夫妻关系中的技术参考与性别:定性研究结果

Tania Rodríguez Salazar
{"title":"夫妻关系中的技术参考与性别:定性研究结果","authors":"Tania Rodríguez Salazar","doi":"10.32870/cys.v2024.8661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reports qualitative findings about technoferences or partner phubbing, showing the multiplicity of experiences that it generates. The analysis situates the phenomenon in the dynamics of the onlife world and highlights gender differences. It stands out that the interruptions caused by the other are more annoying than their own, that men demand more and have greater power to influence the partner uses. The conclusion is that the most tolerated or justified technoferences are those that have to do with paid work, and that they are not always inevitable, but can express communicational agency.","PeriodicalId":112547,"journal":{"name":"Comunicación y Sociedad","volume":"80 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technoferences in Couple Relationships and Gender: Qualitative Findings\",\"authors\":\"Tania Rodríguez Salazar\",\"doi\":\"10.32870/cys.v2024.8661\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reports qualitative findings about technoferences or partner phubbing, showing the multiplicity of experiences that it generates. The analysis situates the phenomenon in the dynamics of the onlife world and highlights gender differences. It stands out that the interruptions caused by the other are more annoying than their own, that men demand more and have greater power to influence the partner uses. The conclusion is that the most tolerated or justified technoferences are those that have to do with paid work, and that they are not always inevitable, but can express communicational agency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":112547,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comunicación y Sociedad\",\"volume\":\"80 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comunicación y Sociedad\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v2024.8661\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comunicación y Sociedad","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v2024.8661","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章报告了关于技术会议或伴侣 "phubbing "的定性研究结果,展示了其所产生的多重体验。分析将这一现象置于生活世界的动态之中,并突出了性别差异。结果表明,对方的干扰比自己的干扰更令人讨厌,男性要求更多,也更有能力影响伴侣的使用。结论是,最能被容忍或最合理的技术干扰是那些与有偿工作有关的干扰,它们并不总是不可避免的,但可以表达交流的能动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Technoferences in Couple Relationships and Gender: Qualitative Findings
This article reports qualitative findings about technoferences or partner phubbing, showing the multiplicity of experiences that it generates. The analysis situates the phenomenon in the dynamics of the onlife world and highlights gender differences. It stands out that the interruptions caused by the other are more annoying than their own, that men demand more and have greater power to influence the partner uses. The conclusion is that the most tolerated or justified technoferences are those that have to do with paid work, and that they are not always inevitable, but can express communicational agency.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信