B Churchill

Forming connections in the digital era: Tinder, a new tool in young Australian intimate life:

Tinder is a location-based smartphone application used by young adults. Advertised as a popular and unique way to forge connections, Tinder’s introduction into intimate life is indicative of increased information and communication technology (ICT) usage within this sphere. While the impact of ICT use within intimate life has been debated, little sociological research has investigated Tinder within this context. This article draws on data from a small scale exploratory study, including surveys (n = 203) and interviews (n = 10), examining the use of Tinder by young Australians (aged 18 to 30) and how use contributes to intimate outcomes. While survey results provide insight regarding engagement with Tinder and its use in intimate life, two key themes – (1) Tinder’s use as an additional tool in intimate life and (2) its perceived impact on ‘connection quality’ – demonstrate Tinder’s role in intimate outcomes. Findings support Jurgenson’s depiction of today’s societies as ones characterised by augmented reality rather than digital dualism.

Parenting Stress and the Use of Formal and Informal Child Care: Associations for Fathers and Mothers:

We investigated relationships between nonparental care and psychological strains of parenthood. Using data from employed parents of children below 5 years of age (n = 6,886 fathers and mothers) from Waves 4 to 11 of the household panel survey Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA), we constructed a parenting stress scale from the average of four items (α = .76) administered in the Self-Completion Questionnaire. We ran panel random-effects regression models testing associations between amount and type of nonparental care and parenting stress, for both mothers and fathers. We distinguished between formal care, informal and family care (mainly grandparents), and mixed care. Results showed that fathers and mothers’ parenting stress is positively associated with hours of nonparental care, but that for both genders parenting stress is significantly lower if the care is provided by informal/family carers.

Book Review: Blau, J. and Frezzo, M., eds, Sociology and Human Rights: A Bill of Rights for the Twenty-First Century

that Miller excels. Bringing the stories in Part 1 together, Miller provides a critical account of considerations alluded to earlier in the text, such as the meaning of Facebook friends and the ways in which Facebook can aid those who struggle to form relationships. It is here too that Miller’s overall argument and motivation to produce the text become clear; ‘there is no such thing as Facebook from the perspective of cultural relativity. Facebook is only the aggregate of its regional and particular usage’ (p. 163). The reasoning behind this argument is captured in the term ‘Fasbook’, a term which Miller uses to reflect the idea that Facebook has become Trinidadian, as opposed to merely ‘an imported facility’ (p. 159). Overall, Miller’s text seamlessly weaves the stories of his participants into the analytical and critical discussions in Part 2 of the text. His knowledge and understanding of the socio-economic, political and cultural background of Trinidadians adds a nuanced perspective to the text and the conclusions he draws. Ultimately, however, what the text lacks is a clear target audience. The style of the text – which Miller himself admits ‘is taken more from short story composition than from academic genre’ (p. xii) – may indeed appeal to a non-academic audience, but whether the subject matter and the approach he takes also appeal to this audience is unclear. Conversely, some academic readers of the text may be deterred by the text’s style, which is largely a recap of conversations Miller had with Trinidadians over the course of a year of fieldwork. Indeed, Miller himself admits that the composition of the text ‘may require some patience’ (p. xii) from an academic audience. Even academics interested in Facebook research may not find the text entirely useful, as Miller relies on commonly cited sources to support his conclusions (such as boyd, 2006; boyd and Ellison, 2007; and Gershon, 2010) – and only uses them sparsely at that. This said, Miller does provide a fascinating read and few others have addressed the growing popularity and impact of Facebook outside Western countries and societies.