CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 37Media and Digital CommunicationLegal Systems and InstitutionsMultimedia Communication and Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Transformation of television-viewing practices in Greece: Generation Z and audio-visual content

Podara, Anna, Matsiola, Maria, Nicolaou, Constantinos, Maniou, Theodora A., Kalliris, George·2022·Journal of Digital Media & Policy
DOI 10.1386/jdmp_00034_1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In recent years, digitalization has detached television content from the television screen, and so the television is no longer the only choice for personal audio-visual consumption. The audio-visual market is facing increased fragmentation due to the multiplicity of delivering platforms. Furthermore, the digital touch has brought about far-reaching changes in people’s audio-visual consumption practices. The protagonists of this new digital landscape are the members of Generation Z (GenZ), who are early adopters of the digital innovation. In this article, contemporary consumption behaviours of audio-visual content, contrasting those at the times of traditional television viewing, are explored in the context of the GenZ community. In Greece, GenZ represent nearly 20 per cent of the entire population and makes an interesting target to be scrutinized under the prism of ongoing studies of media usage.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1386/jdmp_00034_1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 37

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. 2018, The private life of a nation in crisis: A study on the politics in/of Greek television fiction, Ph.D. thesis
  2. 2012, Television consumption trends among the “digital generation”, International Journal of Iberian Studies, 25, 111, 10.1386/ijis.25.2.111_1 · DOI
  3. 1991, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Spread of Nationalism
  4. 2008, Watching television without pity: The productivity of online fans, Television & New Media, 9, 24, 10.1177/1527476407307241 · DOI
  5. [1996] 2006, Living Room Wars: Rethinking Media Audiences for a Postmodern World
  6. 2014, Transnational audiences: Geocultural approaches, Continuum, 28, 4, 10.1080/10304312.2014.870868 · DOI
  7. 2016, Feedback fears for the “Me, Me, Me” generation: How to tread carefully in dishing out criticism, Human Resource Management International Digest, 24, 27, 10.1108/HRMID-05-2016-0076 · DOI
  8. 2010, Discovering Behaviors and Attitudes Related to Pirating Content
  9. 2012, White flight in networked publics: How race and class shaped American teen engagement with MySpace and Facebook, 203
  10. 2008, Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage
  11. 2019, Crowded nests: Parent–adult child co-residence transitions and parental mental health following the great recession, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 60, 204, 10.1177/0022146519849113 · DOI
  12. 2018, Preparing Generation Z for the teaching profession, SRATE Journal, 27, 1
  13. [1996] 2012, African American Viewers and the Black Situation Comedy: Situating Racial Humor
  14. 2013, The triple articulation of media technologies in audiovisual media consumption, Television & New Media, 14, 421, 10.1177/1527476412439106 · DOI
  15. 2010, Cinema 3.0: The interactive-image, Cinema Journal, 50, 81, 10.1353/cj.2010.a405349 · DOI
  16. 2016, Still “watching” TV? The consumption of TV fiction by engaged audiences, Media and Communication, 4, 176, 10.17645/mac.v4i3.427 · DOI
  17. 2000, Seeing Things: Television in the Age of Uncertainty
  18. 2014, 2011 Population and Housing Census
  19. 2017, Report on TV and Media 2017: A Consumer-Driven Future of Media
  20. 2018, Netflix reports strong but not stellar Q2, Forbes
  21. 2002, Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research, Media Psychology, 4, 279, 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0403_04 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 2018, Boomers to millennials: Generational stereotypes at work in academic librarianship, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44, 845, 10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.011 · DOI
  23. 2014, How the millennial generation is transforming employee benefits, Benefits Quarterly, 30, 8
  24. 2000, Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation
  25. 2019, Media, politics and state broadcasting in Greece, European Journal of Communication, 34, 345, 10.1177/0267323119844414 · DOI
  26. 2006, Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide
  27. 2009, Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century
  28. 2017, Binge-watching: Video-on-demand, quality TV and mainstreaming fandom, International Journal of Cultural Studies, 20, 304, 10.1177/1367877915606485 · DOI
  29. 2019, The Nielsen Total Audience Report: Q3 2018
  30. 2009, The end of television?, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 625, 6, 10.1177/0002716209337796 · DOI
  31. 2004, After Method: Mess in Social Science Research
  32. [1988] 1993, The Export of Meaning: Cross-cultural Readings of Dallas
  33. 2005, Critical debates in internet studies: Reflections on an emerging field, 9
  34. 2015, Active audiences? The debate progresses but is far from resolved, Communication Theory, 25, 439, 10.1111/comt.12078 · DOI
  35. 2011, Risks and Safety on the Internet: The Perspective of European Children
  36. 2017, From PSB to privatisation: Structures and vulnerabilities of the Greek-cypriot broadcasting sector, VIEW Journal of European Television History and Culture, 6, 102, 10.18146/2213-0969.2017.jethc127 · DOI
  37. 2017, From linearity to circulation. How TV flow is changing in networked media space, TECNOSCIENZA: Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies, 7, 103
  38. 2014, Net Children Go Mobile: Final Report (with Country Fact Sheets)
  39. 2015, Augmenting user interaction experience through embedded multimodal media agents in social networks, 188, 10.4018/978-1-4666-8556-7.ch010 · DOI
  40. 2019, Technology-enhanced learning in audiovisual education: The case of radio journalism course design, Educational Sciences, 9, 62, 10.3390/educsci9010062 · DOI
  41. [2010] 2012, Media evolution and cultural change, 52
  42. 2016, Monster, Multigenerational Survey: Move Over, Millennials: What You’ll Need to Know for Hiring as Gen Z Enters the Workforce
  43. [1986] 2016, Family Television: Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure
  44. 2019, Technology-enhanced learning and teaching methodologies through audiovisual media, Education Sciences, 9, 196, 10.3390/educsci9030196 · DOI
  45. 2005, Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation, 12
  46. 2000, Η τηλεόραση και το κοινό της (‘Television and its audience’)
  47. 2017, Conceptualizing media users across media: The case for “media user/use” as analytical concepts, Convergence, 23, 378, 10.1177/1354856517700380 · DOI
  48. 2013, The media towards the crisis: Intense adoption of the logic of the elites, 87
  49. 2018, News forms of TV viewing: Web documentary as interactivity tool, 50 Χρόνια Ελληνική Τηλεόραση, 455
  50. 2019b, Transformation of television consumption practices: A comparative analysis on documentary viewing among post millennials, Participations Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 16, 68
  51. 2001, Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part 1, On the Horizon, 9, 1, 10.1108/10748120110424816 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 2008, Generational differences, 295
  53. 2013, The Media and Technology Usage and Attitudes Scale: An empirical investigation, Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2501, 10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.006 · DOI · Paper page
  54. 2018, Generation Z: A Century in the Making
  55. 1999, Television and New Media Audiences
  56. 2019, Netflix and Binge: Exploring New Cultures of Consumption
  57. 1991, Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1954 to 2069
  58. 1998, Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation
  59. 2009, Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World
  60. 1996, Greek public broadcasting: Intensified competition and the enemy within, Synthesis: Review of Modern Greek Studies, 1, 5
  61. 2012, GR Kids Go Online: Final Report for the Greek Secretariat of Youth
  62. 2017, iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy – and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood – and What That Means for the Rest of Us
  63. 2018, The mediated data model of communication flow: Big Data and data journalism, KOME – An International Journal of Pure Communication Inquiry, 6, 32
  64. 2022, Transformation of television-viewing practices in Greece: Generation Z and audio-visual content, Journal of Digital Media & Policy, 13, 157, 10.1386/jdmp_00034_1

Metadata

Authors
Podara, A., Matsiola, M., Nicolaou, C., Maniou, T. A., & Kalliris, G.
Affiliations
  • Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
  • ISNI: 0000000109457005 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
  • University of Cyprus (CY)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Digital Media & Policy
Publisher
Intellect
Published
2022-06-01
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
157-179
ISSN
  • 2516-3523 (ISSN-L)
  • 2516-3531
DOI
10.1386/jdmp_00034_1
OpenAlex
W3106939854
Cited by
37
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Journal of Digital Media & Policy (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Legal Systems and Institutions
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Multimedia Communication and Technology
Keywords
Generation Z, television viewing habits, digitalization of television, media use, Greece

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review