An intertwined perspective on technology and digitised individuals: Linkages, needs and outcomes

Abstract

Information technology (IT) has changed dramatically over the last several decades. Although, in its early days IT has been mostly used as a tool for conducting business or running complex governmental and organisational operations, it has shifted to also become a productivity and hedonic tool for individual users (Matt, Trenz, Cheung, & Turel, 2019). Readers can reflect on how many technologies surround them now, as they read this article. These can include a range of mixed-use technologies that cater to both hedonic and utilitarian objectives. Examples include, but are not limited to, the device through which this article is read (desktop, laptop, tablet, or smartphone), a smart TV, smart kitchen appliances, smart watches, wearable fitness trackers, and connected or autonomous cars that drive the readers whilst they listen to a text-to-voice generated version of this article. These changes in the technological landscape have presumably been supported by technological advancements that have made technology more connected and affordable than before, smaller, yet broader in its capabilities, beyond merely being job-or leisure-oriented (Turel et al., 2019). Since many of these technologies are used exclusively in leisure or non-work settings, or in both work and non-work (including leisure) settings, they have created what we call digitised individuals, defined as users who use at least one digital technology in their non-work life domains. 1 Note that digitised individuals have existed since the dawn of personal computers, but we see major growth in the last decade with the vast penetration of smartphones, social media and personal lifestyle and health technologies. We view the collective of digitised individuals as contributing to the phenomenon of the digitisation of individuals, defined as the proliferation of digital technologies in the lives of individual users (Matt, Trenz, et al., 2019). Although the bare minimum to qualify as digitised individuals according to this definition is using one technology for non-work including leisure purposes, nowadays, many people use multiple technologies to different extents, being integrated into their lives in many different ways. This creates a large variability in the extent of their digitisation. The combination of the significant diffusion of digital technologies used by individuals with the variability in their (partly joint) usage leads to the necessity to develop an intertwined perspective that considers technology and the individual at the same time, that is, a socio-technical perspective. Several studies have argued for a need to understand digitised individuals, the drivers of the digitisation of individuals and the consequences of this digitisation, because technologies aimed at the digitisation of individuals have unique features that distinguish them from commonly examined business technologies, or that are insufficiently highlighted and understood in studies of non-work technologies (Matt, Trenz, et al., 2019; Turel et al., 2019). These characteristics inclu...

How the introduction of the COVID-19 tracing apps affects future tracking technology adoption

“…Concerning the manipulation variables, we first expected that a benefit for the public in addition to the benefit for the self would lead to a higher intention to use future tracking apps; however, our results did not support this. We know that the nature of benefits that new technologies can have for digitized individuals can be complex and is subject to different roles that individuals take on (Turel, Matt, Trenz, & Cheung, 2020). Trang et al (2020) point out that there are different groups of COVID-19 tracing app users: critics, undecided and advocates.…”

Understanding people's intention to use facial recognition services: the roles of network externality and privacy cynicism

“…Satisfaction is a positive affective response to the evaluation process (Fornell, 1992), influencing information system usage intention (Xu et al, 2015). When information technology meets people's needs, they tend to feel happy and satisfied, which usually leads them to increase their use of the technology (Turel et al, 2020). This study expects that satisfaction will also motivate intention to use in the context of FRS.…”

Values and Ethics in Information Systems

“…With social media, smartphones, smartwatches, and other digital technologies rapidly becoming an integral part of life for consumers across the world, a growing number of stakeholders voice the need to better understand the implications of this ongoing transformation. Within this development, the paradigm of the ''digitization of the individual'' has become a central issue for IS research (Vodanovich et al 2010;Vaghefi et al 2017;Turel et al 2020). At its core, it implies that digital technologies heavily influence user perceptions, cognitions, emotional reactions, and behavior (Vanden Abeele 2020), and can thereby contribute to individual and societal outcomes.…”

“…First, the understanding of the ''digitized individual'' paradigm should be unified. For example, Turel et al (2020) define a digitized individual as someone who uses at least one digital technology. In contrast, Kilger (1994) refers solely to virtual identity, while Clarke (1994) describes a ''digital persona'' to be a model of an individual based upon the data collected and analyzed about this person.…”