Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Oct 22;9(4):e31.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.9.4.e31.

Barriers and facilitators to home computer and internet use among urban novice computer users of low socioeconomic position

Emily Z Kontos  1 , Gary G Bennett, K Viswanath
Affiliations

Barriers and facilitators to home computer and internet use among urban novice computer users of low socioeconomic position

Emily Z Kontos et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Despite the increasing penetration of the Internet and amount of online health information, there are significant barriers that limit its widespread adoption as a source of health information. One is the "digital divide," with people of higher socioeconomic position (SEP) demonstrating greater access and usage compared to those from lower SEP groups. However, as the access gap narrows over time and more people use the Internet, a shift in research needs to occur to explore how one might improve Internet use as well as website design for a range of audiences. This is particularly important in the case of novice users who may not have the technical skills, experience, or social connections that could help them search for health information using the Internet. The focus of our research is to investigate the challenges in the implementation of a project to improve health information seeking among low SEP groups. The goal of the project is not to promote health information seeking as much as to understand the barriers and facilitators to computer and Internet use, beyond access, among members of lower SEP groups in an urban setting.

Objective: The purpose was to qualitatively describe participants' self-identified barriers and facilitators to computer and Internet use during a 1-year pilot study as well as the challenges encountered by the research team in the delivery of the intervention.

Methods: Between August and November 2005, 12 low-SEP urban individuals with no or limited computer and Internet experience were recruited through a snowball sampling. Each participant received a free computer system, broadband Internet access, monthly computer training courses, and technical support for 1 year as the intervention condition. Upon completion of the study, participants were offered the opportunity to complete an in-depth semistructured interview. Interviews were approximately 1 hour in length and were conducted by the project director. The interviews were held in the participants' homes and were tape recorded for accuracy. Nine of the 12 study participants completed the semistructured interviews. Members of the research team conducted a qualitative analysis based on the transcripts from the nine interviews using the crystallization/immersion method.

Results: Nine of the 12 participants completed the in-depth interview (75% overall response rate), with three men and six women agreeing to be interviewed. Major barriers to Internet use that were mentioned included time constraints and family conflict over computer usage. The monthly training classes and technical assistance components of the intervention surfaced as the most important facilitators to computer and Internet use. The concept of received social support from other study members, such as assistance with computer-related questions, also emerged as an important facilitator to overall computer usage.

Conclusions: This pilot study offers important insights into the self-identified barriers and facilitators in computer and Internet use among urban low-SEP novice users as well as the challenges faced by the research team in implementing the intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Structural Influence Model [16]
Figure 2
Figure 2
Total number of calls by all participants to technical support helpline by number of months with computer
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Pew Internet & American Life Project, authors. February 15 – March 7, 2007 Tracking Survey. [2007 Oct 14]. http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/User_Demo_6.15.07.htm.
    1. Fox S. Health information online: eight in ten internet users have looked for health information online, with increased interest in diet, fitness, drugs, health insurance, experimental treatments, and particular doctors and hospitals. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2005. [2007 Oct 12]. 5OQ3kLyaG http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/156/report_display.asp.
    1. Satterlund Melisa J, Mccaul Kevin D, Sandgren Ann K. Information gathering over time by breast cancer patients. J Med Internet Res. 2003 Aug 27;5(3):e15. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5.3.e15. http://www.jmir.org/2003/3/e15/ - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beckjord Ellen Burke, Finney Rutten Lila J, Squiers Linda, Arora Neeraj K, Volckmann Lindsey, Moser Richard P, Hesse Bradford W. Use of the internet to communicate with health care providers in the United States: estimates from the 2003 and 2005 Health Information National Trends Surveys (HINTS) J Med Internet Res. 2007 Jul 12;9(3):e20. http://www.jmir.org/2007/3/e20/v9i3e20 - PMC - PubMed
    1. DiMaggio P, Hargittai E, Neuman WR, Robinson JP. Social implications of the Internet. Annu Rev Sociol. 2001;27(1):307–336. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.307. - DOI

Publication types