Measuring Digital Citizenship among Youth: Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Scale in Portugal

Measuring Digital Citizenship among Youth: Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Scale in Portugal | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Measuring Digital Citizenship among Youth: Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Scale in Portugal Mariana Rodrigues This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9563069/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Democratic societies increasingly shaped by digital technologies face complex challenges that require the development of critical and participatory forms of digital citizenship among youth. While existing approaches often emphasise technical skills and normative behaviours, there is a growing need for multidimensional frameworks that integrate ethical, critical, and civic dimensions. This study aimed to develop and validate a self-report instrument to assess digital citizenship among youth, theoretically grounded in Choi’s ( 2016 ) framework and empirically extended to reflect contemporary digital practices. Data were collected from a probabilistic sample of 1104 Portuguese youth aged 11 to 21 years. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a 27-item structure organised into six dimensions: basic technical competences, advanced technical competences, digital ethics, sociopolitical responsibility, critical awareness, and political activism. The model demonstrated satisfactory fit and robust psychometric properties. Structural equation modelling revealed significant differences across dimensions according to sex, age, and socioeconomic status. The findings suggest that digital citizenship is a multidimensional and context-sensitive construct that extends beyond technical and normative approaches, incorporating critical awareness and socially oriented engagement. The validated instrument provides a robust tool for research and educational practice, supporting the assessment of youth digital citizenship and the design of interventions aimed at fostering critical and participatory engagement in digital societies. Educational Psychology Digital citizenship Youth Scale development Psychometric validation Education Structural equation modelling Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 1 Introduction The increasing integration of digital technologies into everyday life has blurred the boundaries between online and offline contexts, particularly among younger generations (Castells, 2001 ; Jordan, 2009 ; Stellmann, 2021). Recent data indicate that 79% of youth aged 15–24 use the Internet and that 90% of children aged 9–13 own a smartphone globally (Razorfish, 2024 ; ITU, 2023 ). While this digital transformation creates opportunities for communication, learning, and social interaction, it also introduces complex challenges, including exposure to harmful content, misinformation, and new forms of social inequality (Dadi et al., 2024 ; Smahel et al., 2020 ). In response to these challenges, policy and academic discourses increasingly emphasise the role of education in fostering digital citizenship among young people, understood as the development of knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes required to participate meaningfully in digitally mediated democratic societies (OECD, 2015 ; UNESCO, 2024 ). However, despite the growing relevance of this concept, there is still a lack of consensus regarding its definition and measurement. Existing research highlights significant limitations in the empirical assessment of digital citizenship. Many instruments focus predominantly on technical skills, online safety, or normative behaviours, often neglecting critical and participatory dimensions (Chen et al., 2021 ; Shi et al., 2023 ). Furthermore, most studies rely on non-probabilistic samples and are concentrated in a limited number of countries, restricting the generalisability of findings and overlooking contextual specificities (Richardson et al., 2021 ). To address these gaps, the present study aims to develop and validate a multidimensional instrument to assess digital citizenship among Portuguese youth aged 11 to 21 years, grounded in Choi’s ( 2016 ) theoretical framework. By combining a representative sample with a comprehensive conceptual approach, this study seeks to contribute to advancing both the measurement and understanding of digital citizenship in contemporary digital societies. 2.4 Conceptualisations of Digital Citizenship Over the past decades, the concept of digital citizenship has evolved considerably, reflecting broader transformations in digital technologies and their role in society. Early definitions conceptualised digital citizenship primarily in terms of access and participation, defining it as the “ability to participate in society online” (Mossberger et al., 2007 , p. 1). This perspective emphasised inclusion and digital access as key components of citizenship in the digital age. Subsequent approaches, particularly those proposed by Ribble and Bailey ( 2004 , 2007 ), introduced a more normative framework centred on responsible, ethical, and legal use of digital technologies. This perspective framed digital citizenship as a set of behavioural norms guiding appropriate online conduct, including issues such as digital etiquette, security, and respect for others. More recently, scholars have argued for broader and more critical conceptualisations of digital citizenship that move beyond technical and normative dimensions. These approaches emphasise the role of digital technologies as spaces for civic engagement, identity construction, and social participation, highlighting the importance of critical thinking, agency, and democratic engagement (Cortesi et al., 2020 ; Emejulu & McGregor, 2019 ). In this sense, digital citizenship is increasingly understood as a multidimensional construct encompassing not only individual competences but also social, political, and ethical engagement in digital environments. 1.2 Choi’s Framework and Critical Approaches Among the various conceptualisations, Choi’s ( 2016 ) framework offers one of the most comprehensive and theoretically grounded approaches to digital citizenship. Based on a cross-disciplinary analysis, the author conceptualises digital citizenship as a multidimensional construct comprising four categories: ethics, media and information literacy, participation/engagement, and critical resistance. This framework integrates technical, cognitive, and socio-political dimensions, positioning digital citizenship as a form of democratic participation in digital contexts. The ethics dimension focuses on responsible, safe, and respectful behaviour online, often associated with normative approaches to digital citizenship. The media and information literacy (MIL) dimension encompasses the skills required to access, evaluate, and produce digital information. However, recent research highlights that MIL extends beyond functional skills to include critical understanding of information ecosystems, misinformation, and the socio-technical processes shaping digital content (Livingstone, 2019 ; Mihailidis, 2018 ). As such, MIL is increasingly recognised as a key component of informed and critical participation in democratic societies. The participation/engagement dimension reflects the role of digital technologies as spaces for civic and political action, enabling individuals to express opinions, collaborate, and engage in collective efforts to address social issues. In this perspective, digital citizenship is understood as an active practice embedded in digital public spheres (Choi, 2016 ; Jones & Mitchell, 2016 ). Finally, the critical resistance dimension introduces an explicitly critical and emancipatory perspective, emphasising the capacity to question and challenge power structures, inequalities, and dominant narratives in digital environments. This dimension aligns with critical approaches that conceptualise digital citizenship as a form of agency and social transformation, highlighting the importance of recognising algorithmic bias, digital inequalities, and mechanisms of control embedded in digital platforms (Emejulu & McGregor, 2019 ; Pangrazio, 2016 ). Together, these dimensions position digital citizenship as a complex and dynamic construct that extends beyond individual behaviour to encompass critical awareness and engagement with broader social and political structures. 1.3 Measurement of Digital Citizenship Despite the conceptual development of digital citizenship, its empirical measurement remains a significant challenge. Several instruments have been developed to assess digital citizenship across different contexts and populations, demonstrating varying conceptualisations and psychometric properties (Chen et al., 2021 ; Fernández-Prados et al., 2021 ; Shi et al., 2023 ). Many existing instruments focus on specific aspects of digital citizenship, such as digital literacy, online safety, or ethical behaviour, often neglecting its multidimensional nature. For example, some scales emphasise technical competences and responsible use of technology (Isman & Gungoren, 2014), while others focus on civic engagement and respectful online behaviour (Jones & Mitchell, 2016 ). While these approaches provide valuable insights, they may contribute to fragmented understandings of digital citizenship and limit comparability across studies. More recent efforts have attempted to develop instruments aligned with broader theoretical frameworks, particularly that of Choi ( 2016 ) (Choi et al., 2017 ; Kim & Choi, 2018 ; Lozano-Díaz & Fernández-Prados, 2020 ). However, systematic reviews highlight persistent limitations in this body of research, including the predominance of non-probabilistic samples, a concentration of studies in specific geographical contexts, and insufficient attention to younger populations (Richardson et al., 2021 ; Shi et al., 2023 ). These limitations underscore the need for theoretically grounded and psychometrically robust instruments capable of capturing the multidimensional nature of digital citizenship across diverse contexts and populations. There is a need for measures that integrate technical, ethical, critical, and participatory dimensions, while also accounting for contextual specificities and the lived experiences of youth in digital environments. 2 Methods 2.1 Data collection procedures The development of the instrument was informed by a comprehensive review of the literature on digital citizenship. Existing validated scales were selected, translated, and culturally adapted to the Portuguese context when necessary. The preliminary version of the questionnaire was evaluated by a panel of experts in Education Sciences and Psychology to assess content validity, clarity, and conceptual adequacy. Subsequently, a pilot study was conducted with two groups of students from grades 7 to 12 to ensure comprehensibility and appropriateness for the target population. Minor adjustments were made based on feedback from both experts and participants. The final version of the instrument was approved by the School Survey Monitoring Unit of the Portuguese Directorate-General for Education (Ref. 0566300008). All ethical procedures were strictly followed, including informed consent, voluntary participation, anonymity, confidentiality, and data protection. Data were collected through an online questionnaire administered via LimeSurvey, with an average completion time of approximately 20 minutes. 2.2 Participants This study draws on data from a longitudinal research project (Ede – Digital Education in Schools), using information collected in two waves (November/December 2021 and June/July 2022). The sample comprised a cohort of 1150 students from 38 Portuguese schools, selected through stratified probabilistic sampling to ensure representation across the national territory. Participants’ ages ranged from 11 to 21 years (M = 14.83; SD = 1.81). The sample included 48.8% female participants, 50.5% male participants, and 0.7% identifying as another gender. Regarding educational level, participants were distributed across grades 7 to 11. Approximately 20.8% of the sample reported receiving school social support, indicating lower socioeconomic status. 2.3 Measures Drawing on the theoretical framework developed by Choi ( 2016 ), digital citizenship was defined as a multidimensional construct combining technical skills, ethics, critical awareness, and political activism, along with their respective measures. The measures included in the instrument were selected from existing empirical studies and are presented and summarised in Table 1 . Technical skills . This dimension encompasses both basic and advanced technical skills required to access and use digital technologies. These were assessed using scales of students’ self-efficacy in relation to the use of general and specialised applications, respectively (Fraillon et al., 2018). Participants were asked to indicate how capable they felt in performing a set of basic tasks (seven items), such as editing photographs or evaluating the credibility of online content, and a set of advanced tasks (six items), such as creating a database or installing security software. Each item was rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all capable) to 5 (very capable). Ethics . This dimension refers to ethical and respectful conduct in digital environments, emphasising individual rights and democratic principles. The digital ethics scale developed by Choi ( 2015 ) was used for its assessment. Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a series of nine statements concerning online activities, including downloading content illegally or posting photos or videos of others without permission, using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Critical awareness . This dimension concerns the ability to question and critically analyse power structures, discourses, and representations present in digital contexts, as well as their social, political, economic, and environmental impacts. The critical resistance scale developed by Choi ( 2015 ) was adopted to assess critical awareness. Participants were presented with six statements, such as “some individuals or organisations control a large proportion of the information circulating on the Internet” or “problems in the digital world reflect what happens in the real world” and were asked to indicate their level of agreement using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Political activism . This dimension refers to the capacity for engagement and active participation in civic and political life through individual or collective actions using digital technologies. It was assessed using the participation/engagement scale developed by Choi ( 2015 ). Participants indicated how frequently they engaged in a set of 11 online activities, ranging from signing petitions to collaborating with others to solve local, national, or global problems, using a five-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very frequently). Sociodemographic information . The instrument collected sociodemographic data, including sex (1 = male, 50.4%), age group (1 = 16–21 years, 40.6%), and socioeconomic status (SES). SES was operationalised as a composite variable combining multiple indicators, including perceived economic hardship, parental employment status, school social support, and parental education. These variables were XXXharacterize prior to aggregation to ensure comparability. 2.4 Data analysis procedures 2.4.1 Preliminary analysis The data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 29.0. Descriptive analyses were conducted to characterise the sociodemographic profile of the study sample and to assess whether all instrument items met the criteria established for inclusion in subsequent analyses (Table 1 ). Specifically, items were examined for: (a) extreme mean values or zero variance; (b) absolute skewness values greater than 3 or kurtosis values greater than 10, indicating substantial deviations from normality; and (c) the absence of correlations above .30 with other items (Kline, 2016 ). 2.4.2 Exploratory Factorial Analysis To examine the factorial structure of the instrument items designed to measure digital citizenship, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 29.0. The principal components extraction method was applied, and an oblique rotation (promax) was selected, given the assumption of correlations between factors. Sample adequacy was assessed using the overall and individual Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measures, as well as Bartlett’s test of sphericity. Adequacy was further evaluated based on the ratio of participants to items. The number of factors to retain was determined using Kaiser’s criterion (eigenvalues greater than 1), the scree test, and sample size considerations (Hayton et al., 2004). To decide on item retention, the following criteria were applied: (a) items with communalities above .40 (Rex B. Kline, 2016 ) and factor loadings above .40 (James Stevens, 2002); (b) absence of items loading on multiple factors; and (c) conceptual coherence with the respective factor. The EFA was conducted using data from the first wave of the Ede project (n = 1150). 2.4.3 Confirmatory Factorial Analysis Subsequently, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using IBM SPSS Amos 28.0, drawing data collected at the second wave of observation, seven months after the initial survey, with the same cohort of students. The aim was to test the digital citizenship model derived from the EFA. The CFA tested a six-factor model comprising: basic technical competences (seven items), advanced technical competences (six items), ethics (four items), sociopolitical responsibility (four items), critical awareness (five items), and political activism (eight items). The overall model fit and the psychometric properties of the instrument were assessed. Model fit was evaluated using the following reference indices: Chi-square test (χ²/df < 5), Comparative Fit Index (CFI ≥ .90), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI ≥ .90), Expected Cross-Validation Index (ECVI, lower values indicating better fit in comparison), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA ≤ .08) (Kline, 2016 ). The psychometric evaluation included the assessment of factorial reliability and convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity. Factorial reliability was estimated using composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach’s alpha (α), with values ≥ .70 considered indicative of adequate internal consistency. Convergent validity was examined through factor loadings, with acceptable values ≥ .50, and average variance extracted (AVE), considered adequate when ≥ .50. Discriminant validity was assessed based on the Fornell–Larcker criterion, requiring that the AVE of each factor exceeds the squared correlations between that factor and all others (Kline, 2016 ). Item removal decisions were based on a combination of statistical indicators (e.g., modification indices, factor loadings) and theoretical considerations, ensuring conceptual coherence of the final model. Given the longitudinal design of the study, the temporal stability of digital citizenship was explored by examining correlations between mean scores across the two waves of data collection. Although full measurement invariance testing was beyond the scope of this study, this analysis provides an initial indication of the stability of the construct over time. 2.4.4 Structural Equation Model Finally, a structural equation model (SEM) was tested using IBM SPSS Amos 28.0 to examine significant differences in the latent factors of digital citizenship (dependent variables) as a function of sociodemographic variables, namely sex (1 = male), age group (1 = 16–21 years), and socioeconomic status, which were included as predictors in the model. Parameter estimation was performed using the maximum likelihood method. Given the large sample size and the approximately normal distribution of the data, this estimator was considered appropriate. Missing data were handled using regression imputation, as the proportion of missing values was low and did not significantly affect the overall data structure. Model fit was assessed using the indices described for the CFA. 3 Results 3.1 Descriptive analysis Prior to the preliminary analysis, four negatively worded items (i24-i27) were reverse-coded to ensure that higher scores corresponded to higher levels of digital citizenship. Descriptive statistics were examined to assess the distributional properties of the items. Mean values, standard deviations, skewness, and kurtosis indicated that all items presented acceptable levels of univariate normality (|Sk| < 3; |Ku| < 10), supporting their inclusion in subsequent analyses (Table 1 ). Item–item correlations were also inspected, and items 20 and 21 did not reach the minimum correlation threshold (r < .30) were excluded to ensure internal consistency and coherence of the construct. These preliminary analyses confirmed the adequacy of the dataset, and 36 items were retained for factor analysis. 3.2 Exploratory Factorial Analysis Prior to conducting the exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the presence of multivariate outliers was assessed using Mahalanobis distance. The critical value for 36 items (χ²(36), p < .001 ≈ 67.99) was used as a threshold. A total of 41 cases exceeding this value were identified and subsequently removed, as they represented atypical response patterns with the potential to distort the factor structure. Despite the reduction in sample size (n = 1109), the ratio between the number of participants and the number of estimated parameters remained highly favourable, with a cases-to-items ratio exceeding 30:1, well above recommended thresholds for factor analysis (Kline, 2016 ). The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy indicated excellent overall adequacy (.916), while individual KMO values for each item exceeded .80, suggesting that all items shared a substantial proportion of common variance. These results provide strong support for the suitability of the correlation matrix for factor analysis. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was statistically significant, χ²(630) = 15109.97, p < .001, further confirming the adequacy of the data for EFA (Kline, 2016 ). An initial examination of eigenvalues and factor structure revealed the emergence of an additional factor not anticipated in the original theoretical model. This factor, comprising items 22, 23, and 28, demonstrated both theoretical coherence and psychometric consistency and was therefore retained. It was interpreted and labelled as sociopolitical responsibility, reflecting an informed, empathetic, and reflective orientation towards others and towards social and political issues in digital contexts (see Table 1 ). Based on the predefined criteria (factor loadings ≥ .40, communalities ≥ .40, and absence of cross-loadings), several items were excluded. Item 33 was removed due to low factor loading and communality values. Items 19 and 36 were excluded due to cross-loadings across multiple factors, combined with relatively low factor loadings. Although item 37 showed a significant loading, it was excluded due to a lack of conceptual coherence with the corresponding factor. Following item removal, a six-factor solution was retained. These six factors presented eigenvalues greater than 1 and jointly explained 63.32% of the total variance. Although the scree plot suggested a potential seventh factor, this solution was not retained due to limited interpretability and marginal contribution to explained variance. Considering the convergence of statistical criteria and theoretical interpretability, the six-factor solution with 32 items was deemed the most appropriate representation of the data (see Table 1 ). Table 1 Descriptive statistics for the 38 items of the digital citizenship measure (n = 1150). Technical Competences M SD Sk Ku C FC r 2 Basics i1. Edit photographs or other images. 3.24 1.19 − .15 − .76 .61 .83 - i2. Write or edit text for schoolwork. 3.60 1.01 − .46 − .17 .69 .85 .50 i3. Search the Internet for relevant information for a school project. 3.67 0.97 − .46 − .05 .67 .79 - i4. Create a multimedia presentation (with sound, images, or video). 3.08 1.14 − .02 − .64 .66 .82 .52 i5. Upload text, images, or videos to an online profile or website. 3.19 1.18 − .19 − .74 .67 .78 .58 i6. Install a programme or application. 3.60 1.20 − .47 − .68 .60 .64 .52 i7. Evaluate the credibility of the information and content I find online. 3.19 1.05 − .17 − .31 .60 .59 .62 Advanced i8. Create a database. 2.62 1.09 .22 − .50 .62 .65 .61 i9. Create or edit a web page. 2.44 1.11 .40 − .51 .69 .81 .64 i10. Upload text, images, or videos to an online profile or website. 3.15 1.15 − .10 − .68 .62 .52 - i11. Create a computer programme, script, or application. 2.21 1.10 .61 − .35 .72 .88 .72 i12. Install security software to protect my computer and data (e.g., antivirus or firewall). 2.82 1.20 .11 − .84 .58 .70 .49 i13. Configure a local computer network or other technologies. 2.47 1.13 .35 − .59 .70 .86 .66 Critical Awareness i14. Some individuals or organisations control a large proportion of the information circulating on the Internet. 2.97 1.27 − .18 -1.06 .60 .83 .45 i15. Online participation is an effective way to try to change something I consider unfair. 2.73 1.18 .01 − .93 .67 .75 .59 i16. I reflect on the environmental impacts of using digital technologies. 2.89 1.13 − .11 − .78 .57 .72 .45 i17. Information I read on the Internet makes me change my opinion about certain issues. 2.86 1.11 − .07 − .79 .63 .72 .53 i18. Problems in the digital world reflect what happens in the real world (e.g., prejudice or violence). 3.22 1.23 − .41 − .82 .66 .77 .50 i19. I learn more about events in other parts of the world through the Internet. d 3.60 1.12 − .69 − .17 .57 .43/ .44 - Ethics i20. Issues related to the Internet (such as fake news) influence my life. a 2.86 1.06 − .18 − .58 - - - i21. My private information is secure when I use the Internet. a 3.18 1.04 − .26 − .34 - - - i22. I am careful about other people’s feelings when I write online. f 3.86 .95 − .87 .89 .66 .82 .30 i23. I am responsible for the information and content I share online. f 3.90 .98 -1.01 1.03 .69 .80 .40 i24. I illegally download content (e.g., music, films, software). r 3.22 1.28 − .02 -1.07 .52 .72 .29 i25. I have used offensive language towards others in online spaces. r 3.65 1.20 − .40 − .97 .65 .81 .87 i26. I post photos or videos of people I know online without their permission. r 4.13 1.05 − .94 − .18 .59 .77 .66 i27. I prefer communicating with people online rather than face-to-face. r 3.54 1.16 − .32 − .73 .49 .70 .35 Political Activism i28. I become aware of political or social issues through the Internet. f 3.29 1.05 − .51 − .13 .43 .51 .26 i29. I express my opinion online about political or social issues. 2.13 1.16 .70 − .52 .64 .79 .49 i30. I contact political representatives or other public entities online about an issue that is important to me or my community. 1.76 1.08 1.20 .32 .74 .90 .81 i31. I participate in online meetings or public forums about issues relevant to my community or school. 1.88 1.07 .96 − .07 .71 .86 .74 i32. I participate in online awareness campaigns on issues I consider important. 1.94 1.09 .89 − .18 .72 .86 .74 i33. I order/buy/exchange products online (e.g., via Amazon or OLX). c 2.55 1.22 .28 − .90 .35 .49 - i34. I collaborate with others online to address local, national, or global issues (e.g., environmental issues, human rights). 2.05 1.16 .77 − .47 .66 .74 .55 i35. I sign or organise online petitions. 1.93 1.10 .93 − .11 .55 .68 .46 i36. I feel more civically or politically engaged online than offline. d 2.16 1.14 .59 − .70 .62 .55/ .41 - i37. My online participation encourages my offline participation. e 2.36 1.14 .31 − .84 .54 .50 - i38. I use the Internet to participate in social movements or protests. 2.13 1.18 .64 − .73 .65 .69 .48 Note : M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; Sk = Skewness; Ku = Kurtosis; C = Communality; FL = Factor Loading; r² = Squared Multiple Correlation in the full model; a Items without correlations > .30; b Items with factor loadings < .40; c Items with communality < .40; d Items with cross-loadings; e Item excluded due to lack of conceptual coherence; f Items from the Sociopolitical Responsibility factor; r Reverse-coded items. 3.3 Confirmatory Factorial Analysis Prior to conducting the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the assumptions of univariate and multivariate normality were examined. Univariate normality was assessed through skewness and kurtosis coefficients, which fell within acceptable thresholds (|Sk| < 2; |Ku| < 7), supporting the use of maximum likelihood estimation (Kline, 2016 ). Multivariate normality was assessed through the identification of multivariate outliers using Mahalanobis distance, considering the critical value for 32 items (χ²(32), p < .001 ≈ 64.00). Five extreme cases were identified and removed, resulting in a final sample of 1104 participants. The initial CFA model indicated areas of model misspecification. Modification indices suggested redundancy among the residuals of several items, indicating potential overlap in item content and a violation of the assumption of error independence (Kline, 2016 ). Based on these results, items 1, 3, 10, 30, and 38 were removed. These decisions were informed not only by statistical criteria but also by theoretical considerations, including item wording, conceptual redundancy, and contribution to the respective latent constructs. The final model (Fig. 1 ) supports a six-factor structure, reflecting the multidimensional nature of digital citizenship. The model demonstrated good overall psychometric properties (Table 2 ). Composite reliability (CR) values ranged from .70 (sociopolitical responsibility) to .92 (political activism), indicating satisfactory internal consistency across all factors. Cronbach’s alpha values ranged from .66 to .91, although one factor presented a slightly lower value, this is considered acceptable given the exploratory nature of the construct and the limited number of items in that dimension. Table 2 Factorial reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the digital citizenship model (n = 1104). BTC No. α CR AVE BTC ATC E SR CA PA 5 .87 .90 .54 .74 ATC 5 .89 .91 .63 .61 .79 E 4 .75 .77 .54 − .09 .29 .74 SR 3 .66 .70 .43 .49 .05 − .25 .66 CA 5 .83 .86 .50 .38 .24 .12 .53 .71 PA 5 .91 .92 .68 .13 .13 .65 − .05 .54 .82 Note : BTC = Basic Technical Competences; ATC = Advanced Technical Competences; E = Ethics; SR = Sociopolitical Responsibility; CA = Critical Awareness; PA = Political Activism; CR = Composite Reliability; AVE = Average Variance Extracted; diagonal elements in bold represent the square root of the AVE. Average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from .43 to .68, exceeding the recommended threshold of .50 for most factors. For those factors with AVE values slightly below .50, composite reliability remained adequate, suggesting acceptable convergent validity in the context of a multidimensional construct. Discriminant validity was supported, as the square root of the AVE for each factor exceeded the inter-factor correlations, in line with the Fornell–Larcker criterion (Kline, 2016 ). The final model demonstrated a high level of overall fit: χ²(335) = 1312.63, p < .001; χ²/df = 3.92; CFI = .934; TLI = .925; RMSEA = .051, 90% CI [.049, .054]; SRMR = .053. These results represent a substantial improvement over the initial model, further supported by a lower Expected Cross-Validation Index (ECVI) value (see Table 3 ), indicating improved model parsimony and generalisability. Table 3 Fit indices of the digital citizenship model (n = 1104). Digital Citizenship: initial model df χ² χ²/df CFI TLI SRMR RMSEA C.I. 90% ECVI 449 2456.06 5.47 .896 .886 .068 .064 [.061; .066] 2,37 Digital Citizenship: final model 335 1312.63 3.92 .934 .925 .053 .051 n.s . [.049; .054] 1.32 Digital Citizenship: conditional model 1 387 2639.55 6.82 .946 .827 .158 0.073 [.070; .075] 2.54 Digital Citizenship: conditional model 2 392 1522.20 3.88 .923 .914 .083 .051 n.s . [.048; .054] 1.52 Additional analysis of temporal consistency revealed a positive and statistically significant correlation between the mean levels of digital citizenship at T1 and T2 (r = .352, p < .001), suggesting moderate stability of the construct over time. This finding reflects the dynamic nature of digital citizenship, particularly during adolescence, a developmental stage characterised by ongoing cognitive, social, and technological changes. Overall, these findings support the psychometric robustness of the final 27-item instrument and its suitability for assessing digital citizenship among youth in the Portuguese context. 3.4 Structural Equation Model The initial structural equation model indicated suboptimal fit indices (Table 3 ), suggesting the need for model refinement. All non-significant paths (p > .05), both among predictor variables and between these and the latent factors, were removed to improve model parsimony. Based on modification indices and guided by theoretical considerations, four covariances were added between selected digital citizenship factors (Fig. 2 ), reflecting conceptual overlap between related dimensions. The final model demonstrated an acceptable level of fit (Table 3 ), supporting the adequacy of the specified relationships between variables. Regarding the effects of the predictor variables, participants’ sex (0 = female/other; 1 = male; categories combined due to sample size considerations) showed significant associations with five of the six latent factors, except for ethics. Being male was negatively associated with basic technical competences (BTC; β = − .072, p = .023), sociopolitical responsibility (β = − .282, p < .001), and critical awareness (β = − .090, p = .006), but positively associated with advanced technical competences (ATC; β = .140, p < .001) and political activism (β = .106, p = .001). These findings suggest that male participants tend to report higher levels of advanced technical proficiency and political engagement, while demonstrating lower levels of critical awareness and sociopolitical responsibility in digital contexts compared to female or other-gender participants. Age group (0 = 11–16 years; 1 = 16–21 years) showed a positive and statistically significant association only with political activism (β = .061, p = .019), indicating that older participants tend to demonstrate higher levels of engagement in online political activities. Socioeconomic status (continuous variable) was significantly associated with three dimensions of digital citizenship. It was positively related to basic technical competences (β = .242, p < .001) and sociopolitical responsibility (β = .101, p = .003) and negatively related to political activism (β = − .120, p < .001). These results suggest that participants from higher socioeconomic backgrounds tend to exhibit greater technical competence and higher levels of socially oriented responsibility, while showing lower levels of engagement in political activism. Overall, the findings highlight that digital citizenship is not only multidimensional but also socially patterned, varying according to individual and contextual characteristics. 4 Discussion This study aimed to address key theoretical and methodological limitations in the assessment of digital citizenship by developing and validating a multidimensional instrument grounded in Choi’s ( 2016 ) framework and applied to a representative sample of Portuguese youth. In doing so, it contributes to the ongoing shift in the literature from predominantly normative and technicist perspectives towards more critical, participatory, and socially oriented understandings of digital citizenship. The results of the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses support the multidimensional structure of the construct, confirming the adequacy of a six-factor model encompassing basic and advanced technical competences, ethics, sociopolitical responsibility, critical awareness, and political activism. While broadly aligned with Choi’s ( 2016 ) framework, these findings also suggest the need for conceptual refinement. In particular, the distinction between basic and advanced technical competences highlights the increasing complexity and stratification of digital skills, reflecting diverse forms of engagement with digital technologies. A particularly relevant contribution of this study is the emergence of sociopolitical responsibility as a distinct dimension. Although not explicitly anticipated in the original framework, this factor captures an orientation towards others and towards collective issues, combining empathy, awareness, and a sense of responsibility in digital contexts. This finding reinforces critical perspectives that conceptualise digital citizenship as a relational and socially embedded practice oriented towards the common good, rather than solely an individual competence or behavioural compliance (Emejulu & McGregor, 2019 ; Gutiérrez-Ujaque, 2024 ). It also suggests that contemporary forms of digital citizenship may be more granular and context-sensitive than previously conceptualised. The observed temporal stability of the construct, as indicated by moderate correlations across the two waves of data collection, provides additional support for its reliability. At the same time, the magnitude of this association reflects the dynamic nature of digital citizenship, particularly during adolescence, a developmental stage characterised by ongoing cognitive, social, and technological transformations (Livingstone & Third, 2017 ; Rekker et al., 2017). The analysis of sociodemographic variables further highlights the socially patterned nature of digital citizenship. Gender differences suggest distinct orientations towards digital engagement, with female participants reporting higher levels of sociopolitical responsibility and critical awareness, and male participants demonstrating higher levels of advanced technical competences and political activism. These findings point to differentiated forms of digital participation, where technical proficiency and critical engagement do not necessarily co-occur, reinforcing the multidimensional nature of the construct. Age differences were observed only in relation to political activism, with older participants showing higher levels of engagement. This finding is consistent with research on political socialisation, which indicates that political identity and participation tend to develop progressively throughout adolescence (Rekker et al., 2017). The relationship between socioeconomic status reveals a particularly nuanced pattern. While higher socioeconomic status was associated with greater technical competences and sociopolitical responsibility, it was negatively associated with political activism. This finding may reflect a more institutionalised and normative orientation among more advantaged youth, where digital engagement is framed in terms of responsible use and access rather than as a space for contestation or social change. In contrast, lower socioeconomic status may be associated with more expressive or critical forms of digital participation, highlighting the role of social positioning in shaping modes of engagement in digital environments (Emejulu & McGregor, 2019 ). Overall, these findings support the view that digital citizenship is a complex, multidimensional, and context-dependent construct that cannot be reduced to technical skills or normative behaviours. Instead, it encompasses cognitive, ethical, and participatory dimensions that are shaped by both individual characteristics and broader social conditions. 5 Limitations and Future Research Despite its contributions, this study presents several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the use of self-report measures may introduce biases such as social desirability and subjective interpretation, potentially affecting the accuracy of responses. Second, although the study benefits from a longitudinal design, the analysis did not include full measurement invariance testing across time, limiting the ability to assess the structural stability of the construct. Future research should address this limitation by examining longitudinal invariance to ensure the comparability of measurements across different time points. Third, the analysis focused primarily on individual-level variables, without incorporating relevant contextual factors such as school environments, digital practices, or access to educational resources, which are likely to influence digital citizenship. Future research should adopt multilevel and mixed method designs to better capture the interaction between individual and contextual dimensions. Finally, although the instrument was validated using a representative sample within the Portuguese context, its generalisability to other cultural and geographical settings remains to be established. Replication studies in diverse contexts are therefore recommended to assess the external validity and cross-cultural applicability of the instrument. 6 Conclusion This study makes important conceptual and empirical contributions to the field of digital citizenship research. Conceptually, it advances an operationalisation of digital citizenship that moves beyond technicist and normative approaches, incorporating critical, relational, and participatory dimensions. By recognising digital environments as interconnected with offline contexts, it reinforces the understanding of digital citizenship as a form of engagement within a broader public sphere shaped by social, political, and cultural dynamics. Empirically, the study provides a psychometrically robust instrument validated in a representative sample of Portuguese youth aged 11 to 21, addressing key limitations in previous research, particularly the reliance on non-probabilistic samples and narrow conceptualisations of the construct. From a practical perspective, the validated instrument represents a valuable tool for educational and research contexts. It enables the identification of profiles of digital citizenship among young people, supporting the design, implementation, and evaluation of educational interventions. Ultimately, this study contributes to promoting forms of digital education that go beyond technical literacy, fostering critical awareness, social responsibility, and active participation in digital societies. Declarations Ethics approval The study protocol was approved by the Portuguese Ministry of Education through the Monitoring of Surveys in School Context (MIME), Directorate-General for Education and Science Statistics (DGEEC) (Ref. 0566300008), in accordance with national regulations governing research in school settings and ethical standards for data collection involving minors. The research instrument and consent procedures were subject to expert review prior to approval. Informed consent was obtained from all participants and from their legal guardians. Conflict of interest The author declare no conflict of interest. Acknowledgement This work was funded by national funds, through the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT)/Portuguese Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation, under M. Rodrigues employment contract, established through CIIE funds [UIDP/00167/2020] and by the Tenure Programme [2023.14305.TENURE.017/CP00013/CT00004]. It was also partially supported by national funds through FCT, under the multi-year funding awarded to CIIE [UIDB/00167/2020 and UID/00167/2025]. Since 2025, CIIE has also received support from the European Union - NextGenerationEU under the Recovery and Resilience Plan [UID/PRR/167/2025]. Data availability statement Data sharing is not applicable to this article as participants did not provide consent for data sharing. References Al-Abdullatif, A. M., & Gameil, A. A. (2020). Exploring Students’ Knowledge and Practice of Digital Citizenship in Higher Education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning , 15 (19), 122-142. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i19.15611 Alves, P. J. de A. F., Ricardo, J. C., & Sebastião, N. I. A. (2025). Redes sociais e a construção da identidade na juventude. Revista Ibero-Americana De Humanidades, Ciências e Educação , 11 (5), 391–400. https://doi.org/10.51891/rease.v11i5.18492 Avinç, E., & Doğan, F. (2024). Digital literacy scale: Validity and reliability study with the rasch model. Education and Information Technologies , 29, 22895-22941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12662-7 Castells, M. (2001). The Internet galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business, and society . Oxford University Press. Chen, L. L., Mirpuri, S., Rao, N., & Law, N. (2021). Conceptualization and measurement of digital citizenship across disciplines. Educational Research Review , 33 (4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100379 Choi, M. (2015). Development of a scale to measure digital citizenship among young adults for democratic citizenship education [Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University]. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1437610223 Choi, M. (2016). A concept analysis of digital citizenship for democratic citizenship education in the Internet age. Theory & Research in Social Education , 44 (4), 565-607. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2016.1210549 Choi, M., Glassman, M., & Cristol, D. (2017). What it means to be a citizen in the Internet age: Development of a reliable and valid digital citizenship scale. Computers & Education , 107 , 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.002 Cortesi, S., Hasse, A., Lombana-Bermudez, A., Kim, S., & Gasser, U. (2020). Youth and digital citizenship+ (plus): Understanding skills for a digital world . Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3557518 Dadi, A. F., Dachew, B. A., & Tessema, G. A. (2024). Problematic internet use: A growing concern for adolescent health and well-being in a digital era. Journal of Global Health , 14 , 03034. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.14.03034 Emejulu, A., & McGregor, C. (2019). Towards a radical digital citizenship in digital education. Critical Studies in Education , 60 (1), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2016.1234494 Fernández-Prados, J. S., Lozano-Díaz, A., & Ainz-Galende, A. (2021). Measuring Digital Citizenship: A Comparative Analysis. Informatics , 8 (1), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8010018 Fraillon, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Duckworth, D. (2019). Assessment Framework of ICILS 2018 . IEA: Amsterdam. Gutiérrez-Ujaque, D. (2024). Towards a critical digital literacy and consciousness in higher education: the emancipatory role of critical digital pedagogy. Pedagogies: An International Journa l, 19 (3), 337-371. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2024.2379787 Huschle, L., Kindlinger, M., & Abs, H. J. (2024). Personal Responsibility and Beyond: Developing a Comprehensive Conceptualization of Digital Citizenship Competences. Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society , 4 (4). https://doi.org/10.34669/wi.wjds/4.4.5 ITU. (2023). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2023 . International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/facts-figures-2023/ Jones, L. M., & Mitchell, K. J. (2016). Defining and measuring youth digital citizenship. New Media & Society , 18 (9), 2063-2079. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815577797 Jordan, B. (2009). Blurring Boundaries: The “Real” and the “Virtual” in Hybrid Spaces. Human Organization , 68 (2), 181-193. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44148549 Kim, M., & Choi, D. (2018). Development of Youth Digital Citizenship Scale and Implication for Educational Setting. Educational Technology & Society, 21 (1), 155-171. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press. Livingstone, S. (2019). Audiences in an age of datafication: Critical questions for media research. Television & New Media, 20 (2), 170-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418811118 Livingstone, S., & Third, A. (2017). Children and young people’s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. New Media & Society , 19 (5), 657-670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318 Lozano-Díaz, A., & Fernández-Prados, J. S. (2020). Educating Digital Citizens: An Opportunity to Critical and Activist Perspective of Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability , 12 (18), 7260. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187260 Mihailidis, P. (2018). Civic media literacies: re-Imagining engagement for civic intentionality * . Learning, Media and Technology , 43 (2), 152-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1428623 Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2007). Digital citizenship: The Internet, society, and participation . MIT Press. OECD. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection . OECD Publishing. Pangrazio, L. (2016). Reconceptualising critical digital literacy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education , 37 (2), 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.942836 Razorfish (2024). The youth digital report: Gen Z, Gen Alpha and the future of engagement . Razorfish Insights. https://www.razorfish.com Richardson, J. W., Martin, F., & Sauers, N. (2021). Systematic review of 15 years of research on digital citizenship: 2004–2019. Learning, Media and Technology , 46 (4), 498–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1941098 Ribble, M. & Bailey, G. (2004). Digital citizenship: Focus questions for implementation. Learning & Leading Technology, 32 (2), 12–15. Ribble, M., & Bailey, G. (2007). Digital citizenship in schools . Washington: International. Society for Technology in Education. Ribble, M., Bailey, G., & Ross, T. (2011). Digital citizenship in schools: Nine elements all students should know (2nd ed.). Washington: International. Society for Technology in Education. Shi, G., Chan, K. K., & Lin, X. F. (2023). A systematic review of digital citizenship empirical studies for practitioners. Education and Information Technology , 28 , 3953-3975.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11383-z Smahel, D., Machackova, H., Mascheroni, G., Dedkova, L., Staksrud, E., Ólafsson, K., Livingstone, S., & Hasebrink, U. (2020). EU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries . EU Kids Online. UNESCO (2024). Guidelines on digital citizenship education . United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9563069","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":631613442,"identity":"46acf4f6-8643-4db4-8a76-68273db5ac6e","order_by":0,"name":"Mariana Rodrigues","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4183-4805","institution":"Centre for Research and Intervention in Education, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mariana","middleName":"","lastName":"Rodrigues","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-29 08:53:57","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9563069/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9563069/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108169761,"identity":"c4d3e0d6-7e9c-4164-abc0-1dd55a72c611","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-30 06:46:25","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":248709,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCFA of the final digital citizenship model\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9563069/v1/b177b0b8ffd4baeedb2ce8f2.png"},{"id":108169762,"identity":"fed2e23a-4d79-48b3-9bdc-5d85b027d978","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-30 06:46:25","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":285534,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFinal SEM of digital citizenship conditioned by sociodemographic variables. Standardised coefficients for significant paths and covariances (p \u0026lt; .010) are presented.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9563069/v1/ef1ed10ae05ee879988384e4.png"},{"id":108182956,"identity":"522cd97f-30e4-41d4-8c2b-69aee07c590e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-30 08:59:42","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":949037,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9563069/v1/da0f5055-23f6-417d-a56c-ff765d6cfa68.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasuring Digital Citizenship among Youth: Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Scale in Portugal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1 Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe increasing integration of digital technologies into everyday life has blurred the boundaries between online and offline contexts, particularly among younger generations (Castells, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Jordan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Stellmann, 2021). Recent data indicate that 79% of youth aged 15\u0026ndash;24 use the Internet and that 90% of children aged 9\u0026ndash;13 own a smartphone globally (Razorfish, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; ITU, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). While this digital transformation creates opportunities for communication, learning, and social interaction, it also introduces complex challenges, including exposure to harmful content, misinformation, and new forms of social inequality (Dadi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Smahel et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn response to these challenges, policy and academic discourses increasingly emphasise the role of education in fostering digital citizenship among young people, understood as the development of knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes required to participate meaningfully in digitally mediated democratic societies (OECD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; UNESCO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, despite the growing relevance of this concept, there is still a lack of consensus regarding its definition and measurement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExisting research highlights significant limitations in the empirical assessment of digital citizenship. Many instruments focus predominantly on technical skills, online safety, or normative behaviours, often neglecting critical and participatory dimensions (Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, most studies rely on non-probabilistic samples and are concentrated in a limited number of countries, restricting the generalisability of findings and overlooking contextual specificities (Richardson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo address these gaps, the present study aims to develop and validate a multidimensional instrument to assess digital citizenship among Portuguese youth aged 11 to 21 years, grounded in Choi\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) theoretical framework. By combining a representative sample with a comprehensive conceptual approach, this study seeks to contribute to advancing both the measurement and understanding of digital citizenship in contemporary digital societies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Conceptualisations of Digital Citizenship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver the past decades, the concept of digital citizenship has evolved considerably, reflecting broader transformations in digital technologies and their role in society. Early definitions conceptualised digital citizenship primarily in terms of access and participation, defining it as the \u0026ldquo;ability to participate in society online\u0026rdquo; (Mossberger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e, p. 1). This perspective emphasised inclusion and digital access as key components of citizenship in the digital age.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequent approaches, particularly those proposed by Ribble and Bailey (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), introduced a more normative framework centred on responsible, ethical, and legal use of digital technologies. This perspective framed digital citizenship as a set of behavioural norms guiding appropriate online conduct, including issues such as digital etiquette, security, and respect for others.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore recently, scholars have argued for broader and more critical conceptualisations of digital citizenship that move beyond technical and normative dimensions. These approaches emphasise the role of digital technologies as spaces for civic engagement, identity construction, and social participation, highlighting the importance of critical thinking, agency, and democratic engagement (Cortesi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Emejulu \u0026amp; McGregor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In this sense, digital citizenship is increasingly understood as a multidimensional construct encompassing not only individual competences but also social, political, and ethical engagement in digital environments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2 Choi\u0026rsquo;s Framework and Critical Approaches\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the various conceptualisations, Choi\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) framework offers one of the most comprehensive and theoretically grounded approaches to digital citizenship. Based on a cross-disciplinary analysis, the author conceptualises digital citizenship as a multidimensional construct comprising four categories: ethics, media and information literacy, participation/engagement, and critical resistance. This framework integrates technical, cognitive, and socio-political dimensions, positioning digital citizenship as a form of democratic participation in digital contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe ethics dimension focuses on responsible, safe, and respectful behaviour online, often associated with normative approaches to digital citizenship. The media and information literacy (MIL) dimension encompasses the skills required to access, evaluate, and produce digital information. However, recent research highlights that MIL extends beyond functional skills to include critical understanding of information ecosystems, misinformation, and the socio-technical processes shaping digital content (Livingstone, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Mihailidis, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). As such, MIL is increasingly recognised as a key component of informed and critical participation in democratic societies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe participation/engagement dimension reflects the role of digital technologies as spaces for civic and political action, enabling individuals to express opinions, collaborate, and engage in collective efforts to address social issues. In this perspective, digital citizenship is understood as an active practice embedded in digital public spheres (Choi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Jones \u0026amp; Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the critical resistance dimension introduces an explicitly critical and emancipatory perspective, emphasising the capacity to question and challenge power structures, inequalities, and dominant narratives in digital environments. This dimension aligns with critical approaches that conceptualise digital citizenship as a form of agency and social transformation, highlighting the importance of recognising algorithmic bias, digital inequalities, and mechanisms of control embedded in digital platforms (Emejulu \u0026amp; McGregor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Pangrazio, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTogether, these dimensions position digital citizenship as a complex and dynamic construct that extends beyond individual behaviour to encompass critical awareness and engagement with broader social and political structures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.3 Measurement of Digital Citizenship\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the conceptual development of digital citizenship, its empirical measurement remains a significant challenge. Several instruments have been developed to assess digital citizenship across different contexts and populations, demonstrating varying conceptualisations and psychometric properties (Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Prados et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMany existing instruments focus on specific aspects of digital citizenship, such as digital literacy, online safety, or ethical behaviour, often neglecting its multidimensional nature. For example, some scales emphasise technical competences and responsible use of technology (Isman \u0026amp; Gungoren, 2014), while others focus on civic engagement and respectful online behaviour (Jones \u0026amp; Mitchell, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). While these approaches provide valuable insights, they may contribute to fragmented understandings of digital citizenship and limit comparability across studies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore recent efforts have attempted to develop instruments aligned with broader theoretical frameworks, particularly that of Choi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) (Choi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Kim \u0026amp; Choi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Lozano-D\u0026iacute;az \u0026amp; Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Prados, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, systematic reviews highlight persistent limitations in this body of research, including the predominance of non-probabilistic samples, a concentration of studies in specific geographical contexts, and insufficient attention to younger populations (Richardson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese limitations underscore the need for theoretically grounded and psychometrically robust instruments capable of capturing the multidimensional nature of digital citizenship across diverse contexts and populations. There is a need for measures that integrate technical, ethical, critical, and participatory dimensions, while also accounting for contextual specificities and the lived experiences of youth in digital environments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"2 Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Data collection procedures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe development of the instrument was informed by a comprehensive review of the literature on digital citizenship. Existing validated scales were selected, translated, and culturally adapted to the Portuguese context when necessary.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe preliminary version of the questionnaire was evaluated by a panel of experts in Education Sciences and Psychology to assess content validity, clarity, and conceptual adequacy. Subsequently, a pilot study was conducted with two groups of students from grades 7 to 12 to ensure comprehensibility and appropriateness for the target population. Minor adjustments were made based on feedback from both experts and participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe final version of the instrument was approved by the School Survey Monitoring Unit of the Portuguese Directorate-General for Education (Ref. 0566300008). All ethical procedures were strictly followed, including informed consent, voluntary participation, anonymity, confidentiality, and data protection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData were collected through an online questionnaire administered via LimeSurvey, with an average completion time of approximately 20 minutes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study draws on data from a longitudinal research project (Ede \u0026ndash; Digital Education in Schools), using information collected in two waves (November/December 2021 and June/July 2022).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sample comprised a cohort of 1150 students from 38 Portuguese schools, selected through stratified probabilistic sampling to ensure representation across the national territory. Participants\u0026rsquo; ages ranged from 11 to 21 years (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.83; SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.81). The sample included 48.8% female participants, 50.5% male participants, and 0.7% identifying as another gender. Regarding educational level, participants were distributed across grades 7 to 11. Approximately 20.8% of the sample reported receiving school social support, indicating lower socioeconomic status.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Measures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDrawing on the theoretical framework developed by Choi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), digital citizenship was defined as a multidimensional construct combining technical skills, ethics, critical awareness, and political activism, along with their respective measures. The measures included in the instrument were selected from existing empirical studies and are presented and summarised in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eTechnical skills\u003c/em\u003e. This dimension encompasses both basic and advanced technical skills required to access and use digital technologies. These were assessed using scales of students\u0026rsquo; self-efficacy in relation to the use of general and specialised applications, respectively (Fraillon et al., 2018). Participants were asked to indicate how capable they felt in performing a set of basic tasks (seven items), such as editing photographs or evaluating the credibility of online content, and a set of advanced tasks (six items), such as creating a database or installing security software. Each item was rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all capable) to 5 (very capable).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEthics\u003c/em\u003e. This dimension refers to ethical and respectful conduct in digital environments, emphasising individual rights and democratic principles. The digital ethics scale developed by Choi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) was used for its assessment. Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a series of nine statements concerning online activities, including downloading content illegally or posting photos or videos of others without permission, using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eCritical awareness\u003c/em\u003e. This dimension concerns the ability to question and critically analyse power structures, discourses, and representations present in digital contexts, as well as their social, political, economic, and environmental impacts. The critical resistance scale developed by Choi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) was adopted to assess critical awareness. Participants were presented with six statements, such as \u0026ldquo;some individuals or organisations control a large proportion of the information circulating on the Internet\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;problems in the digital world reflect what happens in the real world\u0026rdquo; and were asked to indicate their level of agreement using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePolitical activism\u003c/em\u003e. This dimension refers to the capacity for engagement and active participation in civic and political life through individual or collective actions using digital technologies. It was assessed using the participation/engagement scale developed by Choi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Participants indicated how frequently they engaged in a set of 11 online activities, ranging from signing petitions to collaborating with others to solve local, national, or global problems, using a five-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (very frequently).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eSociodemographic information\u003c/em\u003e. The instrument collected sociodemographic data, including sex (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;male, 50.4%), age group (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16\u0026ndash;21 years, 40.6%), and socioeconomic status (SES). SES was operationalised as a composite variable combining multiple indicators, including perceived economic hardship, parental employment status, school social support, and parental education. These variables were XXXharacterize prior to aggregation to ensure comparability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Data analysis procedures\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.1 Preliminary analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 29.0. Descriptive analyses were conducted to characterise the sociodemographic profile of the study sample and to assess whether all instrument items met the criteria established for inclusion in subsequent analyses (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Specifically, items were examined for: (a) extreme mean values or zero variance; (b) absolute skewness values greater than 3 or kurtosis values greater than 10, indicating substantial deviations from normality; and (c) the absence of correlations above .30 with other items (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.2 Exploratory Factorial Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine the factorial structure of the instrument items designed to measure digital citizenship, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 29.0. The principal components extraction method was applied, and an oblique rotation (promax) was selected, given the assumption of correlations between factors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample adequacy was assessed using the overall and individual Kaiser\u0026ndash;Meyer\u0026ndash;Olkin (KMO) measures, as well as Bartlett\u0026rsquo;s test of sphericity. Adequacy was further evaluated based on the ratio of participants to items. The number of factors to retain was determined using Kaiser\u0026rsquo;s criterion (eigenvalues greater than 1), the scree test, and sample size considerations (Hayton et al., 2004).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo decide on item retention, the following criteria were applied: (a) items with communalities above .40 (Rex B. Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and factor loadings above .40 (James Stevens, 2002); (b) absence of items loading on multiple factors; and (c) conceptual coherence with the respective factor. The EFA was conducted using data from the first wave of the Ede project (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1150).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.3 Confirmatory Factorial Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequently, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using IBM SPSS Amos 28.0, drawing data collected at the second wave of observation, seven months after the initial survey, with the same cohort of students. The aim was to test the digital citizenship model derived from the EFA. The CFA tested a six-factor model comprising: basic technical competences (seven items), advanced technical competences (six items), ethics (four items), sociopolitical responsibility (four items), critical awareness (five items), and political activism (eight items). The overall model fit and the psychometric properties of the instrument were assessed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel fit was evaluated using the following reference indices: Chi-square test (χ\u0026sup2;/df\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5), Comparative Fit Index (CFI \u0026ge; .90), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI \u0026ge; .90), Expected Cross-Validation Index (ECVI, lower values indicating better fit in comparison), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA \u0026le; .08) (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe psychometric evaluation included the assessment of factorial reliability and convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity. Factorial reliability was estimated using composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha (α), with values \u0026ge; .70 considered indicative of adequate internal consistency. Convergent validity was examined through factor loadings, with acceptable values \u0026ge; .50, and average variance extracted (AVE), considered adequate when \u0026ge; .50. Discriminant validity was assessed based on the Fornell\u0026ndash;Larcker criterion, requiring that the AVE of each factor exceeds the squared correlations between that factor and all others (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eItem removal decisions were based on a combination of statistical indicators (e.g., modification indices, factor loadings) and theoretical considerations, ensuring conceptual coherence of the final model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiven the longitudinal design of the study, the temporal stability of digital citizenship was explored by examining correlations between mean scores across the two waves of data collection. Although full measurement invariance testing was beyond the scope of this study, this analysis provides an initial indication of the stability of the construct over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4.4 Structural Equation Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, a structural equation model (SEM) was tested using IBM SPSS Amos 28.0 to examine significant differences in the latent factors of digital citizenship (dependent variables) as a function of sociodemographic variables, namely sex (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;male), age group (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16\u0026ndash;21 years), and socioeconomic status, which were included as predictors in the model. Parameter estimation was performed using the maximum likelihood method. Given the large sample size and the approximately normal distribution of the data, this estimator was considered appropriate. Missing data were handled using regression imputation, as the proportion of missing values was low and did not significantly affect the overall data structure. Model fit was assessed using the indices described for the CFA.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3 Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Descriptive analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrior to the preliminary analysis, four negatively worded items (i24-i27) were reverse-coded to ensure that higher scores corresponded to higher levels of digital citizenship. Descriptive statistics were examined to assess the distributional properties of the items. Mean values, standard deviations, skewness, and kurtosis indicated that all items presented acceptable levels of univariate normality (|Sk| \u0026lt; 3; |Ku| \u0026lt; 10), supporting their inclusion in subsequent analyses (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eItem\u0026ndash;item correlations were also inspected, and items 20 and 21 did not reach the minimum correlation threshold (r \u0026lt; .30) were excluded to ensure internal consistency and coherence of the construct. These preliminary analyses confirmed the adequacy of the dataset, and 36 items were retained for factor analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Exploratory Factorial Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrior to conducting the exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the presence of multivariate outliers was assessed using Mahalanobis distance. The critical value for 36 items (χ\u0026sup2;(36), p \u0026lt; .001\u0026thinsp;\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;67.99) was used as a threshold. A total of 41 cases exceeding this value were identified and subsequently removed, as they represented atypical response patterns with the potential to distort the factor structure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the reduction in sample size (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1109), the ratio between the number of participants and the number of estimated parameters remained highly favourable, with a cases-to-items ratio exceeding 30:1, well above recommended thresholds for factor analysis (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Kaiser\u0026ndash;Meyer\u0026ndash;Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy indicated excellent overall adequacy (.916), while individual KMO values for each item exceeded .80, suggesting that all items shared a substantial proportion of common variance. These results provide strong support for the suitability of the correlation matrix for factor analysis. Bartlett\u0026rsquo;s test of sphericity was statistically significant, χ\u0026sup2;(630)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15109.97, p \u0026lt; .001, further confirming the adequacy of the data for EFA (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn initial examination of eigenvalues and factor structure revealed the emergence of an additional factor not anticipated in the original theoretical model. This factor, comprising items 22, 23, and 28, demonstrated both theoretical coherence and psychometric consistency and was therefore retained. It was interpreted and labelled as sociopolitical responsibility, reflecting an informed, empathetic, and reflective orientation towards others and towards social and political issues in digital contexts (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the predefined criteria (factor loadings \u0026ge; .40, communalities \u0026ge; .40, and absence of cross-loadings), several items were excluded. Item 33 was removed due to low factor loading and communality values. Items 19 and 36 were excluded due to cross-loadings across multiple factors, combined with relatively low factor loadings. Although item 37 showed a significant loading, it was excluded due to a lack of conceptual coherence with the corresponding factor.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollowing item removal, a six-factor solution was retained. These six factors presented eigenvalues greater than 1 and jointly explained 63.32% of the total variance. Although the scree plot suggested a potential seventh factor, this solution was not retained due to limited interpretability and marginal contribution to explained variance. Considering the convergence of statistical criteria and theoretical interpretability, the six-factor solution with 32 items was deemed the most appropriate representation of the data (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive statistics for the 38 items of the digital citizenship measure (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1150).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTechnical Competences\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSk\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKu\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003er\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBasics\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei1. Edit photographs or other images.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei2. Write or edit text for schoolwork.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei3. Search the Internet for relevant information for a school project.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei4. Create a multimedia presentation (with sound, images, or video).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei5. Upload text, images, or videos to an online profile or website.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei6. Install a programme or application.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei7. Evaluate the credibility of the information and content I find online.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAdvanced\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei8. Create a database.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei9. Create or edit a web page.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei10. Upload text, images, or videos to an online profile or website.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei11. Create a computer programme, script, or application.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei12. Install security software to protect my computer and data (e.g., antivirus or firewall).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei13. Configure a local computer network or other technologies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCritical Awareness\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei14. Some individuals or organisations control a large proportion of the information circulating on the Internet.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei15. Online participation is an effective way to try to change something I consider unfair.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei16. I reflect on the environmental impacts of using digital technologies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei17. Information I read on the Internet makes me change my opinion about certain issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei18. Problems in the digital world reflect what happens in the real world (e.g., prejudice or violence).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei19. I learn more about events in other parts of the world through the Internet.\u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.43/\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEthics\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei20. Issues related to the Internet (such as fake news) influence my life.\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei21. My private information is secure when I use the Internet.\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei22. I am careful about other people\u0026rsquo;s feelings when I write online.\u003csup\u003ef\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei23. I am responsible for the information and content I share online.\u003csup\u003ef\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei24. I illegally download content (e.g., music, films, software).\u003csup\u003er\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei25. I have used offensive language towards others in online spaces.\u003csup\u003er\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei26. I post photos or videos of people I know online without their permission.\u003csup\u003er\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei27. I prefer communicating with people online rather than face-to-face.\u003csup\u003er\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePolitical Activism\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei28. I become aware of political or social issues through the Internet.\u003csup\u003ef\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei29. I express my opinion online about political or social issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei30. I contact political representatives or other public entities online about an issue that is important to me or my community.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei31. I participate in online meetings or public forums about issues relevant to my community or school.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei32. I participate in online awareness campaigns on issues I consider important.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei33. I order/buy/exchange products online (e.g., via Amazon or OLX).\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei34. I collaborate with others online to address local, national, or global issues (e.g., environmental issues, human rights).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei35. I sign or organise online petitions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei36. I feel more civically or politically engaged online than offline.\u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.55/\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei37. My online participation encourages my offline participation.\u003csup\u003ee\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ei38. I use the Internet to participate in social movements or protests.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"8\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eNote\u003c/b\u003e: M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Mean; SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Standard Deviation; Sk\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Skewness; Ku\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Kurtosis; C\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Communality; FL\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Factor Loading; r\u0026sup2; = Squared Multiple Correlation in the full model; \u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003eItems without correlations \u0026gt; .30; \u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003eItems with factor loadings \u0026lt; .40; \u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003eItems with communality \u0026lt; .40; \u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003eItems with cross-loadings; \u003csup\u003ee\u003c/sup\u003eItem excluded due to lack of conceptual coherence; \u003csup\u003ef\u003c/sup\u003eItems from the Sociopolitical Responsibility factor; \u003csup\u003er\u003c/sup\u003eReverse-coded items.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Confirmatory Factorial Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrior to conducting the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the assumptions of univariate and multivariate normality were examined. Univariate normality was assessed through skewness and kurtosis coefficients, which fell within acceptable thresholds (|Sk| \u0026lt; 2; |Ku| \u0026lt; 7), supporting the use of maximum likelihood estimation (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultivariate normality was assessed through the identification of multivariate outliers using Mahalanobis distance, considering the critical value for 32 items (χ\u0026sup2;(32), p \u0026lt; .001\u0026thinsp;\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;64.00). Five extreme cases were identified and removed, resulting in a final sample of 1104 participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe initial CFA model indicated areas of model misspecification. Modification indices suggested redundancy among the residuals of several items, indicating potential overlap in item content and a violation of the assumption of error independence (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Based on these results, items 1, 3, 10, 30, and 38 were removed. These decisions were informed not only by statistical criteria but also by theoretical considerations, including item wording, conceptual redundancy, and contribution to the respective latent constructs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe final model (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) supports a six-factor structure, reflecting the multidimensional nature of digital citizenship. The model demonstrated good overall psychometric properties (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Composite reliability (CR) values ranged from .70 (sociopolitical responsibility) to .92 (political activism), indicating satisfactory internal consistency across all factors. Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha values ranged from .66 to .91, although one factor presented a slightly lower value, this is considered acceptable given the exploratory nature of the construct and the limited number of items in that dimension.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFactorial reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the digital citizenship model (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1104).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"19\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c14\" colnum=\"14\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c15\" colnum=\"15\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c16\" colnum=\"16\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c17\" colnum=\"17\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c18\" colnum=\"18\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c19\" colnum=\"19\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" morerows=\"1\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBTC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eα\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAVE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBTC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eATC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.74\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eATC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.79\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.74\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.66\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.71\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c17\" namest=\"c16\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c18\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c19\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.82\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"19\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eNote\u003c/b\u003e: BTC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Basic Technical Competences; ATC\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Advanced Technical Competences; E\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Ethics; SR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Sociopolitical Responsibility; CA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Critical Awareness; PA\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Political Activism; CR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Composite Reliability; AVE\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Average Variance Extracted; diagonal elements in bold represent the square root of the AVE.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAverage variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from .43 to .68, exceeding the recommended threshold of .50 for most factors. For those factors with AVE values slightly below .50, composite reliability remained adequate, suggesting acceptable convergent validity in the context of a multidimensional construct. Discriminant validity was supported, as the square root of the AVE for each factor exceeded the inter-factor correlations, in line with the Fornell\u0026ndash;Larcker criterion (Kline, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe final model demonstrated a high level of overall fit: χ\u0026sup2;(335)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1312.63, p \u0026lt; .001; χ\u0026sup2;/df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.92; CFI = .934; TLI = .925; RMSEA = .051, 90% CI [.049, .054]; SRMR = .053. These results represent a substantial improvement over the initial model, further supported by a lower Expected Cross-Validation Index (ECVI) value (see Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), indicating improved model parsimony and generalisability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFit indices of the digital citizenship model (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1104).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"10\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigital Citizenship:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003einitial model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ\u0026sup2;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ\u0026sup2;/df\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCFI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTLI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSRMR\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRMSEA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC.I. 90%\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eECVI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e449\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2456.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.896\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.886\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.068\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.064\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[.061; .066]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2,37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigital Citizenship:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003efinal model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e335\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1312.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.934\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.925\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.053\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.051\u003csup\u003en.s\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[.049; .054]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigital Citizenship:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003econditional model 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e387\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2639.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.946\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.827\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.158\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.073\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[.070; .075]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigital Citizenship:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003econditional model 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e392\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1522.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.923\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.914\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.083\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.051\u003csup\u003en.s\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[.048; .054]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditional analysis of temporal consistency revealed a positive and statistically significant correlation between the mean levels of digital citizenship at T1 and T2 (r = .352, p \u0026lt; .001), suggesting moderate stability of the construct over time. This finding reflects the dynamic nature of digital citizenship, particularly during adolescence, a developmental stage characterised by ongoing cognitive, social, and technological changes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, these findings support the psychometric robustness of the final 27-item instrument and its suitability for assessing digital citizenship among youth in the Portuguese context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4 Structural Equation Model\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe initial structural equation model indicated suboptimal fit indices (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), suggesting the need for model refinement. All non-significant paths (p \u0026gt; .05), both among predictor variables and between these and the latent factors, were removed to improve model parsimony.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on modification indices and guided by theoretical considerations, four covariances were added between selected digital citizenship factors (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), reflecting conceptual overlap between related dimensions. The final model demonstrated an acceptable level of fit (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), supporting the adequacy of the specified relationships between variables.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the effects of the predictor variables, participants\u0026rsquo; sex (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;female/other; 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;male; categories combined due to sample size considerations) showed significant associations with five of the six latent factors, except for ethics. Being male was negatively associated with basic technical competences (BTC; β = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.072, p = .023), sociopolitical responsibility (β = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.282, p \u0026lt; .001), and critical awareness (β = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.090, p = .006), but positively associated with advanced technical competences (ATC; β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.140, p \u0026lt; .001) and political activism (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.106, p = .001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings suggest that male participants tend to report higher levels of advanced technical proficiency and political engagement, while demonstrating lower levels of critical awareness and sociopolitical responsibility in digital contexts compared to female or other-gender participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge group (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11\u0026ndash;16 years; 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16\u0026ndash;21 years) showed a positive and statistically significant association only with political activism (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.061, p = .019), indicating that older participants tend to demonstrate higher levels of engagement in online political activities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocioeconomic status (continuous variable) was significantly associated with three dimensions of digital citizenship. It was positively related to basic technical competences (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.242, p \u0026lt; .001) and sociopolitical responsibility (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.101, p = .003) and negatively related to political activism (β = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.120, p \u0026lt; .001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results suggest that participants from higher socioeconomic backgrounds tend to exhibit greater technical competence and higher levels of socially oriented responsibility, while showing lower levels of engagement in political activism. Overall, the findings highlight that digital citizenship is not only multidimensional but also socially patterned, varying according to individual and contextual characteristics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4 Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study aimed to address key theoretical and methodological limitations in the assessment of digital citizenship by developing and validating a multidimensional instrument grounded in Choi\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) framework and applied to a representative sample of Portuguese youth. In doing so, it contributes to the ongoing shift in the literature from predominantly normative and technicist perspectives towards more critical, participatory, and socially oriented understandings of digital citizenship.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses support the multidimensional structure of the construct, confirming the adequacy of a six-factor model encompassing basic and advanced technical competences, ethics, sociopolitical responsibility, critical awareness, and political activism. While broadly aligned with Choi\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) framework, these findings also suggest the need for conceptual refinement. In particular, the distinction between basic and advanced technical competences highlights the increasing complexity and stratification of digital skills, reflecting diverse forms of engagement with digital technologies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA particularly relevant contribution of this study is the emergence of sociopolitical responsibility as a distinct dimension. Although not explicitly anticipated in the original framework, this factor captures an orientation towards others and towards collective issues, combining empathy, awareness, and a sense of responsibility in digital contexts. This finding reinforces critical perspectives that conceptualise digital citizenship as a relational and socially embedded practice oriented towards the common good, rather than solely an individual competence or behavioural compliance (Emejulu \u0026amp; McGregor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Guti\u0026eacute;rrez-Ujaque, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). It also suggests that contemporary forms of digital citizenship may be more granular and context-sensitive than previously conceptualised.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe observed temporal stability of the construct, as indicated by moderate correlations across the two waves of data collection, provides additional support for its reliability. At the same time, the magnitude of this association reflects the dynamic nature of digital citizenship, particularly during adolescence, a developmental stage characterised by ongoing cognitive, social, and technological transformations (Livingstone \u0026amp; Third, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Rekker et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of sociodemographic variables further highlights the socially patterned nature of digital citizenship. Gender differences suggest distinct orientations towards digital engagement, with female participants reporting higher levels of sociopolitical responsibility and critical awareness, and male participants demonstrating higher levels of advanced technical competences and political activism. These findings point to differentiated forms of digital participation, where technical proficiency and critical engagement do not necessarily co-occur, reinforcing the multidimensional nature of the construct.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge differences were observed only in relation to political activism, with older participants showing higher levels of engagement. This finding is consistent with research on political socialisation, which indicates that political identity and participation tend to develop progressively throughout adolescence (Rekker et al., 2017).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe relationship between socioeconomic status reveals a particularly nuanced pattern. While higher socioeconomic status was associated with greater technical competences and sociopolitical responsibility, it was negatively associated with political activism. This finding may reflect a more institutionalised and normative orientation among more advantaged youth, where digital engagement is framed in terms of responsible use and access rather than as a space for contestation or social change. In contrast, lower socioeconomic status may be associated with more expressive or critical forms of digital participation, highlighting the role of social positioning in shaping modes of engagement in digital environments (Emejulu \u0026amp; McGregor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, these findings support the view that digital citizenship is a complex, multidimensional, and context-dependent construct that cannot be reduced to technical skills or normative behaviours. Instead, it encompasses cognitive, ethical, and participatory dimensions that are shaped by both individual characteristics and broader social conditions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5 Limitations and Future Research","content":"\u003cp\u003eDespite its contributions, this study presents several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the use of self-report measures may introduce biases such as social desirability and subjective interpretation, potentially affecting the accuracy of responses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, although the study benefits from a longitudinal design, the analysis did not include full measurement invariance testing across time, limiting the ability to assess the structural stability of the construct. Future research should address this limitation by examining longitudinal invariance to ensure the comparability of measurements across different time points.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, the analysis focused primarily on individual-level variables, without incorporating relevant contextual factors such as school environments, digital practices, or access to educational resources, which are likely to influence digital citizenship. Future research should adopt multilevel and mixed method designs to better capture the interaction between individual and contextual dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, although the instrument was validated using a representative sample within the Portuguese context, its generalisability to other cultural and geographical settings remains to be established. Replication studies in diverse contexts are therefore recommended to assess the external validity and cross-cultural applicability of the instrument.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6 Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study makes important conceptual and empirical contributions to the field of digital citizenship research. Conceptually, it advances an operationalisation of digital citizenship that moves beyond technicist and normative approaches, incorporating critical, relational, and participatory dimensions. By recognising digital environments as interconnected with offline contexts, it reinforces the understanding of digital citizenship as a form of engagement within a broader public sphere shaped by social, political, and cultural dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpirically, the study provides a psychometrically robust instrument validated in a representative sample of Portuguese youth aged 11 to 21, addressing key limitations in previous research, particularly the reliance on non-probabilistic samples and narrow conceptualisations of the construct.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a practical perspective, the validated instrument represents a valuable tool for educational and research contexts. It enables the identification of profiles of digital citizenship among young people, supporting the design, implementation, and evaluation of educational interventions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUltimately, this study contributes to promoting forms of digital education that go beyond technical literacy, fostering critical awareness, social responsibility, and active participation in digital societies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":" \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study protocol was approved by the Portuguese Ministry of Education through the Monitoring of Surveys in School Context (MIME), Directorate-General for Education and Science Statistics (DGEEC) (Ref. 0566300008), in accordance with national regulations governing research in school settings and ethical standards for data collection involving minors. The research instrument and consent procedures were subject to expert review prior to approval. Informed consent was obtained from all participants and from their legal guardians.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eConflict of interest\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe author declare no conflict of interest.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis work was funded by national funds, through the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT)/Portuguese Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation, under M. Rodrigues employment contract, established through CIIE funds [UIDP/00167/2020] and by the Tenure Programme [2023.14305.TENURE.017/CP00013/CT00004]. It was also partially supported by national funds through FCT, under the multi-year funding awarded to CIIE [UIDB/00167/2020 and UID/00167/2025]. Since 2025, CIIE has also received support from the European Union - NextGenerationEU under the Recovery and Resilience Plan [UID/PRR/167/2025].\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData availability statement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData sharing is not applicable to this article as participants did not provide consent for data sharing.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAl-Abdullatif, A. M., \u0026amp; Gameil, A. A. (2020). Exploring Students\u0026rsquo; Knowledge and Practice of Digital Citizenship in Higher Education. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(19), 122-142. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i19.15611\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlves, P. J. de A. F., Ricardo, J. C., \u0026amp; Sebasti\u0026atilde;o, N. I. A. (2025). Redes sociais e a constru\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o da identidade na juventude. \u003cem\u003eRevista Ibero-Americana De Humanidades, Ci\u0026ecirc;ncias e Educa\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(5), 391\u0026ndash;400. https://doi.org/10.51891/rease.v11i5.18492\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAvin\u0026ccedil;, E., \u0026amp; Doğan, F. (2024). Digital literacy scale: Validity and reliability study with the rasch model.\u003cem\u003e Education and Information Technologies\u003c/em\u003e, 29, 22895-22941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12662-7\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCastells, M. (2001). \u003cem\u003eThe Internet galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business, and society\u003c/em\u003e. Oxford University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen, L. L., Mirpuri, S., Rao, N., \u0026amp; Law, N. (2021). Conceptualization and measurement of digital citizenship across disciplines. \u003cem\u003eEducational Research Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100379\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChoi, M. (2015). \u003cem\u003eDevelopment of a scale to measure digital citizenship among young adults for democratic citizenship education\u003c/em\u003e [Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University]. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1437610223\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChoi, M. (2016). A concept analysis of digital citizenship for democratic citizenship education in the Internet age. \u003cem\u003eTheory \u0026amp; Research in Social Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(4), 565-607. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2016.1210549\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChoi, M., Glassman, M., \u0026amp; Cristol, D. (2017). What it means to be a citizen in the Internet age: Development of a reliable and valid digital citizenship scale. \u003cem\u003eComputers \u0026amp; Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e107\u003c/em\u003e, 100\u0026ndash;112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.002\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCortesi, S., Hasse, A., Lombana-Bermudez, A., Kim, S., \u0026amp; Gasser, U. (2020). \u003cem\u003eYouth and digital citizenship+ (plus): Understanding skills for a digital world\u003c/em\u003e. Berkman Klein Center for Internet \u0026amp; Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3557518\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDadi, A. F., Dachew, B. A., \u0026amp; Tessema, G. A. (2024). Problematic internet use: A growing concern for adolescent health and well-being in a digital era. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Global Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, 03034. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.14.03034 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEmejulu, A., \u0026amp; McGregor, C. (2019). Towards a radical digital citizenship in digital education. \u003cem\u003eCritical Studies in Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e60\u003c/em\u003e(1), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2016.1234494\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFern\u0026aacute;ndez-Prados, J. S., Lozano-D\u0026iacute;az, A., \u0026amp; Ainz-Galende, A. (2021). Measuring Digital Citizenship: A Comparative Analysis. \u003cem\u003eInformatics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8010018\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFraillon, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., \u0026amp; Duckworth, D. (2019). \u003cem\u003eAssessment Framework of ICILS 2018\u003c/em\u003e. IEA: Amsterdam.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuti\u0026eacute;rrez-Ujaque, D. (2024). Towards a critical digital literacy and consciousness in higher education: the emancipatory role of critical digital pedagogy. \u003cem\u003ePedagogies: An International Journa\u003c/em\u003el, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(3), 337-371. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2024.2379787\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuschle, L., Kindlinger, M., \u0026amp; Abs, H. J. (2024). Personal Responsibility and Beyond: Developing a Comprehensive Conceptualization of Digital Citizenship Competences. \u003cem\u003eWeizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(4). https://doi.org/10.34669/wi.wjds/4.4.5\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eITU. (2023). \u003cem\u003eMeasuring digital development: Facts and figures 2023\u003c/em\u003e. International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/facts-figures-2023/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJones, L. M., \u0026amp; Mitchell, K. J. (2016). Defining and measuring youth digital citizenship. \u003cem\u003eNew Media \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(9), 2063-2079. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815577797\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJordan, B. (2009). Blurring Boundaries: The \u0026ldquo;Real\u0026rdquo; and the \u0026ldquo;Virtual\u0026rdquo; in Hybrid Spaces. \u003cem\u003eHuman Organization\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e68\u003c/em\u003e(2), 181-193. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44148549\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim, M., \u0026amp; Choi, D. (2018). Development of Youth Digital Citizenship Scale and Implication for Educational Setting. \u003cem\u003eEducational Technology \u0026amp; Society, 21 \u003c/em\u003e(1), 155-171.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKline, R. B. (2016). \u003cem\u003ePrinciples and practice of structural equation modeling\u003c/em\u003e (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLivingstone, S. (2019). Audiences in an age of datafication: Critical questions for media research. \u003cem\u003eTelevision \u0026amp; New Media, 20\u003c/em\u003e(2), 170-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418811118\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLivingstone, S., \u0026amp; Third, A. (2017). Children and young people\u0026rsquo;s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. \u003cem\u003eNew Media \u0026amp; Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(5), 657-670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLozano-D\u0026iacute;az, A., \u0026amp; Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Prados, J. S. (2020). Educating Digital Citizens: An Opportunity to Critical and Activist Perspective of Sustainable Development Goals. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(18), 7260. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187260\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMihailidis, P. (2018). Civic media literacies: re-Imagining engagement for civic intentionality\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e. \u003cem\u003eLearning, Media and Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(2), 152-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1428623\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., \u0026amp; McNeal, R. S. (2007). \u003cem\u003eDigital citizenship: The Internet, society, and participation\u003c/em\u003e. MIT Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOECD. (2015).\u003cem\u003e Students, computers and learning: Making the connection\u003c/em\u003e. OECD Publishing.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePangrazio, L. (2016). Reconceptualising critical digital literacy. \u003cem\u003eDiscourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(2), 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.942836\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRazorfish (2024). \u003cem\u003eThe youth digital report: Gen Z, Gen Alpha and the future of engagement\u003c/em\u003e. Razorfish Insights. https://www.razorfish.com\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRichardson, J. W., Martin, F., \u0026amp; Sauers, N. (2021). Systematic review of 15 years of research on digital citizenship: 2004\u0026ndash;2019. \u003cem\u003eLearning, Media and Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e46\u003c/em\u003e(4), 498\u0026ndash;514. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1941098\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRibble, M. \u0026amp; Bailey, G. (2004). Digital citizenship: Focus questions for implementation. \u003cem\u003eLearning \u0026amp; Leading Technology,\u003c/em\u003e \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(2), 12\u0026ndash;15.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRibble, M., \u0026amp; Bailey, G. (2007). \u003cem\u003eDigital citizenship in schools\u003c/em\u003e. Washington: International. Society for Technology in Education.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRibble, M., Bailey, G., \u0026amp; Ross, T. (2011). \u003cem\u003eDigital citizenship in schools: Nine elements all students should know\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed.). Washington: International. Society for Technology in Education.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShi, G., Chan, K. K., \u0026amp; Lin, X. F. (2023). A systematic review of digital citizenship empirical studies for practitioners. \u003cem\u003eEducation and Information Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e, 3953-3975.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11383-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSmahel, D., Machackova, H., Mascheroni, G., Dedkova, L., Staksrud, E., \u0026Oacute;lafsson, K., Livingstone, S., \u0026amp; Hasebrink, U. (2020). \u003cem\u003eEU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries\u003c/em\u003e. EU Kids Online.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUNESCO (2024). \u003cem\u003eGuidelines on digital citizenship education\u003c/em\u003e. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Centre for Research and Intervention in Education, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Digital citizenship, Youth, Scale development, Psychometric validation, Education, Structural equation modelling","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9563069/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9563069/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eDemocratic societies increasingly shaped by digital technologies face complex challenges that require the development of critical and participatory forms of digital citizenship among youth. While existing approaches often emphasise technical skills and normative behaviours, there is a growing need for multidimensional frameworks that integrate ethical, critical, and civic dimensions. This study aimed to develop and validate a self-report instrument to assess digital citizenship among youth, theoretically grounded in Choi\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) framework and empirically extended to reflect contemporary digital practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData were collected from a probabilistic sample of 1104 Portuguese youth aged 11 to 21 years. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a 27-item structure organised into six dimensions: basic technical competences, advanced technical competences, digital ethics, sociopolitical responsibility, critical awareness, and political activism. The model demonstrated satisfactory fit and robust psychometric properties. Structural equation modelling revealed significant differences across dimensions according to sex, age, and socioeconomic status.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings suggest that digital citizenship is a multidimensional and context-sensitive construct that extends beyond technical and normative approaches, incorporating critical awareness and socially oriented engagement. The validated instrument provides a robust tool for research and educational practice, supporting the assessment of youth digital citizenship and the design of interventions aimed at fostering critical and participatory engagement in digital societies.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Measuring Digital Citizenship among Youth: Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Scale in Portugal","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-30 06:46:21","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9563069/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"5d710255-0b1b-4e21-bc82-c6500e4b5456","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 30th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":67228129,"name":"Educational Psychology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-30T06:46:21+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-30 06:46:21","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9563069","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9563069","identity":"rs-9563069","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}