Resources and appropriation theory: An empirical approach using the successive kinds of digital access model in the Mexican case
PDF (Español (España))
HTML (Español (España))


Digital divide
ICT appropriation
access and improvement
digital skills
causal modeling


This essay examines validity and empirical relevance of successive kinds of access to technology model (SAT) as important segment of resources and appropriation theory (RAT). SAT model proposed by Van Dijk has been developed into a theoretical evolutionary frame, which seeks to explain the social unequal access to information and communications technologies (ICT). Methodological approach used in the study consists of a comparative approach supported by previous knowledge that helped determine statistical validity of  assumptions that form basis of SAT model. Analyzed information comes from an extensive and representative source of microdata that was examined through modeling using structural equations. In this initial approximation, research confirms that SAT Model is characterized by a relative efficiency defined by significant causal relationships albeit low predictive power.
PDF (Español (España))
HTML (Español (España))


Ajzen, I. A. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. doi:

Azen, R., & Walker, C. M. (2011). Categorical data analysis for the behavioral and social sciences. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1994). Structural equation models in marketing research: basic principles. In R. P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Basic Principles of Marketing Research (pp. 317-385). Oxford: Blackwell.

Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244-254.

Barclay, D., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. (1995). The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modelling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies, 2(2), 285-309.

Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo Vadis, TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 212-218.

Brown, S., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: a baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 399-426.

Bucy, E., & Newhagen, J. (2004). Media access: social and psychological dimensions of new technology use. London: LEA.

Bunz, U. (2004). The computer-Email-Web (CEW) fluency scale. Development and validation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 17(4), 479-506. doi:

Burnette, J. L., & Williams, L. J. (2005). Structural equation modeling (SEM): an introduction to basic techniques and advanced issues. In R. A. Swanson & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Research in organization: foundations and methods of inquiry (pp. 143-160). San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers.

Castells, M. (2002). The Internet galaxy. Reflections on the Internet, business, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-336). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.

Croutsche, J. J. (2009). Analyse des données en marketing, en management et en sciences sociales: Conceptualisation et applications. Paris: Editions ESKA.

Diamontopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269-277. doi:

DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2004). From unequal access to differentiated use: A literature review and agenda for research on digital inequality. In K. Neckerman (Ed.), Social inequality (pp. 355-400). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Falk, R.F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. Akron: The University of Akron.

Finn, S., & Korukonda, A. R. (2004). Avoiding computers: Does personality play a role? In E. Bucy. & E. Newhagen (Eds.), Media Access: Social and Psychological Dimensions of New Technology Use (pp. 73-90). London: LEA.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi:

Gohar, F. K., Junghoon, M., Hangjung, Z., & Jae, J. R. (2010). Civil conflict, digital divide, and e-government service adoption: A conflict theory approach. Engineering and Technology, 66, 537-549.

Hargittai, E. (2002). The second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday: Peer- Reviewed Journal on the Internet, 7(4), s/p. doi:

Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among members of the net generation. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92-113. doi:

Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008). Digital inequality, differences in young adults use of the Internet. Communication Research, 35(5), 602-621. doi:

Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2013). Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement. European Journal of Communication, 28(6), 696-713. doi:

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In R. R. Sinkovics & P. N. Ghauri. (Eds.), Advances in International Marketing (pp. 277-319).

Hsu, H. H., Chen, W. H., & Hsieh, M. J. (2006). Robustness testing of PLS, LISREL, EQS and ANN based SEM for measuring customer satisfaction. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 17(3), 355-372. doi:

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2005). Estadísticas sobre disponibilidad y uso de las tecnologías de información y comunicaciones. Aguascalientes: INEGI.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2013). Estadísticas sobre disponibilidad y uso de las tecnologías de información y comunicaciones, 2012. Aguascalientes: INEGI.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2014). Estadísticas sobre disponibilidad y uso de las tecnologías de información y comunicaciones, 2013. Aguascalientes: INEGI.

Jörg, H., Ringle, C., Sinkovics, M., & Rudolf, R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277-319.

Larose, R., & Eastin, M. (2004). A social cognitive theory of Internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48(3), 358-377. doi:

Lenhart, A., Horrigan, J., Rainie, L., Allen, K., Boyce, A., Madden, M., & O´Grady, E, (2003). The ever-shifting Internet population: A new look at Internet access and the digital divide. Washington: Pew Internet and American Life Project. Recuperado de

McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334-359. doi:

Merritt, K., Smith, D., & Renzo, J. C. D. (2005). An investigation of self reported computer literacy: Is it reliable? Issues in Information Systems, 6(1), 289-295.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Peng, D.X., & Lai, F. (2012). Using partial least squares in operations management research: A practical guideline and summary of past research. Journal of Operations Management, 30(6), 467-480. doi:

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

Tenenhaus, M. (1999). L’approche PLS. Revue de Statistique Appliquée, 47(2), 5-40.

Tenenhaus, M., Esposito Vinci, V., Chatelin Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 48(1), 159-205.

Toudert, D. (2013). La brecha digital en los contextos de marginación socioterritorial de las localidades mexicanas de más de 2500 habitantes: Exploración y discusión. Comunicación y Sociedad, (19), 153-180.

Toudert, D. (2014). Aprovechamiento de las TIC en México: una aproximación empírica a través del uso de microdatos y la aplicación de la modelación PLS. Apertura, 6(1), 6-17.

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2009). Using the Internet: Skill related problems in users’ online behavior. Interacting with Computers, 21(5-6), 393-402. doi:

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2010). Measuring Internet skills. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction 26(10), 891-916.

Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Courtois, C., & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2014). Internet skills, sources of support, and benefiting from Internet use. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 30(4), 278-290. doi:

Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2005). The Deepening Divide. Inequality in the information society. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics 34(4-5), 221-235. doi:

Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2012). The Evolution of the digital divide. The digital divide turns to inequality of skills and usage. In J. Bus, M. Crompton, M. Hildebrandt & G. Metakides. (Eds.), Digital Enlightenment Yearbook (pp. 55-75). Amersterdam: IOS Press.

Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Van Deursen, A. J. A. M. (2014). Digital Skills. Unlocking the information society. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., Peters, O., & Ebbers, W. (2008). Explaining the acceptance and use of government Internet services: A multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in the Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 379-399.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178.

Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and Social Inclusion, Rethinking the Digital Divide. Cambridge, London: The MIT Press.

Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 177-195.

Zillien, N., & Hargittai, E. (2009). Digital distinction: Status-specific Internet uses. Social Science Quarterly, 90(2), 274-291. doi: