The Risks of Digitalization: Systematization of the Scientific Field

The article is devoted to analyzing and systematizing the digitalization risks that are in the focus of the scientific community. The empirical data is comprised of publications in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Scopus in 2010–2024. Four groups of digitalization risks were identified and described: digital inequality, digital addiction, privacy problems and a group of other risks. The specifics of identifying and gauging risks were revealed. It is shown that privacy risks are identified as a subjective sense of threat by individuals, while both subjective and objective criteria are used to measure the risks of digital dependence and digital inequality. It is concluded that there is a tradition of studying risks in some scientific fields that is absent in others. For example, tools from the field of psychology are widely used to identify and measure digital addiction but are almost absent from the field of sociology. Similarly, different vulnerable groups were found to be exposed to different risks. The focus of digital inequality researchers has been on the elderly as the most exposed to this risk. On the contrary, in studies of digital addiction, young people are the most vulnerable group. Age and digital literacy are mentioned as factors influencing different groups of digital threats. Despite attempts to identify a single group of factors behind the spread of digitalization risks, the research field remains highly fragmented.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sociological Journal
Published
2025-03-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2025.31.1.4
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Engineering Education and Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.25

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Risks of Digitalization: Systematization of the Scientific Field

Роман Щербаков
1 citations
Sociological Journal
Engineering Education and Technology
3.25
article

The Risks of Digitalization: Systematization of the Scientific Field

Роман Щербаков
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The article is devoted to analyzing and systematizing the digitalization risks that are in the focus of the scientific community. The empirical data is comprised of publications in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Scopus in 2010–2024. Four groups of digitalization risks were identified and described: digital inequality, digital addiction, privacy problems and a group of other risks. The specifics of identifying and gauging risks were revealed. It is shown that privacy risks are identified as a subjective sense of threat by individuals, while both subjective and objective criteria are used to measure the risks of digital dependence and digital inequality. It is concluded that there is a tradition of studying risks in some scientific fields that is absent in others. For example, tools from the field of psychology are widely used to identify and measure digital addiction but are almost absent from the field of sociology. Similarly, different vulnerable groups were found to be exposed to different risks. The focus of digital inequality researchers has been on the elderly as the most exposed to this risk. On the contrary, in studies of digital addiction, young people are the most vulnerable group. Age and digital literacy are mentioned as factors influencing different groups of digital threats. Despite attempts to identify a single group of factors behind the spread of digitalization risks, the research field remains highly fragmented.

Sociological JournalVol. 31(1)
National Research University Higher School of Economics (RU)
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Engineering Education and Technology
3.25
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.