher, interaction, communication, self-disclosure, privacy. Redes sociales, relación profesor-alumno, estudiante universitario, profesor, interacción, comunicación, autorrevelación, privacidad.

1 84 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 iepedueo ehooyi dcto,i sipratt nesadtewy nwihtechnology which in ways the understand to important is it education, in technology of use widespread outside connect to started have teachers and Twitter, students and MySpace, Facebook, as such websites, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-08 negative possible avoid and scholarly 2013). but al., credibility students et (Veletsianos their on area impacts preserve this some in to have insufficient might order are Regulations how studies in construct. determine developing might SNSs to through students in able that achieved be perceptions unveil should be Teachers to could 2007). better information is which (Buckingham, it much (MIL) SNSs, era, Literacy digital in Information pervasive relationship and this in Media student-teacher rather, Australia empirical solution; the of no and optimal prevalence the is understand Israel, the not there to is Considering America, fact, strategy in 2017). of banning Forkosh-Baruch, but, a States & interactions adopting (Hershkovitz SNSs, these United actions forbid the these to type support example, time to this to For evidence in time relationships from 2017). policies student-teacher implemented Ranieri, ban have & to makers (Manca privacy policy media environment, and of classroom authorities formal school this causing sometimes In in- 2008). that students. al., obvious and et is teachers professional both It (Carter of for unclear boundaries easier environment. the be is formal which management can a in life in SNSs, personal over not express or communication and are share from they in-class to differs tend that their communication teachers assume therefore, person for they environment; boundary teaching because official privacy freely an communication themselves not a traditional is from create it differs that can media in social they environments However, 2005). example, Wahl, & for (McBride communication communication; classroom their in the of perceptions to student contents affect referred the could teachers only instance, They by not users. shared for SNS photographs explored of negatively. informal perceptions (2007) (2010), of the affect number Butler might increased al. information that shared some et found of amount However, Mazer SNSs. the how also of SNSs. but satisfaction. comments aspects on in-class posted negative supported comments the and that inappropriate underlined useful positive found with considered studies as example, (2013) students correlated the For SNSs research Forkosh-Baruch limited, SNSs on and was in teacher relationships issues. Hershkovitz the student-teacher interaction and negative students student-teacher levels. and between the communication focusing engagement positive although that Researchers and both reported achievements to 2019). (2012) students’ point al., Bower et SNSs and Song on Callaghan 2019; relationships (Hershkovitz, student-teacher environment on classroom and school the relationship Teacher-student 2.1. review Literature 2. 2018). (Harper, the teachers and with students Therefore, between interaction (Puzio, educational 2013). the Forkosh-Baruch, practice possible affects professional & their (Hershkovitz their and in issues SNSs websites privacy of these to questions discussions use using related in asked the about especially engage of be concerns 2013), and prevalence some teachers, can the have and students despite educators peers However, benefits, their example, with 2014).For course. interact the media, al., about social et via classroom (Greenhow the settings outside education higher in 2013). Puzio, 2019; networking Hershkovitz, social & of (Elhay emergence the school With in 2009). tools al., communication et outstanding Ito the 2017; Forkosh-Baruch, of & some (Hershkovitz become era have this (SNSs) sites networking social particular, In Introduction 1. anann h aac ewe cdmcadproa ieo Nsi ifcl n a eambiguous, be can and difficult is SNSs on life personal and academic between balance the Maintaining lives private their about share to want they information much how manage easily can Teachers affect and development academic students’ in role important an play relationships Teacher-student issues school-related and school for tools educational and communication important as seen are SNSs Improvements nteItre n ehooyhv nrdcdnwcmuiaintosadstyles. and tools communication new introduced have technology and Internet the in • ae 83-92 Pages hrfr,tahr’ceiiiyi h e atri tann ucsflsuetcommunication. student successful attaining in factor key the is credibility teachers’ Therefore, esrsett hi ece.A euto h obnto fteeeeet,suetlann sdecreased. is learning student elements, show these they of combination and the decreases, of motivation result their a al., As credible, et teacher. teacher (Finn less their messages as between to teacher aggressive respect association less their and moderate perceive use, a students technology humour, is When as There 2009). such behaviours, 2008). teacher Martin, and & credibility (Cayanus credibility teacher raises self-disclosure 2012). teachers’ al., critical in et (Trad are increase behaviours self-disclosure an uncivil that of students’ claiming relevance in studies and results are amount there The how since students on communication teachers. and competencies of and and teachers components skills friends both gain their will should help with students technologies should way, communicate this digital approach to in of This and processes, utilisation communication perspective. that their pedagogical manage stated a (2007) from Buckingham approached reason, be this For boundaries. and the students between communication of 2004). forms establish Martin, can various Self-disclosure & facilitate relationship (Cayanus 2019). and teachers al., positive environment et a learning (Song that supportive learning was said student a be there to can it contribute that Therefore, can self-disclosure. stated self-disclosure teacher teacher and (1989) learning affective Sorensen of perceptions student- student of between 1994). source personal (Fusani, strong a communication as viewed faculty is Teacher self-disclosure another”. to communicates person 2.2. nsuettahrrltosiso Ns ihteproeo nlsn h atr htafc student- affect questions: that research factors following the the analysing addressed of study this purpose SNNs, the on With guidelines relationship or policies teacher SNSs. regulations, well- on new creating relationships a to student-teacher relation in on is for examining authorities important as studies school is There study and comprehensive SNSs this makers, few Therefore, policy of teachers, very SNSs. 2017). on use are relationships there student-teacher al., the However, towards and perceptions and teachers et students’ perspective. between achievement teachers’ (Froment friendships the Facebook students’ processes to from on pertaining students learning 2011) SNSs (Plew, and dissertation of doctoral teaching non-usage documented for or tools usage of communication effects the report 3.1. their tools. perceive interaction students this social how 3. Thus, these enact determine use should to learners communication. teachers SNSs better how why on and for Understanding friendship SNSs utilised of teacher-student use be explore teachers’ 2014). can to important friendships (Aydin, is SNS-based posting it how interactions, active and reveal avoid would and commenting, reveals teachers behaviour research their chatting, Some with as 2017). interacting while 2015; such behaviours Ranieri, passive & prefer (Manca students investigation that further needs SNSs 2015). on they (Johnson, behaviours information students with of have Since type they the disclosure to 2015). that of attention reported amount Johnson, (2009) pay the al. and should 2014; et share teachers Facebook, Hayes, Mazer credibility, on what & teacher teacher to (Hutchens increases contrary the self-disclosure credibility, of negatively perceptions teacher’s photos credibility on decrease unwanted can effect teacher’s to disclosure an exposed excessive the have is possibly affect could student can that a shared if this and was instance, and what Barber For adversely, also example, credibility but teachers. For teacher presence towards the affected their SNS on credibility. Facebook only on however, of impact not presence was terms may 2004); teacher’s it in students the al., negatively that and argued life et teachers (2008) professional Pearce between McCroskey and friendships personal 1992; establishing of of Thompson, boundaries way & a (Frymier as teachers communication their to credibility Methodology efdslsr sakn ffinl omncto hc oiieyafcssuetpriiainand participation student affects positively which communication friendly of kind a is Self-disclosure blurring classroom, the beyond extended has communication student-teacher above, discussed As a that self the about message “any is (2009) al. et Mazer to according self-disclosure of definition The h xsigrsac otyfcsso s fSS o cdmcproe.I eea,studies general, In purposes. academic for SNSs of use on focuses mostly research existing The other’s each perceive they how and students and teachers between practices Communication high attribute they when affected positively is learning students’ that shown have studies Various efdslsr n credibility and Self-disclosure eerhamadrsac questions research and aim Research © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 83-92 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 85 86 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 Wa ido otn hudo hudntb hrdb ortahr nsca networks?”. social on teachers your by shared be not should or should content of kind “What hl eann rnsadpten”(ee ta. 07 4) h ugsino hmsn(04 that (2004) Thompson of suggestion The 641). analysed 2017: were al., data et quantitative (Lever the patterns” and coefficients, trends pattern finalised retaining factor was while the questionnaire the determine Thus, to order removed. In were items items. five 17 and with items, group-related to applied was methods. quantitative on placed being emphasis greater a with h eerhr raie h oe n nepee h idnst omteieso h aacollection data the of items the form to findings the interpreted and codes the organised researchers The universities different 19 from students university 1,324 comprised phase quantitative the in participants The 20) h is tpwst raea tmpo ae nteitriwrslsadteresearchers’ the and results interview the on based pool item an create to was step first The (2003). aiu eatet fdfeetfclis(dcto,lw niern,sotsine,communication, sciences, sport engineering, law, (education, faculties different of departments various i h rnia opnnsaayi PA,wih“ipiistecmlxt nhg-iesoa data high-dimensional in complexity the “simplifies which (PCA), analysis components principal the via https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-08 (EFA) analysis factor exploratory An clarity. questionnaire and validity the of Then, terms scale. in Likert experts five-point field a by be evaluated to were determined items was questionnaire The DeVellis experiences. by recommended stages development scale the on two based by developed was analysed questionnaire The were study. data qualitative The 2005). Simsek, 2004). reliability. & Christensen, inter-rater (Yildirim & for phase researchers (Johnson second coded the and of segmented, instrument transcribed, were study and the of response?” data think your on qualitative you elaborate do you “What Can are: networks? questions social on interview teachers the interview your of the with Examples feedback, friends their being to from finalised. about researchers According and other questions. modified two open-ended and were consulted the questions were reviewed experts field two academic tool, same collection the data the of validity the ensure attending years, 23 to 18 The on). from so aged and method. seniors The sampling to participants. convenience freshmen the from finding via for ranging sources selected undergraduates main were the were were participants participants researchers the The of phases colleagues quantitative academic the 1. immediate Table and qualitative in the from summarised obtained are participants the about data Descriptive Turkey. in quantitative, was study this of of Participants priority findings 3.3. The the generalize participants. and of test number quantitative large to a a is developing via aim of study final often aim the The the of researchers data. with phase design, qualitative first group research obtained the research exploratory developing the qualitative such in on a assisted study.In based using study situation instrument the were the a of tool of understand phase collection phase to second data first try the quantitative the of shaped from emerging instrument analysis results the an interview and the collection therefore, data utilised; qualitative context, this In design Research 3.2. ..Data 3.4. h eoddt olcinto a h usinar sdt banteqatttv aao the of data quantitative the obtain to used questionnaire the was tool collection data second The The 1990). Corbin, & (Strauss method analysis content the with analysed were data qualitative The To researchers. the by developed interview semi-structured the was tool collection data primary The Turkey. in university state large a attending students university 21 were there phase, qualitative the In 2011). (Creswell, design sequential exploratory an with approach mixed-methods a used study This SNSs? on relationship student-teacher the SNSs? affect on that share? teachers factors to their the not from are expect and What students share 4) do to actions teachers of their type want What students 3) do posts of type What 2) 1) htaetesuet’vesaottesuettahritrcini SNSs? in interaction student-teacher the about views students’ the are What olcinadanalysis and collection • ae 83-92 Pages h is atr ossigo ories a aelda prevduiiy,tescn atr(ee items) (seven factor second the utility”, “perceived as labelled was items, four of consisting factor, first The Nrss 98.Brlt’ etfrshrct a efre,adteapoiaecisur was chi-square approximate the and performed, was sphericity for test Bartlett’s 1998). (Norusis, 15.7,p.0.Teetotsssoe htfcoilaayi a prpit o hssto data. of set this for appropriate was analysis factorial that showed tests two These p<.000. 11058.274, iw n sitdi h eeomn fteiesi h usinar.Tems rmnn idn is finding prominent most The questionnaire. the in items the of development the in assisted and views 4.2. was rule, 4.1. K1 the as known 4. also is which 1.0, than greater eigenvalues applied. have should factors noteworthy neato nSS?Bsdo h ulttv idns oeta afo h tdnstogtpositively thought students the student-teacher of about half than views more students’ findings, the qualitative are the What on students’ to Based below. relation the SNSs? in of presented on responses examination are interaction students’ comprehensive questions The a research on SNSs. student four focused on and the relationship study teacher student-teacher this into the the framework, of research concerning friendship however, this and perceptions the In studied; teaching on mostly focusing limited. for been SNSs practices very have of classroom are 2013) issues Tess, of socialisation 2012; terms and al., in communicative et the especially Gao SNSs, 2012; of (Aydin, aspects learning positive The students. and 5. accounted factors four 15.35% The were variance. behaviours. factors total teacher (34.69%) two the favourable the variance remaining of perceived 67.30% the highest unfavourable of for for by The perceived 9.43% factors explained the and 0.83. to variance utility the (7.83%) perceived was of of variance for scale percentages lowest values whole The the the and reliability behaviours. of factor teacher satisfactory barriers that perceived and The the 0.91, to to belonged 2004). 0.72 from Thompson, ranged in scale cited (1954, Guttman (http://bit.ly/2XIBIOy). dataset and in mean presented loadings, are factorial and The items behaviours”, the behaviours”. teacher teacher of unfavourable favourable deviation “perceived data: “perceived standard as as the items) items) from (four (two factor emerged last factor factors the third Four the loadings. barriers”, “perceived factor as the reveal to variables used between was rotation correlation Varimax better with .80 a PCA above indicate value 1 a acceptable, to considered closer suggesting is values .50 0.87, and than was 1974), greater adequacy (Kaiser, KMO sampling commendable A of is measure multi-collinearity. of (KMO) absence Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin the the that shows result SNSs that thought students the addition, teachers In their with interaction. friend teachers. daily a and their being students saw to between students contribution communication the increased positive of a half than as between respect more SNSs of hand, level on the other affect the probably On would sub-chapter. media negatively. next social on them the teacher in a with explained friend as finding being that items, This believed separate teachers. two by as shared phase be quantitative not the should in views included religious and also political is students, the to according that Discussion analysis and Results nti r,SS aebcm ato otpol’ al otn,icuiguiest teachers university including routine, daily people’s most of part a become have SNSs era, this In by suggested as 1, than greater Eigenvalue an with factors noteworthy four the presents 2 Table The 20. v. SPSS IBM using instrument the of validity construct the ensure to conducted was EFA they because SNSs on teachers their with friends be to want not did students some Additionally, their revealed students the with interviews the (http://bit.ly/33kFVcB), dataset the in summarized As ulttv results Qualitative uniaieresults Quantitative © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 83-92 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 87 88 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 hc a h ihs ensoeaog2 tm,adtetidadfut tm aighge mean higher having items fourth and third the and items, 23 among score mean highest the personal had their which about information sharing teachers’ their favoured they example, For teachers. their with the From discourteous. as them perceived therefore and informal, very be would teachers their with them. with codn oHthn n ae 21) tdnspee oueFcbo o ntutoa purposes, instructional for Facebook use to prefer students (2014), Hayes and Hutchens to According T rne l,2019b). al., et (Turan about h olwn eaiusfo h es otems prpit:“i igcmet rnig violation https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-08 drinking, assignment, comment, racism ring request, reported “lip information students party She the appropriate: professors, which most other in behaviours. the of study reputation to faculty reports a least blog fictional professor social designed the her depicting comment, your (2012) from In on scenarios Nemetz behaviours anything Facebook following previously. say class”. of the stated “don’t in appropriateness as tip, say the study, important wouldn’t the rated most you of the that phase gave profile was qualitative (2014) media This Fuglei the 2005). media, in Wahl, social & finding McBride negatively concerning important al.,1991; students most teachers’ et that (Kearney reported the their self-disclosure also also disliked teacher studies of research mostly kind Previous students some views. perceived the religious and examined, political was their sharing behaviours curious teacher be unfavourable can them. perceived about Students information photos SNSs. basic viewing of read by nature to the followed want to they score, appropriate therefore mean seems teachers; highest (2014) reaction their the with This about Aydin’s having results, teachers. same updates” post”. of the status videos teachers’ almost teachers’ and my revealed my students videos “read undergraduate “watch item teaching and the language updates” English 121 status with teachers’ study my “read information”, education were teachers’ physical scores my undergraduate “read 416 item of the in (2015) results Göktas similar by reported students study sport interaction descriptive and of A education kind developments. some professional liked and students life the that seen was it examined, was behaviours items teacher teacher related utility, favourable the unfavourable perceived and factors perceived the SNSs: about and on information detailed behaviours, friendship provides teacher teacher dataset statistical student favourable The affected perceived behaviours. factors barriers, four perceived following the al., et findings, (Akkoyunlu formal more be to culture”. Turkish relationship in student-teacher teachers their the 2015). by want disrespectful considered teachers behaviours, be students’ some communication “can active Furthermore, poking some their and that that posting, stating chatting, issue, thinking as similar on such a revealed based (2015) responses Göktas perspective, their teachers’ given finding This have disrespectful. can may as respect students considered of being level the culture Turkish their the that in with affect behaviours friends negatively indicates of would be kind friend to respect some a want by of being not explained level that did be thought the they they affect Five indicated because negatively students SNSs views. would the on teachers that religious teachers their showing and finding with also political The friend study their a them. This being about between that contents concerns. believed some share privacy students that not the to being should of prominent due most teachers mainly the that with SNSs indicated relationship, 2015). on students teacher-student friendship Ravid, about of issues & privacy approve (Miron some not revealed unwanted do was (73%) SNSs they via but communication students, of minority a for however, of half communication than their more increased that SNSs on showed teachers findings (Kleinglass, course their research students with our friend with a Similarly, communication being that 2008). and claimed that Saunders, learning students claim the & improving studies Kolek for Research in tool cited teachers. contributing and 2005, on a students SNSs teachers perceived between be their students communication could The with the SNSs friend them. for with a factor communication facilitating being their a that to as contribution indicated wanted positive students a students the had school media Additionally, secondary social that teachers. found their which befriend study, to (2013) Forkosh-Baruch’s and Hershkovitz to htkn fpssd tdnswn hi ecest hr n o osae hntefactor the When share? to not and share to teachers their want students do posts of kind What perceived of factor the When SNSs? on teachers their from expect students do actions of kind What quantitative the to According SNSs? on relationship student-teacher affect that factors the are What appropriate; is SNSs via communication students, of majority the for that reports mainly literature The tdn-ece redhpo Ns lhuhfo ifrn dcto ee,orfnigi parallel is finding our level, education different a from Although SNSs. on friendship student-teacher • ae 83-92 Pages Dakvce l,21) uhitrcinwt hi ecesi tefamtvto o tdns(rsoi et (Draskovic 2015). students for Morris, motivation & a (Sarapin itself is teachers their with interaction Such 2013). al., et (Draskovic eu ttmn,… Nmt,21:6.Teprevduiiyfco nlddatosaotSNSs’ about actions included factor utility perceived The 6). 2012: (Nemetz, …” statement, Jesus ausadielge.Cneprr ei o drs ifrn klsadcmeece;ie,multiple i.e., competencies; and skills different address now media Contemporary ideologies. and values rvc etnso Nss htte a dutwocnseterpssadwt hmte hr other share they whom with and the posts their about see students information can given by who be jointly adjust can should determined they teachers guidelines that and information. or so Students SNSs policies of relevant institution. settings respective to privacy the according Communication or out encouraged. teachers be actions carried to and certain are be students can dichotomy: with a interaction SNSs facilitate thus, on that is, others students.There but by avoided, be experienced must and viewed negatively take and thus, positive should, Teachers study. SNSs. our over professional in students their confirmed with in was communicating developments (Draskovic finding when share This shown account teachers have life. into that personal studies this degree, their several in some hand, events to other the and expect, the prevent life students On would addition, that which In 2013) sharing. students, al., are issues. with et should, teachers Teachers professional interaction what for for students seeing SNSs. one groups that from and course over latter finding Facebook life them only main personal with use for our views could one to teachers religious accounts, addition separate or in two political followed 1991; have share are therefore, al., not 2014) et should al., (Kearney et teachers studies Miller consider various 2005; Wahl, from & communication will McBride SNS their audience student-teacher to target concerning self-disclosure the guidelines negative how possible consider avoid should should Teachers message 2014). media al., message. et a the (Miller produces students (Buckingham, to communication” who respond of person and forms A contemporary perceive of range 88). whole the 2008: by required are “that literacies 6. sharing content and 2017), al., et (Froment announcements, their purposes to with organization refers exams, communicate generally of to students dates the media and with social scheduling environments communication use as educational This to such Social in 2015). tend seen al., and be et courses. expect can (Hamid students their effect teachers consequence, this concerning a and with As feedback communication, enhance particular. communication more can in course, receiving that tool towards about a expectations motivation is media their course, and the teachers, in their participation students’ to contributions otertahr.Ti ih etemi esnwytesuet i o att edafin request friend a send to want not did students the why reason main about their attitude the teachers. in knew their be course person. affect item might they to other negatively loaded This the might when most by posts teachers. students seen teachers’ second their be their their the to to seeing posts was to that their item indicated wanted fair students this students some be nor that teachers Furthermore, teachers not noteworthy neither The that is could showing it (2015). they clearly and study, thought al. lives, they private et that students’ Akkoyunlu their by stated presented study was their perspective in teachers’ indicated from study discussion current similar posts. the their (2016) in see students to the teachers al. why their their et is want affect this not Song face-to- negatively that did than might they possible intimate information that discussion. is sharing more it the that was and intimacy of think communication, environments The might professional point online students in starting negatively. Therefore, relationship the communication environments. teacher their face be and affect can student would students that SNSs suggested and in teachers friend between a level being that was teachers performance academic and 2015) al., et (Imlawi motivation academic affects positively which 2013), al., Conclusions h ieauerve n u td eelta tdn-ece omncto vrSSi both is SNS over communication student-teacher that reveal study our and review literature The the that suggest we meanwhile perspectives, teachers’ on required is research further Although reflects inevitably media Social culture. interactive and participatory a into evolved has media New h epne oohries seilytoeaotba n rjdc upr hsifrne A inference. this support prejudice and bias about those especially items, other to responses The their with interacting to barrier biggest the factor, barriers perceived the under students, to According © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 83-92 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 89 90 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 a fetdb h uclueo nvriysuet nTre.Lsl,atog twsntitne,the intended, not was it although Lastly, Turkey. in students university of subculture the by affected was i Nsbcuei ilsrl nerp n itatterdiyruie,sc slcuig researching, lecturing, as such routines, daily their distract and interrupt surely will it because SNSs via 0310.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9260-7 1093-1106. https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-08 uai ..(94.“xr-ls”cmuiain rqec,imday efdslsr,adstsato nstudent-faculty in http://bit.ly/2reD7QN satisfaction and avoid. classroom. self-disclosure, to the immediacy, things outside Frequency, and interaction communication: drawbacks “Extra-class” Benefits, (1994). education: D.S. in credibility. Fusani, media teacher Social perceived (2014). to M. relation Fuglei, in affinity-seeking teacher Perceived Education (1992). Communication C.A. Thompson, & A.B., Frymier, http://bit.ly/2qr2Zbu rmn,F,Grí-ozlz .. oóqe,MR 21) h s fsca ewrsa omncto olbetween tool communication a as networks social of review. use literature The A (2017). students: M.R. and Bohórquez, teachers teacher & of A.J., review García-González, F., metaanalytical Froment, A outcomes. student (2009). and L.M. behaviors Larson, teacher https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903131154 & with K.A., associations Jernberg, its N., and Elledge, credibility P.L., and Witt, P., relationship, Schrodt, teacher-student A.N., communication, Finn, out-of-class of media. perceptions Teachers’ social environment. through (2019). classroom interaction A. Hershkovitz, lecturer-student & the on A.A., perspective(s) Elhay, Croatian Cases Management (2013). of A. Journal Kustrak, International & M., Caic, N., Draskovic, (2003). R.F. De-Vellis, http://bit.ly/2CczAEC University. Graduate (2012). M.S. directions (Eds.), González-Canche, V.L. research & and Plano-Clark, C., review & Rios-Aguilar, J.W., R., Creswell, Deil-Amen, ed.) In C., (2nd design. Davis, research methods methods mixed mixed a conducting Choosing and Designing (2011). V.L. Plano-Clark, negativity. & and J.W., relevance Creswell, Amount, self-disclosure. Teacher ). (2008). 56 M.M. Martin, & J.L., Cayanus, scale. self-disclosure teacher. instructor the An of (2004). role https://doi.org/10.1080/08824090409359987 M.M. critical Martin, the & – J.L., sites Cayanus, networking social through Learning International, (2012). M. Bower, & N., horn. Callaghan, own your Tweeting (2010). K. Butler, Internet. the of age the in education media Rethinking Education International literacies: and media Digital United (2007). CA, D. Diego, Buckingham, San Conference. Association http://bit.ly/2qp6GOY Communication International States. The Presentation]. [Paper attractiveness. teacher (2008). K. Pearce, Facebook. & on L., Barber, teachers their with interactions learners’ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.001 language Foreign environment. (2014). educational S. an Aydin, as Facebook on research of review A (2012). S. Aydin, https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2015.01.020 uknhm .(08.Dfnn iia ieay htd on epene oko bu iia ei.I akha,C,& C., Lankshear, In media. digital about know to need people young do What (Eds.), M. literacy: Knobel, digital Defining (2008). D. Buckingham, friendship student – teacher of predictor a as study. perception development professional Teacher’s scale A (2015). M. facebook: Erdem, in & G., Dahan, B., Akkoyunlu, References attitude online students’ female students. that study male possible this is of it in that and data from female, In the were differs volunteered and Turkey. that relations, students for the human of result of majority representative determinants important a most give the cannot of respondents one is 1,324 culture from addition, obtained data the sampling; Limitations 6.2. about perspective participants teachers’ to applied be elucidate can questionnaire cultures. to same various the important from determine communication, to SNSs communication, is to affects react environment cultures it cultural different and how social Therefore, the Since SNSs. over meetings. communication official organising communication favour and not might Teachers friendship. student-teacher about views teachers’ concerning Recommendations 6.1. 3,3531 https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370802241492 325-341. (3), lhuhti eerhhdoe ,0 atcpns h atcpnswr ece hog convenience through reached were participants the participants, 1,000 over had research this Although undertaken be should investigations further perspective, students’ the on focused study this Since 49 1,11.https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2012.662621 1-17. (1), iia ieais ocps oiisadpractices and Policies Concepts, Literacies: Digital Sage. ed.). (2nd applications and Theory development: Scale dcto n nomto Technologies, Information and Education , , 4,3839 https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529209378900 388-399. 41(4), 2 o ute research further for h etefrteSuyo ihrEuaina h nvriyo rzn n Claremont and Arizona of University the at Education Higher of Study the for Centre The . 1,4-5 https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2007.2.1.43 43-55. (1), • h feto ntutrFcbo atcpto nsuetpretoso ece rdblt and credibility teacher of perceptions student on participation Facebook instructor of effect The ora fApidCmuiainResearch, Communication Applied of Journal ae 83-92 Pages nentoa nieJunlo dctoa Sciences Educational of Journal Online International h uks nieJunlo dctoa Technology Educational of Journal Online Turkish The ititAdministration District , 15 4,3139 https://bit.ly/2E1mZVH 331-339. (4), aePbiain.https://doi.org/10.3316/qrj0702090 Publications. Sage . 24 , 8-0.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9782-7 385-406. , 46 p.7-0.PtrLn.http://bit.ly/2WPIj9x Lang. Peter 73-90). (pp. 2,4-4 https://bit.ly/2DVQ0m0 41-44. (2), , Reports Research Communication omncto Education Communication oilmdai ihreuain literature A education: higher in media Social 22 3,232-255. (3), dcto ehRsac Dev, Research Tech Education System , 7 , 1,242-259. (1), , 42 4,126-144. 16(4), omncto Quarterly Communication 155-163. , eerhi Comparative in Research , 58 4,516-537. (4), dctoa Media Educational 3,252-263. 21(3), 60 , , students. A.C., &Duberstein,A.(2009). Kaiser, 36(1), Johnson, Pearson Johnson, B.,&Christensen,L.(2004). learning with C.J., Perkel, D., Robinson, L., Sims, C., & Tripp, L. Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., Cody, R., Stephenson, B.H., Horst, H.A., Lange, P.G., Mahendran, D., Martínez, K.Z., Pascoe, credibility anduseofcommunication. want inEducation,50 Technology Journal Journal, 45 1237-1245. Kearney, P., Kirschner, teachers sayanddo. Gao, F., https://doi.org/10.1080/00909889409365400 Manca, 641-642. &Saunders,D.(2008). Kolek, E.A., networking. Greenhow, https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2015.11891789 Göktas, Z.(2015). M.(2017). Manca, S.,&Ranieri, Education Lever, Imlawi, J.,Gregg,D.,&Karimi,J.(2015). credibility. Hutchens, J.S.,&Hayes,T. 91-100. ylacomunicaciónenFacebook: relaciónprofesor-alumno perceptions. [La Hershkovitz, https://doi.org/10.1504/ijceell.2013.051765 International Hershkovitz, Harper, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.004 networking useforteachingandlearning. Hamid, S.,Waycott, McBride, Learning, Mazer, https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520601009710 self-disclosure Mazer, International N.(2012). &Rahim, Oye, N.,Helou,A., M.J.(1998). Norusis, Instructional Nemetz, P. Speech Communication Educational McCroskey, G.(2015). Miron, E.,&Ravid, https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2013.835054 Communication credibility tostudentincivilityinthecollegeclassroom. Miller, to go. 21-38. M.,&Altman,N.S.(2017). J., Krzywinski, Brown,T., Katt,J.A., A.N., H.F. J.P., J.P., S., Education Inc. of Educational B. (2018). Luo, https://doi.org/10.3916/C53-2017-09 K. [Poster M.C., https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4346 , 34 Media andTechnology (2010). &Karpinski,A.C. P.A., , Education & (2012). (1), 29 C., Gleason,B.,&Li,J.(2014). Education andInformation Technologies Plax, T.G., (2015). (1974). &Simonds,C.J.(2009). Murphy, R.E., &Simonds,C.J.(2007). Murphy, R.E., J.C., Valencic, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024 Media Education &Society,18(4),371-384. Technology &Forkosh-Baruch, (2017). A., A. &Forkosh-Baruch, (2013). A., A. Pedagogies, 81-13. T., Ranieri, Journal Journal new media. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2010.534798 , andclassroomclimate. on studentmotivation,affectivelearning, 63-74. 1-25. & , 52 Quarterly presentation]. MeetingoftheAmericanEducationalResearchAssociation,SanDiego,CA,UnitedStates. & Zhang,K.(2008). Wahl, Physical educationandsportstudents’interactionswiththeirteachersonFacebook. Technology Faculty The An index Communication S.,&Chang,S.(2015). J., Kurnia, https://doi.org/10.2202/0027-6014.1905 and Information Technologies M. of Continuing , 2(2),24-29. andTechnology of Computers SPSS professional https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.12.004 &Ivey,M.J.(1991). Hays, E.R., https://bit.ly/37zAae5 Technology Journal, effect (2016). S.T. MIT Press. social networkinginteractions: K.M., &Richmond,V.P. (3), 214-225. (2014). , 5 of factorialsimplicity. (2005). (3), interactions: and teacher-student A of Facebook (2), 30 “ description ofFacebook Whereweareandwhere Implications ofsocialnetworksitesforteachingandlearning. Twitter https://bit.ly/2JQnKnT Yes , 43 (2014). & Sivo,S.A. 197-210. (1), Online disclosure: EducationandLife-LongEngineering 115-130. (2), In yourFacebook: Computers &Education,88 Quarterly Tweeting https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8402.001.0001 ‘ for (5), To Educational 8-22. 175-183. statistics Education andHigher Internet The groups asanacademicteachingaid: posts Facebook sharing, say usingsocialnetworking. Model ofperceivedinfluenceacademic performance https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1450690 Student engagementincourse-basedsocialnetworks: 783-801. Psychological, https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370409370192 or https://bit.ly/2E7j7CZ http://bit.ly/32icfMy relationshipandFacebook-mediatedTeacher-student Student-teacher relationshipintheFacebook on for learning: , 39 not . no Points students’ https://doi.org/10.1080/17439880902923655 ® Prentice-Hall. , 19(1),5-20. Psychometrika, 39(1), (4), 309-324. (2004). (2009). http://bit.ly/2NNbV3k research: The effectsofteacherself-disclosure I’ll seeyouon‘Facebook’: , 22 to https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01357.x for and academicperformance. Communication An empiricalexamination say’: Examining Facebook self-disclosure,The relationshipofinstructor Understanding students’perceptionsofthebenefitsonlinesocial (2), 605-622. of significance: teaching!”: College teachermisbehaviors:

toassessstudentviews. Using socialdomaintheory use andacademic social, andeducationaldynamicsofadolescents’onlinesocial perceptions Toward Hanging Teachers’ A criticalanalysisofresearchonmicrobloggingin Quantitative, A reviewofempiricalresearch. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9201-4 https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379109369808 https://doi.org/10.24297/ijct.v2i1.2612 84-96. Social communication. a generalmodelofinstructional out, management https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9429-x Education of Principal instructor messing 31-36. media Percepciones https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.015 Learning qualitative, performance amongundergraduateandgraduate usage asmisbehavioronperceivedteacher , 26 Case studyandrecommendations Communication teacher The effectsofcomputer-mediated © of undergraduateFacebook component analysis. , 63 in , 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02291575 Karpinski, SN 1134-3478 ISSN: inHumanBehaviorComputers , 26 around, academic of credibility. , 23 (1), 1-16. privacy like What studentsdon’t (1), de losalumnos]. and mixedapproaches via Facebook and era: 33-33. practices. boundaries Education, 56 Learning, geeking Journal The impactofinstructor the studentperspective. • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: communication: nonverbal immediacy,and Nature Methods,14(7), Anthropologist on teachercredibility. The out: Kidslivingand of Researchon Comunicar, 53 Media in the Internet profiles. (1), Journal education. classroom. for educators. (2nd edition). about what and 1-17. • Student Technology, and , 21(1-2). NASPA of (6), ae 83-92 Pages , British Higher Texas

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 91 92 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ui,ER 21) h a’ efins o a a h tt oi etitn oilntokn omnctosbetween communications networking social restricting in go state the students? can their far and How teachers friends? school be secondary can’t management Why University instructors´impression (2013). State influences E.R. Georgia that Puzio, differences dissertation]. individual doctoral the [Unpublished and Facebook students, on with communicating friends, as students Plew tas,AL,&Cri,J (1990). J. learning. Corbin, affective & and A.L., perceptions, Strauss, students’ statements, self-disglosive of teachers’ role Education among Communication mediating relationships a The and (1989). education G. online Sorensen, in self-disclosure Teacher professor: my https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1455126 know I self-disclosure. (2019). teacher N. presence. of Park, social role & A J., Kim, classes: H., online Song, in relationship Teacher–student (2016). Behavior W. the Human Luo, from in & communication J., social Kim, online H., Instructor–student Song, friending: Facebook and Faculty perspective. professor’s (2015). P.L. Morris, & S.H., Sarapin, https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-08 (2005). education H. higher Simsek, a & in A., site Yildirim, networking social https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9284-z a 255-278. compartmentalization. with 61, and experiences the appropriation, Instructor in frustrations, communication (2013). Expectations, instructor K.D. French, setting: and & Incivility R., (2012). Kimmons, A. G., Wright, Veletsianos, ... A.N., Miller, K., classroom. Glynn, college H., Blackman, N., Baker, L., Trad, review. literature https://doi.org/10.1037/10694-000 A Association. – Psychological virtual) and (2004). (real B. classes Thompson, education higher in media Behavior, social Human of role The (2013). P.A. Tess, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153 ..(01.Fcbo redhp ewe olg/nvriyisrcosadsuet:Dcdn hte rntt allow to not or whether Deciding students: and instructors college/university between Friendships Facebook (2011). M.S. , nentoa ora fHmnCmue Interaction Human-Computer of Journal International lrd omncto Journal, Communication Florida 29 , 54 5,6-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.032 60-68. (5), American andapplications. concepts Understanding analysis: factor confirmatory and Exploratory h nentadHge Education Higher and Internet The 3-4.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.037 436-443. , , 38 3,2926 https://doi.org/10.1080/03634528909378762 259-276. (3), • ae 83-92 Pages Seçkin. . yöntemleri arastirma nitel bilimlerde Sosyal aiso ulttv eerh ruddter rcdrsadtechniques and procedures theory Grounded research: qualitative of Basics adz a Review, Law Cardozo 40 75.http://bit.ly/2X4QiQc 47-53. , , 27 42.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.001 14-23. , 34 3,1099-1127. (3), , 35 dctoa ehooyRsac n Development, and Research Technology Educational 6,448-455. (6), optr in Computers Sage. . Computers Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

Domesticated voices and false participation: Anatomy of interaction on transmedia podcasting Voces domesticadas y falsa participación: Anatomía de la interacción en el podcasting transmedia

Dr. David García-Marín is Professor in the Department of Communication, Faculty of Humanities, Documentation and Communication at the Carlos III University of Madrid (Spain) ([email protected])

(https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4575-1911) Dr. Roberto Aparici is Professor in the Department of Didactics, School Organization and Special Didactics in the Faculty of Education at the The National Distance Education University in Madrid (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1908-1029)

ABSTRACT Transmedia podcasting (transpodcast) is an example of a digital medium essentially promoted by a community of independent creators that arises from the technological advancement derived from the arrival of Web 2.0. This medium is considered to offer its users greater possibilities of participation and co-creation by abandoning the traditional communicative models based on unidirectionality. The objective of this work is to determine how audience engagement takes place in this medium, taking into consideration the analysis of its participation spaces. In order to reach this goal, a Mixed Method Research Design was used, integrating two case studies with a total sample of 2,490 units of participation generated by users on the iVoox platform, the blogs of the two selected projects, and messages on Twitter. The research was complemented with an ethnographic investigation through observational methods on the presence of the user’s voice in the podcasts of a total of 19 transpodcast projects. Despite the fact that numerous and relevant voices have defended that the new media ecosystem causes the decentralization and democratization of the agenda-setting and empowers ordinary citizens, this study shows a less optimistic and more critical perspective about the possibilities of meaningful citizen participation in online discourse.

RESUMEN El transpodcast (podcasting transmedia) es un ejemplo de un medio digital desarrollado esencialmente por una comunidad de creadores independientes que surge del avance tecnológico derivado de la Web 2.0. Este medio ofrece a sus usuarios mayores posibilidades de participación y cocreación al abandonar los modelos comunicativos unidireccionales basados en la lógica broadcast, propios del siglo XX. El objetivo de este trabajo es determinar cómo se lleva a cabo la interacción de los usuarios en este medio a partir del análisis de los espacios de participación que despliega el transpodcast. Para ello, se empleó una metodología mixta (Mixed Method Research Design), que integra dos estudios de caso con una muestra total de 2.490 unidades de participación generadas por los usuarios en la plataforma iVoox, blogs de los dos proyectos y mensajes en Twitter. La investigación fue complementada con un estudio etnográfico, ejecutado a través de métodos observacionales sobre la presencia del usuario en los programas en formato podcast de un total de 19 proyectos transpodcast. Aunque numerosas y relevantes voces han defendido que el nuevo ecosistema mediático ha causado la descentralización y la democratización de la agenda-setting y ha empoderado a los ciudadanos en términos comunicacionales, este estudio aporta una perspectiva menos optimista y más crítica sobre las posibilidades reales de participación ciudadana significativa en el discurso online.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Audience participation, digital media, podcasting, engagement, interaction, transmedia, interaction analysis, mixed methodology. Participación de la audiencia, medios digitales, podcasting, compromiso, interacción, transmedia, análisis de la interacción, metodología mixta.

1 94 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ihu en ufcetyivsiae:tepeec/atcpto fteue/itnro h different the on user/listener the of presence/participation the investigated: sufficiently being without built elements with creations their furnish to language sound the beyond go to producers its led wants- 2004). (Gillmor, journalism citizen of type a constituting experience, media without hsonclua pc LpzVlarna 09 aeMri ta. 09 a enpooe na in promoted been has 2019) al., et Wade-Morris 2019; (López-Villafranca, space cultural own This Wlo,21) hc novstepyia neato ftelsee ihtesaedpce nteshow. the in depicted space the with listener the of interaction physical the involves which 2018), (Wilson, 2018). (Llinares, itself mediation the of effects and logic the challenges concomitantly, that, 2018) (Berry, ltom sdb ohmda a rnmdaeouinapidt on otn eeae greater generated https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-09 media content old sound the to reproduce transpodcast applied continues does evolution media extent transmedia what To these Has users/listeners? of for culture media. experiences the participatory both in by issue used innovations central platforms storytelling the a all their Despite extend transpodcast, an acquiring and medium, 2018). languages, Aparici, podcasting core media & of by a and García-Marín notion platforms intends implemented as 2016; (Wrather, media, the podcast transpodcast nature other to the of to transmedia having evident Analogous structure concept communicative that, the their projects podcasting. expand (2015), and media from Martínez-Costa those derived by describe medium coined to transpodcast, radio) of (transmedia birth transradio the in resulted podcasting, Thus, manner. participation possible performative single reaching even a participation, unlike in and since, interaction exist of pattern forms not consumption new does up their (Barrios-O’Neill, opens considered user-podcast decide supposedly, is ecosystem interaction actively podcast intertextual the the must time, an listener media, same the forms other the where but At medium 2015). entity, fact, user-centered (Tierney, sound complexity In a legible single radio. a a the by on characterized as user produce 2018) exists to the rarely impossible as experiences, its podcast times interactive many of the generating as richness languages, audio media and the other complexity reproducing in the the and on pausing and of periodicity-possible method possibility unpredictable distribution the an content from with -derived particular of cross- chapters storytelling exploitation podcast’s and its the fragmentation, the of in narrative of publication lies mobility, grounds success The 2019): States Its Solá, United integration. & 2018). the platform (Sellas McMurtry, in perceptions characteristics & the phenomenon specific changed Hancock medium’s mainstream completely 2014; this that a 2014 (Dredge, became in medium launched podcast this show The about a 2019), (García-Marín, years. Serial to five thanks last 2018). the powerful (Swiatek, in a users evolution develop its for to possibilities managed bridging has renewed with which 2018) production, (Sullivan, space independent authenticity of cultural and ethos own amateur its from outline manner to richer podcasting These the helped and has 2019). mechanisms medium, Dann, financing the & specific (Spinelli to mobile its demand applied for features, on producers, talent technological consumed radio of by is differential development not that its and content with podcasters niche combined by audience of made culturally aspects, practices, are search and they ontologically in industrial are media: and differences, podcasts the listeners, sense, of textual that rest of characterized their the In media implementation from by 2017). the different the (Lotz, are little also understanding to only very cultural but Not connected and evolved content. be specificities, behavior have quality to technological podcast higher to seems of the their seem development creation to not by the whose does applied and podcast medium, tools experiences the user the technological of better the of evolution fact, origin the One In the that is since 2016). technology. studies McHugh, to these 2015; linked from Bonini, coming be 2015; perceptions Aguayo, main 2014; the 2012; Lindgren, of 2010; Cordeiro, 2011; 2010; Millette, Gallego, 2008; 2011; Sterne, Markman, 2006; Perrotta, & individuals (Massarelli ecosystem to media digital arena communication prominent the and as collaborative into image and information access the participatory disseminate facilitates and a to text that considered made the is platform 2013) podcast of content Reimer, a The hegemony & share as the (Löwgren to age. to medium, medium digital way challenge the immersive a a in and as as languages niche all, communicative characterized above a be and, as can openly medium way, research This personal a Web. in the on production media Introduction 1. h ocs’ utpafr n rs-ltomcaatradisdsic neatv osblte have possibilities interactive distinct its and character cross-platform and multiplatform podcast’s The great a experienced has podcast professional the communities, amateur of creation the to Parallel the within phenomenon powerful a as podcasting analyzed have authors numerous years, recent In In t is ite er,pdatn a encniue sapatc htrpeet h eto digital of best the represents that practice a as configured been has podcasting years, fifteen first its • ae 93-102 Pages 2.1. 2. performed. content is the shows in resulting place takes participation meaningful medium. user’s this the in degree co-creation what to determine users to the order between and users and producers between interaction and themselves. participation for spaces as perform questions, conversations these for objectives: with space connection following In public the raises producers? digital transpodcast research the the our is by promoted How and constituted processes? debates communication and one-way on based models o aho h w rjcscoe eeaaye.Te eesuidbtenNvme 07and 2017 November between studied were They analyzed. were chosen three projects during two out the carried of was each study for The podcasts. these 2018). of January account to the 2017 November on (from hosted the months chapters on 50 mode comments last the the the in and of communities, analysis content): their copied (sound the by podcasts been generated on both have in tweets focused features participation blogs, central studies listener’s on of and case messages structure Both repository, for their catalyst and podcasting that iVoox a podcasts. representative fact is the independent the popularity justifies is several podcaster’s that projects the element by cases, these last both of the In Furthermore, nature series. referential relevance. TV stations, and in radio visibility expert commercial podcasts’ an national major their as 2017 with renowned SER, the collaborates a Cadena of usually is organizers as Red) and the such en Alicante, of (Vidas in representative one Converso event was most the podcasting Fiction) figures: the (Fans independent popular to Santonja are are content María hosts monologue) alternative while their specialist, and with network and technology (conversational shows context, entire Spanish other formats an the adding Fiction, their in Fans by addition, ones of generated independent In case been Spanish the has podcast. the high in topics central their in addition, TV to prominent In due about and podcasts podcasts downloads. reference relevant monthly of as most and regarded are the listeners they of of context, number two amateur Spanish are the topics In These podcastsphere. movie series. and TV series and TV two between chat informal daily- –published an 2.2. monologue is a latter is The issues, frequency. technological monthly podcaster. on with single enthusiasts, focused a former, The by presented fiction. Fans and Red’ possibilities participatory greater opening presumably, and, podcasting. Spain professional in to medium compared the within status eligibility majority following of its the analysis contain to The had analysis community. the by their for executed chosen of and shows Design members two criteria: Research The of Method studies. rest Mixed case a the two through with analyzing established interact was and platforms participation content these of type any create aeil n methods and Materials )Cntutatxnm bu h ifrn oeslvl nwihtelsee’ atcpto nthe in participation listener’s the which in models/levels different the about taxonomy a Construct in 3) spaces, participation these in users the by produced contents the and platforms out carried digital actions different the Map the 2) projects, transmedia of type this within that, functions the Analyze 1) )Aayi fbo omns l omnshse eae otels 0psspbihdo h blog the on published posts 50 last the to related hosted comments All comments. blog of Analysis published b) contributions users’ the by composed was sample The iVoox. on comments the of Study a) technology with dealing production podcast on pioneers are studies case as selected projects two The en ‘Vidas were studies case two the as formats. distinct chosen adopt projects and transcasting topics the different variables, on these focus registration. previous should Considering without podcastphere. chosen blogs the podcasts their in in two hosted relevance The chapters high d) on its commenting from of possibility derived the users Offering of c) community wide a Having b) to due community amateur the on focused study The character. independent and Non-professional a) fans and users which in platforms different the as defined are transpodcast in spaces participation The apeadprocedures and Sample selection studies Case © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 93-102 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 95 96 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 a 9 nodrt elwt h nlss orctgre,dvddit oa f1 uctgre,were subcategories, 16 of total a into divided categories, four analysis, the with deal to order In 19. was h opso atcptr nt nlzdo hs he pcswsfre y240cmet and comments 2,490 by formed was spaces three these on analyzed units participatory of corpus The Januar wes fwih108(24% eemsae niox 8 omnso lg 2.0)ad752 and (27.30%) blogs on comments 680 subcategories. iVoox, 16 on in messages (30.20%). unfolded Twitter were on were (42.49%) contributions categories 1,058 These which dimensions). of two tweets, that previous (comments extratextual the and of process) any production its in with are fit or that authors contents not (those its these do metatextual with show), on itself, the project extracted of categories: the topic data predetermined to specific following related the the the to of related including comments classification used, to content was and (referred with 1) (Table textual together coding sheet item, the registration coded a For a platforms, of three 2016). occurrence Gutiérrez, the counting & (Torrego then and analysis” data the “encoding in consisting specific a networks. is social which used, on was activity Tweetreach application monitoring the for collection, tool data For sample. the comprised 2017 https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-09 within listeners the act. by participatory occupied are space the listeners the of c) which objective shows, in the the way d) in the and presence a) stage shows, of were: the model this their observed in b) be the studied participate, to all to dimensions shows include asked major of to four number order The The in 2). (Table projects established Awards. transpodcast Podcasting In of Spanish sample 2018. 2017 the November the expand and received to 2018 that made January was shows between decision months, a eleven case, for this used were methods observational d) method quantitative a counting”, and “coding through analyzed were tweets and messages The November during projects two the of accounts official the to addressed tweets All Twitter. of Analysis c) 2018. y bevto ftelsee’ oc nlddi h hw.Frisaayi,non-participatory analysis, its For shows. the in included voice listener’s the of Observation • P gs93-102 ages nraieetnin ol 06% n oe vrg fciia esgs(.1)ta ia nred. en Vidas than (6.81%) messages critical of average lower a and 40.68%) (only extension” “narrative ihtetcnlgcldvcsaaye ytepdatri i hw steisems el ihb the by with dealt most issue the is shows his in podcaster the by analyzed devices technological the with methods. mixed and research qualitative in assist to tool specialized a is which used, was ia nrd h ancnet(70% scnetdt xrsin feoino mah oad the towards empathy or emotion of expressions to connected is (47.04%) content main the red, en Vidas 1.0)wr h eodcnettp otgnrtdb sr,wie1.5 eelne ocritical to linked were 15.85% while users, by generated most type content second the were (18.60%) identified be can comments These (Table 3). show the of content the extend that messages were (58.41%) omnt luihdaon hsporm xrsin feoino mah bu h hwscontent show’s the about empathy or emotion of Expressions program. this around flourished community ocses icus.Ti rjc eevsalwrpretg fcmet nlddudrtelabel the under included comments of percentage lower a receives project This discourse. podcasters’ of abuse the disapprove. on generally focus users criticisms podcast common many most that practice The a offers. is program which the chapters, off-topic that content the about messages experience personal users The narrative. podcast’s the to complement a as relevant content of type a as 3.1. In 3. software Maxqda 2005). the Viedma, observation, & non-participant (Callejo the perspectives from different produced data from instruments the study different analyze of and from object code derived the to results order of of analysis aggregation the the address in that consisting strategy a complementation, by oeacsoe ocnetpouto rmteioxapaduigsca ewrs(nta fbos in blogs) did of project (instead transpodcast networks be this social to of using members and its (44%) app cause posts iVoox can the the community from of this production half of content Almost profile to iVoox technological accustomed blog. on more more its uploaded The of chapters comments. 50 posts Vidas the any last 50 of receive blogs the last case not on of the the comments on in case 618 39 meaningful generate the only especially to in and is able was difference interventions, community This thousand whose lower). red, a (30% en exceeded 680 that was comments messages of of number amount greater a displays 3.2. Results h eerhisrmnsue qatttv nlssadnnpriiatosrain eearticulated were observation) non-participant and analysis (quantitative used instruments research The atcpto nti ltomtnst elwrcmae ota bevdo Vo.Wietelatter the While iVoox. on observed that to compared lower be to tends platform this in Participation unlike which, of (440); produced was comments of number smaller a Fiction, Fans of case the In majority the which of analyzed, were comments 618 of total a podcast, red en Vidas the Regarding atcpto niVoox on Participation omnso blogs on Comments © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 93-102 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 97 98 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ihnacsadwt ifrn iue n eut,o wte hr sagetrpeec fti yeof type this of presence greater a is there Twitter on results, and figures different with and nuances with produced. comments the of 8% with nraieetnin nti pc hni h Vo evc,sne6%o eitrditretossreto serve interventions registered of 68% since service, iVoox the in than space this in extension) (narrative parallel otenme ffloesacmltdb h ia nrdacut nteohrhn,telte has latter https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-09 the networks. hand, social other on the content On creating to account. accustomed red more en and Vidas profile t technological more the Fans a by with by accumulated enthusiasts followers generated reasons. of was relevant number three that the by tweets to explained 161 be of can followers, amount production its tweet modest by in more created difference much comments This the 600 users. almost to Fiction gather compared to number managed high former a The community. Fiction Fans and platforms podcast on hosted comments in category this of use blogs. the Although to analyzed. compared podcasts content two the promotional recording of chapters, communities the new by of generated publication content as collaborators, special etc.) episodes, of special invitation of program, the of activity general The Twitter3.3. expressions. emotional to linked content are significant represented. comments more barely of are 31% produce categories addition, to remaining In tend storytelling. in followers podcast’s category Its the textual extend this website. produces its barely on community posted whose comments Fiction, numerous Fans the place, analyzing fourth when in observed extent, appears also content lesser critical a the to case, this and, In (35.89%) (12.82%). empathy podcaster emotion/ the of to expressions requests the and (43.58%), where queries podcast situation a the in comment. in such least, produced of at writing or, the environment precisely domestic is out a carried in being computers, activity from only generated are blogs or nteoehn,teFn ito wte omnt smr iie uniaieywe compared when quantitatively limited more is community Twitter fiction Fans the hand, one the On The the advertise to serve that (those messages promotional of relevance the show obtained data The is podcast red en Vidas to applied study the in obtained content critical of percentage low This content the of extensions mostly, are, followers its by produced texts the red, en Vidas Considering oteeeuino nte ciiy sal h omnspse npafrssc swebsites as such platforms on posted comments the Usually activity. another of execution the to omnt fVdse e a uhmr ciei h aepro Nvme 07 hnthe than 2017) (November period same the in active more much was red en Vidas of community • ae 93-102 Pages ia nrdfloescneprec.Teedfeecsrfethwtelgco oncinadaffinity and connection of logic the how reflect differences These experience. can followers red en Vidas aeo ia nrd hr eti ure ytecetro h ocs eeae ovrain within conversations generated podcast the of creator the the days. in by several visible queries for especially certain is community where aspect the This red, en blogs. and Vidas iVoox of in present case situation community the that to compared accounts discussions of and adoption the through that achieved closeness personal. best of more be perception as to the perceive seems members to communities compared these impersonal in more built and close less as community own its by of name the with nature. account corporate official an more has a podcasters, of (@Converso72), so several host program, single by account, Twitter the and presented specific creator when its a which of on have account fiction, participation personal not Fans the the unlike does contact to red must contrast project en the in Vidas of to podcast), followers Finally, prefers the the asynchronous. red- to more en listening -Vidas as (when community regarded way this blogs, synchronous that more suggests a which in followers, fiction participate Fans to comparison in blog atcpto ihntasei ocsswr found: were podcasts transmedia within participation 3.4. nte lmn eie rmteaayi fteueo wte stegetrgnrto fdebates of generation greater the is Twitter of use the of analysis the from derived element Another perceived be can account fiction Fans official the since essential, be to considered is difference This project the on comments of volume lower a produced followers red en Vidas that noted be should It yapyn h bevtoa ehd rvosymnind h olwn ielvl/oesof levels/models five following the mentioned, previously methods observational the applying By itnrpriiaino h shows the on participation Listener • • • • • oc n h usqetcmeto h ocse eadn hi otiuin h atthat fact The contribution. their regarding podcaster the of comment subsequent the and voice absolutely be to continues model The show. the of part final the in usually duration), short very r oscin o hi oc ob er.Floesaenticroae noteporm at programs the into incorporated not are there Followers and show heard. the be in to time. relevance voice any no their has for is listener There sections The no user. receivers. and are the senders by between co-creation established or is identical differentiation participation broadcast-style, clear no A vertical, completely radio. is the mode of communication that to the model, this In 0. Level atcpto.Teesosaedsge sclaoaiesae opeeypoue with user’s by the produced commented later for completely and chapters podcasters spaces by exclusive read collaborative and comments user as specific through of designed listeners, by creation are messages the audio shows to These linked by is podcasts participation. model relevant co-create This contribute to 4. invited who being Level users of possibilities itself: more community have others. the podcastphere within the situated bias to relevance a of materials and existence the a production observe podcast with we the the reason, in materials this figures For in produce popular or work. to relevant creative their are able to users due are of community type they this because because or facilitates either quality significantly technical podcasts, creators higher podcast other also in are follower’s participation messages the the audio their to their model difference: dedicated with communicative time participate main the The who a between users with imbalance message. clear one, audio a previous still an the is sending to there after as similar vertical, voice model remains user’s a as the configured of is introduction It 3. (of Level program the of section specific hierarchical. a their in read of the often opinions by are provided the comments platforms introduce These different hosts purpose. the that model: from for coming previous project comments the of voice, of reading detailed user’s evolution the an the through without followers of of superficially, consists inclusion It interaction. very the initial 2. occur promoting the Level of usually of development way conversations the subtle these about very descriptions to a references arise however, introduced that the podcast, is, the conversations since It object, occasions, media certain core hosts. the On the to jump by project. platforms the online program in by the participation provided contacted the have from methods who the listeners although of of hierarchical, mentions any and superficial by one-way and brief clearly some be make to hosts continues the mode communication The 1. Level © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 93-102 Pages

Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 99 100 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 ol aeapoaoitrl n otnospeec hogottedrto ftepdatand podcast the of duration the throughout presence continuous a and role protagonist a have would h rnpdatitrcinmdlgnrlymitisteoewylgccaatrsi ftetraditional the of characteristic logic one-way the maintains generally model interaction transpodcast The Sige irna 98.Orrsac ocue hteatytesm ndrcinldnmcis dynamic unidirectional same the exactly that concludes research Our 1998). Wieringa, & (Shingler cini ita tutrsoe n akn irrh Jnis 08 hry 00.Atrsm initial https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-09 some contributions After and studies 2010). the hegemonic, Shirky, were 2008; universe digital (Jenkins, collaborative the and about hierarchy visions coordinated lacking optimistic their the and in on where open based 2.0 years Web debate structures channel public the essential virtual the an of in in as subjects arrival action communication of digital the participation of After relevant possibilities the the for consider media. to digital began in academics many users 2004, of capacity empowerment communicational producers. transpodcast by followed a bidirectional on being listener really the without communication, of bidirectional by empowerment Higgins being of shows, of freshness lack impression radio the greater the in defend creates and participation (2008) generating that Pinseler medium the horizontal listen, and on (1991), investigations traditionally more Orians breaking their (1982), who of In clearly Moss those and sensation usual. be than the and would voice offer emit different model would a who introducing programs the those These so between analyzed. barrier hosts, previously the participant usual those The the than co-presenter. with hierarchical in a less discussion as ecosystem podcast into participatory the enter true of could a part be and to process invited communication 2015). be (Pinseler, horizontal should framework conversation pre-established user/fan genuinely a a the a like fit transpodcast, reach sounds to editors what to the and order by presenters, that organized In by interaction grounds managed staged the clearly a on an actually are domesticated present is shows completely podcasts media. the is in analog in voice participation on participating users’ listener’s as the The those regarding restricted logic. models as hierarchical the least and all at unidirectional research, their is our of to shows part According the as of media. to programs number access the significant voice’s in a user included of the hardly relevance addition, is the In content Despite Twitter, this are storytelling. and show. exist blogs podcast do iVoox, the on what content, interventions exist, transpodcast not central do the media in participatory each that by assert created to ecosystem specific possible the is to an different it ecosystems. connected as generate that, participatory element participation that of an regard Because to but etc.) appropriate itself, hosts, seem project. medium the not the to does of in to (related it features performed related characteristics consequence, the aspect not specific a cover, As is has use podcasts media project participation. the the for Each digital in topics conditions the differences the medium. in These same the listeners, participation the own advertising that hosts. within their of consider its even by intention to by way, produced us the homogenous covered content lead to a topics spaces the connected the participation about superficial, storytelling, the feelings more podcast’s of personal be this showing to of or tends extensions show community narrative fiction messages as meaningful Fans more considered the create community be red en can Vidas that the While posts. Twitter and comments iVoox conclusions and Discussion 4. rmteaayi ftasocs sritrcin ti osbet as susrltdt h real the to related issues raise to possible is it interaction, user transpodcast of analysis the From user the of relevance limited very the is research our of findings main the of one hand, other the On of make projects transpodcast different of listeners that use differentiated the show data research The hyaecniue sasrtg oepottefe aoro asi hs eid fdifficulties of periods those in fans of labour free the exploit to strategy a as configured are They n/rltl ciiyrltdt h oi fteso hldy rsme eid o instance). for period, summer or content. (holidays new show generate availability the to limited of has topic podcaster the the when to times related often in which activity are content shows deciding little special creating and/or and these for hand, participants solution other the the a participation On as selecting managing programs. organized by to the the gatekeepers in approach of included the as be presence will addition, stand The interventions in podcasters comments bidirectional. and, open: the totally intervention not not to single is is a replying both to of between limited possibility is relationship no user the has so dialogue latter no hosts, is the the there since of structure: podcaster hierarchical a and have to listener cease between not does model the introduced, is user them, rfo obnto fmsae fbt ye.I n ae lhuhtepeec fthe of presence the although case, any In types. both of messages of combination a from or • ae 93-102 Pages uine&RcpinStudies Reception & Audience p.1-3.Plrv Macmillan. Palgrave 15-33). (pp. Press. Chicago of University 178-207). (pp. Competitiveness. and Economy of Ministry Spain’s and Fund) Development Regional (European htteue rdcso oilntok n iia ei a elpsiiiiso eoiginfluential becoming 2015) of (Allen, possibilities discourse real expressive has the media not digital have or and purposes. to whether networks a transformative continues social is, for audiences shown, on That discourse being gives produces despite century sphere. user voice, 21st public the its the the if that or in of debate; role ecosystem public subordinate media the a digital on the influence to whether capacity determine greater to out carried to as be so communication of actors processes. different order participatory in the and research between horizontal useful (and models through truly medium relationship discovered create each new be in must nurture which participation and production language, promote significant own content to essay) its own has and its also practice the defines project) evolution, media medium governed each of each that years as model Just on passive (based century. predominantly language twentieth and the unidirectional during the ecosystem the break media reject that Internet processes the construct about to environments. perceptions digital based on These is empowerment model citizen’s 2018). business ordinary (Srnicek, whose the manipulate platforms about data and the of notions user exploit network former of that of a possibilities structures of commodification closed democratizing exploitation the of the the on conjunction from about a identities as social perspective spaces user’s critical digital ( the more the Han define a (2014), Webster They offer (2011), Turow Internet. (2018) (2011), Pariser Lanier (2009), and Sunstein 2017), (2007), Prior others, among of, acc,D,&Mmrr,L 21) nwwa ocs s otsra ito n ocs ei dniy nLiae,D,Fox, D., Llinares, (1982). In P.D. identity. Moss, media & podcast C.S.C., and Higgins, fiction Post-serial is: podcast a https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_5 (Eds.), what R. know Berry, I & (2018). N., L. Mcmurtry, & D., Hancock, (2017). B.C. Han, podcasting. del https://doi.org/10.1145/1012807.1012808 transmedia narrativa y (2004). gramática D. Gillmor, Cartografía, sonora. Información comunicación la Nueva de Profesional (2018). El R. español. Aparici, podcasting & del D., ecosistema García-Marín, y evolución Origen, pijama. en Periodístico radio La (2019). D. García-Marín, streams. and downloads 5M passes española it as (2010). records iTunes J.I. breaks Gallego, podcast Serial perspective. (2014). in S. trends Dredge, broadcasting and interactivity Convergence, r@dio: becoming Radio (2012). P. Cordeiro, (2010). P. Cordeiro, medium. (2005). Hill. mass A. digital Viedma, new & a J., as Callejo, of podcasting emergence Reframing The podcasting: singer: of Age’ country ‘Second a (Eds.), The are R. you (2015). T. Berry, mean Bonini, & doesn´t N., nashville Fox, from D., are Llinares, and In guitar a podcasting. play (Eds.), in you identities R. because medium Berry, Just & N., (2018). Fox, R. D., Berry, Llinares, In podcasting. in podcast media https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_8 digital science and a (Eds.), cultures of aural J. Ecology New Light, Podcasting. listening: & Wild D., Allen, (2018). In D. Barrios-O’Neill, model. dynamics flow The spheres: public Reconceiving (2015). Málaga. D. de Allen, Universidad la de Institucional Repositorio (2015). V. Aguayo, References FEDER by financed (EDU2016-81772-REDT), Generation Knowledge for Subprogram State the Scientific-Technical Research, in Agency Funding 23-33. hsrsac spr ftewr are u yte“ei dcto ewr”o h tt rga o h rmto fExcellence of Promotion the for Program State the of Network” Education “Media the by out carried work the of part is research This uuersac ntepoieadrl fadecsadteritrcinwt iia ei should media digital with interaction their and audiences of role and profile the on research Future essential is established is receivers and senders between interaction of grammar the how Understanding http://bit.ly/2m0oLku Tssdcoa,UiesddCmltned ard.EPit Complutense. E-Prints Madrid]. de Complutense Universidad doctoral, [Tesis . , 25 1,181-196. (1), aeplind odistinto lo de expulsión La lpdatcm ermet ecmnccó empresarial comunicación de herramienta como podcast El etemda rsrosjunls ytepol,frtepeople the for people, the by journalism Grassroots media: the We ái sidsra culturais indústrias as e rádio A ocsig itiuind otndssnrsynea omsd eoi nl mrs radiofónica empresa la en negocio de formas nuevas y sonoros contenidos de Distribución Podcasting: ocsig e ua utrsaddgtlmedia digital and cultures aural New Podcasting. https://doi.org/10.5209/esmp.63723 , 9 , 2,492-510. (2), https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_2 27 ryco srtga eivsiainsca:L esetv el intervención la de perspectiva La social: investigación de estrategias y Proyectos 5,1071-1071. (5), onsra.Rdoi vrdylife everyday in Radio real. Sounds Herder. . https://bit.ly/2E4VxGZ p.1112.Plrv Macmillan. Palgrave 141-172). (pp. irsHorizonte. Livros . https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.sep.11 http://bit.ly/2visGKC p.8-0) agaeMacmillan. Palgrave 81-105). (pp. nvriyo uesadPress. Queensland of University . ocsig e ua utrsaddgtlmedia digital and cultures aural New Podcasting. Tssdcoa,Uiesddd áaa.RIUMA. Málaga]. de Universidad doctoral, [Tesis . © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: ’elyMedia. O’Reilly . http://bit.ly/2UrwuU4 http://bit.ly/2mpFgqg • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: suissbee Mensaje el sobre Estudios udrsdlCAC del Quaderns rmviet influence to voice From ora of Journal McGraw . • ae 93-102 Pages , 41 , 101 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 102 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 (Eds.), ora fRdo&AdoMedia Audio & Radio of Journal https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-09 Llinares, In industry. cultural a as podcasting (Eds.), of R. formalisation Berry, the & and N., labour Fox, Aspirational D., movement: Podcast (2018). J.L. Sullivan, http://bit.ly/2mrqK1f stations. radio free German on talk of politics The (2008). J. Pinseler, (2011). E. Pariser, Researchers, Fischer. Internet podcasters. of Montreas Association of (1991). the W.a. study of Orians, of http://bit.ly/2moD5Dj conference case States. annual A United the Participation, culture: WA, and participative Seattle, Performance online specific 12.0: a IR as presentation] [Paper podcasting Independent (2011). M. Millette, rte,K 21) aig‘aiu u’frfn:Eaiigpdatlsee atcpto online. participation Media listener Audio podcast & Examining Broadcast fans: in for Studies Fun’ International ‘Maximum Making exploration. (2016). environmental K. Wrather, and (Eds.), performance R. participatory Berry, as & Podcast https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_14 N., wandercast: Fox, of D., world Llinares, the In to Welcome data). their (2018). (and R.Z. podcasts Wilson, preserving and Curating (2014). Project: J.G. Webster, PodcastRE The (2019). E. Hoyt, & S., Hansen, J., Wade-Morris, Press. resistencia]. la de resistance. representación of la representations ante media jóvenes to los responses Youngsters’ de Reacciones tweeting: and tuitear: Watching y (Eds.), [Ver (2016). R. A. Berry, Gutiérrez-Martín, & & N., A., Torrego, Fox, D., Llinares, (2015). In M. medium. Tierney, bridging media intimate digital an and as cultures aural podcast The (2018). L. Swiatek, (2009). C. Sunstein, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_3 podcasting. of politics The (2008). A & M., Freire, B., Baker, J., Morris, J., Sterne, (2018). N. (2019). Srnicek, L. Dann, & M., Spinelli, (2010). C. Shirky, (1998). and C. programming Wieringa, radio & of M., limits Shingler, the Beyond podcasting: of https://doi.org/10.1386/rjao.17.1.63_1 freedom the and Podcast Podium constraints. production (2019). S. Solà, & T., (Eds.), Sellas, B. Monclús, & T., (2007). Bonini, society M. In network Prior, of shows. age radio the everyday in in participation participation Listener (2015). J. Pinseler, https://doi.org/10.16997/wpcc.51 67-67. form. COHRD the Media Introducing Audio (Ed.), documentary/feature: & S. radio Broadcast Thiermann, the in In and Studies International history broadcasters. Oral for challenge (2016). a S. (Eds.), listeners, F. McHugh, for Ribeiro, change & access aesthetics, A M., communities, Podcasting: Oliveira, radio, In Relating (2006). M. transradio. Perrotta, la & a V., crossradio Massarelli, la podcasters. de audio Internet narrativas: and independent nuevas sound of y motivations Radio the (2015). Exploring P. fun: Martínez-Costa, having and Society & friends, Media making New radio, Doing (2012). K.M. (2013). Markman, B. Reimer, & J., Löwgren, u o,J (2011). J. Turow, https://doi.org/10.3916/c47-2016-01 del podcast de plataforma la (2017). en A.D. y Lotz, RNE, pública, radio la en https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/disertaciones/a.6547 sonora ficción España. R. la en Berry, de Prisa & casos Grupo N., de Fox, Estudio D., (2019). Llinares, P. López-Villafranca, In identity. and writing sound https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_7 mediation, Aural http://bit.ly/2mrqPC5 praxis: liminal about? as all Podcasting that (2018). unit-what´s D. audio Llinares, creative RN´s (2014). M. Lindgren, (2018). J. Lanier, https://bit.ly/2YnkqH7 Jenkins, ocsig e ua utrsaddgtlmedia digital and cultures aural New Podcasting. .(2008). H. abig nvriyPress. University Cambridge democracy. Post-broadcast h olyHead. Bodley The now. right accounts media social your deleting for arguments Ten h itrbubble filter The ontv upu.Hwtcnlg ae osmr nocollaborators into consumers makes technology How surplus. Cognitive h al o.Hwtenwavriigidsr sdfnn oriett n orworth your and identity your defining is industry advertising new the How you. Daily The otl.Atets nitre-eiee television internet-delivered on treatise A Portals. p.1817.https://bit.ly/2rpa5y6 168-187). (pp. aaNgaEditora. Negra Caja plataformas. de Capitalismo Paidós. comunicación. de medios los en convergencia la de cultura La culture. Convergence omnadLittlefield. and Rowman post-politics. postwar and aesthetic Void between: lies What eulccm2.0 Republic.com öebtiiugi ai.En altdez oiain ratn n ureehi o anrufern von zufriedenheit und erwartung motivation, zu fallstudie Eine radio. im Hörerbeteiligung , I Press. MIT age. digital a in shape take audiences How attention. of marketplace The ai ora:nentoa tde nBodat&AdoMedia Audio & Broadcast in Studies Journal:International Radio 4,5755 https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811420848 547-565. 14(4), , Disertaciones Social Comunicación en estudios de electrónico Anuario ocsig e ua utrsaddgtlmedia digital and cultures aural New Podcasting. • p.1317.Plrv amla.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90056-8_9 Macmillan. Palgrave 173-187). (pp. losuyAcademic. Bloomsbury revolution. media audio The Podcasting. , ae 93-102 Pages 26 olbrtv ei:Pouto,cnupinaddsg interventions design and consumption Production, media: Collaborative egi Books. Penguin . 1,82.https://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2019.1559550 8-20. (1), nar ehd n ennso radio of meanings and Methods air. On rneo nvriyPress. University Princeton . p.5-1.Routledge. 56-71). (pp. ocsig e ua utrsaddgtlmedia digital and cultures aural New Podcasting. p.2724.Spector. 267-264). (pp. , , 1,4-3 https://doi.org/10.1386/rjao.14.1.43_1 43-63. 14(1), https://doi.org/10.1386/rjao.10.1.35_1 35-51. 10(1), p.1315.Plrv Macmillan. Palgrave 123-145). (pp. az ok.https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9699689 Books. Maize . etise aesi omncto n Culture and Communication in Papers Westminster Arnold. . Comunicar, p.3-6.Plrv Macmillan. Palgrave 35-56). (pp. h irclueJournal Fibreculture The , egi Books. Penguin . 17 1,63-81. (1), 24 p.2328.Plrv Macmillan. Palgrave 273-298). (pp. 9-17. , 2,65-78. 12(2), ai Journal: Radio ai Journal: Radio ai uine and audiences Radio h I Press. MIT The . , ocsig New Podcasting. aeUniversity Yale . 13. Radio, , R. . 5 (1), Comunicar, n. 63, v. XXVIII, 2020 | Media Education Research Journal | ISSN: 1134-3478; e-ISSN: 1988-3478

www.comunicarjournal.com

Problematic Internet uses and depression in adolescents: A meta-analysis Usos problemáticos de Internet y depresión en adolescentes: Meta-análisis

Raquel Lozano-Blasco is Predoctoral Researcher (FPU) in the School of Education at the University of Zaragoza (Spain) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0100-1449) Dr. Alejandra Cortés-Pascual is Associate Professor of Education at the University of Zaragoza (Spain) ([email protected]) ([email protected]) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2839-7041)

ABSTRACT Widespread use of the Internet in 21st century society is not risk-free. This paper studies the comorbidity of some problematic uses of Internet with depression in order to assess their correlation. With that aim, a meta-analysis of 19 samples obtained from 13 different studies (n=33,458) was carried out. The subjects of these studies are adolescents between the ages of 12 and 18 years (µ=15.68) from different cultures and continents (Europe, Euro-Asia, America and Asia). The effect size obtained from the use of a random-effects model (r=0.3, p<0.000) is significant, moderate and positive, thus confirming the relation between pathologic uses of the Internet and depression. Moreover, meta-regression test results showed that 9% of the variance (R2=0.09) is associated with the male gender, while age and culture are not significant variables. The variability rate of the studies is high (I2=87.085%), as a consequence of heterogeneity rather than publication bias, as Egger’s regression test shows (1-tailed p-value=0.25; 2-tailed p-value=0.50, and σ=1.57). Therefore, the need for specific interventions in secondary education dealing with this issue is evident to ensure that it does not extend into adult life.

RESUMEN El uso extendido de Internet en la sociedad del siglo XXI no está exento de riesgos. El presente trabajo estudia la comorbilidad entre los usos problemáticos de Internet y la depresión con la finalidad de determinar la existencia de relación entre ambas. Para ello se ha llevado a cabo un meta-análisis, que cuenta con 19 muestras recogidas en 13 investigaciones (n=33.748), con adolescentes de entre 12 y 18 años (µ=15,68) de diferentes culturas y continentes (Europa, Euro-Asia, América y Asia). El tamaño del efecto obtenido a partir de un modelo de efectos aleatorios (r=0,3, p<0,000) es significativo, positivo y moderado confirmando la existencia de relación entre usos patológicos de Internet y depresión. Por otra parte, la meta- regresión mostró que el 9% (R2=0,09) de la varianza es explicada por el sexo masculino, mientras que la edad y la cultura no son variables significativas. La variabilidad de los estudios es elevada (I2=87,085%) siendo fruto de la heterogeneidad y no del sesgo de publicación, tal y como indicó la prueba de regresión de Egger (p-value 1 tailed=0,25; p-value 2 tailed=0,50 y σ=1,57). Se advierte la necesidad de comenzar a generar proyectos de intervención en Educación Secundaria que traten esta problemática con el objetivo de que no se extienda a la vida adulta.

KEYWORDS | PALABRAS CLAVE Meta-analysis, adolescence, Internet, pathological use, depression, comorbidity, correlation, moderating effect. Meta-análisis, adolescencia, Internet, uso patológico, depresión, comorbilidad, correlación, efecto moderador.

1 104 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 od fL ta.(08,teecsieItre s a edt elhproblems. health to lead can use Internet excessive the (2018), al. et Lu of words sa n ot n ot mrc losfe rmteepyhlgclillnesses. psychological these from suffer also America South and North and Asia, DM5 mrcnPyharcAscain 03.Aaye are u ndfeetcutisadcultures and countries different in out carried Analyses 2013). Association, Psychiatric American (DSM-5, use uncontrolled and excessive the as define they which (IA), addiction” ”Internet term the use (2016), https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-10 from Adolescents the level Europe. so, the in Even that problem 18. claim endemic and (2015) an 12 only al. between not et is aged use Banjanin Serbs pathological adolescent 17. or in to IA symptoms between 13 depressive relationship aged with adolescents correlated Spanish is IA of of population a in different PIU to of related and is Internet IA the between depression. of and relationship use European ideation pathological The of the suicidal sample that including their world. found in problems, the 15, (2014), mental of to al. age relating et average Kaess an of with alarming. way adolescents especially her is or symptoms depressive his or and depression individual the al., affect et Tsitsika that 2016; al., et (Müller related behaviors activities addictive other developing or of gaming risk online Disorders the networking, 2014). Mental increases social of web) (for the Manual Internet surfing the Statistical to of and use Diagnostic persistent the the of that show edition latest the in included is IGD fact, sites, In pornography games, use, online Internet networks, excessive (social as Internet such the al. et through etc.). use, Müller accessible into as applications such come online authors, El-Asam have of Other As (IAD). terms level. disorder several professional addiction years, or Internet and social recent (PIU) personal, in use the Internet state, at problematic users (2019) of lives al. daily et the in feelings discomfort to creates lead that that situations 2017). face Ehrenreich, may & adolescents suffering (Underwood particular, to victimization In susceptible or especially exclusion networks. are of social beings the human of stage, effects In this negative At behavior. the our (2017). Ehrenreich in and changes Underwood implies by spaces technological new in increase According the spaces. (2013), attractive as very al. such platforms profiles et networks create these King to making social adolescents to thus allow Regarding self-representation, platforms desired these etc. their that state reflect downloads, (2016) that video al. et games, Oberst Instagram, video and Facebook networks, IA. social led from by has suffers accessed: conducted population Internet are meta-analysis adult first-world the The the to of of pandemics. unique 6% pervasiveness possible that not the shows promoted is is, (2014) has (IA) Li That turn and addiction in Cheng countries. Internet which developing that uses, in report pathological present (2013) to also al. is et but Zhang countries so, country, Even for that observed in countries. than performed proportion different surveys larger for 2016). a to Romano, Internet users, & According the addicted (Israelashvili potentially on population paradigmatic. older are time is the adolescents only more Korean Korea not spend South South does also of of increase teenagers 29.2% case this Asian The However, Americas, the networks. purposes. and social have Europe to years in connected 15 occur to constantly 12 almost aged are adolescents 2017). of adolescents of (Ofcom, average 83% them an (UK), on for Kingdom week them United per used the hours 40% of which 21 that case spend adolescents, and the and European of networks In cellphones of use social (2014) day. used of a al. regularly frequency hours et sample Tsitsika the two their by in of study 70% the growth that is continuous example found shows clear A countries technologies. several new in conducted research Europe, Introduction 1. áe-udxe l 21)vrfe h orlto ewe ersiedsre n h components the and disorder depressive between correlation the verified (2014) al. et Gámez-Guadix problems health various to Internet the of use addictive the relate that studies numerous are There disorder. recognized a is (IGD) disorder gaming Internet only used, frequently are terms these Although platform this on out carried activities the with concern excessive an as (1998) Young by defined is IA indicated as use, Internet excessive potential of light in considered be should adolescence of nature The activities online numerous which through portal a is Internet the (2015), indicate al. et Király As industrialized in people young and adolescents in observed is problem this (2016), Jun to According of 24% approximately that states (2015) Center Research Pew the (USA), States United the In In eetyas pedo nentuei ifrn utrshsbe bevd ntecs of case the In observed. been has cultures different in use Internet of spread a years, recent • ae 103-113 Pages ol nraeteritrs nrltn nie(oet ta. 07.Tu,i sudrto htteei no is there that understood is it Thus, 2007). al., et (Bonetti online relating in interest their increase would 2012; Edge, & (Chou symptoms depressive affects addiction that show who authors several find we ta.(05 oeta ti seta ogieaoecnsi h rprueo h nentadt eyon rely to and Internet the of use proper the Wu in family. as adolescents the such and guide Authors school to prevention. the essential their both is for by it offered factors that tools protective note are (2015) there that al. noted et be networks. should social it and and entail, Woods pathologies these Therefore, between relationship victimization. the and understand exclusion to of need (2017) situations the Ehrenreich to and support lead (2016) Underwood terms Scott can in disorders. networks anxiety vulnerability and great social depressive of that of stage report onset evolutionary the an and be self-esteem to low continues of adolescence that argue others, among which face, variable independent to the face which and relating variable difficulty dependent the is. greater constitutes factor have which could regarding consensus adolescents solitary Likewise, were 2015). they al., is, that et activity; online greater had In Facebook self-esteem which, 2015). lower to al., regarding and according et active. narcissism rules (2010), (Bickhan more of Mehdizadeh family symptoms of rates depressive of research higher of the lack with onset mention the users to the noteworthy Likewise, to is lead it to 2012). sense, seems this Edge, technologies & new of al., (Chou use et mood the (Bonetti one’s affect addiction could predict defects— symptoms depressive occurs: also 2015). reverse al., et The Kim 2010; 2015). al., et Bickhan ti einn oipc hi elh hti,tecmriiybtenpolmtcadcieueo the of use problematic-addictive 2.2. between comorbidity the is, adolescents. That in health. depression and their Internet impact to beginning is it 2.1. 2. Methodology ie h vdneo h ahlgclueo e ehooisadtepyhlgclpolm that problems psychological the and technologies new of use pathological the of evidence the Given (2015), King and McLaughlin people. young for problem health a become could Internet the to Access (Kim feelings negative reduce to devices mobile their used depression with people case, second the In own one’s hiding is, —that qualities professional and personal of idealization the case, first the In codn osvrlsuis h eainhpbtenadcinaddpeso smxd nti sense, this In mixed. is depression and addiction between relationship the studies, several to According eiso nlso rtraaesiuae odvlptesearch: the develop to stipulated are criteria inclusion of series A how and technologies new use adolescents how in interest increasing been has there years recent In rtrafricuinadexclusion and inclusion for Criteria question Research • • • • • • • • a tpltdta eerhi hc tdnswt E eeasadr esr according measure standard a were SEN with students which in research that stipulated was 2ad1 icuigu o1. er orpeethg coladpoesoa education professional and school high represent to years 18.9 to up (including 18 and 12 iial,toefrwihteCAsfwr eetdaysaitclerrwr lolf out left excluded. also were were question error in statistical statistics any detected the not software state did CMA sample. clearly the that the of not studies which did Scientific for that those data. Similarly, or quantitative data accurate numerical and present clear without it accepted. studies However, be Research would feature. curve main normal the a to as (SEN) needs educational special with population than Adolescent other instruments discarded. using were depression tests and psychometric addiction evaluated that Studies follows: nature. as Biomedical are positioned stipulated prestige criteria recognized exclusion of The journals only 1 select 2019. the to to in decided 2013 was from It established reliability. quantitative. was Intraobserver and range experimental A be publication. should of Studies Date articles. the of nature Methodological between age mean a with students). adolescents to corresponds population study The sample. the of Age st urie(1 nteSiaoJunl&CutyRank. Country & Journal Scimago the in (Q1) quartile © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 103-113 Pages 105 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 106 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 Itre dito Radcielvl N sca ewr RItre).Terfrnelsso the of lists reference The Internet)”. OR network (social AND level) addictive OR addiction (Internet 3suis ihk9smlsfo uoe saadteAeia.Tesac atd4mnh (October, months 4 lasted search The Americas. the and Asia Europe, from samples k=9 with studies, 13 feiil tde.Tesuiswr oe aulybcuems fte i o ee xlctyto explicitly refer not did them of https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-10 most because manually selection the coded for were criteria the studies to The related terms as studies. well as eligible objectives of clear stipulates which (2011), Green and 2019). January comprised and meta-analysis 2018 the December total, and In November criteria. inclusion the met none but reviewed, were articles different search Boolean the using screened 1). manually performed (Figure were abstract was obtained and articles search the title of first their All reading The use”. by AND adolescence 1). AND carried Figure network were “Social (see searches actions keywords Boolean Two different performed. were with – out Direct Science and Scopus -Psycoinfo, databases Search 2.3. ..Coding 2.4. h td olwdtegieie rvddb h ohaeMna fSseai eiw nHiggins in Reviews Systematic of Manual Cochrane the by provided guidelines the followed study The AND “depressive as such search, second the for introduced were keywords of types other Next, three of Searches (2015). Sánchez and Botella of requirements the followed strategy search The strategy procedure • ae 103-113 Pages h rsneo aiu onre loe neaiaino ifrne mn utrs oee,it However, cultures. among differences of examination an allowed countries various of presence The Spanish-speaking by (represented Americas the Regarding sample. total the of 2.60% Turkey), representing oa f3.6 ftesuiswr odce nAi CiaadNrhKra,acutn o 50.18% for accounting Korea), North and (China Asia in conducted were studies the of 30.76% of total A Fac,Sri,U,Hlad pi) h uoenpplto ersne 28%o h oa sample. total the of 42.81% represented population European The Spain). a Holland, comprised UK, studies Serbia, (France, selected 13 the in 19) = (K samples 19 The results. interesting yielded (2013-2019) ftettlsml.Attlo 53%o h tde eecridoti uaincutis(saland (Israel countries Eurasian in out carried were studies the of 15.31% of total A sample. total populations the European of included studies the of individuals. 46.15% 9,733 was research, largest the the in and individuals, examined 20 cultures was the sample smallest Regarding The individuals. 33,748 of total correlation moderate and 2.5. positive significant a size effect establishes an (1998) returned and variables. Cohen CMA the to software between statistical according the which into entered r=0.3, were of data These values. p with sizes disorder. “alexithymia,” depressive and of “loneliness” symptoms “shyness,” be could “preoccupation,” terms they contained interest,” although they of if others, “loss excluded among hand, were ideation,” other studies the “suicidal thus, On as selected; (IAD)”. were such disorder depression addiction addressed ”Internet that or studies (PIU)” only use Internet ”problematic use”, to Internet high necessary and was “average “problematic use. it and addiction”, problematic (CERM)” as First, “Internet use coded device use”, were mobile “excessive depression. use” of Facebook consequence “addiction”, and “negative use”, technologies category: Internet new “problematic same use”, of the use in excessive terms code or to, related addiction onre) .9 ftesuiswr odce nSuhAeiaadrpeetd43%o h sample. the of 4.38% represented and America South in conducted were studies the of 7.69% countries), 3.1. 3. eut n analysis and Results h fetsz a acltdfo aaadepesda ero orltos dsrtoadsample and ratio odds correlations, Pearson as expressed and data from calculated was size effect The ”excessive as such used, been have terms various years, recent in (2019), al. et El-Asam by explained As h ieauesace o tde eae optooia s n ersiesmtm nrcn years recent in symptoms depressive and use pathological to related studies for searches literature The 1. Table see depression, and use Internet problematic both measure to used instruments the For apedescription Sample Instruments © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 103-113 Pages 107 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 108 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 dpeso”uigteCAsfwr.Bsdo h apeo orlto ofiins eiinwas decision a coefficients, correlation of sample the on Based software. CMA the using “depression” a ple ovrf h oeitneo ulcto is hsalw netmto fteaymtyof asymmetry the of estimation an allows This bias. publication of nonexistence the verify to applied was a had chance, from not and heterogeneity from resulting variability of percentage the describes which frs ltgah hw h apesz n 5 ofdneitra 023 .4)frtesuisthat studies the for 0.346) (0.263, interval confidence 95% and size sample the shows graph) plot (forest aiblt ntesuis hrfr,tehptei fhmgniywsrjce.Frispr,teI statistic, I2 the part, its For rejected. was homogeneity of hypothesis the therefore, studies; the in variability h unlpo aa hc eemnstepbiainba.I hssuy eosre htteewsno was there that https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-10 observed we study, this In bias. publication the intercept For determines regression which Egger’s data, high. (2015), plot was funnel Sánchez meta-analysis the and this Botella of of Luna-del-Castillo, & indications variability (Martin-Andrés the the applied According following was that However, model studies. indicate random-effects the 2004). or findings in model these heterogeneity random the (2003), of reason, degree this high al. a et was Higgins there to that indicating (87.085%), value high ttsi fDrSmna n ar 18)(=3.6,d=,p000 hwdta hr was there that showed p<0.000) df=8, (Q=139.368, (1986) Laird and Der-Simonian of the through statistic assumed Q was below. study explained was each is it of process as weight decision-making (p=0.082) The nonsignificant This correlations was the sample. model. (2014) that the random-effects accept of al. or to et rest random 0.05 Chang the than of unlike less value be p=0.005, “a” must than On the value greater deviation. p regard, standard the this that the In note increased articles significant. to that these are necessary data of is extreme data it of the hand, presence finding in other the This variability the of greater limit. likelihood (2016), mean implies strong upper which Scott a the wide, (2017) and suggests above Woods was and values al. (2019), interval presented et confidence (2019) al. the Colder-Carras al. et that et and El-Asam implies Kircaburun (2014) that and (2018) and al. highlight et interval al. et Chang must confidence was Sami (2016), we mean and the interval, al. (1988) below confidence et Cohen Walburg limits the to (2015), had within according were al. 0.30) data et = the Banjanin (d of that moderate 95% was Although effect (p=0.000). size 2 significant Figure The 2004). variables. Luna-del-Castillo, both & reported (Martin-Andrés scores Z Fisher’s to values these transform to made sum, In participants. their of years. age 14.75 mean mean a was the reported provide sample rest not the were variable. the did of this East while studies age to years, Three Middle mean of related women. the range the data were a provide and 41.02% present not and instead Asia did men but studies Southeast were age two 38.15% and sample, that Korea, total indicating the worth South Of is the and because it countries sex, China Asian Regarding by and ignored. represented Indo-European of only representation are greater a latter have to interesting been have should ..Statistical 3.2. e ohaei ign n re 21) h eeoeet ftesml a tde.The studied. was sample the of heterogeneity the (2011), Green and Higgins in Cochrane Per and use” Internet “problematic variables the between relationship the research to aimed study This entdta osuiscnutdi fia ot mrc rOenawr nldd twould It included. were Oceania or America North Africa, in conducted studies no that noted be analysis • ae 103-113 Pages Egr ta. 97.I diin h au ftesadr ro a ml 15) hrfr,i a quite was it therefore, (1.57); small was error standard the of value the addition, In 1997). al., et (Eggers ls otergeso ie hc efim h ako ulcto is(i ta. 04 atnAdé & Martin-Andrés 2014; al., et (Jin bias publication of lack the 2004). reaffirms Luna-del-Castillo, which line, regression the to bias close of absence the implies which p-value=0.50), 2-tailed p-value=0.25, (1-tailed tail either in significance htdrn h rnfrainfo omlcret h ihrcre ausgetrta . undergo 0.5 than greater values mean. the curve, 3 from Fisher that distant the note more noteworthy to must even is We curve it become although normal and structure. data, a deformation therefore, the extreme some from increases; within as more transformation present always error 2011), studies the but standard al., These during below the et figure. that are that the (Sterne that from implies studies studies depart it the some clearly progresses, studies of allow cone to nature the possible diverse As is the it is test. variability Egger’s this by of indicated source the that reaffirming nteohrhn,tefne lt(iue3 elce h aiblt hthdbe rvosyfound, previously been had that variability the reflected 3) (Figure plot funnel the hand, other the On © SN 1134-3478 ISSN: • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: • ae 103-113 Pages 109 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 110 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 PolmtcItre s usinar”(IQ a infcnl rdcieo ersin( <0.001) (p depression of predictive significantly was (PIUQ) Questionnaire” Use Internet “Problematic sme l,21;GmzGai ta. 03 icbrne l,21;Lne l,21;Sm tal., et Sami 2018; al., et Lin 2019; al., et Kircaburun 2013; al., et Gámez-Guadix 2019; al., et Asam r3)acrigt oe 18) oee,Bnai ta.(05 efimdta utperegressions multiple that reaffirmed (2015) al. et Banjanin However, (1988). Cohen to according (r=30) is it However, studies. other the of values the from far very were which respectively), 0.019, and (0.016 the of variability the that indicate findings These 2004). Luna-del-Castillo, & (Martin-Andrés (p=0.1761) https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-10 the on score general with the Consistent in sample. variance the the sex of up of 26.2% make influence that that The showed studies (2019) health. the al. to of et harmful some El-Asam as in obtained, use results discussed Internet the was with variable equated Therefore, moderating be symptoms. a depressive not as to should and IA hours to of in unrelated size number was effect depression networks the moderate social al., and on a et spent shows PIU time Zhang which the between that 2, 2016; showed Figure correlation al., in et positive presented Woods results and the 2016; significant with al., consistent a et is Wartberg This was 2018; adolescents. there al., that et indicating Lu 2013), 2016; al., et Walburg 2018; conclusions and Discussion discussion. 4. values the Z in Fisher’s mind extreme in studies presented three (2016) these al. keep et to Wartberg necessary and (2018) al. et Lu of studies the addition, culture. or age not and sex, in in (p=0.383); differences from and significant either originated not PIU significant presented not was of data was that value terms that value was in although (male a but variance, sex the 3 variance, variable between of the model 14% differences moderating explained of only (culture) were a 4% 5 but there model was explained 0.09), comparison, therefore, (age) sex = 4 men; that (R2 Model of no of implies variance case which rest depression. finding the in the the This of in model, unlike 9% first significant variance, (p<0.05). explained The only the significance (sex) of culture. high 3 5) percentage and had and any 2 sex) were age, explain Models models 4) five not affected models. sex, 3), did Table that the male introduced, (see variables 3) was performed sex, were was variable female these meta-regression moderating 2) whether the Americas simple, determine Once Eurasia, 1) to (Europe, results. generated: culture necessary the and considered of age variability was mean the it sex, since determined: Asia), were and variables such Three 2015). the for analysis 2). value meta-regression (Figure a and mean presents variables the which Moderating than “a”, 3.3. lower (2014) significantly al. is et that Chang interval find we confidence than side, the greater left of intervals the limit confidence On lower had 2). and Figure (UK) (see sample mean Anglo-Saxon the an with worked which (2016), Scott ..Extreme 3.4. hr a osnu mn oto h tde Bnai ta. 05 odre l,21;El- 2017; al., et Colder 2015; al., et (Banjanin studies the of most among consensus a was There In factors. two by reduced was studies, 15 and samples 21 of consisted initially which study, The Sánchez, & (Botella investigations the of variability the study to established were variables Moderating The tde htmv wyfo h iueo h ih r lAa ta.(09 n odand Wood and (2019) al. et El-Asam are right the on figure the from away move that studies values • ae 103-113 Pages We words, with Table The America (2014) negatively limited education topreventthesepathologiesfromcontinuinginto adultlife. findings impulsivity, did IA or Likewise, problems, as use. that beingavictimofcyberbullyingincreasestheincidencedepressionandproblematicInternet Problematic compared Banjanin that p<0.001) and Innovation andUniversities ofSpain. studying be demonstrated sexes. than and This Funding problems, lowself-esteem, disorders. education culture problem symptoms, et depressive addiction population, increases analysis, correlation suffers al. the self-esteem and studied University It The In The they research male men should diagnosis other IA. is (2017) 3); conclusion, moderating from sample showed factorsintheappearanceofIA. individual psychologicalvariablesaredetermining depression were necessary indicate revealed address longitudinal The and other promotes results Agency et that were sex to as there to correlated two adolescents who hyperactivity, symptoms In between and is observing al. disapproval found not Faculty IA, use the

avoid problematic supported not compared Southeast (p<0.001). is, present any that of (Kircaburun from (2015), populations, variables more analyzed the and engage forget of is cellphone that IA of IA PIU moderating that there depression that case, to variable a Education in future the the is the was longitudinal specific 15-20% both significant psychological studies state with at likely not adulthood by and male study how (female that mobile other. Wartberg meta-regression Internet in T1 of is the Asia. positively the age that emotional an pathologies, and public use evidence depressive Walburg problematic variables that third

at Educaviva that to projectsforinstitutes. and todevelopintervention et Cheng sex, depression and (Formación one is areas; population of evolutionary is suffer variables, may T1 is al., present This in addiction grows. that Furthermore, sex, there not Jun positive a significantly religious parties influence T2 with and health presents line variable et and 2019) and most be distress and show from r=0, a shows of (2016) problems, such Research affected al. et are depressive with moderating symptoms IA de it both a related T2 significantly al. use Jun regarding (2016) there problems. grows Li is with relationship correlation showed notably, and and depression beliefs Profesorado 10, and certain as comorbidity an necessary problem. that of (2016), positively the (2014) is the of and pathologies Group, influences self-esteem, (2016), related p>0.05). depression IA cellphone another alarming most PIU is Sami Facebook to predicts findings as urgent and and a and on Chang as symptoms limitations there problematic that risk the the variable, with On the demonstrated meanwhile, correlated studies depression the et Universitario Oberts

physical However, between the (Sotelo-Alonso to to between influenced in of without use Collective problematic al. age need with the situation. begin was the IA, of main depression. Lu the addiction et most (R2=0.09, a IA had were subjective (2018) of these longitudinal al. was other while did initiation et and et population and a appear to pathological to the providing a health, topic. al. severe lack (2014) with al. PIU IGD Internet Internet Intelligence – not bidirectional this significantly (among intervene time found not depression first depressive © FPU) (2018), research Internet, hand, well-being It (2017), that note at of SN 1134-3478 ISSN: and present various study, use is and well-being, a to As and p<0.05). et There T2 does depressive authors; subjects according allow contract necessary significant 6% that al., access, have that intervention three-tailed depression Gámez-Guadix a at other use, increases. and emotional Department persistence in result, Internet via showed seem risk the etc. showing of 2012). variables, adolescents their being data more are IA symptoms an relationship. reduces such a T3, coverage education. the from mental the first of and feedback On has Other analysis • other to symptoms and to it multiple to -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: differentiated suffering moderating respectively. world’s vulnerable maintained meta-regression Considering is as play use, being no of in Africa, the a El-Asam found intervene traumas, Lin a study programs of necessary social the the direct health of including adolescents, anxiety, variables correlation differences researchers, at other IA a the such (male of et et University risk loop, the logistic fundamental Because T2 Each clear adult in al. with Oceania, how were from al. Ministry support. effect problems) youth. et of inclusion hand, social to as and (2013) in in variable in sex, stress, (2018) Chang alexithymia, • so to by the IA; differences. that al. measure depression depression population a depressive behavioral adulthood. secondary secondary associated ae 103-113 Pages regression of between between continue of on T3, that multiage with sex, showed age r=0.37, Zaragoza in positive such (2019). IA anxiety Colder should These Science, North show other sleep sleep et was role. (see of also one and and and nor sex as of al. a 111 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 112 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 online adolescents. Király, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.025 virtual environmentsorsocialphobia? King, communication Kim, Adolescent Pathological Balint, M., Bobes, J., Cohen,R.,Cosman,D.,Cotter, P., Fischer,G., Floderus, B., Iosue, M., Haring, C.,…Ziberna, J. (2014). Kaess, M., Durkee, T.,Brunner,R.,Carli,V.,Parzer,P.,Wasserman,C.,Sarchiapone,M., Hoven, C., Apter,A., Balazs, J., Jun, Cheng, addiction Chang, Botella, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0215 adolescents’ Bonetti, adolescents outcomes. hyperconnected Bickham, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.013 physiological Lin, https://doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2018.1565031 Egger, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2015.09.002 Der-Simonian, R.,&Laird,N.(1986). Colder-Carras, M.,Van-Rooij,A.,deMheen,D.V., Cohen, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324 perceptions Chou, Handbook ofInternational C.M. (2017). world Banjanin, https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 References trauma Kircaburun, K.,Griffiths,M.D.,&Billieux, J.(2019). (pp. 46-68).OxfordUniversityPress. El-Asam, 315). adolescents. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2017.11.004 a Jin, Press. Israelashvili, Higgins, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 Higgins, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0226 relationships Gámez-Guadix, M.(2014). Addictive American https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-10 representative sampleofseniorhighschool studentsinTaiwan. Z.C., M.P., S. (2016). J.H., Seo,M.,&David,P. A.L.S., Valença, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 regions. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316104453.024 video gaming. O., Nagygyörgy,K.,Koronczai,B.,Griffiths,M.D.,&Demetrovics,Z.(2015). H.T.G., M., Smith,G.D.,Schneider, and internetgamingdisorder: F.C., C., &Li,A.Y. J., &Sánchez,J.(2015). J. (1988). L., Campbell,M.A.,&Gilmore,L.(2010). J.P.T., J., Thompson,S.,Deeks,&Altman,D.(2003). A., Samara,M.,&Terry,P. D.S., among adolescentsinTaiwan. N., Banjanin,Dimitrijevic,I.,&Pantic, Psychiatric Wu, Wu, Behaviors, 90428-436. BMJ, Psychiatry, in theUSA. of others’lives. Internet useamongEuropeanadolescents: M., &Romano,J.(2016). online communication. from thecognitivebehavioralmodel. Computers inHumanBehavior,68 Computers inHumanBehavior,58179-186. mood oscillations,socialnetworkingandonlineaddictivebehavior. Chiu, C.H.,Lee,C.M.,Chen,P.H., Self-rating smart Hswen, Cyberpsychology, & Edge,N.(2012). C., & Green,S.(2011). J.Y., be theantidote? The reciprocallongitudinalrelationshipsbetweenmobilephoneaddictionanddepressivesymptomsamongKorean world: (7109), 629-634. Statistical Zhou,

You, Association (Ed.)(2013). In Aboujaoude,E.,&Starcevic,V. A.M., Silva,A.C.O.,Baczynski,T., (2014). 23(1), Y., A cross-sectionalstudyofheavygaming, International J., Hu,W.H., X.H., & Cyberpsychology, Prevention Science Depressive symptomsandproblematicInternetuseamongadolescents: Rich, power analysisfor phoneaddictionscaleforadolescents. 1093-1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-9338(13)76661-6 Internet addictionprevalenceandqualityof(real)life: (2015). • & Computers inHumanBehavior,51 Behavior,

Pages Meta-análisis He, M. M., &Minder, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-132 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.09.007 Cyberpsychology, They arehappierandhavingbetterlivesthanIam: Cochrane handbookfor a pilotstudy. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199380183.003.0003 Journal Computers inHumanBehavior, (2015). Meta-analysis inclinicaltrials. 103-113 J. The Cambridgehandbookofinternational Alleviating depressiononlytobecomeproblematicmobilephoneusers: Addictive Behaviors,39(10), & Yen, (2014). and Social Problematic Behavior, Media of Public Diagnostic andstatistical (pp. 571-573).CambridgeUniversityPress. C.F. en cienciassociales the behavioral Cyberpsychology, 472-479. A & Miao,N.F. European C. (1997). Musci, R.,Xue,Q.L.,&Mendelson,T. The relationshipoflonelinessandsocialanxietywithchildren’s I. (2015). modified Psychosocial (2018). use Behavior, Networking, 17755-760. Psychopathology and Social (Eds.), Health, 60(2),147-155. Carvalho, M.R.,&Nardi,A.E.(2013). and internet useandmentalhealthamongBritishchildrenadolescents. Measuring inconsistencyinmeta-analyses. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.060 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.061 Journal systematic reviewsofinterventions. Prevalence regression depression: Bias inmeta-analysisdetectedbyasimple,graphicaltest. Relationship betweeninternetuseanddepression: Mental problematicgamingsymptoms,andonlinesocializingin

sciences. and Social (2014). Journal factors mediatingtherelationshipbetween childhoodemotional Networking, 15117-121. Behavior, y delasalud.

Medline, 7 In Israelashvili,M.,&Romano,J.(Eds.), of Psychotraumatology,10(1). 440-447. 1434-1440. health 29(1), method and selfdestructivebehaviors.

Predictors of internetaddictionanditsriskprotective factorsin manual of Adolescence, Erlbaum. exposure, Networking, 13(3), and Social in thedigital 140-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.030 Computers inHumanBehavior,43308-312. to 177-188. of mental https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-014-0647-6 https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0317 Cho, Síntesis. test https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.05.010 prevention science. of theinitiationandpersistenceInternet https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 household A metaanalysisof31nationsacrossseven Assessment ofproblematicInternetuseand publication The impactofusingFacebook Networking, 17(11), 62, (2017). age: disorders. 38-46. rules, 279-285. Grave Nomophobia: The CochraneCollaboration. bis Analysis ofthelongitudinal Video and in BMJ, 327 European Cambridge University dangers, meta-analysis symptoms gaming ina The Cambridge 714-719. Can face-to-face Dependency on great promise Focus Child & 557-560. among with on BMJ, on binary young (pp. Underwood, M.K.,&Ehrenreich,S.E.(2017). 55(1), 141-147. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063089 neurotransmitters inShanghaiadolescentswithandwithoutinternetaddiction disorder: Zhang, H.X.,Jiang,W.Q., Young, questionnaire survey. Wu, depression andlowself-esteem. Woods, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.04.057 problematic alcoholandInternetuseinasampleofadolescentsGermany. C., Hoven, C.W., Carli, V.,Wasserman,D.,Thomasius,R.,&Kaess,M.(2016). Wartberg, L.,Brunner,R.,Kriston,Durkee,T.,Parzer,P.,Fischer-Waldschmidt,G., Resch, F.,Sarchiapone,M., Wasserman, Youth Walburg, victimization adolescence: Tsitsika, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d4002 BMJ, 343. (2011). C.H., Tetzlaff, J., Deeks, J.J., Peters, J., Macaskill, P., Schwarzer, G., Duval, S., Altman, D.G., Moher, D., & Higgins, J.P.T. Sterne, J.A., Sutton, A.J., Loannidis, J.P.A., Terrin, N., Jones, D.R., Lau, J., Carpenter, R., Rücker, G., Harbord, R.M., Schmid, http://bit.ly/2r60tId Abnormal Lu, &Luna-Del-Castillo, J.D.(2004). A., Martin-Andrés, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.07.005 school students: Müller, Networking, 13(4). &King,K.(2015). K.A., McLaughlin, Norma-Capitel. perspectiva clínicayepidemiológicadesdeelprimerniveldeatención. (2012). A. I.,Rojas-Soto,J.E.,Sánchez-Arenas,C.,&Irigoyen-Coria, Sotelo-Alonso, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.03.067 Oberst, U.,Renau,V., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.007 and addictiveuseofsocialnetworkingsitesinadolescents. Mehdizadeh, S.(2010). among adolescentsinthepresenceofdepressivesymptoms. Sami, H.,Danielle,L.,Lihi,D.,&Elena,S.(2018). Pew Ofcom (Ed.)(2017). online? L., Xu,D.D.,Liu,H.Z.,Zhang,Ng,C.H.,...Xiang,Y.T. Research Center(Ed.)(2015). C.Y., Services Review,61327-331. K.S. (1998). K.W., A.K., Tzavela,E.C.,Janikian,M.,Ólafsson,K.,Iordache,A.,...Richardson,C.(2014). Recommendations forexaminingandinterpretingfunnelplotasymmetryinmeta-analysesofrandomisedcontrolledtrials. inHumanBehaviorComputers , 60 H.C., &Scott,H.(2016). V., , 43 Child Psychology Lee, M.B.,Liao,S.C.,&Chang,L.R.(2015). and theperilsoflurking. Mialhes, A.,&Moncla,D.(2016). Patterns ofuseinsixEuropeanCountriesandlinkswithpsychosocialfunctioning. Dreier, Prevalence, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.11.010 https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0257 Caught inthenet. M., Beutel,M.E.,Duven,E.,Giralt,S.,&Wölfling,K.(2016). Children andparents: PLoS One,10. &Carbonell,X.(2016). A., Chamarro, Self-presentation Lin, Z.G.,Du,Y.S., demographics andqualityoflife. (2), Journal #Sleepyteens: Teens, 311-323. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137506 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.01.009 American Psychologist,72(2),144-158. Developmental trajectoriesofanxietyanddepressioninearlyadolescence. Wiley. of Adolescence, 2.0: 2015. social media,andtechnologyoverview Media useandattitudesreport. , 559-564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-014-9898-1 Narcissism andself-esteem The powerandthepainofadolescents’digitalcommunication: & Vance, Does school-relatedburnoutinfluenceproblematicFacebook Social mediauseinadolescenceisassociatedwithpoorsleepquality,anxiety, addictiononsuicidalideation The effectofsleepdisturbancesandinternet paralasCienciasdelaSaludBioestadística https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.085 Risk factorsofinternetaddictionamongusers: 51, A. (2013). inHumanBehavior Computers Research Psychiatry 41-49. Research Psychiatry Gender stereotypesinFacebook (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.05.008 Comparison ofpsychologicalsymptomsandserumlevels Archivos enMedicinaFamiliar addictioninTibetanInternet on Facebook. https://bit.ly/2Yq5V5b © https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040429 , 267 SN 1134-3478 ISSN: , 268 Psychopathological addiction? A hiddentypeofinternet depresióneneladultomayor: La , 327-332. A casecontrolstudy. , 131-136. Cyberpsycholog Psychiatry Research, https://pewrsr.ch/2QB8Xlp , 55 , Journal profiles: 172-177. Online socialnetworkingin • -SN 1988-3293 e-ISSN: . Norma-Capitel: , and HanChinesemiddle factors associatedwith

14(1), 5-13. of Adolescent y, Are women Behavio Plos use? 240, 272-277. Cyber An online Journal One, 8(5),1-4. r, • Children and Social more female ae 103-113 Pages Health, Una of Intense and 113 Comunicar, 63, XXVIII, 2020 114 0 2 0 , 63, XXVIII, 2 r unica m o C