FMB Stage 1 - Strategic and Creative Solutions

strategic and creative solutions STAGE ONE

IS GENERATiON Z's EARLY ADOPTION OF TECHNOLOGY CHANGING THEIR IDENTITIES?

Project Declaration This submission is the result of my own work. All help and advice other than received from tutors has been acknowledged and primary and secondary sources of information have been properly attributed.

Should this statement prove to be untrue I recognise the right and duty of the board of examiners to recommend what action should be taken in line with the University’s regulations on assessment contained in its handbook.

Signed:

Date:

Ethics Clause I confirm that this work has gained ethical approval and that I have faithfully observed the terms of approval in the conduct of this project.

Signed:

Date:

Serena Anslow N0703818 Word Count: 8000

S T N NTE

CO introduction

1

METHODOLOGY

rationale

1

INTRODUCTION

11

aim

2

METHODOLOGICAL STRUCTURE

11

objectives

2

SAMPLE

12

literature review

PRIMARY RESEARCH

INTRODUCTION

3

QUESTIONNAIRE

13

1.1 DIGITAL IDENTITY

4

FOCUS GROUP

14

1.2 E-PERSONALITIES

5

GENERATION Z INTERVIEWS

14

1.3 ROLE-IDENTITY THEORY

5

14

1.4 SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY

7

STUDENT SERVICES, YOUTH SERVICES, TUTOR INTERVIEWS

1.5 NARRATIVE IDENTITY THEORY

8

1.6 SELF-CONCEPT THEORY

9

1.7 MATERIAL IDENTITY THEORY

10

CONCLUSION

10

SECONDARY RESEARCH

15

LIMITATIONS

16

RESEARCH FINDINGS 1. THE REALITY GAP THE SHARDED SELF

19 - 20

INSPIRATION VS COMPARISON

21 - 22

CONCLUSION

35

INSIGHTS

36

RECOMMENDATIONS

36

2. VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES BRICOLAGE IDENTITIES

23-24

TECHNOLOGY DEPENDENCE

25-26

3. the self-taught generation ADULTING

27 - 28

DESIRE FOR HUMAN CONNECTION

29 - 30

4. when apple was just a fruit EXTENSION OF THE SELF

31 - 32

THE NEW SUCCESS

33 - 34

APPENDICES REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY IMAGE REFERENCES

INTRODUCTION Each human being has their own unique identity, shaped by both internal and external processes.

Not one two people have identical lives, and each person’s life is made up of a variety of experiences which help form their sense of self. However, some external processes are immense and influence both society and the wider world. Technology is one of those influences.

The concept of identity will be analysed in this report, following completion of a previous study into the macro trend, The Sharded Self. This study uncovered online behavioural habits, including disregarding one’s real-world identity and creating one bound to the virtual world. However, Generation Z were seen to dispel these behaviours, and instead seek authenticity.

Within the literature review, the notion of identity and various identity theories will be examined.

These theories, when collated help to form the foundations of identity; including the groups one is a part of, the roles they play within their lives, their material items, how they form their life narrative and their self-concept. A gap in this research appears to surround any generational differences in technology usage and identity behaviours. Therefore, this report aims to uncover if Generation Z’s early adoption of technology is changing their identities.

RATIONALE

“Just imagine a possible future society where status, being Someone in the real world, need no longer matter because it’s offset by living most of the time in the cyber-world. Could it be that, for the first time, the ideal is, after all, to be a Nobody?” (Greenfield, 2009, p. 153). Greenfield’s research into the concept of identity uncovered a notion that technology may be afflicting the qualities that define an individual.

Baby Boomers, Generation X and Generation Y can all recall a time before technology was at the forefront of society, particularly in terms of personal devices and smartphones. However Generation Z, also known to some as ‘digital natives’ or the ‘iGeneration, are currently twenty-three years of age at their oldest. Therefore, these technologies would have been of higher prevalence within their young lives.

Working directly alongside Generation Z has led to an identification of differences in behaviour and technology use, particularly between this generation and Generation Y. Although the years separating them are not of particular distinction, there has been a considerable difference in the advancement of technology from the birth years of both generations.

The brain is at its most malleable within the periods of childhood and adolescence, influenced by both internal and external systems.

“There is no separation of nature and nurture, biology and environment, or brain and behaviour, but only a collaborative coordination between them.” (Cantor et al., 2018, p.3 cited Fischer and Biddell., 2006).

As Generation Z are the first generation to have not known a world without technology from birth, and constant connectivity during adolescence, this may result in technology becoming the greatest external influence on their identities.

1

O JECTIV

A IM

B ES AIM

OBJECTIVES

To discover if technology is impacting the way identities are formed, and the collective aspects that make us individuals.

1. To investigate the sharding of identity by Generation Z on social media.

2. To explore the link between technology and social identity through group associations.

3. To analyse the impact of technology on educational development and traditional value systems.

4. To explore the link between Generation Z’s virtual identities and their self-concept.

5. To understand to what extent Generation Z associate technology with their material identities.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW INTRODUCTION Identity is a construct, formed by both individual consciousness and external influence.

“It is not a concept confined to the jargon of the social science or the humanities; it permeates our everyday conversations, our moment-to-moment cognitive processes of sense-making in a world increasingly characterised by human diversity.” (McLean, K. and Syed, M., 2015, p.11) The blossoming of individual consciousness is first seen in the development of the senses in infancy. Ego identity is then formed, as the infant discovers their sense of self through personal continuity, and through the recognition that within them they have an “inner population of remembered and anticipated sensations and images which are firmly correlated with the outer population of familiar and predictable things and people.” (Erikson, 1963, p.247) External influence however arises as childhood ends and adolescence begins. Young people begin to become torn between how they are seen in the eyes of others, and what they feel they are (Erikson, 1963).

Erikson’s ego identity theory has helped to underpin various other identity theories; acting as a guide for researchers and providing the theoretical foundations for their own constructs and approaches. These theories investigate various factors which form an individual’s identity, such as: the different roles individuals play in their lives, how they associate themselves with other members of various groups, an individual’s self-concept, how they structure their life narrative, and the material possessions they hold dear (McLean, K. and Syed, M., 2015).

From the theories first being coined, the external influences on identity have changed and developed over time.

Everyday social structures have now been intertwined with technology, resulting in the evolution of a virtual world.

Could online spaces be occupied solely by virtual personae, or has the pervasion of technology within society also penetrated our physical identities?

3

E

“AR

G SIN

O

L WE

OU

, ISH

OF

D RL

WO E D

SI

T OU

THE009, p.9) D N ld, 2

A

AS

IN SF

VE

EL RS

E E NS

E

ER WH

?”

BE

S GIN

fie

en (Gre

1.1 DIGITAL IDENTITY One’s digital identity emerges at the point of authentication, leading then to verification. Before identity can be digitised, the individual’s information needs to be collected and examined to ensure the identity is authentic. Once this process is complete, identifying information such as a photograph must be collected, connecting the individual to the digital identity (Sullivan, 2018).

Digital identity encompasses a plethora of information sets (Sullivan, 2018). These sets are compromised of personal information about the individual, such as their full name, data of birth, gender and an identifying piece of information which is usually an original number or biometric. Bartlett considers the reasoning behind the gathering of data, stating that it is a company’s wish to “understand you better than you understand yourself” and “to predict what you will do, say and even think.” (Bartlett, 2018, p.18) Some psychologists question the revolution of technology and digital identity; expressing their belief that identity is then constructed through simulation. The creation of identity in this form can be seen to blur the boundaries between the real and the virtual, and how much of one’s physical being is within their digital identity. If this is the case, will one’s physical being be responsible for their virtual actions? (Turkle, 1996)

4

1.2 ‘E-PERSONALITIES’ Digital identities are curated; individuals embrace what they consider to be the most appealing and positive parts of themselves, and disregard those which are considered authentic and flawed. Through this curation, their identity becomes fragmented from their true self.

Within this realm, the limitations of the physical world are seen to no longer apply, offering individuals a clean slate on which they can create a new identity (Nagy, P and Koles, B., 2014).

Bartlett concurs that through the safety of the screen and digital spaces, individuals could “cast off the tyranny of their fixed-world identities and create themselves anew.” (Bartlett, 2014, p. 7).

Aboujaoude (2012) observes the positive aspects of ‘e-personalities’. These personalities can be seen as liberating to individuals who may struggle with social situations in the physical world. They can allow individuals “to transcend debilitating shyness, let go of stultifying inhibitions and forge connections and friendships that would be impossible otherwise.”

(Aboujaoude, 2011, p. 20).

Social media, therefore, allows for reinvention.

However, without the perceived boundaries of socially acceptable behaviour, online communication can lead to “less mature and antisocial impulses, aspects of ourselves that have historically been kept in check by culture, expectation, religion, and what one might call the social contract.” (Aboujaoude, 2011, p.

21).

This unchartered territory, may lead to repercussions in the physical world for one’s virtual actions.

1.3 ROLE-IDENTITY THEORY When first meeting someone, you know them only through their ‘social roles’; these are roles such as mother, husband, American etc. In the physical world when one individual meets another, interactions are at first rather shallow with each individual only knowing the other in terms of their particular social role. It is not until you have a deeper relationship with someone, that you begin to know them within their role identities (McCall,G. and Simmons, J., 1978).

Role identity theory is defined as the “character or role that an individual devises for himself… as he likes to think of himself being and acting.” (McCall, G. and Simmons, J., 1978, p. 65). Role identities are the idealised and often exaggerated parts of the self that individuals present to others, and can be seen within the fragmentation of identity on digital platforms.

The embodiment of role-identity is less complicated online. As individuals curate perfected social media profiles, followers only see the role-identities of others and therefore do not know each other solely within social roles. In order to develop a role-identity, participation in role-performances is needed. Individuals understand that if they behave in a way that is reflective of their imaginative view of themselves, that view will then be legitimised (McCall, G. and Simmons, J., 1978).

With the encouragement of likes and comments, the audience provides role-support. Through this support, individuals’ idealised identities may be confirmed. This assistance then shows the individual that their role-identity is receiving recognition, and as a result affirming it in their minds (McCall, G. and Simmons, J., 1978). This affirmation encourages the individual to continue with this behaviour, leaving their true, physical world identity behind.

5

6

1.4 SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY Role identity theorists see identity as self-devised, under complete control of the individual. However, it could be said that social categorisation also has influence on human behaviour.

The internet offers constant connectivity, particularly to smartphone users who remain connected to their social networks at all times. Keen (2012) describes the moment of connection to the internet as a graduation from a physical community, to a “membership into a global community of like-minded souls.” (Keen, 2012, p. 154) This online global community allows for the sharing of ideas between like-minded people. This can offer equal opportunities for individuals who may not have physical access to people of compatible mindsets to build relationships with one another. Symbolic-interactionist theorists believe that the self is in fact a social construct, and the development of one’s self and self-consciousness depends upon an individual’s experiences within the social groups they belong to (Morris, 1967).

They theorise that one’s complete self was made up of two parts, the ‘Me’ and the ‘I’. The ‘Me’ is how an individual adopts the attitudes and behaviours of others. These are then reflected externally in their actions, and presented as their ‘true self’ to those around them. The ‘I’ however, is the individual’s internal reaction to the behaviour of the ‘Me’, therefore known as their authentically true self (Morris, 1967).

If one’s self is dependent upon their experiences within social groups, this will result in individuals developing a collective consciousness. Functionalist sociologist, Durkheim, defined the collective consciousness as “the totality of representations which are collective in the sense that they are present in several minds.” (Nemedi, 1995, p.42).

This notion acts as a hive mind, through which individuals can experience a lack of independent thought, and as a result their identities can become fragments of their social constructs.

7

1.5 NARRATIVE IDENTITY THEORY Narrative identity theorists think of identity as a life story. They theorise that each individual begins to develop a personal story as they progress from late adolescence to young adulthood. This story helps to provide a sense of purpose, and help them find their place within the world (McAdams, 1993).

As young people grow older, the possibility of an alternative way of living to how they grew up becomes more plausible. They realise that they are the makers of their own stories and therefore their own identities (McAdams, 1993).

In support of symbolic-interactionism, narrative identity theorists propose that during the development of personal narrative, adolescents begin to understand that their actions may not be reflective of their true self.

This disparity may be reflected within an individual’s social media profiles and behaviours. Offering them a space in which curation of one’s own narrative can be both published to and affirmed by others. This affirmation can be considered as positive to individuals, and should they receive confirmation from others as to who they want to be, can act as a driving force and motivation to achieve their desired goals.

However, this opportunity to portray themselves as something they are not can also lead to negative repercussions. An individual’s social media profile can create for them a sense of expectation, therefore their real-lives can be seen by them as a disappointment (Anonymous, 2014)

In addition to this, they see that there are inconsistencies between how others may see them, and how they see themselves (McAdams, 1993).

8

1.6 SELF-CONCEPT THEORY Self-esteem can be seen to be part of the process of identity verification.

Burke and Stets see self-esteem as having three dimensions; authenticity, self-worth and self-efficacy. Self-worth is sought out by individuals, as the notion is “rooted in the idea that individual’s desire to see themselves favourably, and they act in a way that maintains and enhances this positive self-view.” (Burke, P. and Stets, J., 2014, p. 410).

Authenticity is seen to involve an individual’s inner thoughts and feelings as to who their true self is, and is therefore a reflection of symbolic interactionism (Burke, P. And Stets, J., 2014).

Social categorisation theory is often combined with social identity theory; defined as an understanding that the beliefs that individuals hold about themselves, answers partly to the social groups that they belong to (Hogg, M. and Reid, S., 2006, cited Tajfel, 1972).

Social identity is defined as “that part of the individuals’ self-concept which derives from their knowledge of their membership of a social group.”

(Tajfel, 1982, p. 24). Therefore, the reasoning behind why individuals associate with various social groups is to develop positive self-esteem.

Media is consumed for the purpose of self-gratification. In a study conducted by Kwon and Wen (2010) it was found that individuals that possess a higher social identity and sense of conformity to social groups, use social media networks more frequently, as through usage they find encouragement.

(Kuss, D. and Griffiths, M., 2011, cited Kwon O,. and Wen, Y., 2010) Similarly, Barker’s (2009) study of 734 students in the United States showed that participants who demonstrated higher levels of self-esteem also used social networking sites to engage with their peers. Female participants in the study displayed more interest in using social networking sites to engage in communication, therefore displaying positive self-esteem. Males, however, were more likely to report negative self-esteem, being less likely to use social media for communication (Barker, 2009).

If self-esteem is part of the process of identity verification, social media can have both positive and negative effects upon them. The female participants in Barker’s study used social media as a platform to boost their self-esteem, which can be viewed as a positive. However, as demonstrated by the male participants in the study, self-esteem being tied so closely with social media use can have a negative effect due to dependency.

9

1.7 MATERIAL IDENTITY THEORY Symbolic representation of identity can also be see through the ownership of material goods. Due to consumer culture, the importance in the ownership of goods has become increasingly prevalent. Owning the ‘right’ material goods can be of high importance to individuals, as the effects of ownership assist them in their journey to obtain their ideal identity and a positive social image, which in turn will help them achieve happiness (Dittmar, 2011).

Within developed, consumer-focused societies, individuals may see up to 3000 advertisements every day. (Dittmar, 2011, cited Kalbrenner, 2004). This exposure to mass media advertisements can skew individuals’ perceptions of what it means to be successful, as success is presented as being related to positive self-concept, happiness and the ability to foster rewarding relationships (Dittmar, 2011). In this respect, individuals begin to associate their self-concept with their material goods, which then are in turn perceived to be an extension of themselves.

Lanier (2011) acknowledges this statement in his work as a technologist.

“We make up extensions to your being, like remote eyes and ears (web-cams and mobile phones)… These become the structures by which you connect to the world and other people. These structures in turn can change how you conceive of yourself and the world.”

(Lanier, 2011, p. 4) If material objects are an extension of oneself, they then also act as a reference point by which you are perceived.

Symbolic interactionism is relational to symbolic representation, as how individuals appear in the eyes of others forms part of “socially shared systems of meaning.” (Dittmar, 2011, p. 748). These socially shared systems assist in the association of material goods with either positive or negative aspects of identity.

CONCLUSION Identity theories are complemented well by the aspect of technology, and its relationship to the development of identity. When combining the literature it is evident that technology is impacting upon the five theories that form the identity of an individual; role identity, social identity, self-concept, narrative identity and material identity theory.

Previous research uncovered a link between technology and identity, however it did not note any generational differences between technology usage and identity development. A person’s identity is seen to be an embodiment of both internal and external factors that emerge throughout one’s lifetime. Advancements in technology could be seen to be one of the largest external influences on identity, particularly for Generation Z; a generation who have grown up with technology at the forefront of their young lives.

An examination into Generation Z’s technology behaviour and usage will uncover if their early adoption of technology has changed their identities; in relation to the various identity theories. Or, if technology has held such prevalence within their lifetime, that no specific change in identity can be noted.

10

METHODOLOGY INTRODUCTION The preceding report investigating the ‘Sharded Self’ assisted in building a foundation of knowledge, which helped to form the aims and objectives for this study.

The topic of technology’s impact upon identity, particularly the identities of Generation Z, was chosen. This was due to the thought-provoking possibility of generational differences in the foundations of identity, and the prospect of technology developing the foundations of identity in turn.

METHODOLOGICAL STRUCTURE For the purpose of a balanced study, both primary and secondary research were undertaken in view of forming an understanding of the topic using current sources, and uncovering new insights through conducting further research. Within these approaches mixed methods were used; adding value to the calculable quantitative data collected through further qualitative research.

When collating the data, Cresswell’s (2014) convergent mixed methods design has been applied. Using this design, the data was collected, analysed and then merged to compare the results of each data set. Cresswell’s reasoning for this design was that

“quantitative results yield general trends and relationships, which are often needed, while qualitative results provide in-depth personal perspectives of individuals.”

(Creswell, 2014, p. 36).

A qualitatively driven study was undertaken, using a mainly interpretive approach, described by Hesse-Biber and Johnson (2015) as an approach which

“assumes social reality is subjective, consisting of narratives or meanings constructed/co-constructed by individuals and others within a specific social context.”

(Hesse-Biber and Johnson, 2015, p.4). Identity is formed of the same foundations across individuals, however the experiences of these individuals, which help their identities to grow, cannot easily be quantified.

11

SAMPLE

The inclusion of all genders was an important factor when selecting participants for this study.

The research question looks into the effects of technology on the identities of Generation Z, therefore it was important that the research was not exclusive of any identifiable gender and avoided a gender bias.

A cluster sampling method was chosen in the creation of the questionnaire. The naturally occurring grouping in question for the implementation of this sampling method was the respondents age. However, Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) state that this method of sampling may reduce the representativeness of the sample. Therefore the respondents were grouped into two clusters; Generation Z and other generations, consisting of Generation X, Y and Baby Boomers. This allowed for variations to appear within the chosen population (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).

As it is the identities of Generation Z in question, they were most likely to offer insights from which an understanding of their behaviours could be built. However, as the research question looks into a possible change in identity, it is important to include a comparison. In this case, it was the inclusion of older generations who were not exposed to the same technologies from a young age as Generation Z. Homogeneous sampling was used to collect external insights from a youth worker, tutors and members of the safeguarding team at a college based in Nottingham City Centre. This enabled a depth of insights to be collected; particularly the impact of technology on concentration and mental health of Generation Z and whether any differences have been seen in previous generations.

12

PRIMARY RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

A questionnaire was created to discover attribute variables between Generation Z and previous generations. It was completed by 100 people, with 50 participants from each cluster. Attribute variables were needed to be collected to discover differences in the behaviour and opinions of respondents (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Each research objective was analysed, and questions were formed to assist in the exploration of each one, looking into:

- - - - -

Online and offline group associations and friendship formations The importance of traditional value systems in the creation of identity An individual’s self-concept in social media usage Where technology places in importance of various material items The connection between a brand and an individual.

The questionnaire included various question-types including open and closed, and ranking questions to help discover the level of importance participants placed on various beliefs and items. Having a variation of question types ensured a lack of repetition, encouraging participants to remain engaged to help ensure validity.

It was shared via three networks; Facebook, on the social pages of a Nottingham-based college, and on SurveySwap.

Sharing the questionnaire on social media allowed for the collection of data from past generations, more so than Generation Z. The questionnaire was also shared by others which assisted in the collection of responses.

Generation Z were the focal point of this research, therefore having the questionnaire shared with students at a Nottingham based college allowed for this generation to be targeted specifically. Additionally, participation for the questionnaire was voluntary, therefore the respondents’ answers would not be influenced by an obligation to participate.

SurveySwap is a website that enables researchers to gather respondents for their surveys, in exchange for their participation in others’ surveys. This network was useful in collecting respondents as within the website there are systems in place to ensure the correct participants are reached, and that the answers given by these participants are valid and not rushed.

13

FOCUS GROUP Five Generation Z members aged 18-23 participated within the focus group. These participants volunteered via email, meaning the selection process was unbiased. Conducted in a private area at a local college, a series of open-ended questions were asked to participants to gain organic answers not guided by any limitations.

All participants took equal control over the discussion, with not one participant leading the group. This meant that a fair distribution of answers was given, and that all participants had the same opportunities to discuss their feelings toward the various questions.

Conducting the focus group in person meant that each participant’s personality came across through the natural conversation produced by the questions. A benefit of this form of qualitative research is that it revealed “dimensions of understanding that often remain unattainable to the more conventional one-to-one interview or questionnaire.”

(Hesse-Biber, 2017, p.152) The questions consisted of mixed-methods, offering participants a chance to engage the two modes of thinking. Their system two brain, the part that requires a little more time to consider and develop ideas before answering, was engaged during the open-ended questions. However, participants were also handed various cards with various stimuli on them. For these questions they were given a ten second timer, engaging their system one brain by offering less time for deep thought and control over response (Kahneman, 2011). These answers could be seen to be most representative of the participants true feelings.

GENERATION Z INTERVIEWS Structured interviews were conducted with another five Generation Z members. Open-ended questions were asked to obtain a deeper understanding of technologies’ impact upon their self esteem, communication preferences and value systems. Using this question format allowed interviewees to choose the direction of their response. However, some questions asked were specific open-ended, which allowed only a limited possibility of answers (Keats, 1996).

Two interviews out of the five conducted took place in person, and three were conducted over email. One-to-one interviews ensured a level of comfort with participants, allowing them to converse without the distraction of others or a feeling of possible judgment.

STUDENT SERVICES, YOUTH SERVICES AND TUTOR INTERVIEWS Four tutors from a college based in Nottingham were interviewed via email to uncover insights into technologies’ impact upon students behaviour whilst in an educational environment. Open-ended questions were asked to discover if technology had influenced students creative thinking, concentration levels and self-esteem within the work they create.

Similarly, these interviews were helpful in gaining an educational perspective particularly when considering the answers the Generation Z participants gave to questions regarding their educational development. The tutors chosen had also previously taught millennial students, this enabled them to keep in mind a comparative when discussing how behaviours may have changed over time.

A member of the Safeguarding team within Student Services at the same Nottingham-based college, and a Youth Services worker were also interviewed via email. Using open-ended questions, they were asked about the effects of technology on the identities of Generation Z in relation to their mental health and self-esteem.

Asking them to describe both the positive and negative sides of technology that they had seen in relation to the development of identity within the generation ensured a lack of bias within the answers given. Working first-hand with members of Generation Z and any issues they may be facing in terms of their identities and various pressures, made these interviews incredibly vital to the research.

These interviews were standardised so the responses gained from each interviewee would be comparable; ensuring all answers received acknowledged the topic being discussed (Berg and Lune, 2013).

14

SECONDARY RESEARCH A variety of books and journals were effective in forming knowledge of the many identity theories, which helped inform the literature review. Conducting this research assisted in distinguishing where the gaps in the current research lay in order to structure the primary research. A DEEPLIST analysis was also undertaken to help form insights into the behaviours of Generation Z, particularly as consumers (appendix 7).

Trend reports and databases offered knowledge and insight into Generation Z, particularly when forming comparisons against their behaviours, and the behaviours of previous generations. Once the information collected from these reports and databases were linked to the primary research conducted, connections were formed between Generation Z’s technology usage and their identities.

15

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS The limitations encountered when conducting this research were due to various factors, including limited resources, time constraints and gaining access to the relevant samples.

When the questionnaire was first shared with respondents, there was some confusion involving the ranking questions.

At first, respondents were able to select the same number for as many statements as they pleased, therefore the answers did not fall onto the likert scale, were registered as invalid, and had to be collected again.

Similarly, when looking into the concept of identity, it is not the same for any two people. As a result of this, asking questions which are pre-coded could mean that respondents may not have been given the option to give an answer that was true to them as an individual.

“The opinions, attitudes, and experiences of people in everyday social life may be too complex to fit within a narrow ‘box” or set of categories… the answers the respondent may want to give may not appear as an option on the survey.” (Chapman, S. and McNeill, P., 2005, p. 45).

The size of the sample within the questionnaire would have also benefitted from being larger. The respondents included fifty members of Generation Z and fifty members of other generations. If the respondent size would have been one-hundred members of each generation, the sample would have been more representative.

In addition to this, the members of Generation Z that took part in each research method were between the ages of eighteen to twenty-three, therefore their answers were not representative of their whole generation who are currently aged six to twenty-three.

The homogeneous sampling method used in the selection of participants for the interviews with professionals could be seen as bias. This was due to the judgement made in the selection of participants, as to how informative their answers would be in enabling the research objectives to be answered (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Furthermore, the professionals interviewed were all located within Nottingham. This could therefore be seen as unrepresentative, and a reason for similarity in opinions.

Interviews conducted over email faced limitations, as participants had longer to think about the question. This could be seen as positive; allowing interviewees more time to come up with a more detailed response, however, it also allows them to consider their answers more which affects validity.

Within the focus group, limitations were also faced as the participants were all from the same tutor group, undertaking the same course. If the participant selection was entirely random, this may have resulted in different answers and participants may have been holding back certain answers. Similarly, the knowledge gained from the focus group cannot be replicated as answers would have been different if different participants were chosen.

The limitations within the secondary research mainly surrounded the lack of variety in the sources. LS:N Global dominated much of the research gathered on Generation Z, this could be seen as a limitation due to a lack of variety in findings. However, The Future Laboratory, UNIDAYS, Warc and Futurecast all had similar results in the research they had conducted. If financial resources were not limited, a larger number of reports could have been purchased to help inform the findings.

16

research findings...

GENERATION Z Q. PLEASE GIVE THREE WORDS YOU FEEL BEST DESCRIBE YOUR IDENTITY. 17

(APPENDIX -)

GENERATION Y, X AND BABY BOOMERS 18

p a g y t i l a e re

th

The possible disparity between the virtual and physical worlds can be seen to create a reality gap. Within this void lies individuals’ discrepancies between their two identities, as they struggle to place their simulated experiences into reality (Bousmalis and Levine, 2017). The following chapter will uncover if the reality gap is as prevalent for Generation Z, or if their awareness of social media algorithms and influencers highlights the difference between the virtual and physical.

THE SHARDED SELF The Sharded Self is described by LS:N Global as “a teething period as we attempt to balance our online and offline lives.” (Firth, 2014, p. 2), through which consumers curate their identities online. Through fragmenting their personalities, and selecting what they believe to be the most appealing parts of themselves, individuals create an identity meant to deceive their audience as to the realities of their real life.

19

Interviews conducted with Generation Z (appendix 1) uncovered an understanding of this behaviour;

life on Instagram and so eir th of s rt pa st be e th st "I know people only po entation of daily life." es pr re ic ist al re a t no it's so

do I,

on Z Interview, 2019)

(Participant One, Generati

9)

201

"Only people close in my life ge t to

(Participant Two, Generation

9)

201

Z Interview, 2019)

see the real me."

This self-awareness means that this behaviour is a conscious effort to perfect their online identities.

Generation Z have grown up with technology and the internet deeply ingrained within their everyday lives, therefore it could be said that they “understand themselves in the context of this fourth dimension.” (Jacoby, 2018, p. 2).

In a study conducted by design consultants Ziba, it was found that 75% of today’s teenagers are “comfortable having multiple online personas.” (Fromm and Read, 2018, p. 95). Interviews conducted with Generation Z mirrored this statistic, with three out of five participants discussing how they use different forms of social media to reflect different parts of their persona. Participant Five described how they use Facebook to update their family on various parts of their life, however Instagram has a different function; to display the more “risqué and fun” side of their identity (Participant Five, Generation Z Interview, 2019).

to get away, take a break, ce an ch a u yo s ve gi ia ed m "Social . It lets you breathe." be if you can't be yourself (Participant Four, Focus

9)

be who you want to

Group, 2019)

Fromm (2017) notes a generational change in social media habits. Consumers are becoming more 201 aware of their social media usage in terms of what they choose to share with others, occupying a mindset comparable to their Baby Boomer counterparts. There has been a “shift in social media usage away from the Millennial mentality of broadcasting everything, to the new mentality of only broadcasting specific stories, to specific people, on specific channels.” (Fromm, 2017, p.8) The interviews undertaken with Generation Z uncovered their unwillingness to share much of their personal information,

"I wouldn't post anything too pe

(Participant One, Generation

9)

rsonal."

Z Interview, 2019)

Harris (2018) considers how 201 this behaviour may be a result of the data breaches conducted by Cambridge Analytica and Equifax. These scandals could be seen to have discouraged Generation Z from sharing their personal information, and in turn driven their mistrust in brands and desire for transparency.

20

can d mainstream media which an l cia so th bo om fr re su "I feel there is more pres image." e cases unacheivable body m so in d an ic ist al re un a fuel w, (Student Services Intervie

21

9)

201

2019)

INSPIRATION VS COMPARISON Participant Three from the interviews with Generation Z stated that they “aspire rather than compare” when using social media (Participant Three, Generation Z Interview, 2019). However, when conducting interviews with college tutors (appendix 2) and Student Services (appendix 3), it was found that the guise of social media could be misleading.

One tutor disclosed that “The internet has also given young people distorted perspectives about the creative industries and how artists should work”. They went on to say that “They have unrealistic expectations of life created by social media.” (Participant One, Tutor Interview, 2018).

The Student Services participant was in agreement with this, expressing that they believe “social media can perpetuate an unrealistic life ideal, leaving many to feel inadequate or striving for these unrealistic goals.” (Student Services Interview, 2018) However, in the focus group (appendix 4) participants were asked which emoji reflected their feelings after seeing posts by rich and successful people on social media, and they all chose the ‘not fazed’ emoji. Participant Three stated, “I feel like sometimes they do it just to have fulfilment, and if that’s how they get it, then go for it.” (Participant Three, Focus Group, 2019).

Participant Five agreed and said, “If it’s someone posting because they’ve worked hard and shown off something they’ve worked hard at, then good for you man show it off!”

(Participant Five, Focus Group, 2019) Interviews were conducted with Generation Z from around the world by Irregular Labs. They found the generation to be extremely aware of the bravado that some brands and influencers portray in return for purchases. One interviewee from London expressed that “The brands that stand out to me are the ones who seem to care about people rather than just profit. We see through you!” (Irregular Labs, 2018, p. 137). Similarly, an interviewee from Chicago voiced their opinion on celebrity endorsements, “The chance of me buying something because a famous person promotes it is zero-percent. I don’t care.” (Irregular Labs, 2018, p. 136).

This research is evidence of the generational desire to close the reality gap. With this generation’s awareness of the inner workings of brands in terms of their marketing; instead of users engaging with the brand’s content, it may be that the brands therefore have to engage with the users’ content to form connections with their consumers.

22

virtua

s

23

nitie

ommu c l

Self-categorisation theory places particular emphasis on the development of identity as a direct result of social interaction (McLean, K. and Syed, M., 2015). If the groups that individuals belong to inflict upon their sense of identity, then could a preference for online communication over offline have a greater influence on the development of one’s sense of self.

BRICOLAGE IDENTITIES The Pew Research Centre discovered that Generation Z value social media in terms of the ease of communication it enables.

“40% of these respondents said that social media has had a positive impact because it helps them keep in touch and interact with others.” (Anderson and Jiang, 2018). The participants within the Generation Z interviews were in agreement with this statistic; stating that varying commitments and distances within their friendship groups means that online communication is simple.

t live so far, it 's easier to jus I e us ca be , ds ien fr y m "When I'm away from friends, so it 's hard to of ps ou gr t en er ff di l ra t seve message them, and I've go eans I never lose touch." m e lin on em th to g in lk ta manage timing, whereas on Z Interview, 2019)

(Participant Five, Generati

9)

201

"I have friends on the other side of the planet ."

(Participant Four, Generation Z Interview , 2019)

The interactions of previous generations would have lay within the boundaries of those within their physical reach; school friends, family and acquaintances. However for Generation Z, advancements in online communication provides opportunities for individuals to interact with others and establish relationships that would previously have been unattainable.

Global connectivity allows for individuals to no-longer be restrained from forging relationships with others from various social and cross-continent demographics.

“Transnationalism and layers of identity are becoming more common, particularly among the young.” (Mickiewicz, Buchanan and Stott, 2016, cited Goldin).

In addition to this, the diversity seen within online communities has created safe spaces for individuals previously disregarded by society, for example those redefining their gender identification and sexuality. In the interview conducted with Student Services it was found that attitudes are becoming more accepting, “a larger cross-section of society is being represented within all forms of media, an establishment which is slowly changing attitudes over time.” (Student Services Interview, 2018). Participant One from the interviews with tutors described how Generation Z are “influenced by a significantly larger group of cultures than before this includes music, film, video etc.” (Participant One, Tutor Interviews, 2018).

As transnationalism is providing opportunities to be influenced by a more diverse range of society, and mainstream media is beginning to represent minority groups more than it has done previously, this could be seen to create more of a bricolage of social identity, that has not been seen within previous generations.

24

25

TECHNOLOGY DEPENDENCE In the survey conducted (appendix 6), 52% of Generation Z respondents stated they believed it would be easier to be part of a group online rather than offline. All participants within the focus group agreed with this statement, “With online communities, you don’t have to be active and feel obliged to be there all the time. For instance, if it’s a physical group you have to constantly go in or else you’d be pushed out.” (Participant One, Focus Group, 2019).

Symbolic interactionist theorists claim that self-esteem derives from social interaction (Tajfel, 1982) and Friend et al, found anxiety to be prevalent among members of Generation Z, due to the constant waves of uncertainty provided by incessant news regarding global affairs (Friend et al., 2018).

"13.9%

ed from anxiety."

nited Kingdom have suffer of 16-19 year olds in the U

(Anxiety UK, 2019)

9)

Therefore, online communication could assist in the development of social skills for those who 201 struggle with interacting via offline means, due to increased anxiety and mental health issues.

Interviews conducted with college tutors uncovered insights into some Generation Z students’ inability to communicate face-to-face. When asked about students’ dependance on technology, Participant Two claimed that “a small proportion of students who only have social interactions and friendship groups via social media… find it extremely difficult to engage with their peers and/or staff in person.” (Participant Two, Tutor Interview, 2018). Participant One agreed, exclaiming that students “struggle to interact with people in the real world as they spend all their spare time socialising digitally.” (Participant One, Tutor Interview, 2018).

Online communication can offer the ability for individuals to reflect on what they might say, before they send it to others. However, it could be said that this means conversations could be less organic in nature, offering the individual a chance to tailor their thoughts and personality to appease others. As a result of this, the individual is doctoring their behaviour and honing their identity more towards the ‘Me’ rather than the ‘I’ (Morris, 1967).

Evidence of non-organic interactions can also be seen within the results of the survey.

social media hadn't got on st po a if at th d te sta ey 34% of participants in the surv uld ask their friends to 'like it ', as oppose to ey wo the response they wanted th ave the post as it was. le uld wo ey th id sa o wh % 24 By asking others to ‘like’ their content, engagement is not consistent with what it would have been in reality. Participant One within the Generation Z interviews related their self-concept to their social identity, “I always say to my group chats ‘like the gram’ so I guess it bothers me to a certain extent.” (Participant One, Generation Z Interview, 2019).

On the other hand, online social identity could be seen to enhance self-esteem. Creating positive relationships with others through online communication, can create a support network through which individuals can encourage others through ‘likes’ and engagement.

26

t h g u a t f l e s the n o i t a r e gen The impact of traditional value systems such as education and family on Generation Z is faltering, with many putting their development in the hands of digital platforms. Aspirations and relationships are being influenced by the online world, and as a result, this generation is relying on virtual notions to teach them values that they believe cannot be learned through real-world communication.

ADULTING Educational systems are seen to shape a nation’s national identity through the teaching of societal morals and values.

“Education in society prepares youngsters for adulthood so that they may form the next generation of leaders. One of the education essential tasks is to enable people to understand themselves.” (Idris et al., 2011, p. 444).

However, through the survey conducted it can be seen that education’s influence on the aspirations of individuals’ careers has witnessed a generational decline.

ity had the greatest

rs id that their school or unive sa s nt de on sp re 0+ -6 24 68% of ns. influence on their aspiratio

9)

20% of Generation Z respondents said that their school or universi 201 ty had the greatest influence on their aspir ations.

9)

On the other hand, 46% of Generation Z said that social media had the greatest influence on their 201 aspirations.

This could be due to a lack of belief by Generation Z in educational systems to assist with their learning and development; particularly in guiding them towards the careers which seem the most appealing to them.

27

ts of people my age lo s re su es pr e th nd ta rs de n't un " "I sometimes think they do k job, be really successful. sic e th t ge , es ad gr od go e th feel to get on Z Interview, 2019)

(Participant One, Generati

9)

201

Previous legislation stated that young people must remain in education until they were sixteen, however in 2013 this age was raised to eighteen (Lipset, 2007); prolonging the period of adolescence. This could also be seen to delay life-markers such as marriage and parenthood (McGregor and Stott, 2018). One affliction of these delays is the desire to focus on one’s personal and professional development.

Social media usage and the importance placed on personal success are seen to be in direct correlation with one another. “There is an expectation that when something good happens or if someone experiences a success, they will share it on social media.” (Fromm, 2017, p.12) A Youth Support worker discussed how the young people they work with are using social media to expand their horizons and seek opportunities (appendix 5). They explained the advantages of social media, and how it “allows them to think of their future by seeing what other people are achieving or by following pages to find out more information in the field which they want to work within.”

(Youth Support Worker Interview, 2019).

This generation is described as having “entrepreneurial prowess” (Mickiewicz., 2017, p. 3). This conception was affirmed through an interview with a member of Student Services at a Nottingham based college. “I see students use social media to network, build brands and sell services.”

(Student Services Interview, 2018).

Previous generations would look to their education system in terms of guidance, relying on that system to provide them with the knowledge and skills they need to turn their aspirations into reality. However, if Generation Z look more to online systems for these learnings, then educational systems would appear to have less influence on the curation of a national identity than social media.

28

DESIRE FOR HUMAN CONNECTION Erikson (1963) regarded the first period of an individual’s development as their learning of trust versus mistrust, in which parents create a bond with their children through consistence and familiarity. “The infant’s first social achievement, then, is his willingness to let the mother out of sight without undue anxiety or rage, because she has become an inner certainty.” (Erikson, 1963, p.247). However, within the economic and political turbulence currently faced by young people and their parents, this consistency and familiarity is more difficult to enforce.

McGregor and Stott (2018) note how there has been a decline in the nuclear family, and as a result of this, the way value systems are passed on from parent to child is being affected, resulting in “a deterioration in moral mentorship.” (McGregor and Stott, 2018) Participant Two from the interviews conducted with tutors identified Generation Z to have an increased need for instant gratification. They believed that this was a result of an increased use of technology, causing both a limited attention span but also a larger need for praise; noting that this could “stem to home and/or previous educational experiences.”

(Participant Two, Tutor Interview, 2018)

ease in learners who are, e has certainly been an incr

"ther word, needy."

(Participant Two, Tutor

9)

201 29

Interview, 2018)

for lack of a better

In a survey conducted by Harvard Graduate School of Education, they found “27% of 18-25-year-olds admitted to not knowing how to begin a relationship, while 70% said they wished they had received guidance from their parents on some aspect of a romantic relationship.”

(McGregor and Stott, 2018) 48% of Generation Z survey respondents stated they would be most likely to form romantic relationships through online dating apps such as Tinder or Bumble. In addition to this, 12% would be most likely to form romantic relationships through social media. The reported lack of parental guidance in this developmental area, alongside the results from the survey, are evidence of a decrease in the ability to form human connections.

Dutta (2018) believes that gaming experiences can help to fill the void left by the lack of familial value systems, encouraging “empathy and emotional investment through allowing players to inhabit and understand different identities.” (Dutta, 2018). If Generation Z understand relationships in the form of online communication, then online networks should create content to assist this generation with their emotional development in a context that they understand.

30

an s ’ t i , n o icti d d a n a t .

"It's no of themselves ight n rr extensio ddicted to you ua Are yo hand?"

018, p. 2)

y, 2 (Jacob

2019)

31

s a w e l p p a n whe t i u r f a just

“In the widest possible sense, […] a man’s Me is the sum total of all that he CAN call his.”

(Vignoles, 2011, p. 403, cited James, 1892).

Material goods have long been seen as symbols of one’s identity, with many believing that the objects individuals hold dear are extensions of themselves (Dittmar, 2011). If possessions are seen as symbols of who an individual is, this can lead to strong attachments, ultimately resulting in them associating objects with “close interpersonal relationships or autonomous identity and the stronger their role for individuals’ past, present or future selves.” (Dittmar, 2011, p. 747, cited Schultz-Kleine, & Allen, 1995).

If the importance placed on some objects rather than others differs generationally, then these objects will result in generational differences in material identity.

EXTENSION OF THE SELF “Understanding Generation Z as mere consumers of technology misses just how pervasive technology is for this portion of society.” (Jacoby, 2018, p.2) If material goods are seen as an extension of oneself, then it could be said that Generation Z view technology not only as a material item, but as an intrinsic part of their identities.

60% of Generation Z respondents to the survey valued their mobile phone and laptop the most out of their material items, whereas 62% of 24-60+ year olds valued their sentimental items most.

These statistics hold significance due to the possible repercussions of the vast difference between technological items and sentimental items. If older generations hold their sentimental items as representative of their identities, then they associate these objects with their past, present or future selves. Sentimental items are seen to be representative of the time from which they were acquired, therefore one’s identity could be seen to reflect who they were at that significant point.

However, if Generation Z hold their new technologies as representative of their identities, then their identities could be seen to be ever-evolving alongside these new technologies. Their identities may therefore not be bound to one particular point in time.

32

THE NEW SUCCESS Dittmar (2011) notes the psychological impact of material goods on an individual’s identity,

“moving closer to an ideal identity, creating a desired social image, and achieving positive emotional states.” (Dittmar, 2011, p. 746) The rise of consumer culture makes material items pervasive, with mainstream media linking many material items to both success and happiness. However, 61.9% of Generation Z are reported to no longer believe that financial accomplishments are true signifiers of success (The Future Laboratory, 2016). As a result of this, brands may need to adapt how they advertise products, and instead begin to advertise the emotions and feelings that may be achieved if the product is purchased.

86% of Generation Z respondents to the questionnaire, said they would be more likely to connect with a brand that has a strong brand story.

Participants within the focus group all chose the ‘not fazed’ emoji when asked how they feel when they see posts from ‘rich and successful’ people on social media. Participant two believed that people may flaunt their material possessions to others due to insecurities, “I do kind of see it as a vulnerable state.” (Participant Two, Focus Group, 2019).

For this Generation it seems that signifiers of success are now interpreted by what they believe to be successful. Participant four stated that other people’s perceived successes would not alter in his mind how he regards himself;

cause they way I'll grow up be e m ct fe af ly al re n't wo do, "Anything that they e, it won't be because in m be ll wi s es cc su y m o ow up. S ly will be the way I want to gr someone I don't know, I on t, ou e m ed lp he rld wo de tsi rked myself for it." of how someone on the ou wo I ow kn I e us ca be p to reach the know by fame. I want to ( Participant Four, Focus

Group, 2019 )

Dittmar (2011), states that the more traditional value systems have become “eroded to some extent… leading to an ‘empty self’ (Dittmar, 2011, p. 747 cited Cushman, 1990). They believe that identity was instead constructed through the attainment of material items. “Instead of being ascribed, identity is increasingly achieved by the individual.” (Dittmar, 2011, p. 747, cited Cote and Levine, 2002).

Therefore, if the influence of traditional value systems on Generation Z is decreasing (see chapter three), and material items are no longer of extreme importance, then is the ultimate influence on Generation Z’s identities the virtual world? If so, will the collective aspects of identity attained from universal networks diminish?

33

34

n o i s u l c n co

Advancements in society and the wider world impact upon the qualities that define each person living within it, and technology is arguably the most immense external influence seen in modern history. Each generation has grown up witnessing various technological advancements; from the invention of mobile devices to the world-wide-web. Therefore, each generation had to adapt and integrate these technologies into their everyday lives, watching as it pervaded long-standing systems such as communication and education. However, Generation Z have known the most recent advancements as the norm.

This report aimed to discover if the early adoption of technology by Generation Z had changed their identities. To do this, identity theory was investigated and primary and secondary research was undertaken to assist in proving or disproving this inquest.

To conclude, it is evident that Generation Z’s identities encompass various aspects of technology, however whether their identities have changed due to this is unlikely. This generation has grown up alongside social media, considering both the virtual world and the physical world as separate entities, and their identities as such. Using social media, they seek inspiration not comparison and are neglecting traditional value systems such as family and education in helping them to discover their possible futures. Constant connectivity allows them to use the internet to communicate with peers, forge global friendships, and access vast amounts of content; helping to educate them about various social and cross-continent demographics. The content they consume is then compartmentalised and internalised within their sense of self.

In previous generations, identity would be a construct of both the people and the social systems contained within their immediate connections. Generation Z however, are influenced by vast amounts of content due to developments in technology. But has this changed their identities? Generation Z have not known a world without technology, therefore their identities would have not changed through usage, they would have always been inflicted by it. It is then arguable that Generation Z’s identities have not changed, but the concept of identity has changed in turn.

35

key insights - Material items hold little value to Generation Z; they interpret personal development as true success as appose to financial stature.

- Traditional value systems hold no authority, as Generation Z look to the virtual world to help them develop their aspirations and belief systems.

- Generation Z view the virtual and physical world as separate entities, and they find it easier to both communicate and be their ‘true selves’ in the virtual world.

- Generation Z’s sense of self is influenced by a significantly larger number of cultures, lifestyles and other identities than previous generations; resulting in unique bricolage identities.

recommendations

As material items no longer hold significance for this generation, brands may need to adapt to this by changing how products are advertised. 86% of Generation Z respondents to the questionnaire, stated they would be more likely to connect with a brand with a strong brand story. Therefore, instead of creating product-led advertisements, brands should create emotion-led advertisements, appealing to an aspiration driven generation.

Placing less trust in their schools and universities for their personal development, Generation Z are looking to the virtual world to learn the skills and qualities necessary to achieve their aspirations. The Generational Diffusion of Innovation Graph (appendix 8) shows the importance this generation places on technology, but also their market share as Innovators/Early Adopters. Brands could seek to capitalise from this distrust in traditional systems, by creating educational platforms to help this generation expand their skill set.

Generation Z’s unique, bricolage identities are a curation of all the cultures, lifestyles and social systems they come into contact with in both the virtual and physical worlds. The demand for equality in regards to issues such as race, gender and sexual orientation is of paramount importance.

Therefore, brands have to adapt to this and be more inclusive; they need to hold the same ideals.

36

appendices ETHICAL CLEARANCE CHECKLIST

appendix one GENERATION Z INTERVIEWS

PARTICIPANT ONE

PARTICIPANT TWO

PARTICIPANT THREE

PARTICIPANT FOUR

PARTICIPANT FIVE

appendix two TUTOR INTERVIEWS PARTICIPANT ONE

PARTICIPANT TWO

PARTICIPANT THREE

1. Have you noticed any changes in the behaviour of students as a result of technology?

Definitely an addiction. I have to constantly tell 18+ year olds to turn their phones off and focus on the work they are supposed to be doing. There is an unhealthy attachment to their phone and being left out of something, a fear that they will miss out on something.

2. If so, what are these changes and have you noticed any differences between students today and those from past years?

Less of an ability to stay focused, to not be checking their devices. I’m as bad sometimes, I’ve got my phone attached to every computer I own, so even if I don’t have my phone I can still do all my phone things. I hate it, and I hate myself.

3. In your opinion, how dependent on technology do students appear to be?

Extremally. But not the right technology, for example most of my students don’t know how to sync emails to their phone, write an email, use a calendar, how to work with external drives on a computer. But the now have to faff around on Instagram and Snapchat. They know how to use phones, not computers.

4. Have you seen any impact on the creativity of students due to technology?

Yes. I’ve put some information below, but if you need more just let me know.

5. If so, do you believe this impact to be positive or negative?

Both. Depending on the student. Students that really want to get in to film making find a way to make new technology work for them and embrace it: understanding it, it’s limitations, and making sure that they aren’t a slave to it and it works for them. Whereas weaker students that are more reliant on the technology start to allow the technology to do everything for them rather than put thought in to what they are doing, and this ultimately impacts what they can do with their footage later down the line or in moments where the technology stops working and they need to think on their own.

PARTICIPANT FOUR

appendix three STUDENT SERVICES INTERVIEW

appendix four FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANT ONE

PARTICIPANT TWO

PARTICIPANT THREE

PARTICIPANT FOUR

PARTICIPANT FIVE

appendix five YOUTH SERVICES INTERVIEW

appendix six QUESTIONNAIRE

I'm Most Likely to Form Friendships Through...

The Gym / Sports Clubs Social Situations (eg; pub or events) Meeting Friends of Friends Social Media / Online Groups School or University 0

5.5 24-60+

11

16.5

22

18-23

I am Least Likely to Form Friendships Through...

The Gym / Sports Clubs Social Situations (eg; pub or events) Meeting Friends of Friends Social Media / Online Groups School or University 0

10 24-60+

20

30

40

18-23

Are You a Member of an Online Group?

No

Yes

0

10

20 24-60+

30 18-23

40

Do You Believe it Would Be Easier to Be Part of a Group Online?

Unsure

No

Yes 0

6.5

13 24-60+

19.5

26

Gen Z

The Biggest Influence on my Political Beliefs is...

Print Media My Family and Friends Social Media Watching Television Online Articles 0

7.5 24-60+

15

22.5

30

18-23

The Smallest Influence on My Political Beliefs Is...

Print Media My Family and Friends Social Media Watching Television Online Articles 0

5 24-60+

10 18-23

15

20

I am Most Likely to Form Romantic Relationships Through...

Meeting Through a Friend The Gym / Sports Clubs Social Media Nights Out / Pub Dating Apps 0

10 24-60+

20

30

40

18-23

I am Least Likely to Form Romantic Relationships Through...

Meeting Through a Friend The Gym / Sports Clubs Social Media Nights Out / Pub Dating Apps 0

10 24-60+

20

30

40

18-23

The Biggest Influence on my Career/ Aspiration is/was...

School / University Print Media Social Media Family and Friends TV or Film 0

10

20 24-60+

18-23

30

40

The Smallest Influence on my Career/ Aspiration is/was...

School / University Print Media Social Media Family and Friends TV or Film 0

7.5

15 24-60+

22.5

30

18-23

The Biggest Influence On My Values Is...

Religion / Spirituality Film and Television Print Media Social Media Family and Friends 0

10 24-60+

20

30

40

18-23

The Smallest Influence On My Values Is...

Religion / Spirituality Film and Television Print Media Social Media Family and Friends 0

10 24-60+

20 18-23

30

40

A Photo You Have Posted to Instagram Isn't Getting The Response You Had Hoped For...

What Would You Be Most Likely To Do? Remove, and Reupload Ask Friends to Like It Leave It Edit It Remove It 0

10 24-60+

20

30

40

18-23

A Photo You Have Posted to Instagram Isn't Getting The Response You Had Hoped For...

What Would You Be Least Likely To Do? Remove, and Reupload Ask Friends to Like It Leave It Edit It Remove It 0

4.5 24-60+

9

13.5

18

18-23

Material Item Valued Most Electrical Goods Books Clothes and Shoes Mobile Phone / Laptop Sentimental Items 0

10 24-60+

20 18 - 23

30

40

Material Item Valued Least Electrical Goods Books Clothes and Shoes Mobile Phone / Laptop Sentimental Items 0

7.5 24-60+

15

22.5

30

18 - 23

Are You More Likely to Connect With a Brand that has a Strong Brand Story?

Unsure

No

Yes 0

12.5

25 24-60+

37.5 18-23

50

appendix seven DEEPLIST ANALYSIS

D – Demographic The New Consumer Summit Report (pg. 12)

- Using online platforms to become hyper-connected

- Developing transnational identities which they are proud of; driving them to build online communities.

- In more developed countries they are the most racially diverse generation.

- Hispanic, African-American, Asian and multiracial teenagers make up 47% of this generation in America (US Census)

E – Economic The New Consumer Summit Report (pg. 12)

- Entrepreneurial generation: 72% keen to start their own business.

The New Consumer Summit Report (pg. 13)

- Apple is collaborating with University of Naples to help students learn how to develop for iOS platforms, and launch start-up businesses.

The New Consumer Summit Report (pg. 22)

- According to Mintel, they have spending power of around £151bn, including their influence on household purchases.

LS:N Global, Money Market

- Generation Z have observed the repercussions of the 2008 recession and therefore approach spending with more caution.

E – Environmental Getting to know Gen Z (p. 15)

- Generation Z stand up for issues regarding racial equality, gender equality and sexual orientation equality. Getting to know Gen Z (p. 16)

- They are becoming more involved in social activism at a young age, due to the accessibility the internet provides in voicing opinions and having a personal platform.

UNiDAYS Gen Z Insights – 2018 Retail Trend Report (p.10)

- The intelligence firm Sparks and Honey conducted research in which they found 76% of Generation Z respondents were concerned about humanity’s impact on the planet. 60% wanted their future job to have a positive impact on the world.

L – Legal GDPR – New legislation was enforced in 2016, helping to protect the privacy and data of each individual. Due to various data scandals, Generation Z may now be more cautious of sharing their personal data with brands, making them harder to target.

I – Informational UNiDAYS Gen Z Insights – 2018 Retail Trend Report (p.8)

- Generation Z do not appreciate advertising which disrupts their online and offline experiences. Increased usage of technology leads them to view a vast number of adverts a day, therefore they will not engage with every one they see.

S – Social The New Consumer Summit Report (p.22)

- Generation Z place less value on body image, and more value on their personaltiies.

- Only 48% of Generation Z teenagers in America identify as exclusively heterosexual.

T – Technological The New Consumer Summit Report (p.13)

- Instant messaging is their preferred social media platform.

- They see texting platforms as where they can voice private issues with friends, instead of posting them to their social channels.

The New Consumer Summit Report (p.14)

- Snapchat encompasses what this Generation wants from social media; playful and fun content with no digital trace.

The New Consumer Summit Report (p.20)

- In terms of social media, they prefer spontaneous communication and interactions with live audiences. Video chat platforms are becoming more prominent within this generation.

- They have a preference for visual content.

REFERENCES THE FUTURE LABORATORY, 2016. New Consumer Summit Report . London, England: The Future Laboratory. (P. 12, 13, 14, 20, 22) MCGREGOR, R. and FRIEND, H., 2018. Money Market [online]. . Available at: https://www.lsnglobal.com/markets/article/22251/money-market-generation-z [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

FROMM, J., 2017. Getting to Know Gen Z: How the Pivotal Generation is Different from Millenialls. Missouri, United States of America: The Future Cast. (P. 15) UNiDAYS, 2018. Gen Z Insights 2018 Retail Trend Report [online]. .Available at: https://p.corporate.myunidays. com/gen-z-insights-trend-report-2018-0 [Accessed 20/01/2019].

DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION THEORY

appendix eight

Diffusion of Innovation theory helps brand to discover how consumers adapt to new technologies which are entering the market. It theorises that the Early Majority of adopters to new technologies will create the highest market share, above Innovators and Early Adopters.

However, when conducting a questionnaire with 50 Generation Z respondents and 50 respondents from older generations, they were asked which of their material items held the most importance to them. The graph below shows which participants rated five, for their technology based items holding the most importance.

60% of Generation Z respondents stated their material items held the most importance, therefore it could be said that they hold the largest market share. However, it is arguable that their adoption of technology does not lie within the early majority. If technological items hold the most importance to this generation, then they are possibly the most receptive to new technologies. Therefore, this would categorise them within the Innovators or the Early Adopters but in turn they hold the largest market share.

references

ABOUJAOUDE, E., E-Personality. In: E-Personality. Virtually You: The Dangerous Powers of the E-Personality.

United States of America: W. W. Norton & Company. Inc, pp. 21.

ANDERSON, M. and JIANG, J., 2018. Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018 [online]. Pew Research Centre.

Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/ [Accessed 01/19 2019].

ANONYMOUS., 2014. The Second Selfie. Marketing, 42 (1).

ANXIETY, U., 2019. Young People and Anxiety [online]. . Available at: https://www.anxietyuk.org.uk/get-help/ anxiety-information/young-people-and-anxiety/.

ATKINS, F., 2016. Warc: Toolkit 2016 - Generation ‘swipe’. London, England.: Warc.

BARKER, V., 2009. Older Adolescents’ Motivations for Social Network Site Use: The Influence of Gender, Group Identity, and Collective Self-Esteem. CyberPsychology and Behaviour., 12 (2).

BARTLETT, J., 2018, The New Panopticon. In: The New Panopticon. The People vs Tech. London, England: Ebury Press, 2018, pp. 18.

BARTLETT, J., 2014, Liberty or Death. In: Liberty or Death. The Dark Net. Great Britain: Random House, 2014, pp. 7.

BERG, B. and LUNE, H., 2013, A Dramaturgical Look at Interviewing . In: A Dramaturgical Look at Interviewing . Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. United Kingdom: Pearson Education M.U.A, 2013, .

BOUSMALIS, K. and LEVINE, S., 2017. Closing Simulation to Reality Gap [online]. Google AI Blog. Available at: https://ai.googleblog.com/2017/10/closing-simulation-to-reality-gap-for.html [Accessed 01/16 2019].

BURKE, P. and STETS, J., 2014. Self Esteem and Identities. Sociological Perspectives, 57 (4), 410.

CANTOR ET AL., 2018. Malleability, plasticity and individuality. How children learn and develop in context.

Applied Developmental Science, 0 (0), 3.

CHAPMAN, S. and MCNEILL, P., 2005, Social Surveys. In: Social Surveys. Research Methods. 3rd ed. England: Routledge, 2005, pp. 45.

DITTMAR, H., 2011a, Material and Consumer Identities. In: Material and Consumer Identities. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. Germany: Springer Science and Business Media, 2011a, pp. 747.

DITTMAR, H., 2011b, Material and Consumer Identities. In: Material and Consumer Identities. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. New York, United States of America: Springer-Verlag, 2011b, pp. 748.

DUTTA, N., 2018. Game Adult Life [online]. . Available at: https://www.jwtintelligence.com/2018/03/gameadult-life/ [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

ERIKSON, E., 1963a, Basic Trust vs Basic Mistrust. In: Basic Trust vs Basic Mistrust. Childhood and Society. United States of America: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1963a, pp. 247.

ERIKSON, E., 1963b. Childhood and Society. United States of America: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. ERIKSON, E., 1963c, Eight Ages of Man . In: Eight Ages of Man . Childhood and Society. United States of America: W.W. Norton & Company. Inc, 1963c, pp. 247.

FIRTH, P., 2014. The Sharded Self. LS:N Global.

FROMM, J., 2017. Getting to Know Gen Z: How the Pivotal Generation is Different from Millenialls. Missouri, United States of America: The Future Cast.

FROMM, J. and READ, A., 2018, Brand Me. In: Brand Me. Marketing to Gen Z: The Rules for Reaching This Vastand Very Different- Generation of Influencers. United States of America: AMACOM, 2018, pp. 95.

GREENFIELD, S., 2009a, Being Human. In: Being Human. ID: The Quest for Meaning in the 21st Century. Great Britain: Sceptre, 2009a, pp. 153.

GREENFIELD, S., 2009b, The Future . In: The Future . ID: The Quest For Meaning In The 21st Century. London, England: Sceptre, 2009b, pp. 9.

HARRIS, J., 2018. The ABCs of Connecting With Generation Z [online]. Content Marketing Institute. Available at: https://contentmarketinginstitute.com/2018/10/connecting-generation-z/ [Accessed 01/17 2019].

HESSE-BIBER, S.N., 2017, Focus Group Research. In: Focus Group Research. The Practice of Qualitative Research.

London, United Kingdom.: Sage Publications, 2017, pp. 152.

IDRIS ET AL, 2012. The Role of Education in Shaping Youth’s National Identity. Social and Behavioural Sciences, (59), 444.

IRREGULAR LABS., 2018. Irregular Report [online]. Irregular Labs. Available at: https://www.irregularlabs.com/ irregular-report-preview [Accessed 01/19 2019].

JACOBY, B., 2018a. To Serve Generation Z Brands Must Get Philosophical [online]. LS:N Global. Available at: https://www-lsnglobal-com.ntu.idm.oclc.org/opinion/article/22377/to-serve-generation-z-brands-must-get-philosophical [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

JACOBY, B., 2018b. To Serve Generation Z Brands Must Get Philosophical. LS:N Global.

JWT INTELLIGENCE., 2017. Meet Generation Z in our latest film [online]. JWT Intelligence. Available at: https:// www.jwtintelligence.com/2017/04/meet-generation-z-latest-film/ [Accessed 01/17 2019].

KAHNEMAN, D., 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow. London, England.: Penguin.

KEATS, D., 1999, Constructing the Questions. In: Constructing the Questions. Interviewing: A Practical Guide for Students and Professionals. Australia: University of NSW Press, 1999, pp. 35-45.

KEEN, A., 2012, The Cult of the Social. In: The Cult of the Social. Digital Vertigo: How Today’s Online Social Revolution is Dividing, Diminishing and Disorientating Us. London, England: Constable and Robinson, 2012, pp.

154.

KUSS, D. and GRIFFITHS, M., 2010. An Empirical Study of the Factors Affecting Social Network Service Use. Computers in Human Behaviour, 26 (2).

LANIER, J., 2011, Missing Persons. In: Missing Persons. You Are Not A Gadget: A Manifesto. London, England: Penguin, 2011, pp. 4.

LIPSETT, A., 2007. Q&A: The New School Leaving Age [online]. . Available at: https://www.theguardian. com/education/2007/nov/29/schools.uk3 [Accessed 22/01/ 2019].

MCADAMS, D., 1993. The Stories We Live By. New York, United States of America: The Guilford Press.

MCCALL, G. and SIMMONS, J., 1978a. Identities and Interactions: An Examination of Human Associations in Everyday Life. New York, United States of America: A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. MCCALL, G. and SIMMONS, J., 1978b, The Role-Identity Model. In: The Role-Identity Model. Identities and Interactions: An Examination of Human Associations in Everyday Life. New York, United States of America: A Division of Macmillian Publishing Co., Inc., 1978b, pp. 65.

MCGREGOR, R. and STOTT, R., 2018. Morality Recoded [online]. . Available at: https://www-lsnglobal-com.ntu. idm.oclc.org/macro-trends/article/22092/morality-recoded [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

MCLEAN, K. and SYED, M., 2015a. The Oxford Handbook of Identity Development. New York: Oxford University Press.

MCLEAN, K. and SYED, M., 2015b, Theoretical Foundations of Identity . In: Theoretical Foundations of Identity . The Oxford Handbook of Identity Development. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015b, pp. 11.

MICKIEWICZ, M., 2017. Next-Generation Apps. LS:N Global.

MICKIEWICZ, M., BUCHANAN, V. and STOTT, R., 2018. Gen Viz [online]. . Available at: https://www.lsnglobal. com/macro-trends/article/19109/gen-viz.

MORRIS, C., 1967. Mind, Self and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviourist. Chicago, United States of America: University of Chicago Press.

NAGY, P. and KOLES, B., 2014. The Digital Transformation of Human Identity: Towards a Conceptual Model of Virtual Identity in Virtual Worlds. The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 20 (3), 276-292.

NEMEDI, D., 1995. Collective Consciousness, Morphology and Collective Representations: Durkheim’s Sociology of Knowledge. Sociological Perspectives, 38 (1), 42.

SAUNDERS, M., LEWIS, P. and THORNHILL, A., 2009, Selecting Samples. In: Selecting Samples. Research Methods for Business Students. 5th ed. Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited, 2009, pp. 210.

SULLIVAN, C., 2018. Digital Identity - From Emergent Legal Concept to New Reality. Computer Law and Security Review, 34 (4), 723-731.

TAJFEL, H., 1982. Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 24.

THE FUTURE LABORATORY, 2016. New Consumer Summit Report . London, England: The Future Laboratory.

THE FUTURE LABORATORY, New Consumer Summit Report. London, England: The Future Laboratory.

THE FUTURE LABORATORY., 2016. New Consumer Summit Report. London, England: The Future Laboratory.

TURKLE, S., 1996. Life On The Screen. Great Britain: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.

VIGNOLES, M., 2011, Identity Motives. In: Identity Motives. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. Germany: Springer Science and Business Media, 2011, pp. 403.

bibliography BOOKS ABOUJAOUDE, E., E-Personality. In: E-Personality. Virtually You: The Dangerous Powers of the E-Personality.

United States of America: W. W. Norton & Company. Inc, pp. 21.

BARTLETT, J., 2018, The New Panopticon. In: The New Panopticon. The People vs Tech. London, England: Ebury Press, 2018, pp. 18.

BARTLETT, J., 2014, Liberty or Death. In: Liberty or Death. The Dark Net. Great Britain: Random House, 2014, pp. 7.

BERG, B. and LUNE, H., 2013, A Dramaturgical Look at Interviewing . In: A Dramaturgical Look at Interviewing . Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. United Kingdom: Pearson Education M.U.A, 2013, .

CHAPMAN, S. and MCNEILL, P., 2005, Social Surveys. In: Social Surveys. Research Methods. 3rd ed. England: Routledge, 2005, pp. 45.

DITTMAR, H., 2011a, Material and Consumer Identities. In: Material and Consumer Identities. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. Germany: Springer Science and Business Media, 2011a, pp. 747.

DITTMAR, H., 2011b, Material and Consumer Identities. In: Material and Consumer Identities. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. New York, United States of America: Springer-Verlag, 2011b, pp. 748.

ERIKSON, E., 1963a, Basic Trust vs Basic Mistrust. In: Basic Trust vs Basic Mistrust. Childhood and Society. United States of America: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1963a, pp. 247.

ERIKSON, E., 1963b. Childhood and Society. United States of America: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. ERIKSON, E., 1963c, Eight Ages of Man . In: Eight Ages of Man . Childhood and Society. United States of America: W.W. Norton & Company. Inc, 1963c, pp. 247.

FROMM, J. and READ, A., 2018, Brand Me. In: Brand Me. Marketing to Gen Z: The Rules for Reaching This Vastand Very Different- Generation of Influencers. United States of America: AMACOM, 2018, pp. 95.

GREENFIELD, S., 2009a, Being Human. In: Being Human. ID: The Quest for Meaning in the 21st Century. Great Britain: Sceptre, 2009a, pp. 153.

GREENFIELD, S., 2009b, The Future . In: The Future . ID: The Quest For Meaning In The 21st Century. London, England: Sceptre, 2009b, pp. 9.

HESSE-BIBER, S.N., 2017, Focus Group Research. In: Focus Group Research. The Practice of Qualitative Research.

London, United Kingdom.: Sage Publications, 2017, pp. 152.

KAHNEMAN, D., 2011. Thinking Fast and Slow. London, England.: Penguin.

KEATS, D., 1999, Constructing the Questions. In: Constructing the Questions. Interviewing: A Practical Guide for Students and Professionals. Australia: University of NSW Press, 1999, pp. 35-45.

KEEN, A., 2012, The Cult of the Social. In: The Cult of the Social. Digital Vertigo: How Today’s Online Social Revolution is Dividing, Diminishing and Disorientating Us. London, England: Constable and Robinson, 2012, pp.

154.

LANIER, J., 2011, Missing Persons. In: Missing Persons. You Are Not A Gadget: A Manifesto. London, England: Penguin, 2011, pp. 4.

MCADAMS, D., 1993. The Stories We Live By. New York, United States of America: The Guilford Press.

MCCALL, G. and SIMMONS, J., 1978a. Identities and Interactions: An Examination of Human Associations in Everyday Life. New York, United States of America: A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. MCCALL, G. and SIMMONS, J., 1978b, The Role-Identity Model. In: The Role-Identity Model. Identities and Interactions: An Examination of Human Associations in Everyday Life. New York, United States of America: A Division of Macmillian Publishing Co., Inc., 1978b, pp. 65.

MCLEAN, K. and SYED, M., 2015a. The Oxford Handbook of Identity Development. New York: Oxford University Press.

MCLEAN, K. and SYED, M., 2015b, Theoretical Foundations of Identity . In: Theoretical Foundations of Identity . The Oxford Handbook of Identity Development. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015b, pp. 11.

MORRIS, C., 1967. Mind, Self and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviourist. Chicago, United States of America: University of Chicago Press.

SAUNDERS, M., LEWIS, P. and THORNHILL, A., 2009, Selecting Samples. In: Selecting Samples. Research Methods for Business Students. 5th ed. Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited, 2009, pp. 210.

TURKLE, S., 1996. Life On The Screen. Great Britain: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.

VIGNOLES, M., 2011, Identity Motives. In: Identity Motives. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research. Germany: Springer Science and Business Media, 2011, pp. 403.

JOURNALS ANONYMOUS., 2014. The Second Selfie. Marketing, 42 (1).

ATKINS, F., 2016. Warc: Toolkit 2016 - Generation ‘swipe’. London, England.: Warc.

BARKER, V., 2009. Older Adolescents’ Motivations for Social Network Site Use: The Influence of Gender, Group Identity, and Collective Self-Esteem. CyberPsychology and Behaviour., 12 (2).

BURKE, P. and STETS, J., 2014. Self Esteem and Identities. Sociological Perspectives, 57 (4), 410.

CANTOR ET AL., 2018. Malleability, plasticity and individuality. How children learn and develop in context.

Applied Developmental Science, 0 (0), 3.

IDRIS ET AL, 2012. The Role of Education in Shaping Youth’s National Identity. Social and Behavioural Sciences, (59), 444.

KUSS, D. and GRIFFITHS, M., 2010. An Empirical Study of the Factors Affecting Social Network Service Use. Computers in Human Behaviour, 26 (2).

MORRIS, C., 1967. Mind, Self and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviourist. Chicago, United States of America: University of Chicago Press.

NAGY, P. and KOLES, B., 2014. The Digital Transformation of Human Identity: Towards a Conceptual Model of Virtual Identity in Virtual Worlds. The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 20 (3), 276-292.

NEMEDI, D., 1995. Collective Consciousness, Morphology and Collective Representations: Durkheim’s Sociology of Knowledge. Sociological Perspectives, 38 (1), 42.

SULLIVAN, C., 2018. Digital Identity - From Emergent Legal Concept to New Reality. Computer Law and Security Review, 34 (4), 723-731.

TAJFEL, H., 1982. Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 24.

REPORTS FIRTH, P., 2014. The Sharded Self. LS:N Global.

FROMM, J., 2017. Getting to Know Gen Z: How the Pivotal Generation is Different from Millenialls. Missouri, United States of America: The Future Cast.

JACOBY, B., 2018. To Serve Generation Z Brands Must Get Philosophical. LS:N Global.

MICKIEWICZ, M., 2017. Next-Generation Apps. LS:N Global.

THE FUTURE LABORATORY, 2016. New Consumer Summit Report . London, England: The Future Laboratory.

THE FUTURE LABORATORY, New Consumer Summit Report. London, England: The Future Laboratory.

THE FUTURE LABORATORY., 2016. New Consumer Summit Report. London, England: The Future Laboratory.

WEB PAGES ANDERSON, M. and JIANG, J., 2018. Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018 [online]. Pew Research Centre.

Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/ [Accessed 01/19 2019].

ANXIETY, U., 2019. Young People and Anxiety [online]. . Available at: https://www.anxietyuk.org.uk/get-help/ anxiety-information/young-people-and-anxiety/.

BOUSMALIS, K. and LEVINE, S., 2017. Closing Simulation to Reality Gap [online]. Google AI Blog. Available at: https://ai.googleblog.com/2017/10/closing-simulation-to-reality-gap-for.html [Accessed 01/16 2019].

DUTTA, N., 2018. Game Adult Life [online]. . Available at: https://www.jwtintelligence.com/2018/03/gameadult-life/ [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

HARRIS, J., 2018. The ABCs of Connecting With Generation Z [online]. Content Marketing Institute. Available at: https://contentmarketinginstitute.com/2018/10/connecting-generation-z/ [Accessed 01/17 2019].

IRREGULAR LABS., 2018. Irregular Report [online]. Irregular Labs. Available at: https://www.irregularlabs.com/ irregular-report-preview [Accessed 01/19 2019].

JACOBY, B., 2018. To Serve Generation Z Brands Must Get Philosophical [online]. LS:N Global. Available at: https://www-lsnglobal-com.ntu.idm.oclc.org/opinion/article/22377/to-serve-generation-z-brands-must-get-philosophical [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

JWT INTELLIGENCE., 2017. Meet Generation Z in our latest film [online]. JWT Intelligence. Available at: https:// www.jwtintelligence.com/2017/04/meet-generation-z-latest-film/ [Accessed 01/17 2019].

LIPSETT, A., 2007. Q&A: The New School Leaving Age [online]. . Available at: https://www.theguardian. com/education/2007/nov/29/schools.uk3 [Accessed 22/01/ 2019].

MCGREGOR, R. and STOTT, R., 2018. Morality Recoded [online]. . Available at: https://www-lsnglobal-com.ntu. idm.oclc.org/macro-trends/article/22092/morality-recoded [Accessed 20/01/ 2019].

MICKIEWICZ, M., BUCHANAN, V. and STOTT, R., 2018. Gen Viz [online]. . Available at: https://www.lsnglobal. com/macro-trends/article/19109/gen-viz.

Unsplash, 2018. [online] Available at: https://unsplash.com/photos/BteCp6aq4GI [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2019. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee.com/portfolio/sunday-funday/ [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2019. [online] Available at:https://ju-schnee.com/ portfolio/ju-schnee-illustration-collection-2018/ [Accessed 21/01/2019] Zurb, 2018. [online] Available at: https://zurb.com/blog/theright-brain-myth [Accessed 22/02/2019]

Behance, 2019. [online] Available at: https://www.behance.net/gallery/74399517/Mobile-kids [Accessed 23/01/2019] Behance, 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.behance.net/gallery/68243475/Masks-Off [Accessed 24/01/2019]

Behance, 2019. [online] Available at: https://www.behance.net/gallery/75028717/Stories-of-Us-Illustrations [Accessed 23/01/2019]

Behance, 2012. [online] https://www.behance.net/gallery/6196287/1000-imaginary-friends-and-one-bear [Accessed 23/01/2019] Behance, 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.behance.net/gallery/73291879/Generation-Z-For-ZEIT [Accessed 24/01/2019] Behance, 2014. [online] Available at: https://dribbble.com/ shots/2889075-Study-Blues [Accessed 24/01/2019] Ju-Schnee, 2019. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/wallpaper/ [Accessed 21/01/2019]

The Mancorialist, 2018. [online] Available at: http://themancorialist.tumblr.com [Accessed 21/01/2019]

The Mancorialist, 2018. [online] Available at: http://themancorialist.tumblr.com [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2018. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/ju-schnee-illustration-collection-2018/ [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2018. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/ju-schnee-illustration-collection-2018/ [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2018. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/ju-schnee-illustration-collection-2018/ [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Dribbble, 2018. Curate. [online] Available at: https://dribbble.com/ shots/5450047-Curate [Accessed 21/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2018. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/illustrations/ [Accessed 23/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2018. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/ju-schnee-illustration-collection-2018/ [Accessed 23/01/2019]

Tyler Spangler, 2018. [online] Available at: http://tylerspangler.com [Accessed 23/01/2019]

Dribbble, 2018. [online] Available at:https://dribbble.com/ shots/5510327-Apple-Logo [Accessed 23/01/2019]

Tyler Spangler, 2018. [online] Available at: http://tylerspangler.com/post/181566275967/artwork-copyright-tyler-spangler-buy-prints [Accessed 24/01/2019]

Ju-Schnee, 2019. [online] Available at: https://ju-schnee. com/portfolio/wallpaper/ [Accessed 24/01/2019]

Creatoz, 2019. [online] Available at: http://creatoz.eu/ best-prezi-presentation-templates/diffusion-of-innovation-diagram-prezi-presentation-template/ [Accessed 24/01/2019]