content analysis
a SNS: social networking site.
b SDI: social digital identity.
c PDI: performative digital identity.
d MIL: mother-in-law.
e DIL: daughter-in-law.
f PII: personally identifiable information.
Of the 27 studies, 11 (41%) were conducted in the United States [ 9 , 19 , 40 , 43 , 47 , 49 , 50 , 52 , 57 , 58 ], 3 (11%) were conducted in Turkey [ 48 , 56 , 60 ], and 2 (7%) were conducted in Australia [ 2 , 18 ], followed by 1 (4%) study conducted in both the Czech Republic and Spain [ 52 ], 1 (4%) conducted in Germany and Austria [ 61 ], and 1 (4%) from each of the following countries: the United Kingdom [ 46 ], Malaysia [ 51 ], Poland [ 10 ], Sweden [ 59 ], Italy [ 62 ], Indonesia [ 55 ], and Portugal [ 17 ]. The remaining 7% (2/27) of the studies did not name the country of data origin [ 44 , 45 ].
The main social networking sites used were Instagram and Facebook. A total of 26% (7/27) of the studies focused on Instagram [ 17 , 18 , 43 , 44 , 47 , 48 , 52 ], and 15% (4/27) of the studies focused on Facebook [ 9 , 10 , 46 , 56 ]. The remaining studies focused on social media more broadly.
In total, 48% (13/27) of the studies used a qualitative approach [ 9 , 10 , 17 - 19 , 43 , 44 , 48 , 51 , 52 , 55 , 60 , 61 ]. A total of 26% (7/27) of the studies used a mixed methods approach [ 46 , 47 , 49 , 50 , 56 - 58 ]. In total, 11% (3/27) of the studies used a quantitative design [ 30 , 53 , 59 ]. A total of 7% (2/27) of the studies used both qualitative and literature review methodologies [ 40 , 54 ], and 4% (1/27) of the articles were book chapters [ 7 ].
In this first part of the Results section, we explore key terms and concepts used in relation to the concept of the digital identity of children on social networking sites. We then explore the concept of digital identity in relation to 2 types of behaviors that underpin the development of young children’s digital identity.
The term sharenting was the most commonly used term in the literature (21/27, 78% of the articles) on the development of children’s digital identities [ 7 , 10 , 17 , 40 , 44 - 54 , 56 , 59 , 60 ]. Of the 27 studies, 5 (19%) studies discussed the term in more detail and provided a definition of sharenting [ 40 , 45 , 47 , 49 , 50 ]. Bezakova et al [ 45 ] explained the term sharenting as “the overuse of social media by parents or legal guardians who share photos or various home videos of minors with the virtual community,” whereas Brosch [ 10 ] defined sharenting as “the practice of a parent to regularly use the social media to communicate a lot of detailed information about their child” and drew on the Collins dictionary definition. All authors appeared to share a similar understanding of the term sharenting . Thus, the definition of sharenting is widely accepted and used frequently in the context of the digital identities of children on social networking sites.
A total of 48% (13/27) of the articles referred to the concept of digital footprint(s) [ 7 , 9 , 10 , 19 , 40 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 50 , 53 , 54 , 60 , 62 ]. The term digital footprints was sometimes used interchangeably with the term digital identity . It often came down to the authors’ preference for wording to describe the creation of digital identities for children. For example, Brosch [ 10 ] and Bezakova et al [ 45 ] explained that children’s digital footprints are mostly created by parents early in their child’s life, sometimes before or just after the birth of the child or during infancy [ 10 , 45 ]. Brosch [ 10 ] further explained that 10.7% of Polish parents in their sample created digital footprints for their unborn children by posting sonogram images, and 8.3% shared photos of the expectant mother on Facebook. As illustrated by this example, the term digital footprints was used synonymously with the term digital identity .
When the risks of sharing children’s content on the web were discussed, the term digital footprints was often chosen. Kumar and Schoenebeck [ 9 ] discussed the risk of mothers creating digital footprints for their children in relation to the benefits of receiving validation. Mothers in their study were hesitant and uncertain about how their photo-sharing behavior might affect their children’s online identity later and restricted their sharing to pictures that were cute and funny and showed milestones. Nevertheless, they found that the benefits of receiving validation via shared content outweighed the mothers’ concerns about digital footprints and oversharing. The authors introduced a new term, privacy stewardship , to describe “the responsibility mothers take on as they consider what kinds of baby photos are appropriate to share and the implications for their children’s digital footprint.” In line with this, Cino and Dalledonne Vandini [ 40 ] described the pressure and responsibilities of motherhood as mothers are eager to and expected to actively manage their children’s digital footprints. The literature suggests that the management of children’s digital footprints and identities is mostly considered to be the responsibility of parents, especially mothers [ 7 , 9 , 40 , 62 ].
The different types of identities that were mentioned in relation to children’s digital identities on social networking sites are discussed in the following sections.
The term children’s identities or variations of this term (eg, child’s identity ) was used in 44% (12/27) of the articles [ 7 , 9 , 17 , 19 , 43 , 44 , 48 , 52 - 54 , 56 ]. The term children’s identities was used to represent a broad concept that often encompassed other subterms or concepts related to identity. A total of 26% (7/27) of the articles that included the term children’s identities further discussed the concept of online identity [ 9 , 17 , 19 , 43 , 45 , 53 , 60 ], and 15% (4/27) of the articles discussed the term digital identity [ 17 , 54 , 60 , 62 ].
All articles that used the term online identities discussed how parents were the creators of their children’s identities on the web [ 9 , 17 , 19 , 43 , 45 , 53 , 60 ]. Similar to the other concepts related to the digital identity of children, online identity could often be used interchangeably with the term digital identity . However, the context in which online identity was used differed from that in which the other terms were used. Of the 27 studies, 5 (19%) studies discussed children’s online identities in the context of children’s rights and agency over their online identity and the missing consent from children to allow their parents to post about them on the web [ 17 , 19 , 43 , 45 , 53 ].
The literature did not generate an accepted definition of digital identity; however, some authors briefly discussed the concept and its relationship with sharenting . Kumar [ 54 ] linked the concepts of digital identity and sharenting: “sharenting is potent thanks to the concept of a ‘digital identity,’ also called a digital persona, profile, legacy, trail, footprint, or presence” and “Sharenting discourse portrays the creation of a digital identity as a choice, one best left to the child.”
Mascheroni et al [ 62 ] also linked the 2 terms by discussing the consequences of sharenting on children’s digital identity: “Generally speaking, almost half of the parents are reportedly aware of the consequences of sharenting for children’s digital identity, but regular sharers show a lower average value, suggesting a lower degree of awareness.”
Jorge et al [ 17 ] discussed the term digital identity in more detail by exploring how celebrity sharenting contributes to the construction of children’s digital identities. They found that the parents shared information and photos that aligned with the theme of happy and grateful parenthood and that the family posts represented the children as the extended selves of the father, stepmother, and grandmother.
Thus, there is an understanding that the digital identities are created by parents through sharenting. Here, sharenting is seen as the action (sharing information about the child), and the digital identity is described as the consequence or outcome of the sharenting behavior. Although sharenting was well defined, definitions for children’s digital identity were not provided in the articles.
Other terms or concepts that included the word identity were used less frequently; for example, relational identity was mentioned in 7% (2/27) of the articles, whereas the terms identity performance , mediated identity , private identity , social identity , social media identity , and moral identities only appeared each in 4% (1/27) of the articles. Overall, most articles (19/27, 70%) in this review discussed some form of identity in relation to children’s presence on social networking sites.
Sharenting is the behavior that parents engage in when sharing information about their children on social networking sites. This creates long-lasting digital footprints on the web that form children’s digital identities . The literature has identified a number of risks related to the creation of children’s digital identities on social networking sites, such as digital kidnapping and identity theft , especially if the information that was shared contained personally identifiable information . These areas will be explored in relation to the concept of the digital identity of young children.
A total of 11% (3/27) of the articles in this review discussed the concept of digital kidnapping [ 43 , 48 , 51 ]. The terms identity theft , personally identifiable information , and privacy stewardship were used in 7% (2/27) of the articles in this review [ 9 , 46 , 49 - 51 , 54 ]. The term digital kidnapping is defined as “people who steal a child’s identity and photo on social media and pass the child off as their own” [ 48 ]. Digital kidnapping is described as one of the risks of creating digital identities for children by sharing images, especially those that include personal information about the child and reveal the child’s face [ 43 , 48 ]. Hashim et al [ 51 ] found that Malaysian mothers were concerned about digital kidnapping and identity theft and, therefore, were conscious of not sharing locations in their posts and actively hid information regarding places and their children’s names and dates of birth.
A total of 7% (2/27) of the articles discussed the concept of extended self [ 17 , 52 ]. These 2 articles also discussed the term relational identity . In the article by Holiday et al [ 52 ], the authors discussed the theory of the “extended self” and applied it to the concept of sharenting. The authors described parents’ engagement in sharenting as fundamental to their identity as parents, which the authors argued says more about the parent as an individual than about the depicted child. Following this thought, sharenting is seen as a form of parents’ self-presentation that includes children as a component in the definition of the self.
Jorge et al [ 17 ] also described parents’ representation of children on social networking sites as the extended selves of family members. When children’s digital identities on social networking sites are interpreted as extensions of their parents’ or family members’ identities, parents’ and family members’ identities form part of the child’s digital identity. Accordingly, some articles in this review (4/27, 15%) discussed the digital identity of parents, mothers, and families in relation to the child’s digital identity [ 9 , 49 , 54 , 62 ].
Overall, the review of the key term and concepts related to digital identity shows that there is limited research defining key terms such as children’s digital identity and digital footprints , whereas sharenting is a commonly used and widely accepted term that is clearly defined.
The development of social and performative digital identities.
The synthesis of the data generated through content and image analyses generated 2 types of digital identity: “social digital identity” and “performative digital identity.” Children’s social digital identity creation involves parents who create their children’s digital identity by sharing information such as everyday activities and milestones without links to commercial products or promotion of their children. Parents’ motivation to create social digital identities for their children is most often to share with family and friends and keep a digital diary [ 9 , 10 , 51 , 52 , 54 , 61 ], whereas children’s performative digital identity is created when parents promote or market their children, often for their own benefit, for example, to promote their clothes and brands [ 18 , 44 , 52 ]. This means that parents post information and photos of their children to convey a picture of the child that can deviate from the actual identity of the child. These posts often present the child in a neat and fashionable way and can include links to products that parents obtain a financial share of. For example, “mummy” or fashion bloggers (eg, #fashionkids) create performative digital identities for their children that mostly benefit them and often disregard the needs of the child [ 18 , 63 ].
Most articles (18/27, 67%) discussed social digital identities exclusively [ 9 , 10 , 19 , 40 , 42 , 45 , 46 , 48 - 51 , 53 , 54 , 56 - 58 , 60 , 61 ], whereas 30% (8/27) discussed performative digital identities [ 7 , 17 , 18 , 43 , 44 , 47 , 52 , 55 ]. Social digital identities were mostly created on Facebook or discussed in a social media context in general, whereas performative digital identities were mostly created on Instagram. A summary of the types of posted content is presented in Table 2 . The percentages indicate the proportion of articles that discussed the different topics.
Analysis of posted content related to children on social networking sites (N=27).
Content | Total articles, n (%) | Activity or leisure time, n (%) | Events (birthdays or family), n (%) | Posing or influencer or making income, n (%) | Developmental stages or milestones, n (%) | Family holidays or outings, n (%) | Embarrassing or cute, n (%) | Face visible, n (%) | Name or DOB , n (%) | Nudity, n (%) |
Social DI | 18 (67) | 11 (61) | 13 (72) | 1 (6) | 6 (33) | 3 (17) | 8 (44) | 6 (33) | 7 (39) | 5 (28) |
Performative DI | 8 (30) | 7 (88) | 2 (25) | 6 (75) | 1 (12) | 1 (12) | 2 (25) | 3 (38) | 2 (25) | 3 (38) |
a DOB: date of birth.
b DI: digital identity.
Social digital identities were often created through images of events such as birthdays and family gatherings, whereas most of the studies that demonstrated a performative digital identity (8/27, 30%) included images and descriptions of children posing for photos, and in some cases, the family made an income from these posts [ 7 , 17 , 18 , 43 , 44 , 47 , 52 , 55 ].
In the following sections, we explain what information (including text and photos) parents typically share when creating social and performative digital identities for children and what motivates them to share this information.
What parents share when creating social digital identities for their children.
Most studies (10/27, 37%) reported that parents created social digital identities for their children by sharing their happy moments. Brosch [ 10 ] found that these happy moments were often recorded during daily life activities, outings, and special events (95.6%). Similarly, most of the mothers in the study by Briazu et al [ 46 ] shared information about special days (72.7%) or social activities (52.6%), and some shared information about health (6.7%) or educational issues (5.2%). Brosch [ 10 ] found that many parents revealed private information about their children by sharing posts containing images of their children’s birthday parties (23.2%), baby videos, birth certificates, kindergarten diplomas, or art (32.7%), as well as sonogram images (10.7%). Information about the child was also shared via posts containing information such as the child’s name and date of birth (48.2%). Brosch [ 10 ] also found that some of the posts contained embarrassing photos (eg, nude or seminude pictures of the child during bathing or at the beach), photos in which children were in distress (eg, crying or angry), or photos in which children were covered in food after dinner (eg, chocolate on their faces).
Kopecky et al [ 53 ] surveyed parents from the Czech Republic and Spain and found that these parents shared photos of celebrations, family moments, holidays, important milestones, and photos that parents considered to be cute or funny. Most parents reported sharing content in which the child could be identified (by face) but did not include sexual content (81.7%). One-fifth of parents shared photos in which the child was partially exposed to the extent that the identity of the child could be determined. A small proportion (3.5%) of parents from the Czech Republic reported sharing nude photos of their young children.
Er et al [ 48 ] investigated sharenting behaviors at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. They found that mothers posted more often than fathers and that most posts contained photos and some contained videos of the children. Of the 226 posts they analyzed, 207 included the children’s faces, with a limited number of parents blurring their children’s faces (n=17). In line with the other studies, the posts were generally happy, for example, expressing the joy of spending time with children and love toward children and showing how children and the family happily played games, cooked, or learned together. The daily lives of the children were also posted, including birthdays, vacations, and anniversaries. A smaller proportion of posts expressed unpleasant situations during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as boredom, complaints, and unhappiness with quarantine.
Cino and Dalledonne Vandini [ 40 ] explored the digital identities that are created for children by the mothers’ mothers-in-law and the conflict that this raises with the mothers. The content is either shared before the birth of the child (eg, pregnancy status of the mother, gender reveal, or labor) or afterward (eg, daily life activities) and usually against the will or knowledge of the mother.
Fox et al [ 50 ] investigated first-time fathers’ sharenting behavior and found that fathers tried to avoid posting sensitive information (eg, their naked child). However, they did post about everyday activities such as going to the park, playing, birthdays, and firsts (eg, first tooth). Fathers were aware of security risks and, therefore, hid their children’s faces and names.
Hashim et al [ 51 ] found that parents mostly shared social events (eg, vacations, events, family activities, and outings; 29.3%), moments (eg, good, funny, happy, important, or special moments; 25.3%), day-to-day activities (13.3%), memories of their children (12%), school activities (10.6%), food (4%), antics (2.6%), and milestones (2.6%) about their children.
Kumar and Schoenebeck [ 9 ] interviewed mothers about their sharenting experiences. Mothers described the photos that they shared about their children as cute and funny and explained that the photos often contained family or friends and developmental milestones of the children.
Marasli et al [ 56 ] found that the most common theme parents shared about on Facebook was special days (81.4%), such as birthdays, graduations, and year-end shows, followed by social activities (54.98%) and educational issues (30%). Less commonly shared themes included sports and arts activities (18.96%), play activities (17.54%), health issues (12.8%), and recommendations about products for children and informatics (12.32%). Most parents in this study (63.77%) also reported that they liked sharing pleasant things about their children.
Minkus et al [ 57 ] used a web-based application programming interface called Face++ to analyze Facebook and Instagram photos. The software identified children via age estimates based on the faces in the photos. Over 25% of the photos on Facebook and 16% of the photos on Instagram with children aged 0 to 7 years had comments that revealed the children’s names, and 2.7% (Facebook) and 5% (Instagram) included the word birthday . The authors were also able to infer the children’s last names from the parents’ last names. Overall, 5.6% of Facebook accounts and 19% of Instagram accounts with child photos revealed the name and date of birth of the children, which is enough information to identify them. By further linking the parents’ Facebook accounts with public records (eg, voter registration records), the authors were also able to identify the address of the parents and children.
In this section, we explore mothers’, fathers’, and mothers-in-law’s motivations for creating social digital identities for their children on social networking sites. Briazu et al [ 46 ] found that mothers’ motivations or perceived benefits of posting about their children were to build connections, gain practical benefits such as asking for parenting advice, gain emotional benefits (eg, pride and joy from their children), and help others, and some mothers did not identify any benefits.
Fox and Hoy [ 49 ] found that the desire to be a “good” mother motivated mothers’ sharenting behavior. Mothers used sharenting as a coping strategy. They shared their experiences as mothers and information about their children to seek affirmation and social support from others. The authors also explored mothers’ motivations not to post about their children. Mothers focused on portraying the “right” image of the child and avoided posts that potentially could have made them look like a “bad” parent. It was also important to mothers in this study that their children would not be upset or embarrassed by their posts later in life.
Kumar and Schoenebeck [ 9 ] found that most mothers in their study used Facebook as an archive for their children’s photos. It was important to these mothers to portray their children and themselves in a favorable light and to receive validation and support as mothers.
Wagner and Gasche [ 61 ] investigated German and Austrian mothers’ decision-making processes and strategies when sharing about their children. Most mothers indicated that the costs of sharing photos of their children on the web outweighed the benefits, and therefore, more than half of the mothers (60%) never shared photos of their children on social networking sites. The mothers’ main motivation to share was social participation (to inform others, to keep others up to date, and to document the children’s development), followed by showing how proud they are of their children and the need to be liked, approved of, and accepted by others.
Fox et al [ 50 ] found that fathers’ motivation to share was not to gain support from others but rather to express humor or spotlight themselves as fathers. Overall, fathers made fewer sharenting decisions, and the main responsibility of sharenting most often lay with the mothers [ 50 ].
Hashim et al [ 51 ] found that the most common motivation (42.8%) for Malaysian parents to share about their children was to save memories of them. Social networking sites served as an archive or journal for them to refer to at a later stage. The second most common motivator (31.6%) was the desire to share their experiences, information, activities, and feelings about raising children. Other motivations included being influenced by other social media users; staying connected and engaged with others; and motivating, encouraging, and inspiring other parents. In line with this, Turgut et al [ 60 ] described parents’ motivation to post about their children as related to keeping in touch with others (eg, relatives and friends) and recording and memorizing their children’s development. Brosch [ 10 ] found that the number of Facebook friends was a significant predictor of sharenting.
Cino and Dalledonne Vandini [ 40 ] investigated the motivation of mothers-in-law to post about their grandchildren. They reported that grandmothers’ motivation stemmed from a desire to show excitement for the grandchild, which was often at the cost of the parent’s desire for agency over their children’s digital identities. However, it was noted that grandparents might be less knowledgeable about the internet and web safety and are potentially naiver about sharing information about their grandchildren on the web.
What parents share when creating performative digital identities for their children.
Posts that contribute to a child’s performative digital identity creation are usually well planned out to present the child in a fashionable or favorable way. Benevento [ 44 ] investigated posts with the #letthekids and #fashionkids hashtags. These are often used by parents who create performative digital identities for their children by sharing well-prepared posts that have been planned out. The hashtag #letthekids emerged as a counter to the more established hashtag #fashionkids ; it stands for “let the kids dress themselves.” The author found that #fashionkids photos often show the child alone during structured activities outdoors. Children are often displayed smiling or with still expressions posing with their possessions (eg, clothing and accessories). The attention is drawn to the child and their outfit rather than the location or activity. The background locations include well-maintained spaces such as parks, backyards, and playgrounds as well as home settings (eg, bedrooms and kitchens). Although children are often presented as posing with a focus on their clothes, these are most often casual.
In contrast, #letthekids photos often show the child during unstructured activities, such as during play, eating in their home environment, or in nature (eg, forest). This hashtag often displays children acting on their own, for example, while playing with their toys in their room, but also sometimes includes family members. The children in the #letthekids hashtag often look away or are shown from behind, as if they are not aware of the photo being taken. Interestingly, #letthekids posters upload more professional photographs than #fashionkids posters and more naked or seminaked pictures of their children than #fashionkids posters [ 44 ].
Choi and Lewallen [ 47 ] investigated children’s gender representations on Instagram and found that parents posted more about their female children than about their male children and generally presented both their female and male children with positive emotions in white or gender-typical (ie, pink and blue) clothes. Children on Instagram were often displayed as playing or having fun in indoor settings by themselves. Girls were found to be frequently displayed as engaging in fashion.
Holiday et al [ 52 ] explored how parents self-presented in their children’s presentation on Instagram. The authors identified 3 presentational categories: polished , promotional , and intimate . Photos in the polished category displayed children as visually appealing and suggested that parents invested time and effort in the post to portray an idealized image of the child. The parents were presented as favorably themselves, with possessions including the child. The attention was often directed toward the parents, not the children (via the text or image). Children in this category served as accessories (eg, in the parents’ arms or on the side of the photo). Parents typically presented themselves as their “ideal self” in this category. The promotion category included posts in which parents used their children to promote their own skills, competencies, services, or products. Finally, the intimate category portrayed children more realistically without perfectioning of the image. With a strong focus on the child in the intimate category, more information is revealed about the child, which adds to the child’s digital identity [ 52 ].
Jorge et al [ 17 ] explored celebrities’ creation of their children’s digital identities through sharenting. The authors analyzed Cristiano Ronaldo’s family’s sharenting practices and the portrayal of the children as the parents’ extended selves. The results showed that celebrity sharenting contributes to digital identities through the themes of happy and grateful parenthood and the representation of children as the extended selves of the father, stepmother, and grandmother. Finally, Latipah et al [ 55 ] found that millennial parents shared content about their children related to everyday activities that are perceived as fun and that are often displayed as esthetically pleasing, with some posts including the promotion of products.
Parents who engage in performative digital identity creation for their children have several motives for sharenting. Some parents want to pass on knowledge and educate other parents by providing advice, products, and insights into their daily life activities [ 18 , 55 ], whereas others’ motive is to primarily promote their products or clothes [ 44 , 52 ]. In the promotion category in the study by Holiday et al [ 52 ], the motivation behind posting was often to promote products or services to other parents, whereas parents’ motivation in the intimate category was often to preserve memories, which is in line with our findings on the motivation to create social digital identities.
Dobson and Jay [ 18 ] found that the motive of their case study was to connect with others as the family lived in a rural area. The mother reported that she had made friendships on the web and that followers empathized with her posts and offered support and a sense of community.
In the study by Latipah et al [ 54 ], parents’ motivation to share about their children was to receive affirmation and social support and to demonstrate the ability to care for their children, social participation, and documentation.
The only study that included children as participants could not be classified as either “performative” or “social” digital identity. In this study, children were asked for their opinion on sharenting [ 58 ]. Children aged 4 to 15 years indicated that it is not OK for parents to post photos of their children (them) on social networking sites, whereas sending the photos to relatives was more accepted by the children in the study. The lowest (least acceptable) scores were found among the youngest children (aged 4-6 y) in the study. Irrespective of the participants’ age, children wanted to be asked before their parents took or shared photos of them, and they wanted their answers to be listened to.
This scoping review identified 27 studies. Participants included mothers and fathers (collectively reported as parents) and grandparents. On the basis of the analysis of the key terms and concepts used in the literature, the following description of how these relate to one another was developed. The creation of a child’s digital identity is developed through the behaviors of parents, most referred to as sharenting . The behavior of parents through the decisions on the web they make creates a digital identity that can be described as social digital identity or performative digital identity. We found that much of the literature on the concept of the digital identity of children reports on parents, especially mothers, and their sharenting behavior on social networking sites. The most used terms related to digital identity in the literature are sharenting , followed by digital footprint and children’s identity . The term sharenting is well defined and popular among researchers and the media, whereas the term digital identity was less commonly used. We found that the term digital footprint was more commonly used than digital identity ; however, clear definitions were also lacking in the articles in this review. Common across all terms was parents making decisions about what to share about their children, mostly without the children’s consent.
The term digital identity is more commonly used in the literature on adults [ 20 - 25 , 64 , 65 ]. However, we expect a rise in the term digital identity in relation to children in the coming years as there has been a steep increase in research that focuses on the consequences and risks of sharenting [ 50 , 66 , 67 ] . The use of digital identity terms often depends on authors’ preference for words. We found that digital footprints , children’s identity , online identity , and digital identity were used interchangeably by authors. Together with sharenting , these 4 constructs were the most used terms across the articles, suggesting that they are closely related.
We found that most of the content shared by parents was related to social digital identity and included sharing special events such as birthdays and family gatherings, as well as everyday activities and leisure time. In the performative digital identity category, posts also included content about everyday activities and leisure time but with a focus on children who were posing for a photo, with some posts contributing to the posters’ income (eg, influencers). In the performative digital identity category, the motives of some parents were to sell products or promote themselves and their children. The content posted appeared carefully prepared and polished. The literature on the digital identity of children frequently made reference to the concepts of safety on the internet and the rights of the child, and these 2 areas will be explored further with reference to the findings of this review.
Although some awareness among parents of the potential risks of creating digital footprints via sharenting and the creation of their children’s digital identities was noted, there is still uncertainty about the exact impact and consequences of parental sharing behavior. One of the potential risks, digital kidnapping, was considered by some parents; however, the benefits of sharing were described as outweighing the risks of creating digital footprints and identities [ 9 ]. The perceived risks of sharenting may differ depending on the parents’ cultural background. For instance, in the study by Wagner and Gasche [ 61 ], 60% of German and Austrian mothers reported never having shared a photo of their children on the web. In an Australian study, participants refrained from posting about their children on social media as a strategy for privacy [ 68 ]. Other researchers suggest that parents who perceive web-based social networks as a source of support are highly likely to sharent [ 69 , 70 ].
To make an informed decision about whether to share children’s content on the web, parents need to receive information and guidance. Researchers and policy makers have started to develop new policies and guidelines for parents. Although there is a need to update existing policies to reflect the addition of online identities [ 71 - 73 ], the focus of many of these guidelines and policies is on children’s screen time exposure and not on children’s digital identity development or children’s right to their digital identity and footprints [ 71 , 74 , 75 ]. Therefore, we recommend more rigorous research on parents’ attitudes toward privacy and the factors influencing their sharing of children’s photos and information on the web. Findings from such studies could inform efforts and emerging policies directed at mitigating sharenting behaviors that are associated with web-related risks.
The process of children’s digital identity creation most often takes place without the child’s permission or input [ 10 , 17 - 19 , 43 , 45 , 52 - 54 , 62 ]. No studies in this review investigated young children’s creation of their own digital identities on social networking sites. A study in this review asked children for their opinion on their parents’ sharenting behavior [ 59 ], and very few of the studies in this review (4/27, 15%) addressed the agency of the child [ 18 , 19 , 54 , 59 ]. When digital identities are created early for the child without the input of the child, their right to create their own digital footprint or identity is taken away, leaving them without a voice and choice [ 45 , 54 , 60 ]. Where possible, children should be involved in the development of their digital identity. Research to identify how this can be achieved and to give voice to the experiences of young children is needed to better understand this important and fast-moving area [ 19 ]. Future studies should explore the perspectives of children as key stakeholders in the creation of their digital identity [ 19 , 76 ].
To our knowledge, this is the first scoping review to map out the literature published on the creation of digital identities among young children through social networking sites. We strove to apply rigorous methods to search and select articles and chart the data. Owing to our strict age range exclusion criteria, we did not review articles that discussed the digital identity of children aged ≥9 years on social networking sites. The use of search terms and the selected databases may not have been exhaustive, and the omission of social networking sites such as YouTube is a limitation. The search was only valid up to April 2023. In the same vein, most of the included studies were conducted in the Western world, with only 7% (2/27) of the studies conducted in Asia and none conducted in Africa or South America. The interpretation of the findings should consider this geographical bias.
Digital identities on social networking sites are created when photos and information about a person are shared. The digital identities of children on social networking sites from conception to the age of 8 years are most often created by their parents (without the children’s permission). Children’s digital identities can be grouped into 2 categories: social and performative. Parents use the web environment to capture moments that matter to them while also creating positive narratives around the child’s life. The content that is shared for each type of identity and the motivation behind the creation of such identities differ. Research into young children and the digital world has focused on areas such as the effects of screen time and child development and digital safety [ 77 - 81 ]. We urge greater attention to the important area of how the digital identity is created, the impact of this, and how young children can be involved in important decisions that affect their lives.
This research was supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child through project CE200100022.
PRISMA | Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses |
PRISMA-ScR | Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews |
Multimedia appendix 2, data availability.
Conflicts of Interest: None declared.
Reframing adolescent identity: a global perspective for the digital age.
This review provides a comprehensive evaluation of adolescent identity development research, critically examining the significant gap between the global distribution of adolescents and the focus of scholarly work. While over 85% of the world's youth live in the majority world—Africa, Asia, and Latin America—only 15% of developmental psychology studies explore these populations, revealing a critical gap in global perspectives on adolescent identity development. This review also emphasizes the lack of theoretical and empirical focus on the transformative role of digital technology in shaping identities. Through a systematic review of research, we provide both an empirical base and a conceptual framework to understand adolescent identity in an increasingly connected world. We also suggest several concrete steps for incorporating global perspectives and digital realities into developmental psychology research in general and identity development research in particular.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most cited most cited rss feed, childhood adversity and neural development: a systematic review, adolescent–parent relationships: progress, processes, and prospects, the life course consequences of very preterm birth, cognitive aging and dementia: a life-span perspective, media and the development of gender role stereotypes, development of adhd: etiology, heterogeneity, and early life course, language development in context, the development of social categorization, screen time, social media use, and adolescent development, neighborhood effects on children's development in experimental and nonexperimental research.
Publication Date: 04 Sep 2024
Sign in to access your institutional or personal subscription or get immediate access to your online copy - available in PDF and ePub formats
20 tech experts share how to protect your identity online.
As consumers, we’ve likely run across cautionary tales and product ads focused on identity theft in a variety of media, from television commercials to podcasts and online news sources to local radio. It’s not surprising it’s a hot topic: The Federal Trade Commission received more than 1 million reports of identity theft through its dedicated website in 2023, and that level of impact is likely to increase year over year as bad actors gain access to increasingly sophisticated tools.
Becoming a victim of digital identity theft can entail lost time and money, damage to your credit, stress and anxiety, and, sometimes, even legal liability. As consumers, we’re our own first line of defense—taking simple, practical and accessible steps to protect our identities online is not just smart, but essential. Here, 20 tech experts from Forbes Technology Council share the advice they urge every individual to follow to protect themselves online.
Audit and minimize your digital footprint by deleting old accounts, disabling unnecessary permissions and using aliases. Avoid reusing passwords, especially for email or financial services accounts, and always enable two-factor authentication. This helps protect your personal data, makes it harder for bad actors to piece together your identity, and adds an extra layer of security. - Reed McGinley-Stempel , Stytch
To protect your online identity, use unique, strong passwords for each account and enable multifactor authentication when it’s available. A password manager can help you create and store these securely. MFA adds security by requiring a second verification, such as a phone code or biometric factor. Regularly update your passwords, especially for critical accounts, and be cautious about sharing personal information online. - Rush Shahani , Persana AI
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Used tesla cybertruck price continues to crash, northern lights forecast: here’s where aurora borealis may be visible tonight, 3. follow the nist password guidelines.
Sometimes the simplest answer is also the best answer. Make the most of your login credentials and available login processes. The NIST Password Guidelines , which are based on the quality of passwords and the behavior of users, recommend length over complexity, using a password manager to ensure a variety of passwords are used for different logins, and making use of multifactor authentication. - Piyush Pandey , Pathlock
Always operate under the assumption that no technology, regardless of its advanced privacy or security protocols, is infallible. Therefore, the most effective strategy for safeguarding your identity is to limit the personal information you share on any platform. By minimizing the amount of data you provide, you reduce the risk of exposure in the event of a breach—which is ultimately inevitable. - Sean Merat , owl.co
To protect your identity online, always read websites’ terms and conditions and cookie policies. Use a separate email for e-commerce to safeguard your personal address. Avoid using your banking PIN on other devices, and enable multifactor authentication on all accounts for added security. - Uzair Ahmed , Right-Hand Cybersecurity
My advice would be to use a password manager and enable two-factor authentication. Password managers generate and store unique, complex passwords for each account, making it difficult for hackers to gain access. Two-factor authentication adds an extra layer of security by requiring a second form of verification, such as a code sent to your phone, in addition to your password. - Ardhendu Sekhar Nanda , First Citizens Bank
Use discretion when posting content on social networks. Do not put your home address, phone number, birthdate or when you are going on a vacation in your social media accounts. Cyber criminals can use this data to impersonate you for malicious purposes, including identity theft, social engineering or even phishing attacks. - Dr. Reji Thomas , TOL Biotech
Everyone should be using a password manager and enabling multifactor authentication whenever possible. As an extra step, you should use an authenticator app whenever possible to reduce your risk of SIM-swapping (someone stealing your phone number). - Jonathan Gillham , Originality.ai
Use strong, unique passwords for each account and enable multifactor authentication wherever possible. Avoid reusing passwords, and consider using a password manager to keep track of your passwords. Also, be cautious about sharing personal information online, and regularly review privacy settings on social media and other platforms. This reduces the risk of identity theft and unauthorized access. - Prashanthi Reddy
Be vigilant about data storage and processing locations, prioritizing local computation or trusted remote environments whenever possible. For off-device storage, avoid keeping sensitive information in plaintext. Always consider where your data resides and how it’s processed to maintain better control over your digital identity. - Echul Shin , Eternis
Remove any sensitive pictures of yourself that are posted on the internet. Media produced by generative AI is becoming increasingly convincing, and these images could be used to create deepfakes or manipulated content that appears to be you in false situations. - James Shi , Datacurve
Pay close attention to the permissions you’re giving to the apps and services that you’re using. Probe the services and technologies that these apps are leveraging. Understand where your data is stored—in what country, and whether it’s on the company’s premises or in the cloud. Choosing apps and services that use trusted, industry-leading security solutions and cloud providers is key to protecting your identity. - Atit Shah , Microsoft
With millions of identities being stolen, trusting individuals to safeguard their identity on their own is impractical. Many rely on ISPs, banks and other service providers for cyber defense. For example, my bank verified my ID and selfie, providing comprehensive protection. In the age of AI, identity verification is an experts’ game. Choose providers with the strongest defenses against misuse of personal data. - Dan Yerushalmi , AU10TIX
Secure your personal devices, as they are often the weakest link. Ensure they are protected with multifactor authentication, up-to-date antivirus software and encryption. Additionally, use unique email aliases for different accounts. This way, if one alias is compromised, you can quickly identify which app or service was breached and limit the potential damage, reducing the overall blast radius of the breach. - Suman Sharma , Procyon Inc.
Good cookie management can help individuals protect their identities online. Clearing cookies consistently is vital so that your activity is not being tracked across multiple websites. Many tools can automate this process, making it easier to maintain privacy. Taking these steps reduces the risk of being tracked and ensures your online activities remain private. - Justin Rende , Rhymetec
The first thing to do is minimize the amount of personal data that we share online. Whenever we are prompted to provide this information, we should ask ourselves if it is truly necessary: “Does this social media platform really need my mailing address?” - David Stapleton , ProcessUnity, Inc.
Cookies are one of the threats to data privacy. My advice is to not ignore cookie notices and to reject as many as you can. Cookies have the potential to collect your personal information and behavior data, which can then be obtained by data brokers and utilized to influence consumer behavior in marketing. - Siddharth Gawshinde , Cloudtech
Use unique, complex passwords for every account, and enable multifactor authentication wherever possible. Regularly monitor your credit reports and online accounts for suspicious activity. Be cautious about sharing personal information online and on social media. Consider using a password manager and an identity monitoring service for added protection. - Patrick Harr , SlashNext
To maintain control over your identity and personal data, prioritize using technologies that emphasize transparency and privacy. Ensure they support anonymous browsing and encrypted communications. When used effectively, VPNs, Web3 applications and good judgment can be your best allies in staying safe and anonymous on the Web. - Anton Umnov , Helika
Be cautious with any third-party software, apps, browser extensions and so on. Double-check which permissions you are giving to each, as they often ask for way more access and data than they actually need. Data selling and viruses are more common in “regular” digital products than we think. A simple text highlighter browser extension can access your Web history. - Yuriy Berdnikov , Perpetio
Date: Aug 29, 2024
Location: Canonsburg, PA, US, 15317
Company: Ansys
Requisition #: 15042
When visionary companies need to know how their world-changing ideas will perform, they close the gap between design and reality with Ansys simulation. For more than 50 years, Ansys software has enabled innovators across industries to push boundaries by using the predictive power of simulation. From sustainable transportation to advanced semiconductors, from satellite systems to life-saving medical devices, the next great leaps in human advancement will be powered by Ansys.
Innovate With Ansys, Power Your Career.
SUMMARY Ansys empowers the world's most innovative companies to design and deliver transformational products by offering the best and broadest engineering simulation software to solve the most complex design challenges and engineer products limited only by imagination. Thus, through our enriching internship program, we help develop the next generation of engineers and technologists. As a Software Development Intern, you will work on impactful projects supporting our Digital Twin Team, with a special focus on the investigation and development of novel functionalities applied to our Digital Twin solutions. The projects involve the extension of existing simulation capabilities and supporting work for DevOps infrastructure of our products. This internship is a 40-hour per week paid position starting May 2025 and concludes August 2025. This position is based on the Ansys HQ in Canonsburg and will require the Intern to be in office a few days a week. RESPONSIBILITIES • Investigation and development of new features
• Improving and extending existing DevOps infrastructure
• Software development across multiple languages, stacks, and operating systems • Testing and documentation
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS • Pursuing a MS or PhD in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Information Science, or related technical field with a GPA of 3.0 or higher • Must be currently enrolled in a full-time degree program and returning to the program after the completion of the internship • Experience in software development with Python • Experience with GIT • Excellent software development skills • Sharp and tenacious problem-solving skills • Team player, responsible, and motivated PREFERRED QUALIFICATIONS • Experience with cloud-based technologies, such as REST, Docker, Kubernetes • Software testing basics (unittests, smoke tests, black-box testing, etc…) • Development experience with Windows and Linux
CULTURE AND VALUES Culture and values are incredibly important to ANSYS. They inform us of who we are, of how we act. Values aren't posters hanging on a wall or about trite or glib slogans. They aren't about rules and regulations. They can't just be handed down the organization. They are shared beliefs – guideposts that we all follow when we're facing a challenge or a decision. Our values tell us how we live our lives; how we approach our jobs. Our values are crucial for fostering a culture of winning for our company: • Customer focus • Results and Accountability • Innovation • Transparency and Integrity • Mastery • Inclusiveness • Sense of urgency • Collaboration and Teamwork Did you know? You can download our software for free by visiting: http://www.ansys.com/products/academic/ansys-student
ANSYS is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability, veteran status, and other protected characteristics. ANSYS does not accept unsolicited referrals for vacancies, and any unsolicited referral will become the property of ANSYS. Upon hire, no fee will be owed to the agency, person, or entity.
At Ansys, we know that changing the world takes vision, skill, and each other. We fuel new ideas, build relationships, and help each other realize our greatest potential. We are ONE Ansys. We operate on three key components: the commitments to our stakeholders, the behaviors of how we work together, and the actions of how we deliver results. Together as ONE Ansys, we are powering innovation that drives human advancement.
Our Commitments:
Our Values:
Our Actions:
INCLUSION IS AT OUR CORE We believe diverse thinking leads to better outcomes. We are committed to creating and nurturing a workplace that fuels this by welcoming people, no matter their background, identity, or experience, to a workplace where they are valued and where diversity, inclusion, equity, and belonging thrive.
WELCOME WHAT’S NEXT IN YOUR CAREER AT ANSYS
At Ansys, you will find yourself among the sharpest minds and most visionary leaders across the globe. Collectively we strive to change the world with innovative technology and transformational solutions. With a prestigious reputation in working with well-known, world-class companies, standards at Ansys are high — met by those willing to rise to the occasion and meet those challenges head on. Our team is passionate about pushing the limits of world-class simulation technology, empowering our customers to turn their design concepts into successful, innovative products faster and at a lower cost.
At Ansys, it’s about the learning, the discovery, and the collaboration. It’s about the “what’s next” as much as the “mission accomplished.” And it’s about the melding of disciplined intellect with strategic direction and results that have, can, and do impact real people in real ways. All this is forged within a working environment built on respect, autonomy, and ethics.
CREATING A PLACE WE’RE PROUD TO BE Ansys is an S&P 500 company and a member of the NASDAQ-100. We are proud to have been recognized for the following more recent awards, although our list goes on: Newsweek’s Most Loved Workplace globally and in the U.S., Gold Stevie Award Winner, America’s Most Responsible Companies, Fast Company World Changing Ideas, Great Place to Work Certified (Belgium, China, Greece, France, India, Japan, Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and U.K.).
For more information, please visit us at www.ansys.com
Ansys is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability, veteran status, and other protected characteristics. Ansys does not accept unsolicited referrals for vacancies, and any unsolicited referral will become the property of Ansys. Upon hire, no fee will be owed to the agency, person, or entity.
Nearest Major Market: Pittsburgh
Stay safe from recruitment fraud! We are aware of scams targeting Ansys and other companies that involve individuals posing as employees to illegitimately conduct interviews and extend false employment offers and payments to gain access to candidates’ sensitive personal and financial information. All Ansys job applicants are required to apply for open roles on careers.ansys.com. While virtual interviews may be conducted as a part of our interview process, Ansys does not make job offers without a thorough interview process. Ansys also will never ask for an applicant’s social security number before they have accepted an offer or ask for payment from an applicant. Ansys assumes no liability for recruitment fraud. We advise that all job seekers take steps to educate themselves on fraudulent practices, so they do not become victims of scams. Learn more via the Federal Trade Commission. Ansys is proud to be an equal opportunity workplace and is an affirmative action employer. At Ansys, we are committed to making our careers website accessible and usable for individuals with disabilities. If you need a reasonable accommodation to apply for or interview for Ansys jobs, please email [email protected]. When contacting us, please provide your contact information and state the nature of your accessibility issue. We will only respond to inquiries concerning requests for reasonable accommodations.
Two white supremacists hoping to start a race war were charged with leading a digital terror group on Telegram and directing followers to commit hate crimes, including killing federal officials, prosecutors said.
Dallas Humber, 34, of Elk Grove, California, and Matthew Allison, 37, of Boise, Idaho, are charged in the 15-count indictment with soliciting hate crimes, soliciting the murder of federal officials and conspiring to provide material support to terrorists, according to a Monday statement from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California .
Federal prosecutors allege Humber and Allison are leaders of the "Terrorgram Collective," described by authorities as a "transnational terrorist group."
Humber and Allison were arrested on Friday, prosecutors said.
According to the indictment, unsealed on Monday, the defendants' terror group operated on the digital messaging platform Telegram. The group promoted white supremacist "accelerationism": "an ideology centered on the belief that the white race is superior; that society is irreparably corrupt and cannot be saved by political action; and that violence and terrorism are necessary to ignite a race war and accelerate the collapse of the government and the rise of a white ethnostate," prosecutors said.
No one with Telegram was immediately reached Monday afternoon for comment. It was not immediately clear on Monday afternoon if Humber and Allison have retained attorneys.
While on the platform, Humber and Allison are accused of spreading videos and publications that provided specific advice for carrying out crimes, celebrating white terrorism attacks and providing a list of "high-value targets" for assassination. The list included names of federal, state and local officials, and leaders of private companies, many whom were targeted because of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity, prosecutors said.
The defendants operated channels and group chats where they solicited group members to commit attacks.
The planned attacks were motivated by enemies of the white race, and described hitting government buildings, including energy facilities, prosecutors said.
The planned attacks also included “high-value targets" like politicians and government officials whose murders would "sow chaos and further accelerate the government’s downfall," prosecutors said.
Some of those planned attacks inspired by the defendants were actually carried out, or were foiled, prosecutors said. They include a person who shot three people, killing two, outside an LGBTQ bar in Slovakia, an individual who planned an attack on an energy facility in New Jersey and a person who stabbed five people near a mosque in Turkey, prosecutors said.
They were charged with one count of conspiracy, four counts of soliciting hate crimes, three counts of soliciting the murder of federal officials, three counts of doxing federal officials, one count of threatening communications, two counts of distributing bombmaking instructions, and one count of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists, prosecutors said.
If convicted on all charges, they face a maximum penalty of 220 years in prison, prosecutors said. Allison is expected to make his first court appearance on Tuesday, according to prosecutors.
Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in the statement the arrest and indictment of the suspects "are a warning that committing hate-fueled crimes in the darkest corners of the internet will not hide you, and soliciting terrorist attacks from behind a screen will not protect you."
The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California Phillip A. Talbert said in the statement: "The defendants solicited murders and hate crimes based on the race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, and gender identity of others."
He continued, “They also doxed and solicited the murder of federal officials, conspired to provide material support to terrorists, and distributed information about explosives that they intended to be used in committing crimes of violence."
Andrew Blankstein is an investigative reporter for NBC News. He covers the Western U.S., specializing in crime, courts and homeland security.
Michael Kosnar is a Justice Department producer for the NBC News Washington Bureau.
Antonio Planas is a breaking news reporter for NBC News Digital.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
PhD Studentship (3 years): Muslim Women Politicians: identity, religion and elections in the UK. Aston University College of Business and Social Sciences. Applications are invited for a three-year PhD studentship, supported by the College of Business and Social Sciences to be undertaken within the Department of Politics, History and ...
Digital identity is seen as multiphrenic (Gergan, 2000) - identity created through multiple subjectivities, but also performed and presented across multiple media / formats / genres. Emergent contributions from the sociological and sociocultural literature - combining personal subjectivities with cultural forms and social relations.
In researching approaches to digital identity, I recently came across a model which I found particularly interesting. In their schema of experiential learning, Usher, Bryant et al. (1996) describe how lifelong learning can be understood in relation to two continua (autonomy to adaptation, and application to expression) which create four specific contemporary social practices: lifestyle,
Last week, the Arts & Sciences Graduate Center at William and Mary hosted a Digital Identity Roundtable to discuss the benefits, pitfalls, and protocols for graduate students who currently use social media for networking and scholarship, and for those who would like to start. As a contributing editor for The Junto, I was invited to participate in that discussion.
Studying relations between identity and digital environments through the mechanisms of selection, evocation, manipulation, and application (see Figure 1) enables a principled synthesis of the literature, highlights what remains unknown, and provides insight into how digital media may promote or hinder identity development. In principle, any ...
First, the evolution of academic concepts about digital identity and the online self is summarised. Then, the article investigates the key dynamics of personal strategies and control issues in detail with ideas, experiences, stories and metaphors taken from 60 qualitative interviews from Central and Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia.
Defining the Digital Self: A Qualitative Study to Explore ...
In November of 2015, shortly after beginning my career as a doctoral student at the Graduate Center, I received an email from Victor Papa, president of the Two Bridges Neighborhood Council. Papa expressed his interest in commemorating the Italian American community of the former Lung Block, an area on the Lower East Side subject to proto-gentrification during and beyond the […]
Broadly defined, digital identity is one's online history - that is, it is any trail a person has left in his or her life that is now online. In academics, the issue is of digital presence is of utmost importance, as a digital identity frames one's professional reputation, doing so by promoting and defining a person's knowledge and ...
Digital identity as an emergent legal concept. In this paper, digital identity describes the set of information required to establish an individual's identity for official purposes, specifically to access and use public sector services. It is the group of identity information that is used to conduct those transactions.
Digital identity Footnote 27 is, thus, the result of the use of this category to facilitate the clarification of the phenomenon of digitalization in a human being's life, especially about their singularization as a person, inside or outside the cybernetic environment. It consists of a set of information transformed into bits or pixels that ...
According to research, a digital ID could add between 3 and 13 percent of GDP in value by 2030. More than half of this value would go directly to citizens' wallet. More than half of this value ...
During T1 2022/2023 experts from UCD Library ran a 6 week lunchtime programme to take Graduate and PhD Students through the ways in which UCD library can support your research. Digital Learning Librarian, Marta Bustillo and Scholarly Communications Librarian, Aoife Quinn Hegarty, introduce participants to multiple social media platforms and how social media can be used as a tool to promote ...
The Application of Digital Identity in the United States. In this draft paper by graduate researchers Keith Duffy, Pasha Goudovitch, and Pavel Fedorov, the authors explore the potential for blockchain technology to improve digital identity in the United States. Identity theft affected nearly 18 million people in the United States in 2014 [1 ...
The Alan Turing Institute's Trustworthy Digital Identity Interest Group brings together a vibrant, global community of over 100 practitioners and researchers. They meet regularly to host vital discussion and investigate the evolving technical and social risks, as well as to contribute towards the development of more trustworthy systems.
How digital identity can improve lives in a post-COVID-19 ...
Results. The key terms used in the literature were sharenting, followed by digital footprints and children's identities.Our study revealed 2 approaches to the creation of digital identity: social digital identity and performative digital identity.The articles in this review most commonly used the term sharenting to describe the behavior parents engage in to create digital identities for ...
Writing for Moveable Type's blog, Robert Minton asks us to think about the possibilities that a personal website and self-created digital identity bring. Again, as a graduate student in 1999 ...
By Jaime Hannans, PhD, RN, CNE, and Yosemite Olivo, RN. Takeaways: Digital identity is the online presence of an individual, including social media presence, profiles and engagement, and any discoverable online content. Professional nurses and nursing students should consider what their digital identity says about them.
This review provides a comprehensive evaluation of adolescent identity development research, critically examining the significant gap between the global distribution of adolescents and the focus of scholarly work. While over 85% of the world's youth live in the majority world—Africa, Asia, and Latin America—only 15% of developmental psychology studies explore these populations, revealing a ...
Valencia M, Hearth S, Gagne A (2020) Unpacking professional identity: the use of multimodal identity texts and duoethnographies in language teacher education. In: Yazan B, Lindahl K (eds) Language Teacher Identity in TESOL: Teacher Education and Practice as Identity Work. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 101-121.
Craft identity a positive with an nursing ePortfolio digital. Take advantage of your digital footprint to demonstrate your skills and experience. Your online identity (including photos you post on Instagram, status updates and likes on Facebook, and Tweets) is a digital finger-print that reveals who you are, personally and professionally.
2. Enable MFA When It's Available. To protect your online identity, use unique, strong passwords for each account and enable multifactor authentication when it's available.
The centrality of teacher identity (TI) in informing teaching practice has received considerable attention among scholars interested in language teacher education in the last several decades (Barkhuizen, 2017; De Costa and Norton, 2017; Varghese et al., 2005, 2016; Yazan and Lindahl, 2020).Yazan and Lindahl (2020) make the case that while the concept of language teacher identity (LTI) has ...
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS • Pursuing a MS or PhD in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Information Science, or related technical field with a GPA of 3.0 or higher • Must be currently enrolled in a full-time degree program and returning to the program after the completion of the internship
Dallas Humber, 34, of California, and Matthew Allison, 37, of Idaho, allegedly help plot attacks "based on the race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation ...
Care Identity Management release 5.65 went live on 5 September 2024. This release includes further improvements to position assignment. Editing position assignments from the position details screen