Laar Et Al 2019 Digital Skills

Computers in Human Behavior 100 (2019) 93–104
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
Full length article
Determinants of 21st-century digital skills: A large-scale survey among T

working professionals☆
Ester van Laara,∗, Alexander J.A.M. van Deursena, Jan A.G.M. van Dijka, Jos de Haanb
a
University of Twente, Department of Communication Science, PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, the Netherlands
b
The Netherlands Institute for Social Research SCP, PO Box 16164, 2500 BD The Hague, the Netherlands
ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT
Keywords: The current workplace increasingly asks for workers with highly digitally skilled knowledge who produce and
21st-Century skills distribute ideas and information. As such, understanding the factors behind differences in the level of various
Digital skills 21st-century digital skills is of decisive importance. This study aims to examine (1) the level of 21st-century
Determinants digital skills among knowledge workers, and (2) the determinants contributing to the level of these skills. The
Workers
following digital skills are investigated: information, communication, collaboration, critical thinking, creativity,
Creative industries
and problem solving. Potential determinants that can be influenced by stakeholders are also included, such as
social support and training. A large-scale online survey was conducted among professionals (N = 1,222) who
work within knowledge-intensive creative industries. The results show that the level of 21st-century digital skills
varies considerably. Furthermore, each 21st-century digital skill is explained by a different set of determinants,
thereby requiring unique approaches for the development of each skill.
1. Introduction communication technologies (ICTs) to access and disseminate in-

formation, to interact and exchange experiences with experts and
Contemporary society is characterized by technological advance- learning communities, and to generate and refine their ideas.
ment, globalization, and accelerated knowledge accumulation (Van de Although ICTs are pervasive at work, not all employees have the
Oudeweetering & Voogt, 2018). People have the opportunity to become skills to take advantage in terms of the richness of activities and the
online creators of knowledge instead of passive consumers of in- variety of learning opportunities ICTs offer. Numerous studies show
formation (e.g., Gretter & Yadav, 2016; Jenkins, 2009; Lankshear & that people vary greatly with regard to their digital skill levels (e.g.,
Knobel, 2008). In the work context, nonroutine and interactive tasks Hargittai, 2010; Van Deursen & Van Dijk, 2015a; Verhoeven,
are becoming more important, while repetitive, manual tasks are Heerwegh, & De Wit, 2016). Research is needed to identify the causes of
readily automated or performed by robots (Levy, 2010; Neubert, potential skill insufficiencies. Unfortunately, existing studies are often
Mainert, Kretzschmar, & Greiff, 2015). Scholars and policy-makers see limited by a focus on technical-oriented skills with less attention given
educators as central to preparing students to gain the required 21st- to the broader spectrum of skills (e.g., communication and collabora-
century skills for the work environment (Gretter & Yadav, 2016). In- tion) (Gonçalves, Oliveira, & Cruz-Jesus, 2018; Van Laar et al., 2017),
creasingly, the emphasis is on content- or knowledge-related skills with or by merging different components of digital skills into a single mea-
integrated digital components (Ilomäki, Paavola, Lakkala, & Kantosalo, sure. Consequently, it remains unclear which skills are influenced by
2016). In a systematic literature review, Van Laar, Van Deursen, Van which determinants. Furthermore, the primary focus in digital skills
Dijk, and De Haan (2017) synthesized and conceptualized 21st-century research is on sociodemographic and -economic determinants
digital skills aimed at the knowledge worker. As a result, the following (Hargittai, 2010; Scheerder, Van Deursen, & Van Dijk, 2017). This study
skills necessary to accomplish a broad range of occupational tasks were aims to explain differences in the level of various 21st-century digital
identified: information, communication, collaboration, critical- skills by examining potential personal, motivational, and social de-
thinking, creativity, and problem-solving skills. These skills are generic terminants at the level of the individual worker. The emphasis is on
skills with specific importance in digital contexts (Kereluik, Mishra, determinants that can be influenced by ICT users themselves, as well as
Fahnoe, & Terry, 2013). For example, people use information by policy makers, educators, and managers in organizations.
☆
This work was supported by NWO the national research council of the Netherlands (under Grant: 409-15-214).
∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (E. van Laar).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.06.017
Received 25 October 2018; Received in revised form 26 June 2019; Accepted 30 June 2019
Available online 01 July 2019
0747-5632/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
E. van Laar, et al. Computers in Human Behavior 100 (2019) 93–104
Organizational characteristics, or determinants of skills specific to the communication (e.g., instant messaging, chat, and email) has be-
organizational context (e.g., organizational culture, leadership style), come prevalent in today's workplace (Schulze, Schultze, West, &
fall outside the scope of this contribution. As employees with a high Krumm, 2017). This study focuses on expressiveness, contact-
level of skills are needed, the focus is on explaining why some working building, networking, and content-sharing skills. Communication
professionals have more proficiency in 21st-century digital skills than expressiveness skills are the ability to shape interpersonal im-
others. Hypotheses are proposed and tested in knowledge-intensive pressions and derive satisfactory outcomes from online interactions.
creative industries which comprise organizations focusing on “the Workers must be able to clearly articulate themselves through a
creation, production, and distribution of creative or cultural goods and variety of online media (Mishra & Kereluik, 2011). The skills to
services” (Kohn & Wewel, 2018, p. 2). One of the key characteristics is choose the right location to post a message and to carefully consider
the dynamic, heterogeneous, and temporal nature of services offered its contents are crucial to get a message across and accomplish what
(Pina & Tether, 2016). Succeeding as a knowledge-intensive organiza- one wants from online interactions (Van Deursen, Courtois, & Van
tion requires the capacity to be creative, innovative, and en- Dijk, 2014). Communication contact-building skills are needed be-
trepreneurial. Innovation relies on workers and their ability to generate cause social applications offer individuals the opportunity to make
knowledge. In the creative industries new ideas and approaches flourish and maintain contacts (Van Deursen et al., 2014). Closely related to
and human capital is a crucial factor for success (Piergiovanni, Carree, this component are communication networking skills, the ability to
& Santarelli, 2012). They exemplify the increasing demand for highly mobilize online contacts to achieve a specific goal, such as in-
skilled workers whose job is to produce intellectual capital. The fol- creasing brand awareness, facilitating resource mobilization, or
lowing research questions are addressed: generating business (Wolff & Moser, 2010). Finally, communication
content-sharing skills are the ability to share online content, from
(1) What is the level of 21st-century digital skills (information, com- status updates, photos, and videos to writing comments and blogs
munication, collaboration, critical thinking, creativity, and problem (Brandtzæg, Lüders, & Skjetne, 2010; Lee, Park, & Hwang, 2015).
solving) among professionals working within the creative in- • Collaboration digital skills: the ability to work effectively and re-
dustries? spectfully in teams to accomplish a common goal and to assume
(2) Which determinants, at the level of the individual worker, con- shared responsibility for completing tasks. Work is increasingly ac-
tribute to 21st-century digital skills? complished by diverse and interdisciplinary teams of people with
complementary expertise and roles, as opposed to individuals doing
As creative industries are typically composed of a relatively large isolated work (Mishra & Kereluik, 2011). The teams involve in-
number of self-employed (including freelance) workers (Trip & Romein, dividuals who are not collocated geographically and who share re-
2014), we address the questions above for both employed and self- levant experiences and information with each other through online
employed workers. Due to the limited literature available, we use a media (Kang, Lee, & Kim, 2017). Collaboration digital skills are
more explorative approach to address the role of employment status in required to identify specific functions for each member based on his
relation to pathways to skill development, or, in other words, whether or her expertise (Van Deursen et al., 2014). They go beyond com-
some skill determinants might be more important for self-employed munication digital skills as they concern the ability to support the
than employed workers. work of others, for example by working in the same document, si-
multaneously or not, and consider the progress made by team
2. Theoretical framework members.
• Critical-thinking digital skills: the ability to make informed judgments
To answer the research questions, we will start this section by ex- about information and communication based on sufficient reflection
plaining the different 21st-century digital skills. In the second part of and evidence. A person has to consider multiple perspectives and
this section potential determinants of these skills are discussed and decide whether the content is supported by objective data to es-
hypothesized. tablish substantiated arguments or reasoning (Higgins, 2014;
Petrucco & Ferranti, 2017). Critical thinking is regarded as the most
2.1. 21st-century digital skills important skill in discerning false, incomplete, and obsolete online
information and communication (Saadé, Morin, & Thomas, 2012). It
The following 21st-century digital skills are considered: concerns the skills to provide proof. Evidence and arguments need
to be evaluated independently of prior beliefs and opinions that one
• Information digital skills: skills to search, evaluate, and manage di- may hold (West, Toplak, & Stanovich, 2008). Workers need the skills
gital information. The amount of online information and the pro- to be open to ideas that challenge some of their beliefs and to
liferation of databases make using search engines effectively and consider various arguments before they formulate their own point of
efficiently essential (Ananiadou & Claro, 2009; Punie & Ala-Mutka, view. Critical thinking implies independent thinking and, therefore,
2008). This study focuses specifically on management and evalua- being able to generate new input from an online discussion and
tion. Information management skills concern the ability to maintain connect viewpoints.
information (Hwang, Kettinger, & Yi, 2015) as workers must be able • Creative digital skills: skills to appropriately use online tools to create
to manage their documents, files, emails, and other forms of digital online content. Workers must be able to use online platforms to give
information as part of their work activities. They need the skills to a creative turn to existing processes. ICTs enable employees to
save files in the right place, to be consistent in the naming of digital generate innovative ideas, perspectives, and approaches from nu-
files, and to organize digital files via hierarchical folder structures. merous online sources (Lee & Chen, 2015; Oldham & Da Silva,
Information evaluation skills include judging the usefulness, re- 2015). They have the potential to increase the creativity of em-
levance, and reliability of the retrieved digital information (Hatlevik ployees' ideas by providing them with unique and potentially di-
& Hatlevik, 2018; Hwang, Tsai, Tsai, & Tseng, 2008). Workers need verse information. Moreover, people's creative potential is fostered
the skills to check whether information found is correct and up-to- by online platforms that enable them to be part of the design of
date. software and to generate their own content (Petersen, 2008). The
• Communication digital skills: skills to transmit information online and highly complex problems facing society in the 21st century ne-
to reflect upon the best way to present this information to a parti- cessitate new and creative solutions (Kereluik et al., 2013). Workers
cular audience (Ananiadou & Claro, 2009). As a result of globali- can use ICTs to show originality in their work and execute their
zation and technological developments, computer-mediated tasks creatively.
94
• Problem-solving digital skills: skills to use ICTs to analyze a problem processes help individuals to concentrate on the task and to optimize
situation and deploy knowledge in finding a solution to the problem. their efforts (Senkbeil & Ihme, 2017). We hypothesize:
Workers are increasingly confronted with complex, opaque, and
H3. ICT self-regulation contributes positively to the level of 21st-
dynamic problems (Neubert et al., 2015). Problem-solvers often use
century digital skills.
the Internet to generate and integrate information about the pro-
blem and to try and solve the problem according to the acquired Self-directed learning involves individuals developing plans and
information (Greiff & Funke, 2017). In evaluating problem-solving strategies and monitoring their behaviors to attain their anticipated
skills, both flexibility and effectiveness should be considered (Yang, goals (Zampetakisa, Bouranta, & Moustakis, 2010). To solve challen-
2012). Flexibility results in a variety of unique responses to a pro- ging tasks in problem situations, individuals have to set specific goals,
blem that require the skills to come up with multiple solutions to the plan their activities, monitor their performance during the problem-
problem using online platforms. Effectiveness ensures that the so- solving process, and evaluate the efficiency of their actions (Ifenthaler,
lutions are practical and thoroughly considered. This requires the 2012). Acquiring new skills can be enhanced if people are encouraged
skills to effectively use various online tools to reach a satisfactory to employ self-directed learning processes (Zimmerman, 2002). Self-
decision or solution. regulating learners maintain an active and ongoing awareness of task
demands, the effectiveness of learning strategies, and their progress
2.2. Determinants of 21st-century digital skills toward task completion (Wolters, 2010). Effective self-directed learners
evaluate the limitations of their knowledge and skills and strategically
The current contribution has an exploratory nature in identifying respond to new learning challenges (Vassallo, 2014). We hypothesize:
potential determinants of the skills discussed in the prior section.
H4. Self-directed learning contributes positively to the level of 21st-
Instead of choosing a specific line of inquiry, we utilize perspectives
from resources and appropriation theory as a conceptual lens to classify
determinants (De Haan, 2004; Van Dijk, 2005). This theory relates the We consider the following distinct individual goal orientations: (1)
differences in people's access to a technology (attitudes, physical access, learning, which focuses on skill development and task mastery; (2)
skills, and usage) to a distribution of resources that, in turn, are ex- performance approach, which focuses on gaining favorable evaluations
plained by personal categories and positions in society. In this con- and outperforming others; and (3) performance avoidance, which fo-
tribution we focus on common personal categories of gender and age cuses on avoiding mistakes and negative evaluations (VandeWalle,
and the positional category of education (Scheerder et al., 2017). In 1997). The value of goal orientation lies in regulating employees' at-
resources and appropriation theory, the resources considered are clas- tention and effort to develop creative solutions to problems at work.
sified under material, temporal, cultural, social, and mental resources. Learning goal-orientated individuals seek challenges that provide them
Material (e.g., access to an Internet connection) and temporal resources with learning opportunities. They approach a task to understand
(e.g., time to use ICT) should be considered as a primary condition to something new or to improve their skill levels (Yi & Hwang, 2003).
employ skills; without these resources, skills will not be developed. In Performance goal orientated individuals aim to achieve higher skill
the current context, mental, social, and cultural resources are more levels compared to their colleagues (VandeWalle, 1997). They pursue
interesting for explaining differences in people's skills. They concern performance goals to demonstrate their competence and to gain fa-
resources such as the perceived ease of use for using ICT, self-directed vorable judgements (Yi & Hwang, 2003). As such, learning and per-
learning capabilities, a status related to performing well on skills, or formance goal orientation are expected to relate to skill acquisition. In
social-contextual factors such as available support. contrast, avoidance goal-orientated individuals are concerned with
Starting with the process of access, we first consider ICT attitude as avoiding failure and negative judgements from others (VandeWalle,
potential determinant of 21st-century digital skills. ICT attitude refers 1997). They are anxious that their incompetence may be revealed by
to the overall affective reaction of a person to the use of a technology sharing irrelevant knowledge and therefore withhold the effort that is
(De Wit, Heerwegh, & Verhoeven, 2014). Research confirms that the crucial for the learning experience to occur (Pintrich, 2000). We hy-
level of digital skills is directly influenced by ICT attitudes (Tondeur, pothesize:
Sinnaeve, Van Houtte, & Van Braak, 2011; Van Deursen & Van Dijk,
H5. Learning goal orientation contributes positively to the level of 21st-
2015b). We hypothesize:
H1. ICT attitude contributes positively to the level of 21st-century
H6. Performance goal orientation contributes positively to the level of
digital skills.
21st-century digital skills.
In terms of resources, perceived ease of use is considered first. This
H7. Avoidance goal orientation contributes negatively to the level of
term can be defined as the degree to which a person believes that using
21st-century digital skills.
ICTs would be free of effort (Davis, 1989). It involves the perception of
the difficulty of learning to use a particular technology. Previous re- Personal initiative is a form of proactivity and is defined as behavior
search has confirmed that perceived ease of use results in higher levels resulting in people taking an active and self-starting approach to work
of ICT skills (Heerwegh, De Wit, & Verhoeven, 2016; Verhoeven et al., and going beyond what is required in a given job (Frese, Fay, Hilburger,
2016) and plays a strong role in the willingness to develop new skills Leng, & Tag, 1997). People with high initiative are more likely to take
(Edmunds, Thorpe, & Conole, 2012). This suggests that the develop- actions to solve problems (Chen, Shih, & Yeh, 2011). Furthermore, Joo,
ment of a feeling of control over computers can contribute to 21st- Yang, and McLean (2014) found that the extent to which employees
century digital skills. We hypothesize: possess proactivity is associated with creative skills. To actively pursue
learning, people need the ability and willingness to go beyond narrow
H2. Perceived ease of use contributes positively to the level of 21st-
task requirements and to approach work proactively (Den Hartog &
Belschak, 2007; Frese et al., 1997). We hypothesize:
ICT self-regulation is defined as the tendency to maintain focus and
H8. Personal initiative contributes positively to the level of 21st-
effort toward goals despite potential distractions online (Zimmerman,
2000). A person working on an information-related task can be easily
distracted by other activities, such as checking e-mails or surfing the Social support involves individuals asking for help from people in
web (Goundar, 2014). ICT self-regulation has also proven to be effective their social network (Liang, Ho, Li, & Turban, 2011). This study focuses
at enhancing problem solving (Zimmerman, 2000). Self-control on informational support, for example recommendations, advice, or
95
knowledge that could be helpful for solving online problems. A dis- Table 1
tinction is made between formal (supervisor, coworkers, and ICT ser- Sample characteristics.
vice desk) and informal (family, friends, and Internet contacts) support. N %
The more an employee is supported by formal or informal support
sources, the more expertise, social networks, and material resources are Gender
Male 646 52.9
available when developing creative ideas (Oldham & Cummings, 1996;
Female 576 47.1
Scott & Bruce, 1994), and the better an employees’ knowledge acqui- Age
sition and application capabilities (e.g., Heppner, Walther, & Good, 18-30 373 30.6
1995; Kim & Lee, 2010). Online help-seeking provides individuals with 31-45 467 38.3
useful information to self-regulate their follow-up behaviors for resol- 46-60 303 24.8
60+ 77 6.3
ving problems. We hypothesize:
Missing 2 0.2
H9. Formal social support contributes positively to the level of 21st- Education
Medium 294 24.1
century digital skills. High 928 75.9
Branch organization
H10. Informal social support contributes positively to the level of 21st-
Advertising/marketing 136 11.1
century digital skills. Graphic design 115 9.4
Performing art 106 8.7
Attendance of an ICT-related training may result in the positive
New media/software 105 8.6
consequence that employees who attended such a training have more Radio/television 97 7.9
opportunities to practice some digital skills. We hypothesize: Visual art/photography 89 7.3
Architecture 84 6.9
H11. Training contributes positively to the level of 21st-century digital Publishing/media 72 5.9
skills. Journalism 72 5.9
Industrial design 64 5.2
Finally, we consider gender, age, and level of education attained. Fashion/textile design 61 5.0
Although men and women do not differ greatly in their online abilities, Museum 61 5.0
research proves that women self-assess their skill levels significantly Gaming 58 4.7
Film 53 4.3
lower (Hargittai & Shafer, 2006). Moreover, the general opinion is that
Books/magazines 49 4.0
younger generations are considered digitally skilled, as they have had Employment situation
exposure to the Internet throughout their entire life (Dutton, Heslper, & Paid employment – permanent contract 241 19.7
Gerber, 2011; Van Deursen, Van Dijk, & Peters, 2011). Finally, research Paid employment – temporary contract 592 48.4
confirms that the level of education results in higher levels of digital Temporary agency worker 12 1.0
Self-employed 377 30.9
skills (Gui & Argentin, 2011; Hargittai, 2010; Van Deursen & Van Dijk,
Function level
2011). Altogether, this leads to the following hypotheses: Junior 200 16.4
Mid-Level 402 32.9
H12. Men have higher levels of 21st-century-digital skills than women. Senior 620 50.7
H13. Age has a negative infiuence on the level of 21st-century digital
skills.
respondents based on response time, their job function, and the country
H14. Level of education has a positive infiuence on the level of 21st- where they work. In total, 776 respondents were recruited via e-mail
century digital skills. and 446 via two online panels. As a result, 1222 professionals who are
directly involved in creative work processes (e.g., designers, engineers
and project managers) were part of this study. Table 1 shows the sample
3. Method characteristics.
3.1. Sample and procedure

3.2. Measures
An online survey was conducted from October to December 2017
among professionals working within creative industries in the The 21st-century digital skills were measured using an instrument
Netherlands. The data were collected by using two online panels and by developed by Van Laar, Van Deursen, Van Dijk, and De Haan (2018).
approaching potential professionals directly. The two online panels The items measured the frequency of various skill-related activities that
used screening questions to ensure that respondents were working are related to the 21st-century digital skills definition. Frequency items
within the creative industries. The direct selection resulted from using a are a direct indicator of behavior and there is evidence that they are
LinkedIn premium account. LinkedIn is a business-oriented social net- suited to serve as a proxy for actual digital skills (Van Deursen, Van
working site used to display professional information, connect with Dijk, & Peters, 2012). The scales ranged from 1 ‘never’ to 5 ‘(almost)
other professionals, and share employment opportunities. Especially always’. Cronbach's alpha values exceeded the normally accepted 0.7
because work within the creative industries is often based on temporal threshold. Appendix A displays the means, standard deviations, and
projects and teams, the use of personal networks is widely acknowl- reliability scores of each 21st-century digital skill for the full sample,
edged (Grugulis & Stoyanova, 2012). Potential organizations were se- employed and self-employed workers.
lected based on information from overarching industrial branch orga- To measure ICT attitude, we adapted three items from Chou (2010),
nizations or knowledge institutions in the Netherlands. Employers’ two from Van Damme et al. (2005), and one item from Tondeur et al.
websites were used to screen and contact potential professionals. This (2011). To measure perceived ease of use, we adapted four items from
study does not rely on personal contacts. Heerwegh et al. (2016), and added one item ourselves. ICT self-regula-
Panel members received a small incentive for their participation. tion was measured by adapting five items from Senkbeil and Ihme
The largest part of the respondents was approached individually by (2017). Self-directed learning was measured by adapting three items
sending potential respondents an email invitation. After completing the from Choy, Deng, Chai, Koh, and Tsai (2016), and we added two items.
online survey, they received an incentive of 10 Euros. The response rate Goal orientation was divided into: learning goal orientation, perfor-
of the e-mail invitation was 11.6%. To ensure data quality, we excluded mance goal orientation, and avoidance goal orientation. The instrument
96
from VandeWalle (1997) was used to assess each type of goal orienta- multiple 21st-century digital skills. For employed professionals, hy-
tion and we used five items to measure these constructs. Personal in- pothesis 2 is supported except for communication contact-building,
itiative was measured by adapting five items from Frese et al. (1997). collaboration, critical-thinking, and creativity skills. For self-employed
Social support was included by asking: “Who do you ask for help when professionals, hypothesis 2 is supported, except for communication
you have problems with the Internet at work?” The potential formal contact-building and networking, collaboration, and critical-thinking
support sources were: ‘supervisor’ (17.5%), ‘colleagues’ (66.8%), ‘ICT skills. The effect is strongest for communication expressiveness in the
services/helpdesk at work’ (47.3%), and ‘external ICT services/help- employed case and for information management in the self-employed
desk’ (14.2%). The potential informal support sources were: ‘friends/ case. ICT self-regulation only contributes positively to information
family outside of work’ (23.4%) and ‘Internet contacts/persons online’ management and communication expressiveness skills for employed
(14.1%). The potential reasons for asking nobody for help were: ‘no professionals, and to communication expressiveness and creativity for
help needed’ (10.6%), ‘no help available’ (2.2%), and ‘problems are too self-employed professionals. The results offer partial support for hy-
complex/specialized’ (2.9%). Training was included as a dichotomous pothesis 3.
variable by asking: “Did you attend a training about Internet applica- In case of employed professionals, self-directed learning contributes
tions and digital skills within the past 3 years?”. Most of the partici- positively to the level of information management and evaluation,
pants (71.1%) stated that they did not follow an ICT-related training. collaboration, and problem-solving skills. Self-directed learning con-
To test the structure of the independent variables, we conducted a tributes positively to partially the same skills in case of self-employed
confirmatory principal component analysis with varimax rotation. professionals; information management, communication expressive-
Factor loadings of 0.40 were considered to be significant for inclusion ness, and collaboration skills. This stresses the importance of setting
of the items in a factor (Stevens, 2012). After the first run, we excluded goals, reflecting on progress and adapting work planning when needed.
seven items that did not load on any factors, or loaded on different Hypothesis 4 is partially supported. The results also offer partial sup-
factors than anticipated. Then, we performed a rerun which confirmed port for hypotheses 5 and 6. For employed professionals, learning goal
eight independent variables with eigenvalues above 0.90 (eigenvalues orientation is accepted, except for information management and eva-
above the 0.70 are acceptable; Jolliffe, 1972), explaining 61% of the luation, communication contact-building, and critical-thinking skills.
variance. Internal consistency of the factors revealed a reliable factor For self-employed professionals, learning goal orientation is accepted for
solution. Cronbach's alpha values ranged from 0.72 to 0.82. Appendix B information evaluation, critical-thinking, and creativity skills. It is an
displays the scales used for the independent measures, including the especially strong predictor for creativity. A person who looks for op-
means, standard deviations, and reliability scores for the full sample, portunities to develop new skills and enjoys challenging tasks displays
employed and self-employed workers. higher levels of digital creative skills. In both cases, performance goal
orientation is accepted for communication networking and content-
4. Results sharing, collaboration, critical-thinking, and creativity skills. The con-
tribution of showing your abilities and accomplishments remains
4.1. Level of 21st-century digital skills stronger for self-employed professionals. In contrast to hypothesis 7,
avoidance goal orientation contributes positively to all skills, except in-
Fig. 1 shows that information management obtained the highest formation evaluation and critical-thinking. Remarkably, it is only pro-
mean score (M = 4.06, SD = 0.79). All other skills obtained scores minent in case of employed professionals.
below 4. Communication content-sharing (M = 2.64, SD = 0.89) and Personal initiative is an important determinant for employed pro-
communication contact-building (M = 2.83, SD = 0.90) scored the fessionals. Hypothesis 8 is accepted for all skills, except information
lowest, with mean scores below 3. An independent samples t-test was management. Almost all 21st-century digital skills ask for a proactive
conducted to examine whether differences between employed and self- working approach. It remains the strongest predictor for communica-
employed workers were significant. See Fig. 1. tion contact-building and networking skills. In case of self-employed
professionals, hypothesis 8 is accepted for communication expressive-
4.2. Determinants of 21st-century digital skills ness, contact-building, networking, and content-sharing skills.
Regarding formal support sources, we found a positive contribution
To test which determinants of 21st-century digital skills are sig- for support from supervisor on problem-solving skills in case of em-
nificant, we used multiple linear regression analysis. The analysis was ployed professionals. Also, support from colleagues contributes posi-
carried out using SPSS (IBM Statistics). Before conducting the regres- tively to collaboration and problem-solving skills. The positive con-
sion analyses, we checked for the assumptions of normality, linearity, tribution of support from colleagues on collaboration skills was also
homoscedasticity, and absence of multicollinearity by using a normal P- found for self-employed professionals. Altogether, hypothesis 9 is par-
P plot, a scatterplot of the residuals, and calculating the Variance tially supported. In both cases, the informal support source of Internet
Inflation Factors (VIF). The model residuals are normally distributed contacts remains a strong positive contributor. Support from Internet
and homoscedastic, so linearity was not a problem. All VIF values were contacts contributes positively to communication contact-building and
between 1 and 2.5, showing only moderate correlations, not warranting networking, content-sharing, creativity, and problem-solving skills.
corrective actions. Moreover, in case of self-employed professionals, support from external
Table 2 shows the results for employed workers and Table 3 for self- ICT Services contributes positively to information management skills
employed workers. For both, the independent variables explain the and support from family and friends contributes negatively to critical-
highest proportion of variance for communication expressiveness skills thinking skills. Hypothesis 10 is partially supported.
(40% and 38%) and the lowest for information management in the Attending training about Internet applications and digital skills con-
employed case (7%) and information evaluation skills in the self-em- tributes positively to multiple 21st-century digital skills. Hypothesis 11,
ployed case (12%). Overall, the results show that the level of each 21st- concerning the positive contribution of training, is in both cases ac-
century digital skill is explained by a different set of determinants. cepted for communication contact-building, networking, and content-
Hypothesis 1 concerns the impact of ICT attitude and is partially sharing. Moreover, in case of employed professionals, training also
supported. For employed professionals, ICT attitude contributes posi- contributes positively to problem-solving skills and in case of self-em-
tively to communication expressiveness and creativity skills. For self- ployed professionals to creativity skills.
employed professionals, the contribution is positive for communication Hypothesis 12 is partly supported, as employed men only outper-
expressiveness and networking, collaboration, and problem-solving form women in communication expressiveness, collaboration, critical-
skills. Tables 2 and 3 also show that perceived ease of use contributes to thinking, and problem-solving skills. In contrast to hypothesis 12, self-
97
Fig. 1. 21st-century digital skill levels from lowest to highest mean scores, Note: ∗
mark significant differences (p < .05) between employed and self-employed
workers.
employed women outperform men in information evaluation, commu- thinking, creativity, and problem solving), research falls short in ex-
nication networking and content-sharing skills. In case of employed amining a broad spectrum of skills and in going beyond socio-
professionals, age contributes negatively to communication expres- demographic and -economic explanations for skill differences (Hargittai,
siveness, collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving skills. In case of 2010; Scheerder et al., 2017). In this contribution we provide empirical
self-employed professionals, age contributes negatively to commu- evidence to further our understanding of skills determinants.
nication expressiveness and problem-solving skills. Hypothesis 13 is A first noteworthy result is that the levels of all skills vary sub-
partially supported. Finally, hypothesis 14, concerning the level of stantially, both for employed and self-employed professionals. The
educational attainment, is accepted for creativity skills in case of self- scores on communication content-sharing and contact-building seem to
employed professionals. be relatively low. These skills are, for instance, supported by ICT-re-
lated training; offering support for a potential practice targeting skill
5. Discussion improvement at the same time. While the level of information man-
agement skills seems relatively high, the findings suggest that overall
5.1. Main findings the levels of all 21st-century digital skills are mediocre. This finding
calls for further examination, as the skills investigated should be con-
Global competition, the Internet, and the widespread use of tech- sidered as highly important for workers within creative industries.
nology suggest that the economy of the 21st century will create new Excellent communication and networking skills are basic requirements
challenges for the workforce. Rapid digital transformation means that (Carey & Naudin, 2006). Considering that our sample is, in general,
almost all jobs require some level of digital skills, as does participation in highly educated, this is also worrisome for other workers, as 21st-
society at large (Ananiadou & Claro, 2009). Now that ICT is widely century digital skills will be increasingly important for all workers in all
available and distributed in organizations, the digital skills workers must industries.
possess go beyond the basic practical skills needed to use ICT effectively. Perceived ease of use, performance goal orientation, and support
Knowledge creation is of decisive importance in the 21st century. Con- from Internet contacts online are prominent factors determining the
sequently, employers increasingly ask for knowledge workers who are level of 21st-century digital skills for both employed and self-employed
highly skilled, meaning that they produce and distribute ideas and in- workers. In line with previous findings, perceived ease of use supports
formation rather than goods or services (Kefela, 2010). Skills are in- the development of digital skills (Heerwegh et al., 2016). From our
creasingly considered as an ongoing part of lifelong learning (Punie, findings, we conclude that perceived ease of use not only predicts basic
2007). Despite the near consensus that there is a rising demand for 21st- technical skills but also content-related digital skills. Another promi-
century digital skills (information, communication, collaboration, critical nent result is that help from people online is the most important support
98
Table 2
Regression analysis to predict 21st-century digital skills for employed workers (N = 833).
IM IE CE CB CN CS COL CT CREA PS
Gender (M/F) .03 .02 -.07 ∗

-.01 -.04 .01 -.10∗∗
-.11 ∗∗∗
-.03 -.12∗∗∗
Age (ref. 18–35)
36-50 -.04 -.04 -.11∗∗∗ -.02 .04 .00 -.09∗∗ -.04 -.06 -.15∗∗∗
51-65 .03 -.02 -.08∗ -.00 .00 .03 -.04 -.05 -.12∗∗∗ -.16∗∗∗
66+ -.04 .02 .01 .01 .01 -.02 -.02 -.00 -.01 .00
Education (ref. Medium)
High -.01 .04 -.01 .03 .01 .03 .06 .03 -.02 -.03
ICT attitude -.06 .04 .15∗∗∗ .00 .05 -.00 -.01 .02 .16∗∗∗ .04
Perceived ease of use .10∗ .14∗∗∗ .36∗∗∗ -.03 -.10∗∗ .09∗ .02 .04 .01 .28∗∗∗
ICT self-regulation .11∗∗ .05 .14∗∗∗ -.04 -.03 .05 -.02 .00 .04 .04
Self-directed learning .10∗ .13∗∗ .04 .02 .07 -.06 .10∗ .07 -.08 -.11∗∗
Learning goal orientation -.09 -.01 .10∗ .06 .10∗ .10∗ .14∗∗ .07 .26∗∗∗ .14∗∗
Performance goal orientation .05 -.05 -.03 .06 .14∗∗∗ .12∗∗ .10∗∗ .12∗∗∗ .10∗∗ .04
Avoidance goal orientation -.09∗ .03 .09∗∗ .12∗∗ .17∗∗∗ .11∗∗ .08∗ -.02 .19∗∗∗ .11∗∗∗
Personal initiative .06 .12∗∗ .15∗∗∗ .27∗∗∗ .25∗∗∗ .11∗∗ .11∗∗ .15∗∗∗ .21∗∗∗ .16∗∗∗
Social support
Supervisor .06 -.04 .02 -.04 -.01 .02 .-.01 -.02 .02 .07∗
Colleagues .03 -.00 .02 .04 .03 .02 .12∗∗∗ .03 .04 .08∗∗
ICT Services/helpdesk at work .04 .02 -.02 .05 .03 .04 -.00 .02 .00 -.01
External ICT Services/helpdesk .06 -.04 -.03 -.01 .02 -.01 -.02 -.03 -.05 -.02
Family/friends outside work -.05 .04 -.00 .01 .03 .01 -.06 .02 .04 .00
Internet contacts/persons online .04 .04 .03 .08∗ .10∗∗ .09∗∗ .06 .06 .09∗∗ .10∗∗
ICT training -.01 .06 .01 .11∗∗∗ .09∗∗ .19∗∗∗ .05 .03 .05 .07∗
2
R .07 .10 .40 .14 .20 .14 .15 .13 .26 .29
F 3.04∗∗∗ 4.59∗∗∗ 26.63∗∗∗ 6.78∗∗∗ 10.18∗∗∗ 6.64∗∗∗ 7.13∗∗∗ 6.27∗∗∗ 14.21∗∗∗ 16.63∗∗∗
∗
All regression coefficients are standardized.
∗
p < .05, ∗∗p < .01, ∗∗∗p < .001.
∗
IM=Information Management, IE=Information Evaluation, CE=Communication Expressiveness, CB=Communication Building, CN=Communication Networking,
CS=Communication Sharing, COL=Collaboration, CT=Critical Thinking, CREA=Creativity, Problem Solving = PS.
source determining the level of 21st-century digital skills. This is con- formal support sources, such as colleagues. This suggests that training
trary to the common finding that mainly formal support sources assist efforts might reduce the amount of difficulties experienced online, and
in difficulties with content-related digital skills (Van Deursen et al., thereby it reduces the need to ask the ICT service desk or colleagues for
2014). Based on our findings, help from colleagues contributes only to help. Furthermore, the results highlight that performance goal or-
the development of collaboration and problem-solving skills. A possible ientation not only predicts offline social or creative skills (e.g., Huang,
explanation might be that formal training eliminates the effect of other 2016; Liu, Wang, & Yao, 2017) but also several 21st-century digital
Table 3
Regression analysis to predict 21st-century digital skills for self-employed workers (N = 389).
IM IE CE CB CN CS COL CT CREA PS
Gender (M/F) -.03 .11 ∗

.06 .05 .20 ∗∗∗
.11 ∗
.00 -.03 .05 -.08
Age (ref. 18–35)
36-50 .10 -.05 -.16 ∗∗
-.01 .04 .11 -.03 -.08 -.06 -.08
51-65 .03 .00 -.08 .00 .04 .05 -.01 -.09 -.07 -.17∗∗
66+ .05 .03 .04 -.03 -.01 .01 -.07 -.08 -.08 -.16∗∗
Education (ref. Medium)
High .05 -.04 -.01 -.01 .02 -.03 .07 .06 -.10∗ -.06
ICT attitude .01 -.00 .13∗ .06 .13∗ .05 .23∗∗∗ .03 .04 .15∗
Perceived ease of use .36∗∗∗ .15∗ .32∗∗∗ .07 .01 .17∗∗ .05 .10 .17∗∗ .21∗∗∗
ICT self-regulation .04 .10 .14∗∗ .02 .03 .03 .04 .06 .11∗ .09
Self-directed learning .13∗ .08 .22∗∗∗ .06 .07 -.06 .14∗ .07 -.11 .02
Learning goal orientation -.03 .15∗ -.06 .05 .10 .01 .01 .16∗ .28∗∗∗ .07
Performance goal orientation -.06 -.05 .07 .10 .18∗∗∗ .13∗ .25∗∗∗ .18∗∗∗ .13∗ .03
Avoidance goal orientation -.04 -.05 -.03 .01 .04 .01 .01 .00 .08 .01
Personal initiative .09 -.06 .12∗ .19∗∗∗ .14∗ .18∗∗ .01 .05 .06 -.04
Social support
Supervisor -.03 .00 -.01 .05 .05 .00 .06 .02 .05 .04
Colleagues .03 .02 .01 .05 .05 .04 .12∗∗ .04 .03 .02
ICT Services/helpdesk at work .01 .07 .01 .08 -.05 .03 .02 -.00 -.02 -.05
External ICT Services/helpdesk .14∗∗ .06 .00 .08 .06 .05 .09 .01 .03 -.03
Family/friends outside work .06 .04 -.03 -.00 -.05 .01 .00 -.12∗ .01 .03
Internet contacts/persons online .09 .04 .05 .19∗∗∗ .14∗∗ .19∗∗∗ .04 .03 .11∗ .15∗∗
ICT training -.01 .08 .02 .14∗∗ .13∗∗ .12∗ .08 .07 .10∗ .03
2
R .25 .12 .38 .20 .24 .19 .27 .21 .26 .25
F 6.13∗∗∗ 2.44∗∗∗ 11.32∗∗∗ 4.62∗∗∗ 5.78∗∗∗ 4.20∗∗∗ 6.74∗∗∗ 4.93∗∗∗ 6.45∗∗∗ 6.00∗∗∗
∗
All regression coefficients are standardized.
∗
p < .05, ∗∗p < .01, ∗∗∗p < .001.
∗
IM=Information Management, IE=Information Evaluation, CE=Communication Expressiveness, CB=Communication Building, CN=Communication Networking,
CS=Communication Sharing, COL=Collaboration, CT=Critical Thinking, CREA=Creativity, Problem Solving = PS.
99
skills. appropriate initiatives.

The results reveal several differences between employed and self-
employed workers. Personal initiative is of particular importance for
5.2. Limitations and future research directions
employed professionals. They need the ability and willingness to go
beyond narrow task requirements and to approach work proactively by
The generalizability of the results is limited to professionals working
showing initiative (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2007; Frese et al., 1997).
within creative industries in the Netherlands. Future research may
The initiative concept seems very interesting, as it shares a central ar-
further examine whether our findings can be applied to different work
gument with recent learning theories that view learning as an active
contexts or to creative industry professionals in other countries.
process (Hetzner, Heid, & Gruber, 2012). A possible explanation for
Nonetheless, creative industries bring together a combination of crea-
why personal initiative did not contribute to the skills of self-employed
tive content and ICT skills (Bakhshi, Freeman, & Higgs, 2012) and serve
professionals, is that their degree of initiative is already high (Frese,
as a suitable context for investigating determinants contributing to
1995). They have no superior and have to self-start their actions (Frese
21st-century digital skills of knowledge workers.
et al., 1997). A similar reason might explain why avoidance goal or-
The 21st-century digital skills are measured using a self-reported
ientation only contributes to employed workers' level of digital skills.
method. Self-reported measures may not reflect the actual individuals'
Self-employed workers are not always able to delegate tasks and re-
skill levels, since this can lead to overrated or underrated skills (Talja,
sponsibilities to someone else (Frese et al., 1997). In contrast to our
2005). Relevant here is also the debate on the type of scales (e.g.,
expectations, employed workers’ avoidance goal orientation con-
agreement versus frequency) that best reflect actual skills (see for ex-
tributes positively to multiple 21st-century digital skills. Previous re-
ample Van Deursen, Helsper, & Eynon, 2016). The best way to address
search supports the finding for employee creativity (Song, Yu, Zhang, &
the limitations of self-reports is conducting observational studies in
Jiang, 2015). A possible explanation might be that the respondents
which actual performances are measured (Hargittai, 2005; Talja, 2005;
avoid setting tasks that do not suit their capabilities. It is valuable to
Van Deursen & Van Dijk, 2011). A useful contribution would be to
evaluate your strengths and weaknesses and to assign tasks to others if
subject participants to online tasks to test their range of 21st-century
they are more suitable for a given task.
digital skills.
Overall, an important conclusion from this contribution is that the
Although ICT-training emerged as a prominent determinant, based
level of each 21st-century digital skill is explained by a unique set of
on our results it is not clear whether the person attended an ICT-related
determinants. From previous research, we know that the analyzed skills
training via the organization, self-study, or own initiative. Furthermore,
have a conditional nature, which means that a person who lacks one
it is not clear if the person followed a technically-oriented skills training
type of skill is also likely to lack another (Van Laar, Van Deursen, Van
(e.g., learning a software program) or content-related skills training
Dijk, & De Haan, 2019). Our results highlight another barrier to skill
(e.g., learning how to collaborate effectively and respectfully). Future
development, as the proposed skills vary due to the different individual
research is encouraged to look into the specific context in which a
background variables. Not only does the development of each skill ask
person attended the ICT-related training. Additionally, it might be
for a specific order in which they should be learned, it also requires
worthwhile to investigate the qualitative aspects of support and
accounting for a different set of determinants. Self-directed learning, for
training by measuring a person's satisfaction level after asking for help
instance, contributes to the level of information, collaboration, and
and the reasons for not attending ICT training.
problem-solving digital skills, but does not have an impact upon com-
munication, creativity, or critical-thinking digital skills. This has im-
plications concerning the development of policies that target skill im- Acknowledgement
provement. The development of each 21st-century digital skill asks for a
unique approach. Understanding which factors affect the development This work was supported by NWO the national research council of
of skills at the level of the individual worker is important for designing the Netherlands (grant number: 409-15-214).
Appendix A. Means, standard deviations, and reliability of the 21st-century digital skills (full sample, employed and self-employed
workers)
Note: Items were asked in Dutch on a 5-point Likert scale: 1 = never, 2 = rarely, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, 5=(almost) always.
M (SD)
Total Employed Self-employed
The next statements are about processing information for work-related purposes.
At work, how often …
Information management (α = .76) 4.06 (0.79) 4.09 (0.76) 3.99 (0.84)
1.…do you save useful digital files directly to the right folder 4.21 (0.82) 4.22 (0.82) 4.19 (0.83)
2.…are you consistent in the naming of digital files 4.00 (0.95) 4.02 (0.93) 3.95 (0.99)
3.…do you organize digital files via a hierarchical folder structure 3.98 (1.07) 4.05 (1.01) 3.84 (1.17)
The next statements are about searching information for work-related purposes.
Information evaluation (α = .71) 3.67 (0.72) 3.70 (0.70) 3.62 (0.74)
1.…do you check the reliability of a website 3.56 (0.98) 3.61 (0.98) 3.48 (0.99)
2.…do you check the information found on a different website 3.50 (0.89) 3.50 (0.89) 3.51 (0.89)
3.…do you check if the information found is up to date 3.95 (0.82) 3.98 (0.80) 3.88 (0.85)
The next statements are about profiling yourself online for work-related purposes.
Communication: expressiveness (α = .79) 3.83 (0.60) 3.86 (0.60) 3.75 (0.60)
1.…do you get what you want from interactions on the internet 3.71 (0.73) 3.74 (0.74) 3.66 (0.70)
2.…are you via the internet effective in accomplishing what you want 3.87 (0.72) 3.93 (0.70) 3.74 (0.74)
3.…do you know how to use the internet to express ideas clearly 3.90 (0.72) 3.92 (0.72) 3.87 (0.70)
Communication: contact-building (α = .84) 2.83 (0.90) 2.80 (0.92) 2.87 (0.83)
100
1.…do new collaborations emerge by approaching online contacts 2.81 (0.99) 2.75 (1.00) 2.93 (0.95)
2.…do you establish online contacts to collaborate with 3.02 (1.04) 2.99 (1.07) 3.08 (0.97)
3.…do you find experts on the internet to start a project with 2.65 (1.07) 2.67 (1.10) 2.61 (1.00)
Communication: networking (α = .92) 3.04 (0.81) 2.97 (0.81) 3.19 (0.78)
1 …. do you spend time and effort in online networking with people from your field 3.04 (1.00) 2.97 (1.00) 3.17 (0.99)
2 …. do you use your online network to benefit from it 3.09 (1.00) 3.01 (1.01) 3.25 (0.94)
3 …. do you use your online network to generate business 2.92 (1.08) 2.75 (1.08) 3.30 (0.97)
4 …. do you build online relationships with people from your field 3.27 (0.96) 3.25 (0.98) 3.31 (0.94)
5 …. does the internet help you approach new professional contacts 3.29 (0.90) 3.26 (0.91) 3.37 (0.89)
6.…do you use your online network to increase brand awareness 3.16 (1.09) 3.00 (1.09) 3.51 (1.01)
7.…do you start a conversation with other professionals via the internet 2.81 (1.04) 2.76 (1.04) 2.92 (1.02)
8.…do you use your online network to achieve policy goals 2.72 (1.01) 2.73 (1.00) 2.72 (1.04)
Communication: content-sharing (α = .77) 2.64 (0.89) 2.63 (0.92) 2.66 (0.81)
1.…do you post new messages on the internet 3.11 (1.05) 3.06 (1.08) 3.21 (0.97)
2.…do you post a blog/article on the internet 2.36 (1.12) 2.34 (1.14) 2.39 (1.08)
3.…do you share information on the internet to start a discussion 2.46 (1.04) 2.50 (1.08) 2.37 (0.94)
The next statements are about sharing information for work-related purposes.
Collaboration (α = .93) 3.31 (0.79) 3.37 (0.77) 3.19 (0.83)
1.…do you share important information with your team via the internet 3.47 (1.05) 3.57 (0.98) 3.26 (1.17)
2.…do you use the internet to share information that supports the work of others 3.38 (1.00) 3.45 (0.97) 3.22 (1.04)
3.…do you use the internet to share resources that help the team perform tasks 3.27 (1.06) 3.37 (1.02) 3.06 (1.11)
4.…do you use the internet to provide each other with information that progresses work 3.52 (1.00) 3.59 (0.96) 3.39 (1.08)
5.…does the internet help you get support from co-workers 3.19 (0.98) 3.24 (0.99) 3.10 (0.95)
6.…do you communicate via the internet with co-workers from other disciplines 3.32 (1.03) 3.39 (1.00) 3.16 (1.06)
7.…do you share work-related knowledge with each other via the internet 3.35 (0.94) 3.39 (0.94) 3.26 (0.93)
8.…do you use the internet to give feedback to co-workers 3.09 (1.08) 3.10 (1.08) 3.07 (1.06)
9.…does the internet help you use other professionals' expertise 3.24 (0.85) 3.25 (0.87) 3.22 (0.82)
The next statements are about having online discussions (e.g., e-mail, Skype, online forums) for work-related purposes. At
work, how often …
Critical thinking (α = .94) 3.39 (0.70) 3.44 (0.68) 3.28 (0.72)
1.…do you give substantiated arguments or reasoning 3.57 (0.93) 3.64 (0.91) 3.43 (0.95)
2.…do you give proof or examples of arguments you give 3.34 (0.91) 3.39 (0.89) 3.23 (0.93)
3.…do you give a justification for your point of view 3.45 (0.91) 3.51 (0.90) 3.34 (0.94)
4.…are you able to put the discussion into a new perspective 3.25 (0.86) 3.28 (0.86) 3.19 (0.86)
5.…do you ask questions to understand other people's viewpoint 3.49 (0.96) 3.55 (0.93) 3.35 (1.00)
6.…do you consider various arguments to formulate your own point of view 3.54 (0.88) 3.58 (0.86) 3.47 (0.92)
7.…do you connect viewpoints to give a new turn to the discussion 3.22 (0.91) 3.27 (0.89) 3.12 (0.94)
8.…do you suggest new related points 3.15 (0.89) 3.21 (0.87) 3.04 (0.91)
9.…do you filter the most important points from discussions 3.59 (0.91) 3.65 (0.91) 3.47 (0.90)
10.…do you generate new input from a discussion 3.26 (0.85) 3.32 (0.82) 3.12 (0.89)
11.…are you open for ideas that challenge some of your held beliefs 3.50 (0.86) 3.55 (0.86) 3.41 (0.87)
12.…do you use the internet to justify your choices 3.25 (0.89) 3.31 (0.89) 3.13 (0.90)
Creativity (α = .89) 3.30 (0.73) 3.31 (0.72) 3.27 (0.74)
1.…do you give a creative turn to existing processes using the internet 3.16 (0.89) 3.19 (0.86) 3.10 (0.94)
2.…do you use the internet to generate innovative ideas for your field 3.34 (0.90) 3.36 (0.89) 3.31 (0.93)
3.…do you show originality in your work using the internet 3.25 (0.94) 3.22 (0.92) 3.32 (0.98)
4.…do you use the internet to execute your tasks creatively 3.38 (0.87) 3.39 (0.86) 3.36 (0.90)
5.…do you follow trends on the internet to generate original ideas 3.46 (0.93) 3.50 (0.92) 3.39 (0.93)
6.…do you use the internet to evaluate the usability of your ideas 3.21 (0.93) 3.26 (0.91) 3.13 (0.96)
The next statements are about problems at work that you want to solve by using the Internet.
Problem solving (α = .92) 3.52 (0.61) 3.52 (0.62) 3.52 (0.59)
1.…does the internet help you find the best way to solve the problem 3.56 (0.75) 3.56 (0.75) 3.57 (0.75)
2.…do you solve the problem using the internet 3.47 (0.81) 3.47 (0.82) 3.48 (0.80)
3.…do you come up with solutions to the problem via the internet 3.58 (0.78) 3.59 (0.79) 3.55 (0.75)
4.…does the internet help you find ways to solve problems 3.72 (0.74) 3.70 (0.75) 3.74 (0.70)
5.…are you confronted with a problem that you are sure you can solve using the internet 3.38 (0.82) 3.39 (0.84) 3.37 (0.76)
6.…do you make a decision using the internet that makes you feel happy afterwards 3.56 (0.75) 3.56 (0.76) 3.58 (0.71)
7 …. do you find the solution via the internet even though initially no solution is immediately apparent 3.32 (0.77) 3.34 (0.78) 3.29 (0.76)
8.…does the actual outcome you achieved via the internet match what you expected 3.55 (0.71) 3.54 (0.72) 3.57 (0.69)
101
Appendix B. Means, standard deviations, and reliability of the independent measures (full sample, employed and self-employed workers)
Note: Items were asked in Dutch on a 5-point Likert scale: 1 = totally disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = disagree/agree, 4 = agree, 5 = totally agree.
Note: Items removed are shown in italics.
M (SD)
Determinants Total Employed Self-employed
ICT attitude (α = .72) 3.69 (0.81) 3.74 (0.82) 3.57 (0.79)

1. I cannot take part into a conversation about internet applications 3.83 (1.03) 3.85 (1.04) 3.79 (1.03)
2. I am hesitant to try new internet applications 3.64 (0.98) 3.71 (0.96) 3.47 (1.00)
3. I cannot keep pace with the developments of internet applications 3.59 (1.03) 3.65 (1.04) 3.46 (1.00)
If I hear about new internet applications, I want to start experimenting with it
I am interested in working with internet applications
Among my colleagues, I am the first to try new internet applications
Perceived ease of use (α = .82) 4.22 (0.54) 4.26 (0.52) 4.14 (0.57)
1. The use of the internet is easy for me 4.46 (0.64) 4.51 (0.62) 4.33 (0.68)
2. I can teach myself the things I need to know about internet applications 4.04 (0.73) 4.07 (0.72) 3.98 (0.75)
3. If I get problems using the internet, I can usually solve them by myself 3.89 (0.86) 3.92 (0.84) 3.82 (0.90)
4. I can manage myself when using the internet 4.37 (0.62) 4.40 (0.62) 4.31 (0.63)
5. I feel comfortable using the internet 4.33 (0.65) 4.38 (0.62) 4.24 (0.70)
ICT self-regulation (α = .82) 3.32 (0.67) 3.34 (0.64) 3.28 (0.71)
When I work with Internet applications …
1. I can concentrate on one activity for a long time 3.49 (0.87) 3.52 (0.86) 3.43 (0.90)
2. After an interruption, I can easily resume my concentrated style of working 3.76 (0.76) 3.78 (0.73) 3.70 0.82)
3. I am easily distracted 3.01 (0.98) 3.04 (0.97) 2.96 (1.01)
4. It is easy for me to stay focused 3.33 (0.89) 3.38 (0.87) 3.24 (0.95)
5. I do not allow anything to distract me from my task 3.00 (0.88) 2.96 (0.88) 3.09 (0.89)
Self-directed learning (α = .72) 3.99 (0.49) 3.96 (0.49) 4.05 (0.49)
1. I try to determine the best way to work on task 4.08 (0.60) 4.04 (0.60) 4.15 (0.61)
2. I check my progress 3.90 (0.68) 3.86 (0.68) 3.98 (0.66)
3. I reflect on the way I perform my work 3.86 (0.73) 3.85 (0.72) 3.89 (0.75)
4. I adapt my planning when needed 4.12 (0.66) 4.10 (0.66) 4.17 (0.66)
I set goals for myself
Learning goal orientation (α = .80) 4.02 (0.51) 4.00 (0.51) 4.06 (0.52)
1. I look for opportunities to develop new skills and knowledge 3.94 (0.69) 3.92 (0.68) 3.99 (0.69)
2. I think learning and developing skills is important 4.12 (0.64) 4.11 (0.62) 4.13 (0.67)
3. I enjoy challenging tasks that I can learn a lot from 4.13 (0.67) 4.12 (0.68) 4.15 (0.65)
4. I enjoy working in situations where I will need many skills 4.11 (0.65) 4.10 (0.65) 4.14 (0.64)
5. I am willing to take risks to develop my skills 3.80 (0.80) 3.76 (0.78) 3.88 (0.85)
Performance approach goal orientation (α = .77) 3.40 (0.69) 3.45 (0.66) 3.29 (0.72)
1. I am concerned with showing my coworkers that I perform 3.45 (0.91) 3.54 (0.87) 3.28 (0.97)
2. I prefer to work on projects where I can show my abilities to others 3.31 (0.91) 3.35 (0.91) 3.23 (0.90)
3. I enjoy it when others at work are aware of how well I am doing 3.48 (0.90) 3.56 (0.87) 3.31 (0.94)
4. I enjoy showing my accomplishments to coworkers 3.35 (0.83) 3.36 (0.83) 3.33 (0.85)
I would rather show what I can do than I try something new
Avoidance approach goal orientation (α = .81) 2.27 (0.75) 2.30 (0.76) 2.21 (0.72)
1. I avoid learning new skills because I am afraid to appear incompetent 1.96 (0.90) 1.99 (0.91) 1.90 (0.87)
2. I avoid situations where I might perform poorly 2.57 (0.94) 2.58 (0.92) 2.56 (0.97)
3. I avoid taking on tasks if there is a chance that I appear incompetent 2.43 (0.93) 2.45 (0.91) 2.37 (0.95)
4. I would rather not ask questions if I do not understand something because I do not want to appear incompetent 2.12 (0.97) 2.16 (0.99) 2.03 (0.91)
I do not avoid difficult tasks even if it is then easier to make mistakes
Personal initiative (α = .75) 3.68 (0.55) 3.71 (0.54) 3.64 (0.59)
1. I actively attack problems 4.12 (0.60) 4.13 (0.59) 4.08 (0.62)
2. I take initiative immediately even when others do not 3.54 (0.79) 3.55 (0.78) 3.52 (0.83)
3. I use opportunities quickly in order to attain my goals 3.66 (0.75) 3.70 (0.71) 3.57 (0.82)
4. Whenever action needs to be taken, I am often the first that takes the initiative 3.41 (0.77) 3.43 (0.76) 3.37 (0.80)
Whenever there is a chance to get actively involved with new developments, I take it
References International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(17), 3447–3461. https://doi.

org/10.1080/09585192.2011.599940.
Chou, S. W. (2010). Why do members contribute knowledge to online communities?
Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st-Century skills and competences for new millennium Online Information Review, 34(6), 829–854. https://doi.org/10.1108/
learners in OECD countries. OECD education working papers, Vol. 41Paris, France: OECD 14684521011099360.
Publishing https://doi.org/10.1787/218525261154. Choy, D., Deng, F., Chai, C. S., Koh, H. L. J., & Tsai, P. S. (2016). Singapore primary and
Bakhshi, H., Freeman, A., & Higgs, P. (2012). A dynamic mapping of the UK's creative secondary students' motivated approaches for learning: A validation study. Learning
economy. London, UK: NESTA. and Individual Differences, 45, 282–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.11.
Brandtzæg, P. B., Lüders, M., & Skjetne, J. H. (2010). Too many facebook “friends”? 019.
Content sharing and sociability versus the need for privacy in social network sites. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 26(11–12), 1006–1030. https:// information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.
doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2010.516719. De Haan, J. (2004). A multifaceted dynamic model of the digital divide. IT & Society, 1(7),
Carey, C., & Naudin, A. (2006). Enterprise curriculum for creative industries students: An 66–88.
exploration of current attitudes and issues. Education + Training, 48(7), 518–531. De Wit, K., Heerwegh, D., & Verhoeven, J. C. (2014). Can openness to ICT and scientific
https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910610705908. research predict the ICT skills and ICT use of bachelor's students? Computers &
Chen, C. J., Shih, H. A., & Yeh, Y. C. (2011). Individual initiative, skill variety, and Education, 78, 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.003.
creativity: The moderating role of knowledge specificity and creative resources. Den Hartog, D., & Belschak, F. (2007). Personal initiative, commitment and affect at
102
work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 601–622. https:// 5897/INGOJ.
doi.org/10.1348/096317906X171442. Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth:
Dutton, W., Helsper, E. J., & Gerber, M. (2011). The Internet in Britain in 2011. Oxford, UK: Teacher knowledge for 21st century learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher
Oxford Internet Institute. Education, 29(4), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2013.10784716.
Edmunds, R., Thorpe, M., & Conole, G. (2012). Student attitudes towards and use of ICT Kim, S., & Lee, H. (2010). Factors affecting employee knowledge acquisition and appli-
in course study, work and social activity: A technology acceptance model approach. cation capabilities. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 2(2), 133–152.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. https://doi.org/10.1108/17574321011078184.
1467-8535.2010.01142.x. Kohn, K., & Wewel, S. A. (2018). Skills, scope and success: An empirical look at the start-
Frese, M. (1995). Entrepreneurship in East Europe: A general model and empirical up process in creative industries in Germany. Creativity and Innovation Management,
findings. In C. L. Cooper, & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.). Trends in organizational behavior 27(3), 295–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12279.
(pp. 65–83). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. New
Frese, M., Fay, D., Hilburger, T., Leng, K., & Tag, A. (1997). The concept of personal York, NY: Peter Lang.
initiative: Operationalization, reliability and validity in two German samples. Journal Lee, M. R., & Chen, T. T. (2015). Digital creativity: Research themes and framework.
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70(2), 139–161. https://doi.org/10. Computers in Human Behavior, 42, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.
1111/j.2044-8325.1997.tb00639.x. 001.
Gonçalves, G., Oliveira, T., & Cruz-Jesus, F. (2018). Understanding individual-level di- Lee, H., Park, N., & Hwang, Y. (2015). A new dimension of the digital divide: Exploring
gital divide: Evidence of an African country. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, the relationship between broadband connection, smartphone use and communication
276–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.039. competence. Telematics and Informatics, 32(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.
Goundar, S. (2014). The distraction of technology in the classroom. Journal of Education 2014.02.001.
and Human Development, 3(1), 211–229. Levy, F. (2010). How technology changes demands for human skills. OECD education working
Greiff, S., & Funke, J. (2017). Interactive problem solving: Exploring the potential of papers, Vol. 45Paris, France: OECD Publishing https://doi.org/10.1787/
minimal complex systems. In B. Csapó, & J. Funke (Eds.). The nature of problem sol- 5kmhds6czqzq-en.
ving: Using research to inspire 21st century learning (pp. 93–105). Paris, France: OECD Liang, T. P., Ho, Y. T., Li, Y. W., & Turban, E. (2011). What drives social commerce: The
Publishing. role of social support and relationship quality. International Journal of Electronic
Gretter, S., & Yadav, A. (2016). Computational thinking and media & information lit- Commerce, 16(2), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415160204.
eracy: An integrated approach to teaching twenty-first century skills. TechTrends, Liu, Y., Wang, S., & Yao, X. (2017). Individual goal orientations, team empowerment, and
60(5), 510–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0098-4. employee creative performance: A case of cross-level interactions. Journal of Creative
Grugulis, I., & Stoyanova, D. (2012). Social capital and networks in film and TV: Jobs for Behavior, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.220.
the boys? Organization Studies, 33(10), 1311–1331. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Mishra, P., & Kereluik, K. (2011). What 21st century learning? A review and a synthesis.
0170840612453525. In C. D. Maddux, M. J. Koehler, P. Mishra, & C. Owens (Eds.). Proceedings of society for
Gui, M., & Argentin, G. (2011). Digital skills of internet natives: Different forms of in- information technology & teacher education international conference 2011 (pp. 3301–
ternet literacy in a random sample of northern Italian high school students. New 3312). Chesapeake, VA: AACE International.
Media & Society, 13(6), 963–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810389751 6. Neubert, J. C., Mainert, J., Kretzschmar, A., & Greiff, S. (2015). The assessment of 21st
Hargittai, E. (2005). Survey measures of web-oriented digital literacy. Social Science century skills in industrial and organizational psychology: Complex and collaborative
Computer Review, 23(3), 371–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439305275911. problem solving. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 238–268. https://doi.
Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na (t) ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among org/10.1017/iop.2015.14.
members of the “net generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113. https://doi.org/ Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual
10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x. factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607–634. https://doi.org/10.
Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2006). Differences in actual and perceived online skills: The 2307/256657.
role of gender. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. Oldham, G. R., & Da Silva, N. (2015). The impact of digital technology on the generation
1540-6237.2006.00389.x. and implementation of creative ideas in the workplace. Computers in Human Behavior,
Hatlevik, I. K., & Hatlevik, O. E. (2018). Students' evaluation of digital information: The 42, 5–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.041.
role teachers play and factors that influence variability in teacher behaviour. Petersen, S. M. (2008). Loser generated content: From participation to exploitation. First
Computers in Human Behavior, 83, 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01. Monday, 13(3), https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v13i3.2141.
022. Petrucco, C., & Ferranti, C. (2017). Developing critical thinking in online search. Journal
Heerwegh, D., De Wit, K., & Verhoeven, J. C. (2016). Exploring the self-reported ICT skill of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 13(3), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-
levels of undergraduate science students. Journal of Information Technology Education, 8829/1390.
15(1), 19–47. Piergiovanni, R., Carree, M. A., & Santarelli, E. (2012). Creative industries, new business
Heppner, P. P., Walther, D. J., & Good, G. E. (1995). The differential role of information, and regional economic growth. Small Business Economics, 39(3), 539–560.
strumentality, expressivity, and social support in predicting problem-solving ap- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9329-4.
praisal in men and women. Sex Roles, 32(1–2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Pina, K., & Tether, B. S. (2016). Towards understanding variety in knowledge intensive
BF01544759. business services by distinguishing their knowledge bases. Research Policy, 45,
Hetzner, S., Heid, H., & Gruber, H. (2012). Change at work and professional learning: 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.005.
How readiness to change, self-determination and personal initiative affect individual Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in
learning through reflection. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 27(4), learning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544–555. https://
539–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-011-0094-1. doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544.
Higgins, S. (2014). Critical thinking for 21st-century education: A cyber-tooth curri- Punie, Y. (2007). Learning spaces: An ICT-enabled model of future learning in the
culum? Prospects, 44(4), 559–574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-014-9323-0. knowledge-based society. European Journal of Education, 42(2), 185–199. https://doi.
Huang, Y. M. (2016). Networking behavior: From goal orientation to promotability. org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2007.00302.x.
Personnel Review, 45(5), 907–927. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2014-0062. Punie, Y., & Ala-Mutka, K. (2008). Future learning spaces: New ways of learning and new
Hwang, Y., Kettinger, W. J., & Yi, M. Y. (2015). Personal information management ef- digital skills to learn. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 2(4), 210–225.
fectiveness of knowledge workers: Conceptual development and empirical validation. Saadé, R. G., Morin, D., & Thomas, J. D. (2012). Critical thinking in E-learning en-
European Journal of Information Systems, 24(6), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1057/ vironments. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1608–1617. https://doi.org/10.
ejis.2014.24. 1016/j.chb.2012.03.025.
Hwang, G. J., Tsai, P. S., Tsai, C. C., & Tseng, J. C. (2008). A novel approach for assisting Scheerder, A. J., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017). Determinants of
teachers in analyzing student web-searching behaviors. Computers & Education, 51(2), Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second-and third-level
926–938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.011. digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1607–1624. https://doi.org/10.
Ifenthaler, D. (2012). Determining the effectiveness of prompts for self-regulated learning 1016/j.tele.2017.07.007.
in problem- solving scenarios. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 38–52. Schulze, J., Schultze, M., West, S. G., & Krumm, S. (2017). The knowledge, skills, abilities,
Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., & Kantosalo, A. (2016). Digital competence–An and other characteristics required for face-to-face versus computer-mediated com-
emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and munication: Similar or distinct constructs? Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(3),
Information Technologies, 21(3), 655–679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014- 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9465-6.
9346-4. Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of
Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3),
the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 580–607. https://doi.org/10.2307/256701.
Jolliffe, I. T. (1972). Discarding variables in a principal component analysis I: Artificial Senkbeil, M., & Ihme, J. M. (2017). Motivational factors predicting ICT literacy: First
data. Applied Statistics, 21(2), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.2307/2346488. evidence on the structure of an ICT motivation inventory. Computers & Education,
Joo, B. K., Yang, B., & McLean, G. N. (2014). Employee creativity: The effects of perceived 108, 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.003.
learning culture, leader–member exchange quality, job autonomy, and proactivity. Song, W., Yu, H., Zhang, Y., & Jiang, W. (2015). Goal orientation and employee creativity:
Human Resource Development International, 17(3), 297–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/ The mediating role of creative role identity. Journal of Management and Organization,
13678868.2014.896126. 21(1), 82–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2014.64.
Kang, Y. J., Lee, J. Y., & Kim, H. W. (2017). A psychological empowerment approach to Stevens, J. P. (2012). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (5th ed.). New
online knowledge sharing. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 175–187. https://doi. York, NY: Taylor and Francis Group.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.039. Talja, S. (2005). The social and discursive construction of computing skills. Journal of the
Kefela, G. T. (2010). Knowledge-based economy and society has become a vital com- American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 13–22. https://doi.
modity to countries. International NGO Journal, 5(7), 160–166. https://doi.org/10. org/10.1002/asi.20091.
103
Tondeur, J., Sinnaeve, I., Van Houtte, M., & Van Braak, J. (2011). ICT as cultural capital: sequential and conditional nature of 21st-century digital skills. International Journal
The relationship between socioeconomic status and the computer-use profile of of Communication, 13, 1–26.
young people. New Media & Society, 13(1), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/ VandeWalle, D. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation
1461444810369245 1. instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 995–1015. https://doi.
Trip, J. J., & Romein, A. (2014). Creative city policy and the gap with theory. European org/10.1177/0013164497057006009.
Planning Studies, 22(12), 2490–2509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013. Van de Oudeweetering, K., & Voogt, J. (2018). Teachers' conceptualization and enact-
790592. ment of twenty- first century competences: Exploring dimensions for new curricula.
Van Damme, M., De Haan, J., Kraan, K., Kwakkelstein, T., De Leede, J., Steijn, B., et al. Curriculum Journal, 29(1), 116–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2017.
(2005). Verzonken technologie: ICT en arbeidsmarkt. Den Haag, the Netherlands: 1369136.
Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau (SCP). Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society.
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Courtois, C., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2014). Internet skills, London, UK: Sage Publishing.
support sources and beneficial Internet use. International Journal of Human-Computer Vassallo, S. (2014). The entanglement of thinking and learning skills in neoliberal dis-
Interaction, 30(4), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2013.858458. course. In T. Corcoran (Ed.). Psychology in education (pp. 145–165). Dordrecht, the
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2016). Development and validation Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
of the internet skills scale (ISS). Information, Communication & Society, 19(6), Verhoeven, J. C., Heerwegh, D., & De Wit, K. (2016). ICT learning experience and re-
804–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1078834. search orientation as predictors of ICT skills and the ICT use of university students.
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2011). Internet skills and the digital Education and Information Technologies, 21(1), 71–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/
divide. New Media & Society, 13(6), 893–911. https://doi.org/10.1177/ s10639-014-9310-3.
1461444810386774. West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2015a). Internet skill levels increase, but critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions.
gaps widen: A longitudinal cross-sectional analysis (2010-2013) among the Dutch Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 930–941. https://doi.org/10.1037/
population. Information, Communication & Society, 18(7), 782–797. https://doi.org/ a0012842.
10.1080/1369118X.2014.994544. Wolff, H. G., & Moser, K. (2010). Do specific types of networking predict specific mobility
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2015b). Towards a multifaceted model outcomes? A two-year prospective study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(2),
of Internet access to understand digital divides: An empirical investigation. The 238–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.03.001.
Information Society, 31(5), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2015. Wolters, C. A. (2010). Self-regulated learning and the 21st century competencies. The William
1069770. and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.hewlett.org/library/
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Peters, O. (2011). Rethinking Internet grantee-publication/self-regulated-learning-and-21st-century-competencies.
skills: The contribution of gender, age, education, Internet experience, and hours Yang, Y. T. C. (2012). Building virtual cities, inspiring intelligent citizens: Digital games
online to medium- and content-related Internet skills. Poetics, 39(2), 125–144. for developing students' problem solving and learning motivation. Computers &
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2011.02.001. Education, 59(2), 365–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.012.
Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Peters, O. (2012). Proposing a survey Yi, M. Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems: Self-
instrument for measuring operational, formal, information, and strategic internet efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model.
skills. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 28(12), 827–837. https:// International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.
doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2012.670086. 1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9.
Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2017). The Zampetakis, L. A., Bouranta, N., & Moustakis, V. S. (2010). On the relationship between
relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. individual creativity and time management. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1),
Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 577–588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03. 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.12.001.
010. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M.
Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2018). 21st- Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39).
Century digital skills instrument aimed at working professionals: Conceptual devel- New York, NY: Academic Press.
opment and empirical validation. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2184–2200. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Achieving self-regulation: The trial and triumph of adoles-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.08.006. cence. In F. Pajares, & T. Urdan (Eds.). Academic motivation of adolescents (pp. 1–27).
Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & De Haan, J. (2019). The Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
104

Laar Et Al 2019 Digital Skills

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laar Et Al 2019 Digital Skills

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laar Et Al 2019 Digital Skills

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Computers in Human Behavior 100 (2019) 93–104

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

Full length article

Determinants of 21st-century digital skills: A large-scale survey among T

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

1. Introduction communication technologies (ICTs) to access and disseminate in-

3.1. Sample and procedure

Gender (M/F) .03 .02 -.07 ∗

Gender (M/F) -.03 .11 ∗

skills. appropriate initiatives.

Total Employed Self-employed

Determinants Total Employed Self-employed

ICT attitude (α = .72) 3.69 (0.81) 3.74 (0.82) 3.57 (0.79)

References International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(17), 3447–3461. https://doi.

You might also like