ZIVOT DIVERGING OR CONVERGING EFFECTS OF CONTEMPORARY MEDIA ON YOUNG AND AGED POPULATIONS • Aykut Toros • E. Gülay Keskin May 30, 2012; Prague
İstanbul fotoğrafı ekle Yeditepe Üniversitesi fotoğrafı Ekle
CONTENTS OF PRESENTATION • 1. THE QUESTION • 2. THE DATA • 3. MAJOR TERMINOLOGY • 4. ANALYSIS • 5.SUMMARY EXTRACTIONS • 6.CONCLUSION
THE QUESTION: IS CONTEMPORARY MEDIA BRINGING TOGETHER OR PUSHING APART THE ELDERLY AND NOT ELDERLY
THE DATA: “2011 SOCIAL CHANGE AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT SURVEY” Department of Sociology Yeditepe University Istanbul; TURKEY
1-Questionnaire2 - IntervıeverManual3 -AddressUpdating4- ResponseFollow-upForms5 - Telephonecontrols6 - Etc. • RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRUBUTION OF CLUSTERS KMZ LINK
FIELDWORK RESULTS • Facetofaceinterviewswerecarried in: • 539Clusters • 8 085Households Whichrequired • 17 154 singleormultiplevisitstohouseholds Number of respondentsinterviewed • Age 17 andabove • 22 735completed interviews (H.H.response rate 82%) • 21 199 aged 17-64 (not elderly) • 1 639 aged 65 and above (elderly)
CALENDER OF FIELDWORK 1-Good organization leads to high quality of data 2-The graph shows smooth accumulation of data. No observable heaps or dips until 95% of the data was collected
EVIDENCE ON QUALITY OF DATA: • EXTERNAL CONSISTENCY • DEMOGRAPHIC STRUCTURE
TERMINOLOGY APPROBATIVE: VALUES AND NORMS(ACTIONS) THAT ARE NOT ACCEPTED AS CONTRADICTORY TO THE SOCIAL PREFERENCES. PHENOMENA THAT ARE ON THE APPROVAL SIDE RATHER THAN ON THE DISAPPROVAL SIDE OF THE CONTINIUM ELDERLY/NOT ELDERLY: ELDERLY ARE THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE AT OR ABOVE AGE 65. NOT ELDERLY ARE THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE BETWEEN AGE 17 THRU 64 CONTEMPORARY MEDIA: OLD AND NEW MEDIA THAT ARE IN USE IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD
THREE GROUPS OF VARIABLES DIVERGENCE/CONVERGENCE ISSUES (Values dimension) 1. "What Is the Position of Women in Society?" 2. “Problems of which domain has priority, nationaldomain or of your immidiate environment?" 3. "Would you feel bothered if a women reaches top level government administration" 4."We should show understanding to life style of those with different morals." 5. "It is permissible to skip some of the religious obligations, under current living conditions 6. "Do laws or leaders rule in the area that you live." 7. "People like us have no say in politics " 8. "Do you find the President trustworthy" 9. “Do you trust the judicial courts" 10.”Do you find European Union trustworthy". APPROBATIVE BEHAVIOUR DETERMINANTS (Action dimension) 1. "Reads Paper Or Not" 2. "Paper Read is Modern or Conservative " 3. "Uses Social network or not" 4. "Paper Read is Colorful or Dull" 5. "Paper Read Have Big or Small Fonts" 6. "Reads Columns or Not" 7. "Most watched TV is Mainly Thematic or Entertaining" 8. "Most watched TV is Neutral or Flanked". CONTROL VARIABLES 1.Gender 2.Education 3.Geographic Region i.e. 10x8x3= 240 TABLES
LEVELS OF ANALYSIS EMPLOYED Level 1: Simple comparison of percentages (on divergence/convergence issues). Example:What percentage of elderly approves a divergence or convergence issue?
LEVELS OF ANALYSIS EMPLOYED (Cont’d) Level 2: Comparison of percentages by approbative dichotomies. Example:What percentage of elderly approves a divergence or convergence issue by approbative dichotomies?
LEVELS OF ANALYSIS EMPLOYED (Cont’d) Level 3: Ratios of non-elderly/elderly by divergence/convergence issues by approbative dichotomies. Example: How similar or different are the ratios of non-elderly/elderly by divergence/convergence issues by approbative dichotomies.
OF COURSE WE CAN NOT PRESENT TO YOU ALL THE TABLES IN THE SAME MANNER INSTEAD, WE SHALL BE PRESENTING SUMMARY EXTRACTIONS
GUIDE FOR INTERPRETING THE RATIOS Among the group which adopts a conservative behavior (i.e. Do not read daily newspapers) Percentage of young (not elderly) adopting an approbative value(Men&Women have equal roles in Society) = 46.6% divided by Percentage of elderly adopting and approbative behaviour (Men&Women have equal roles in Society)= 63.54% Ratio =(46.6)/(63.54) =0.73
PROPORTION NOT READING NEWPAPERS Observation: 1.Proportion of females not reading newspapers are higher than males in all cohorts 2.Among males, proportions decrease in young and pre-elderly cohorts 3.Male and female ratios become similar in elderly cohorts Observation: -Proportion Not reading newspapers are much higher in the older cohorts compared to younger cohorts.
Observation: -There is a gender related social integration gap and this is against females. -There is a female rejuvenation after age 60. After age 60, the gap narrows and closes among the very upper age cohorts • FEMALE APPROBATIVE BEHAVIOR DISADVANTAGES AT MIDDLE AGES
MIDDLE LEVEL ACTIVITY SYNDROME (TOTAL POPULATION) Observation: -Conservative behaviour , similar approbative values -Non conservative behaviour, approbative values start to differentiate -Differentiation starts after athreshold -Differentiation shows a bell shaped curve
MIDDLE LEVEL ACTIVITY SYNDROME (MALE FEMALE DIFFERENCES) Observation: -There is a difference between males and females -Female threshold level is earlier (lower) then males -Female value similarities shows oscillations
MEDIA AND APPROBATIVE VALUES • Observation: • When relation with the media is of unapprobative nature, there seems to be no difference between young and the elderly on approbative values. • -When relations with the media is of approbative nature, there appears to be adifference between young and the elderly on approbative values. • -The visibility of divergence is most appearent with social network usage.
CONCLUSION -Proportion Not reading newspapers are much higher in the older cohorts compared to younger cohorts. -There is a female rejuvenation after age 60. After age 60, the gap narrows and closes among the very upper age cohorts -Differentiation shows a bell shaped curve …and may be most importantly -Differences between not elderly and elderly in “using social network” appears to be the most differentiating factor. So converging policies would require promotion use of social network among elderly.
THANK YOU Aykut Toros (email@example.com) E. Gülay Keskin (firstname.lastname@example.org)