Research Article

Digital hygiene among teachers

Łukasz Tomczyk 1 * , Katarzyna Potyrała 2 , Marek Kaczmarzyk 3 , Dawid Mędrala 3
More Detail
1 Jagiellonian University, Kraków, POLAND2 Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University, Kraków, POLAND3 University of Silesia in Katowice, Katowice, POLAND* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(1), January 2026, ep620, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17627
Published: 22 December 2025
OPEN ACCESS   826 Views   541 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The aim of the study was to diagnose the level of digital hygiene among teachers in Poland. The study was also intended to reveal the factors (socio-demographic variables) that differentiate the level of attitudes and activities enabling the safe use of digital devices and the Internet. The research was conducted using the digital hygiene test and was carried out in the second half of 2023 in Poland (N = 736) in line with the need to strengthen the skills enabling the use of new technologies in a way that does not threaten digital health and safety. Based on the data collected, it was noted that (1) the surveyed teachers most often drew attention to not using the phone in a situation requiring attention, e.g., crossing a road or a track. In addition, very frequent behaviors included not accepting unknown people as friends, limited trust in links and content on the Internet, and conscious digital footprint actions; (2) the least frequent behaviors were the physical disinfection of smartphones, avoiding using phones before bedtime, and actively responding to negative content posted on the Internet; (3) individual digital hygiene activities are rarely correlated in a significant way, suggesting high internal differentiation; (4) having good ICT habits in one area does not guarantee the same in another area; (5) cluster analysis showed that 9% of teachers have a high level of digital hygiene in selected areas; (6) 44% of teachers have varying levels of digital hygiene, while 46.2% have medium or low levels of digital hygiene; (7) gender does not differentiate digital hygiene levels; and (8) workplace and school type is a factor in digital hygiene levels.
Keywords: digital hygiene, digital competence, digital wellbeing, teachers, Poland

CITATION (APA)

Tomczyk, Ł., Potyrała, K., Kaczmarzyk, M., & Mędrala, D. (2026). Digital hygiene among teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(1), ep620. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17627

REFERENCES

  1. Baker, R., Brick, J. M., Bates, N. A., Battaglia, M., Couper, M. P., Dever, J. A., Gile, K. J., & Tourangeau, R. (2013). Summary report of the AAPOR task force on non-probability sampling. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 1(2), 90-143. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smt008
  2. Balaban, I., Redjep, N. B., & Calopa, M. K. (2018). The analysis of digital maturity of schools in Croatia. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(6), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i06.7844
  3. Bigaj, M. (2023). Growing up by the screen. Foksal.
  4. Bigaj, M., Woynarowska, M., Ciesiolkiewicz, K., Klimowicz, M., & Panczyk, M. (2023). Digital hygiene of adult Internet users in Poland. Newsline Publishing House.
  5. Blume, C. (2020). German teachers’ digital habitus and their pandemic pedagogy. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 879-905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00174-9
  6. Bosler, S., & Wilhelm, C. (2017). La politique des études d’usage: Une méta-analyse internationale des études sur les médias numériques [The politics of usage studies: An international meta-analysis of studies on digital media]. Les Enjeux de l’Information et de la Communication, 18(3A), 73-86. https://doi.org/10.3917/enic.hs5.0073
  7. Boulet, C. (2006). Digital hygiene: Clean living on a dirty network. Interface: The Journal of Education, Community and Values, 6(3).
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812507
  9. Branley-Bell, D., Coventry, L., Dixon, M., Joinson, A., & Briggs, P. (2022). Exploring age and gender differences in ICT cybersecurity behaviour. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2693080
  10. Childers, G., Linsky, C. L., Payne, B., Byers, J., & Baker, D. (2023). K-12 educators’ self-confidence in designing and implementing cybersecurity lessons. Computers and Education Open, 4, Article 100119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100119
  11. d’Haenens, L., Vissenberg, J., Martinez Castro, D. F., Martinez, G., Garmendia, M., Larrañaga, N., Helsper, E. J., Edisherashvili, N., Maksniemi, E., Puusepp, M., Kasemets, M.-L., Tomczyk, L., Kielar, I., Krzeczkowska, M., Irani, F., Hietajärvi, L., Sormanen, N., Tiihonen, S., Salmela-Aro, K., & Wilska, T.-A. (2024). Report on the development of the evaluation strategies tailored to media literacy and digital skills intervention programmes. REMEDIS. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11393866
  12. de Amorim, R. C., & Hennig, C. (2015). Recovering the number of clusters in data sets with noise features using feature rescaling factors. Information Sciences, 324, 126-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2015.06.039
  13. Dutt, A., Ismail, M. A., & Herawan, T. (2017). A systematic review on educational datamining. IEEE Access, 5, 15991-16005. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2654247
  14. Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
  15. Guillén-Gámez, F. D., Mayorga-Fernández, M. J., Bravo-Agapito, J., & Escribano-Ortiz, D. (2020). Analysis of teachers’ pedagogical digital competence: Identification of factors predicting their acquisition. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 26(3), 481-498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09432-7
  16. Ibrahim, A., McKee, M., Sikos, L. F., & Johnson, N. F. (2024). A systematic review of K-12 cybersecurity education around the world. IEEE Access, 12, 59726-59738. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2024.3393425
  17. Kezer, M., Sevi, B., Cemalcilar, Z., & Baruh, L. (2016). Age differences in privacy attitudes, literacy and privacy management on Facebook. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.5817/cp2016-1-2
  18. Long, T. Q., Hoang, T. C., & Simkins, B. (2023). Gender gap in digital literacy across generations: Evidence from Indonesia. Finance Research Letters, 58, Article 104588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104588
  19. Mantilla, A., & Edwards, S. (2019). Digital technology use by and with young children: A systematic review for the statement on young children and digital technologies. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 44(2), 182-195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1836939119832744
  20. Mikołajczyk, K., Molek-Winiarska, D., & Kleszewski, E. (2023). “I have to be always on”–Managerial role and experience of work-life balance and regeneration practices during remote work. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 17(3), 200-219. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijwhm-11-2022-0195
  21. Mutsch, U. (2012). Der mediale habitus von volksschulkindern und ihren lehrerinnen und lehrern [The media habits of primary school children and their teachers]. Universitat Wien. http://othes.univie.ac.at/23971/1/2012-10-18_0104284.pdf
  22. Oddone, K., Hughes, H., & Lupton, M. (2019). Teachers as connected professionals: A model to support professional learning through personal learning networks. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4082
  23. Pellegrini, F. (2019). Sécurité et hygiène numérique des professionnels [Digital security and hygiene for professionals]. Dalloz IP/IT, (4), 233-236.
  24. Pittaway, D. (2020). Digital hygiene: Pandemic lockdowns and the need to suspend fast thinking. Filosofia Theoretica: Journal of African Philosophy, Culture and Religions, 9(3), 33-48. https://doi.org/10.4314/ft.v9i3.3
  25. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
  26. Potyrała, K., & Tomczyk, Ł. (2021). Teachers in the lifelong learning process: Examples of digital literacy. Journal of Education for Teaching, 47(2), 255-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2021.1876499
  27. Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu (EUR 28775 EN). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770
  28. Pyżalski, J., Walter, N., & Tomczyk, Ł. (2022). Problematic Internet use: Pre-pandemic scale of the phenomenon among adolescents in the three visegrad countries (Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia). The New Educational Review, 69(3), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2022.69.3.05
  29. Ray, H., Wolf, F., Kuber, R., & Aviv, A. J. (2021). “Warn them” or “just block them”?: Investigating privacy concerns among older and working age adults. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, 2021(2), 27-47. https://doi.org/10.2478/popets-2021-0016
  30. Siddiq, F., Olofsson, A. D., Lindberg, J. O., & Tomczyk, L. (2023). Special issue: What will be the new normal? Digital competence and 21st-century skills: Critical and emergent issues in education. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 7697-7705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12067-y
  31. Singh, S., & Balhara, Y. P. S. (2021). “Screen-time” for children and adolescents in COVID-19 times: Need to have the contextually informed perspective. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 63(2), 192-195. https://doi.org/10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_646_20
  32. Sklar, A. (2017). Sound, smart, and safe: A plea for teaching good digital hygiene. Learning Landscapes, 10(2), 39-43. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v10i2.799
  33. Smahel, D., Machackova, H., Mascheroni, G., Dedkova, L., Staksrud, E., Ólafsson, K., Livingstone, S., & Hasebrink, U. (2020). EU kids online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries. The London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.21953/lse.47fdeqj01ofo
  34. Statistics Poland. (2023). Education in the 2022/2023 school year. Statistical Office in Gdańsk, Centre for Education and Human Capital Statistics, Pomeranian Centre for Regional Surveys.
  35. Sterne, J. (2003). Bourdieu, technique and technology. Cultural Studies, 17(3-4), 367-389. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950238032000083863a
  36. Stosic, L., Dermendzhieva, S., & Tomczyk, L. (2020). Information and communication technologies as a source of education. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 12(2), 128-135. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v12i2.4815
  37. Tomczyk, Ł. (2020). Skills in the area of digital safety as a key component of digital literacy among teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 471-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09980-6
  38. Tomczyk, Ł. (2021). Research trends in media pedagogy: Between the paradigm of risk and the paradigm of opportunity. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 9(3), 399-406. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2021-9-3-399-406
  39. Tomczyk, Ł. (2023). Measuring digital competences. Ten common methodological challenges. Problemy Opiekuńczo-Wychowawcze, 620(5), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0053.6037
  40. Tomczyk, Ł., & Fedeli, L. (2022). Digital literacy for teachers. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1738-7
  41. Tomczyk, Ł., & Lizde, E. S. (2023). Is real screen time a determinant of problematic smartphone and social network use among young people? Telematics and Informatics, 82, Article 101994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2023.101994
  42. Trültzsch-Wijnen, C. W. (2020). Media literacy and the effect of socialization. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56360-8
  43. van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2013). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507-526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959
  44. Vissenberg, J., Puusepp, M., Edisherashvili, N., Tomczyk, L., Opozda-Suder, S., Sepielak, D., Hietajärvi, L., Maksniemi, E., Pedaste, M., & d’Haenens, L. (2023). Report on the results of a systematic review of the individual and social differentiating factors and outcomes of media literacy and digital skills. REMEDIS. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10356744
  45. von Gillern, S., Rose, C., & Hutchison, A. (2024). How students can be effective citizens in the digital age: Establishing the teachers’ perceptions on digital citizenship scale. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(5), 2093-2109. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13434
  46. Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y., (2022). DigComp 2.2: The digital competence framework for citizens–With new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376
  47. Wacquant, L. (2016). A concise genealogy and anatomy of habitus. The Sociological Review, 64(1), 64-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12356
  48. Wahyuningrum, E., Suryanto, S., & Suminar, D. R. (2020). Parenting in digital era: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educational, Health and Community Psychology, (3), 226-258.
  49. Wilhelm, C. (2021). Approche socio-culturelle et comparative des représentations du numérique. Vie privée et “hygiène de vie numérique” en Allemagne [A socio-cultural and comparative approach to representations of digital technology. Privacy and “digital hygiene” in Germany]. Interfaces Numériques, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.25965/interfaces-numeriques.4589
  50. Yegen, C., Kirik, A. M., & Çetinkaya, A. (2023). Sustainability, digital security, and cyber hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic. In S. R. Mondal, C. Yegen, & S. Das (Eds.), New normal in digital enterprises (pp. 91-105). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8618-5_5