From Connectivity to Digital Civic Participation: Adult Women in Digital Environments

De la conectividad a la participación ciudadana digital: mujeres adultas en entornos digitales

Anna Escofet Roig. Universidad de Barcelona. España.

Mª José Rubio Hurtados. Universidad de Barcelona. España.

Received: 2026/03/10 Reviewed 2026/03/12 Accepted: 2026/06/02 Publiched: 2026/09/01

How to cite:

Escafet Roig, A. & Rubio Hurtados, M.J. (2026). From Connectivity to Digital Civic Participation: Adult Women in Digital Environments [De la conectividad a la participación ciudadana digital: mujeres adultas en entornos digitales]. Pixel-Bit, Revista de Medios y Educación, 77, Art.7. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.120554

ABSTRACT

Digitalisation has transformed the ways in which citizenship is enacted. However, increased access to digital technologies and the development of digital skills do not necessarily translate into higher levels of digital civic participation. This study examines the level of digital civic participation among adult women and explores the influence of sociodemographic and contextual variables on such participation. A quantitative survey was conducted with 185 women over the age of 18 attending digital training centres in Catalonia. Data were collected using a Digital Civic Participation Scale assessing technical skills, critical perspective, local/global awareness, online actions, and sociopolitical activism. The findings indicate a moderate level of digital civic participation, characterised by relatively strong technical skills and social awareness, but low levels of online engagement and sociopolitical activism. The results reveal a gap between digital competencies and civic participation and suggest that women’s digital citizenship is shaped by educational and contextual factors. These findings highlight the need to promote digital inclusion policies aimed at strengthening agency and fostering more equitable and meaningful forms of participation.

RESUMEN

La digitalización ha transformado las formas de ejercicio de la ciudadanía, aunque el aumento del acceso y de las competencias digitales no se traduce necesariamente en mayores niveles de participación ciudadana digital. Este estudio analiza el nivel de participación ciudadana digital de mujeres adultas y la influencia de variables sociodemográficas y contextuales en dicha participación. Se realizó un estudio cuantitativo mediante encuesta a 185 mujeres mayores de 18 años participantes en centros de capacitación digital de Cataluña, aplicando una escala de participación ciudadana digital que evalúa habilidades técnicas, enfoque crítico, conciencia local/global, acciones en red y activismo sociopolítico. Los resultados muestran un nivel medio de participación ciudadana digital, caracterizado por buenas habilidades técnicas y niveles relativamente elevados de conciencia social, pero bajos niveles de acciones en red y activismo sociopolítico. Los resultados evidencian una brecha entre competencias digitales y participación cívica y sugieren que la ciudadanía digital de las mujeres se configura como un proceso condicionado por factores educativos y contextuales, lo que subraya la necesidad de promover políticas de inclusión digital orientadas al desarrollo de la agencia y a una participación más equitativa y significativa.

KEYWORDS· PALABRAS CLAVES

Digital citizenship, participation, agency, women, digital inclusion.

Ciudadanía digital, participación, agencia, mujer, inclusión digital.

.

1. Introduction

The digitalisation of social life has profoundly reshaped the ways in which citizenship is exercised and participation in public affairs is enacted, creating new opportunities while also generating new forms of inequality in access to the digital public sphere (Boulianne, 2020; Robinson et al., 2020). Over the last two decades, digital technologies have expanded channels for information, expression, and collective organisation, giving rise to new forms of participation that extend beyond traditional institutional spaces. Within this context, the concept of digital citizenship has emerged as a key analytical framework for understanding how rights, responsibilities, and civic practices are exercised in digitally mediated environments. Digital citizenship cannot be reduced to the competent use of technologies or technical literacy alone (Area-Moreira et al., 2020; Choi & Cristol, 2021). Rather, it involves the capacity to participate critically, ethically, and transformatively in the digital public sphere through the articulation of rights, responsibilities, and agency (Isin & Ruppert, 2020). Digital citizenship should therefore be understood as a dynamic process shaped by power relations, structural inequalities, and sociotechnical conditions that influence who is able to participate, under what conditions, and with what consequences.

From this perspective, digital civic participation constitutes a multidimensional construct (Theocharis & van Deth, 2021; Vaccari & Valeriani, 2021). It encompasses a broad range of practices, from information consumption and opinion expression to collective organisation, mobilisation, and political influence. Boulianne (2020) distinguishes between lower-intensity forms of participation—such as accessing information, sharing content, or expressing symbolic support—and higher-intensity forms that involve stronger engagement, including organising campaigns, participating in deliberative processes, and collaborating with institutions or social movements.

At the same time, digital civic participation may become trapped in forms of slacktivism, where symbolic action is not accompanied by structural change or sustained engagement (Christensen, 2011). Bennett and Segerberg (2021) qualify this interpretation by arguing that transformative impact depends less on the type of action itself than on the social and political conditions within which that action takes place. In particular, they emphasise that digital civic participation becomes more transformative when embedded within stable social networks, shared collective identities, and concrete political opportunities that connect individual action with broader mobilisation processes (Cantijoch et al., 2021). In the absence of such networks, participation tends to fragment and lose political effectiveness. Likewise, Bennett and Segerberg (2021) argue that collective identity plays a crucial mediating role between digital civic participation and sustained activism. When individuals recognise themselves as part of a broader “we”, organised around shared causes such as feminism, social justice, or community action, digital practices acquire greater political significance by reinforcing motivation, legitimacy, and belonging. Under these conditions, digital civic participation moves beyond isolated or expressive action and becomes a mechanism for strengthening social ties, consolidating shared interpretative frameworks, and sustaining collective action over time (Gil de Zúñiga et al., 2021). This capacity of networks to generate trust, reciprocity, and cooperation may also be interpreted through the lens of social capital, understood as the set of relational resources that facilitate collective action and civic participation (Putnam, 2000; Castells, 2012).

This identity dimension is particularly relevant for historically underrepresented groups such as women, for whom digital communities may function as spaces of mutual support, validation of lived experiences, and political agency (Bailey & Welles, 2020). Digital networks can facilitate the construction of situated political identities, make structural inequalities visible, and generate repertoires of action that connect the personal with the political (Bailey & Welles, 2020; Heger & Hoffmann, 2023). However, these positive effects depend on conditions of safety, recognition, and care, since exposure to digital violence or hostility may weaken collective identity and foster self-censorship or withdrawal (EIGE, 2024; Jane, 2020).

Finally, Theocharis and van Deth (2021) emphasise the importance of political opportunities—understood as institutional windows, social junctures or favourable regulatory frameworks—for digital citizen participation to translate into effective change. Networked actions tend to have a greater impact when they connect with offline processes, institutional channels or moments of high public visibility, in which demands can be gathered, amplified or institutionalised. Furthermore, the effectiveness of digital citizen participation increases when it is embedded in hybrid civic action ecosystems, where digital and in-person engagement reinforce one another and enable the articulation of expression, organisation and political advocacy (Bennett & Segerberg, 2021; Boulianne, 2020).

To enable this transition, the development of digital competencies has been identified as a central enabling factor. In recent years, international organisations and European policy frameworks have promoted a broad understanding of digital competence that integrates technical, cognitive, critical, and ethical dimensions (European Commission, 2022; García-Valcárcel & Tejedor, 2022). However, a growing body of research shows that possessing digital skills does not automatically lead to active or transformative forms of civic participation (Choi & Cristol, 2021; Scheerder et al., 2020). The translation of competencies into civic agency depends on additional factors such as political self-efficacy, civic motivation, institutional trust, and perceptions of safety within digital environments.

This mismatch between technical capability and effective participation has been conceptualised as a form of outcome divide, whereby inequalities are expressed not so much through access or skills but through the social, political, and civic benefits derived from digital engagement (Helsper, 2021; Robinson et al., 2020). Within this framework, the gender digital divide remains one of the central analytical lenses for understanding the relationship between digital technologies and inequality. Although women’s access to the Internet has improved substantially in many contexts, important disparities persist in advanced uses of technology, public participation, and the outcomes generated through digital engagement (ITU, 2024; Hilbert, 2021; OECD, 2024). These disparities should not be interpreted as individual deficits but rather as the result of social and cultural structures that assign unequal roles to women across productive, reproductive, and public domains (Wajcman, 2020). The sexual division of labour, care responsibilities, educational and occupational segregation, and gender norms that penalise women’s public visibility significantly shape women’s digital trajectories (Hargittai & Shafer, 2023).

From this perspective, women’s digital inclusion should be understood as a process of civic agency (Isin & Ruppert, 2020), aimed at strengthening their capacity for participation, decision-making, and social influence, rather than merely as a strategy to reduce technical gaps.

Building on these reflections, the objectives of this study were:

1. To examine the level of digital civic participation among women aged 18 and over.

2. To explore the influence of sociodemographic and contextual variables on the level of digital civic participation among women aged 18 and over.

2. Methodology

To address the proposed objectives, a quantitative research approach based on survey methodology was adopted. This design sought to characterise, describe, and identify key features associated with the variables under study (Hernández Sampieri et al., 2010).

2.1. Participants and sample

The target population consisted of women aged 18 and over living in Catalonia who participate in digital environments. Participants were recruited through settings in which this population is concentrated, namely centres belonging to the Xarxa Punt TIC network in Catalonia, which focuses on digital access and digital skills development. A non-probability, convenience-based, multi-stage sampling strategy was employed. In the first stage, participating centres were selected according to criteria intended to ensure territorial representativeness across Catalonia. In the second stage, women participants were recruited voluntarily within each centre. The final sample consisted of 185 women from 45 centres across the four Catalan provinces. Their sociodemographic and contextual characteristics are presented in Table 1. The centres informed potential participants about the study and distributed the online questionnaire to those who agreed to participate. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection.

Table 1

Sociodemographic and Contextual Characteristics of the Sample

Variable	Categories	Score
Age	Under 40 years	28%
	40 years and over	72%
	Mean age	50 (min. 18 max. 89)
Educational level	Primary or no formal education	17.8%
	Secondary education	8.6%
	Upper secondary	27.6%
	Bachelor’s degree	30.3%
	Master’s degree	15%
	Doctorate	.5%
Main device used to access the Internet	Smartphone	72.4%
	Tablet	3.2%
	Laptop	14.6%
	Desktop computer	7.2%
	Other	2.2%
Main source of information on political/social/cultural issues	News websites	15.7%
	Social media	49.7%
	TV or radio	27%
	Other	7.6%
Main reason for Internet use	Leisure	16.3%
	Work/study	12.5%
	Information seeking	26.6%
	Social media access	31.5%
	Social or political participation	1.6%
	Other	11.4%
Participation in women-oriented online actions	Yes	10.7%
	No	89.3%

2.2. Instruments

Data were collected using the Digital Citizenship Scale developed by Choi (2016). This instrument has been applied and validated across different international contexts and adapted to the Spanish context by Lozano and Fernández (2018), demonstrating a stable factorial structure and satisfactory reliability indices. The scale consists of 26 items organised into five dimensions:

- Internet Political Activism

- Technical Skills

- Local/Global Awareness

- Critical Perspective

- Online Networking Actions

Examples of scale items include: I believe that participation through the Internet is a good way to change something I consider unfair. I am able to use digital technologies to achieve my goals. I comment on posts written by others on news websites, blogs, or social media platforms that I visit. Using the Internet makes me more aware of global issues. I belong to online groups involved in political or social issues. I sign online petitions concerning social, cultural, political, or economic issues.

Across previous applications and validation studies, the instrument has consistently demonstrated high reliability indices (Cronbach’s α > .80). In the present study, internal consistency measured through Cronbach’s alpha reached .881. Additionally, the scale structure proposed by Lozano and Fernández (2018) was reviewed and validated through expert judgement. Items were distributed across dimensions as follows:

- Critical Perspective: 4 items

- Technical Skills: 6 items

- Online Actions: 4 items

- Local/Global Awareness: 3 items

- Activism: 9 items

The questionnaire used a five-point Likert response format, ranging from: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree.

2.3. Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses were conducted, including measures of central tendency and frequency distributions. Additionally, non-parametric mean comparison tests were performed, as the variables did not fully meet parametric assumptions. All analyses were conducted using SPSS version 20. The level of statistical significance was established at p < .05.

3. Results

Regarding the first objective —to examine the level of digital civic participation among women aged 18 and over— the descriptive results for the overall scale and its dimensions are presented below.

Participants obtained a mean score of 2.89 on the overall scale, suggesting a moderate level of digital civic participation. The dimension scores also ranged between moderate and low levels. The highest mean score corresponded to Technical Skills (M = 3.89), indicating that women in the sample possessed an adequate level of competence in accessing and using Internet technologies. Conversely, the lowest scores were observed in Political/Social Activism, followed by Online Actions. See table 2 below.

Table 2

Scores obtained for the overall scale and its subdimensions

	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Standard Deviation
Critical Perspective	145	1.00	5.00	2.95	.911
Technical Skills	146	1.00	5.00	3.89	.735
Online actions	145	1.00	5.00	2.43	.985
Awareness	147	1.00	5.00	3.55	.912
Activism	142	1.00	4.78	2.20	.914
Total Scale	128	1.15	4.73	2.89	.629

When examining individual item scores (Table 3), the highest means correspond to variables associated with access to and ability to perform different types of activities in digital environments. By contrast, lower scores are concentrated in variables related to engagement in non-conventional forms of social and political participation through the Internet.

Table 3

Item Scores for the Digital Civic Participation Scale

	N	Min.	Max.	Mean	SD
Critical Perspective
I believe that participation through the Internet promotes engagement in real life	155	1	5	2.94	1.226
I reconsider my views on an issue when using the Internet	152	1	5	2.90	1.217
believe that participation through the Internet is a good way to change something I consider unfair	156	1	5	3.19	1.274
I believe that participation through the Internet is an effective way to become involved in political or social issues	153	1	5	2.88	1.272
Technical Skills
I can use the Internet to find the information I need	161	1	5	4.43	.920
I can use the Internet to find and download applications that are useful for me	157	1	5	4.24	.983
I can access the Internet through digital devices (smartphone, tablet, laptop, desktop computer) whenever I want	160	1	5	4.40	1.035
I am able to use digital technologies to achieve my goals	155	1	5	3.80	1.153
I can send original messages, audio, images, or videos to express my feelings, thoughts, ideas, or opinions online	160	1	5	3.44	1.487
I enjoy communicating with other people through the Internet	160	1	5	3.01	1.291
Online Actions
I comment on posts written by others on news websites, blogs, or social media platforms	154	1	5	2.67	1.437
I regularly publish thoughts related to political or social issues online	151	1	5	2.38	1.418
I express my opinions online to challenge dominant perspectives or the status quo regarding political or social issues	157	1	5	2.57	1.512
I prefer collaborating with others online rather than in person	153	1	5	2.16	1.283
Local/Global Awareness
Using the Internet makes me more aware of global issues	154	1	5	3.69	1.169
Using the Internet makes me better informed about political and social issues	175	1	5	3.59	1.296
I believe that the Internet reflects the prejudices and power structures found in real life	150	1	5	3.33	1.180
Internet Activism
I belong to online groups involved in political or social issues	152	1	5	1.97	1.371
I collaborate online with others to address local, national, or global problems	150	1	5	2.09	1.264
I engage in online volunteering activities for social or political organisations	150	1	5	1.90	1.360
I organise petitions or signature campaigns on social, cultural, political, or economic issues online	149	1	5	1.61	1.143
I attend political meetings or public forums organised through social media or the Internet	155	1	5	2.52	1.448
I use the Internet to participate in social movements or protest actions	151	1	5	2.34	1.327
I am more socially or politically engaged online than in real life	152	1	5	2.07	1.254
I sometimes contact public administration or government through the Internet regarding issues that concern me	152	1	5	2.92	1.512
I sign online petitions on social, cultural, political, or economic issues	153	1	5	2.56	1.404

Regarding the second objective—to explore the influence of selected sociodemographic and contextual variables on women’s levels of digital civic participation—the following section presents the results derived from comparisons between scale scores and participant characteristics. The age variable was dichotomised into two groups. Statistically significant differences emerged between women under 40 years old and those aged 40 and over. The Mann–Whitney U test revealed significant differences in the dimensions Online Actions and Local/Global Awareness, with younger women obtaining higher scores in both dimensions. By contrast, no statistically significant differences were found regarding technical skills, sociopolitical activism, or critical perspective, suggesting comparable levels across age groups (see Table 4).

Table 4

Comparison of Scale Scores by Age

	Critical perspective	Technical Skills	Online actions	Local/Global Awareness	Activism	Total Scale
AGE Under 40 years 40 years and over	X=3.1 X=2.8 Z=-1.55 P=.120	X=4 X=3.8 Z=-1.46 P=.143	X=2.6 X=2.3 Z=-2.11 P=.034	X=3.8 X=3.4 Z=-2.05 P=.040	X=2.1 X=2.2 Z=.223 P=.824	X=3 X=2.8 Z=-1.50 P=.132

Regarding participation in women-oriented online actions, the Mann–Whitney U test revealed that women involved in such activities obtained consistently higher scores across several dimensions. The strongest differences appeared in Activism, although statistically significant differences were also found in Critical Perspective, Online Actions, and the overall scale score (see Table 5).

Table 5

Comparison of Scale Scores by Participation in Women-Oriented Online Actions

	Critical perspective	Technical Skills	Online actions	Local/Global Awareness	Activism	Total Scale
Participation in women-oriented online actions Yes No	X=3.6 X=2.9 Z=-2.67 P=.007	X=4.11 X=3.9 Z=-1.65 P=.244	X=3.15 X=2.35 Z=-2.44 P=.014	X=3.8 X=3.51 Z=-1.30 P=.194	X=3.11 X=2 Z=-3.40 P=.001	X=3.53 X=2.82 Z=-3.35 P=.001

Women’s educational level was dichotomised into lower educational attainment (basic and intermediate education) and higher educational attainment (Bachelor’s degree and above). The Mann–Whitney U test identified statistically significant differences only in the Sociopolitical Activism dimension. Women with higher educational attainment obtained higher activism scores, suggesting that educational trajectories may contribute to greater civic engagement in digital environments (see Table 6).

Table 6

Comparison of Scale Scores by Educational Level

	Critical perspective	Technical Skills	Online actions	Local/Global Awareness	Activism	Total Scale
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL Lower educational attainment Higher educational attainment	X=3 X=2.9 Z=-.431 P=.666	X=3.95 X=3.83 Z=-1.14 P=.251	X=2.50 X=2.35 Z=-.937 P=.349	X=3.35 X=3.57 Z=-.088 P=.930	X=1.9 X=2.42 Z=-3.199 P=.001	X=2.8 X=3 Z=-1.17 P=.239

With regard to the main device used to access the Internet, the Kruskal–Wallis H test showed statistically significant differences in Technical Skills, Online Actions, Local/Global Awareness, and the overall scale score. Women who primarily accessed the Internet through smartphones obtained the highest scores across these dimensions (see Table 7).

Table 7

Comparison of Scale Scores by Main Device Used to Access the Internet

	Critical perspective	Technical Skills	Online actions	Local/Global Awareness	Activism	Total Scale
MAIN DEVICE FOR INTERNET ACCESS Smartphone Tablet Laptop Desktop computer	X=3 X=2.16 X=2.77 X=2.83 H=5.74 P=.125	X=3.97 X=2.55 X=3.86 X=3.76 H=13.64 P=.003	X=2.57 X=1.15 X=2 X=1.78 H=18.31 P=.001	X=3.71 X=2.94 X=3 X=3.16 H=14.79 P=.002	X=2.23 X=1.42 X=2.20 X=2.33 H=5.28 P=.152	X=2.98 X=1.83 X=2.73 X=2.77 H=14.33 P=.002

When analysing the main source of information, women who primarily obtained information through social media platforms showed higher scores overall. The largest differences emerged between women using social media and those relying mainly on television and radio, who consistently obtained lower scores. The Kruskal–Wallis H test revealed statistically significant differences in Technical Skills, Online Actions, Local/Global Awareness, Activism, and the overall scale score (see Table 8).

Table 8

Comparison of Scale Scores by Main Source of Information

	Critical perspective	Technical Skills	Online actions	Local/Global Awareness	Activism	Total Scale
INFORMATION SOURCE News websites Social media TV or radio Other	X=3 X=3 X=2.65 X=2.72 H=5.07 P=.079	X=3.71 X=4 X=3.7 X=3.5 H=7.62 P=.022	X=2.4 X=2.62 X=2 X=2.46 H=10.8 P=.004	X=3.66 X=3.78 X=3 X=3.2 H=16.9 P=.001	X=2.24 X=2.31 X=1.9 X=2.45 H=6.84 P=.033	X=2.9 X=3 X=2.6 X=2.8 H=12.23 P=.002

Finally, regarding the main reasons for Internet use, the Kruskal–Wallis test identified statistically significant differences only in the Activism dimension. Women whose primary motivation for using the Internet was participation in political or social actions achieved the highest scores in this dimension (see Table 9).

Table 9

Comparison of Scale Scores by Main Reason for Internet Use

	Critical perspective	Technical Skills	Online actions	Local/Global Awareness	Activism	Total Scale
MAIN REASON Leisure Work/Study Information seeking Social media Participation in social or political actions Other	X=2.9 X=2.6 X=3 X=3.1 X=3.1 X=2.7 H=6.48 P=.166	X=3.8 X=3.7 X=3.6 X=4.1 X=4 X=4 H=9.17 P=.057	X=2.4 X=2.4 X=2.5 X=2.5 X=2.6 X=2 H=.543 P=.969	X=3.7 X=3.5 X=3.5 X=3.6 X=3.8 X=2.9 H=1.37 P=.848	X=1.9 X=2.4 X=2.4 X=2 X=3.4 X=2 H=9.65 P=.047	X=2.7 X=2.8 X=3 X=3 X=3.2 X=2.7 H=2.47 P=.649

4. Discussion and Conclusions

The findings of this study contribute to a deeper understanding of digital civic participation among adult women, revealing a pattern characterised by moderate levels of digital competence alongside comparatively low levels of sociopolitical participation in digital environments. Overall, the results suggest that access to the Internet and the development of technical skills constitute necessary but insufficient conditions for fostering active forms of digital citizenship. This finding reinforces the need to conceptualise digital inclusion as a broader process linked to civic and social agency (Choi & Cristol, 2021; Helsper, 2021).

First, participants demonstrated relatively strong levels of functional digital skills, particularly in activities related to information seeking, access to resources, and everyday uses of digital applications. However, more active forms of participation—such as content creation, engagement in public debate, or involvement in collective initiatives—were considerably less frequent. This contrast highlights the existence of a divide between instrumental uses of technology and civically oriented forms of digital engagement. In this sense, the findings support the existence of an outcome divide (Helsper, 2021), whereby inequalities emerge not in access or skills themselves but in the civic benefits generated through digital use.

The findings further indicate that the transition from functional uses of digital technologies toward more active forms of digital civic participation is shaped by a combination of sociodemographic and contextual factors. Age emerged as a relevant factor in relation to content production and social awareness, with younger women reporting higher levels of online actions and local/global awareness. This result may be interpreted in light of longer trajectories of digital socialisation and the greater integration of digital technologies into everyday life—factors previously identified as determinants of digital civic participation (Boulianne, 2020; Vaccari & Valeriani, 2021).

At the same time, the absence of significant differences in technical skills and activism suggests that technological familiarity alone does not guarantee greater sociopolitical engagement. Educational attainment also appears as a particularly relevant explanatory factor. Women with higher educational qualifications showed higher levels of Internet activism, suggesting that formal education may support both the development of critical competencies and the willingness to engage in public affairs. This finding aligns with previous research identifying educational capital as one of the strongest predictors of digital civic participation (van Deursen & Helsper, 2020). From this perspective, educational inequalities extend into the field of digital citizenship, contributing to unequal capacities for social and political influence. The results also underline the importance of specific patterns of Internet use in explaining digital civic participation. Women who engaged in online actions related to social causes or specific issues displayed significantly higher participation levels across nearly all dimensions, particularly activism. This finding suggests that involvement in concrete causes or communities may act as a mobilisation factor that facilitates movement from passive forms of participation toward more active and sustained engagement, consistent with research on connective action and networked participation (Bennett & Segerberg, 2012; Theocharis & van Deth, 2021).

Regarding access conditions, smartphones emerged as the device associated with higher levels of digital civic participation, likely due to their accessibility and integration into everyday routines. Similarly, women who used social media as their primary source of information reported higher participation levels than those relying mainly on traditional media such as television or radio. These findings are consistent with studies suggesting that exposure to interactive digital environments promotes civic engagement and public expression (Boulianne, 2020; Choi, 2016). Taken together, the results support the interpretation of women’s digital civic participation as a gradual and situated process, in which movement from access and instrumental use toward more active forms of civic engagement depends on the interaction between personal, educational, and contextual conditions. From this perspective, digital citizenship cannot be understood merely as a technical competence but rather as a situated social practice, shaped by participation opportunities, educational trajectories, and available forms of agency (Isin & Ruppert, 2020; Wajcman, 2020).

This study provides empirical evidence that challenges the assumption that reducing the digital access divide automatically leads to greater digital civic participation. The findings show that even in contexts where access and digital skills are relatively widespread, significant differences remain in both the intensity and forms of participation. Consequently, women’s digital inclusion should be conceived as a process aimed at strengthening their capacity for participation, decision-making, and social influence, rather than exclusively as a strategy for acquiring technical skills (Hargittai & Shafer, 2023; OECD, 2024).

The study also presents several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the use of convenience sampling limits the generalisability of the findings. Additionally, because participants were recruited through digital training centres, the sample may represent women with comparatively higher levels of digital competence than the broader population. Furthermore, the quantitative and deductive design adopted in this study limits the possibility of exploring the complexity of participants’ lived experiences and meanings. Future research would therefore benefit from incorporating qualitative approaches capable of contrasting reported perceptions with actual practices of digital civic participation. Despite these limitations, the study provides a relevant empirical contribution to understanding how adult women participate in digital civic life and the factors that may facilitate or constrain such participation.

From an applied perspective, the findings point to the need to design digital inclusion policies and programmes that explicitly incorporate a digital civic participation dimension, promoting safe spaces for expression, opportunities for collective engagement, and experiences that connect technology use with social action. This implies moving beyond training models focused exclusively on technical skills toward educational approaches that integrate the development of critical competencies, reflection on social issues, strengthening self-efficacy, and fostering civic agency (Choi & Cristol, 2021; OECD, 2024). In particular, it appears relevant to promote initiatives that facilitate the creation of communities of participation and mutual support, as engagement in meaningful social networks encourages movement from passive participation toward more active and sustained forms of civic involvement (Bennett & Segerberg, 2012; Theocharis & van Deth, 2021). From a social capital perspective, such communities may be understood as environments that foster trust, reciprocity, and cooperation—elements that are essential for sustaining meaningful processes of civic participation (Putnam, 2000; Castells, 2012).

The findings also highlight the importance of adopting an intersectional perspective, allowing researchers and policymakers to better understand how different axes of inequality—such as age, educational level, and digital trajectories—interact to generate differentiated opportunities for participation (Collins & Bilge, 2020). From this viewpoint, women’s digital civic participation cannot be treated as a homogeneous phenomenon but rather as a set of diverse trajectories shaped by social and biographical conditions that influence the development of digital agency.

From a gender perspective, digital inclusion policies should pay particular attention to conditions of safety, recognition, and trust within digital environments, since these factors play a decisive role in women’s willingness to participate in networked public spaces (EIGE, 2024; Jane, 2020). In this sense, digital inclusion has the potential not only to reduce technological inequalities but also to foster more equitable and meaningful forms of digital citizenship, supporting processes of agency development that enable women to play a more active role in social and political life mediated through digital technologies. These findings provide relevant empirical evidence for understanding the construction of digital citizenship from a gender perspective. At the same time, it is important to avoid overly optimistic interpretations of digital participation. Previous research has shown that digital environments may also reproduce inequalities, exclusionary dynamics, and forms of superficial participation that ultimately constrain their transformative potential (Christensen, 2011; Heger & Hoffmann, 2023).

Contribution of the authors

Conceptualisation, Author 1; data curation, Author 2; formal analysis, Author 2; securing funding, Author 1; research, Author 1; methodology, Author 2; project management, Author 1; resources, Author 1; software, Author 2; supervision, Author 1; validation, Author 1 and Author 2; visualisation, Author 2; writing—preparation of the original draft, Author 1 and Author 2; writing—revision and editing, Author 1 and Author 2.

Funding

The article is based on the research project Being a woman in a digital world: citizenship, participation and engagement on social media (EXI077/21/000005), which received funding from the grants scheme for research projects in the field of democratic quality (DEMOC) of the Generalitat de Catalunya.

Supplementary material

Anna Escofet Roig & Maria Jose Rubio Hurtado. (2026). Respuestas al cuestionario sobre mujeres y participacion ciudadana digital. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18940267

Ethical approval

Methodological decisions were made in accordance with the guidelines set out in the University of Barcelona’s Code of Good Research Practice (Universitat de Barcelona, 2020), particularly with regard to honesty, rigour, procedures, methods and conflicts of interest. All participating women gave their informed consent to take part in this research study.

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

Area-Moreira, M., Bethencourt-Aguilar, A., & Martín-Gómez, S. (2020). Digital citizenship and digital competence in education. Comunicar, 28(63), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.3916/C63-2020-01

Bailey, J., & Welles, B. F. (2020). #MeToo and digital activism: Activist framing and the role of digital media. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 17(3), 253–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2020.1770810

Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661

Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2021). The logic of connective action revisited. Information, Communication & Society, 24(5), 709–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1899692

Boulianne, S. (2020). Twenty years of digital media effects on civic and political participation. Communication Research, 47(7), 947–966. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218808186

Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. Polity Press.

Cantijoch, M., Cutts, D., & Gibson, R. (2021). Moving slowly up the ladder of political engagement: A “spill-over” model of Internet participation. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 23(1), 26–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148120943677

Choi, M. (2016). A concept analysis of digital citizenship for democratic citizenship education. Theory & Research in Social Education, 44(4), 565–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2016.1210549

Choi, M., & Cristol, D. (2021). Digital citizenship for democratic citizenship education. Theory & Research in Social Education, 49(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2020.1850435

Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2020). Intersectionality (2nd ed.). Polity Press.

Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i2.3336

European Commission. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Publications Office of the European Union.

European Institute for Gender Equality. (2024). Gender equality index 2024: Digitalisation and gender equality. Publications Office of the European Union.

García-Valcárcel, A., & Tejedor, F. J. (2022). Digital competence in higher education: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 1815–1837. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10684-2

Gil de Zúñiga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2021). Social media use for news and political participation: The mediating role of political expression. Journal of Communication, 71(3), 345–369. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqab011

Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2023). Differences in actual and perceived online skills: The role of gender. Social Science Computer Review, 41(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439321994740

Heger, K., & Hoffmann, C. P. (2023). Feminist women's online political participation: Empowerment through feminist political attitudes or feminist identity? Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 20(4), 393–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2022.2119320

Helsper, E. J. (2021). The digital disconnect: The social causes and consequences of digital inequalities. Sage.

Hernández Sampieri, R., Fernández Collado, C., & Baptista Lucio, M. del P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación. McGraw-Hill.

Hilbert, M. (2021). Digital gender divide or technologically empowered women? A literature review. Women's Studies International Forum, 84, 102430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2020.102430

International Telecommunication Union. (2024). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2024. ITU.

Isin, E. F., & Ruppert, E. (2020). Being digital citizens. Rowman & Littlefield.

Jane, E. A. (2020). Online abuse and harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 20(6), 889–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1787896

Lozano-Díaz, A., & Fernández-Prados, J. S. (2018). Ciudadanía digital y participación: Un estudio con estudiantes universitarios. Comunicar, 26(54), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.3916/C54-2018-09

OECD. (2024). Bridging digital divides. OECD Publishing.

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.

Robinson, L., Schulz, J., Blank, G., Ragnedda, M., Ono, H., Hogan, B., Mesch, G., Cotten, S., Kretchmer, S., Hale, T., & Wellman, B. (2020). Digital inequalities 2.0: Legacy inequalities in the information age. Social Science Computer Review, 38(6), 697–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319861631

Scheerder, A., van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2020). Determinants of Internet skills: A systematic review. Telecommunications Policy, 44(2), 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101860

Theocharis, Y., & van Deth, J. W. (2021). Political participation in a changing world: Conceptual and empirical challenges in the study of citizen engagement. Routledge.

Vaccari, C., & Valeriani, A. (2021). Outside the bubble: Social media and political participation. New Media & Society, 23(6), 1595–1613. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820902441

van Deursen, A., & Helsper, E. (2020). A nuanced understanding of Internet use and non-use among older adults. Information, Communication & Society, 23(7), 995–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1563207

Wajcman, J. (2020). Digital technology, work extension and the acceleration society. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 34(3), 369–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002220914940