Adolescent-Smartphone: Symbiotic Phenomena

Relying on the most recent studies of new communication and information technologies, the main objective of this paper is to unveil the impact of using smartphones on adolescents. This article focuses on the specificities and particularities of the “interdependence” between the adolescent and his/her smartphone. Smartphones possess the abilities to “augment” the human body with a multiplicity of sensual capacities. In this context, this article tries to deeply focus on the “symbiotic phenomena” between the adolescent and his/her smartphone.

In this paper, we discuss Jeremy Bodon’s (2014) observation that the smartphone acquires the position of an organic artifact. For this purpose, we join the study of Jean-François Bach and his research team (2013) in order to decipher the main facets of the adolescent’s relationship with this new technology.

Introduction

Nowadays, communication and information technologies are constantly evolving (Bach et al., 2013; Bodon, 2014). Therefore, we are in a new era when humans are being asked to engage more frequently in emerging technology. Indeed, innovative technologies such as Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, Mixed Reality and Digital Transformation have recently grown in popularity and interest. These technologies are constantly developing and spreading throughout the world (public, large companies, research and higher education institutes, etc.).

In this sense, mankind has deeply been involved with various developing technologies (Andrieu, 2019). Actually, the rapid emergence of innovative technologies is giving rise to “smart” and connected objects (Bach et al., 2013). Indeed, emerging technologies are all around us through those objects (smartphone, smart tablet, AR or VR headset, smart watch, smart bracelet, smart eyewear, etc.).

This constant evolution of technology can be explained by two crucial characteristics. In the first perspective, it is the spread and omnipresence of the values of self-improvement. From then on, the subject hybridizes and replaces themselves with products, artifacts and even machines. Better still, they become themselves a hybrid in a world governed and monopolized by these technological objects. In a second perspective, new technologies seem to converge so as to absorb several disciplines, namely nanotechnology, genetic biology, computer science and cognitive science. Hence, this hypermodern era is specified by a purely technological improvement that aims primarily at increasing human capacities.

In this sense, the smartphone is the ultimate “smart” object in its ability to “augment” the human body with a multiplicity of sensorimotor capacities. This small “smart” object that accompanies adolescent everywhere (at school, at home, in the metro, on a walk, at a concert, with the family, etc.) and overtime seems to allow him to be in full control of his own world (virtual and real). Hence, the intrinsic relationship between the smartphone and the adolescent gives rise to a deeper focus. Therefore, our mission is to study the different levels of proximity between the adolescent and his/her smartphone.

To study the specificities and particularities of the relationship between teenagers and their smartphones, we will rely on studies that focus on the child and the smartphone. François Bach and his research team (2013), under the direction of the Academy of Science of the French Institute, propose a detailed study on the complex relationship between children and their smart objects.

Children, from birth to adolescence, display an irresistible fascination with smart objects, namely with their smartphones. In this respect, adolescents, enthusiastic about exploring their smartphones, are confronted with a number of ambivalences that we will unfold while answering two crucial questions:

• What does adolescent’s smartphone acceptance mean?
• What are the different facets of the adolescent’s smartphone?

• The smartphone through user experience (Adolescent experience)

Since the beginning of the 21^st century, the rapid development of new technologies has stimulated the innovation of so-called “smart” things. These are products that are specified by the ambivalence of using their own information about their own states and functional environments, and of interoperating with other “smart” products (Gutiérrez et al., 2013). In this context, children exhibit an almost obsessive interest with smart items, specifically with the smartphone. As a result, we are seeing a rise in interest in this category of “smart” products, which is impacting both new approaches to scientific research, design, and industrial production processes as well as ordinary life (Gutiérrez et al., 2013). This technological advance has enabled the smartphone revolution, most importantly with the launching of the first Apple iPhone by Steve Jobs on January 9^th, 2007. This leads us to ask: What is a smartphone? How can we explain this fascination with smartphones since young age?

Most researchers implicated in the field of Information and Communication Sciences and Technology (ICST) reveal the indefiniteness of the “smartphone”. Indeed, there is no single authoritative definition of the term. Despite the diversity of definitions, a smartphone refers to an entity of the so-called “smart thing” (Gutiérrez et al., 2013). Like Gutiérrez and his team, Smart Product Studies researchers have introduced the concept of the “smart thing” in order to escape the diversity of definitions. Thus, we find that both concepts of “smart and “intelligent” products derive from the original common root: the “smart thing”. Gutiérrez and his team define the concept of the smart thing as follows: “Smart Thing can be defined as a product or object that responds to some of the collected definitions of Smart Products and Intelligent Products”. (Jean-François Bach et al., 2013, p.51).

On the other hand, a smartphone is a “smart” phone or multifunctional mobile. This “smart” device refers to a phone that usually has a touch screen, a digital camera, the functions of a personal digital assistant and some functions of a laptop. Data input is usually done via a touch screen, more rarely via a keyboard or stylus. Like a computer, it can run a variety of applications through a specially designed mobile operating system; so, in particular it can provide features in addition to those of conventional mobile phones, such as diary, TV, calendar, web browsing, e-mail viewing and sending, geo-location, Dictaphone/recorder, calculator, compass, visual voice mail, digital mapping, etc. The most sophisticated devices have voice, eye, gesture and face recognition. In addition, this portable device requires an internet connection via a mobile phone network or a Wifi network in order to use its potential.  Smartphones are now considered true “ordiphones,” whose performance is constantly evolving and developing.

In other words, the smartphone, this “smart” mobile phone, is a multi-tasking digital tool, which uses various technologies assisted by an operating system. In this context, it becomes essential to focus specifically on the smartphone in use (User Experience). The technological power of a smartphone and its meaning differs according to the user experience (from one age group to another). Seniors, adults, teenagers and children do not use the smartphone in the same way. Respectively, the smartphone holds different names, such as mobile phone, smart tablet, computer, and especially smartphone.

The notion of a “smart product” as conceived by Max Mühlháuser (2007) in his well-known article, “Smart Products: An Introduction,” is based on two fundamental requirements: simplicity and openness. By means of observation, there are two main interactions that define a smart product: product-user (p2u) and product-product (p2p) interactions. These two interactions are expressed in terms of simplicity and openness.

Simplicity is understood in terms of human-computer interaction. It is about the considerable optimization of product-user interaction by improving the intelligence (smartness) of products as well as by the technological advancement of multimodal mobile user interfaces. On the one hand, better intelligence leads to a more adequate product-user interaction (p2u). On the other hand, the different devices and interaction modalities have to be dynamically united in order to achieve an optimal interaction of hands, eyes, mouth and ears. Therefore, smart products must cooperate with the interaction means available in the environment: product-product interaction (p2p).

François Bach et al (2013) note that the international reports on smartphone use agree that “the smartphone seems to adhere to its most ultimate significance with adolescent use.” Indeed, adolescent can use all the possibilities of a smartphone (phoning, chatting via the various social networking applications, playing games, practicing image editing applications, using Microsoft, Adobe or other tools, etc.).

• Method and tools

The age of adolescence is the period of age between 12 and 18 years old. Thus, adolescence refers to a period marked by a high cognitive potential and emotional fragility, which is linked to physical and brain phenomena (François Bach et al., 2013). Furthermore, this age group refers to the period during which feelings of identity construction and acquisition of autonomy develop. Hence, the adolescent expresses the desire for independence, while social links take shape. Indeed, adolescence is characterized by an unprecedented openness to all possibilities. The latter is accentuated by the incessant exploration of the world of new information and communication technologies: the world of avatars, virtual friends, virtual games and social networks (François Bach et al., 2013).

In this essay, which focuses on the place of the smartphone in adolescence, we specifically consider the phenomenon of adolescents’ attachment to their smartphones. From now on, the smartphone is becoming miniaturized, personalized and increasingly integrated into the intimate life of adolescents.

Better still, the smartphone seems to go beyond even the consistency of human skin to allow an infinite number of possibilities for adolescent to open up to the world (François Bach et al., 2013). Indeed, the smartphone is the first step in the process of developing new emerging technologies such as wearable technologies. These wearable technologies are propagated through wearable objects such as smart watches, smart glasses, AR or VR headsets, e-textile, etc. Thus, the smartphone triggers the phenomenon of incorporation of artificial intelligence technologies (connected microchips, smart retina, smart earpiece).

The problematic of this experiment concerns the smartphone and the measurement of the appropriation of this object by the adolescent. This study is based on the value of the interaction between the smartphone and its adolescent user (HMI) in the formulation of these different facets. In other words, the problematic of this study is mainly based on the value of the experience of using the smartphone by its user (adolescent) in order to unveil the different facets. In other words, the problematic of this investigation is the following: To what extent does the adolescent’s User experience define the specificities and particularities of the smartphone?

This article therefore seeks to answer these two hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: The smartphone acquires the status of an organic artifact through the interdependent relationship that links it to the adolescent.

Hypothesis 2: The adolescent’s user experience defines the main specificities of their smartphone.

3- Results and their discussion

According to a study conducted in 2013 by Jean-François Bach and his team, social networks have a wide range of applications. In this way, the majority of young adults and adolescents use social media as a platform for experimentation and technical advancement. Adolescents may therefore define themselves and their own surroundings in this virtual, digital universe (Gallez and Marie, 2011).

From the first perspective, the dazzling omnipresence of the smartphone in the intimate life of adolescents is all the more reinforced by the strong attraction to social networks (François Bach et al., 2013). Indeed, of all the uses of a smartphone, consulting social networks takes precedence over users’ occupations (Desagher Christophe, 2012). Studies on using social media by age show a significant percentage of adolescents (12-18 years) and young people (18-25 years). In this respect, the smartphone allows the perpetual development of different social media such as “Facebook”, “Twitter”, “Instagram”, “Snapchat” and “What’s App”, etc. Indeed, these social media are finding new tools for their technological evolution in that smartphone is becoming a social artifact: valorization of social relationship, self-esteem and new forms of intimacy.

From the second perspective, the rapid development of new information and communication technologies has led to a considerable increase in the expectations of digital technology in the field of learning (Amadieu and Tricot, 2014). Since then, new methods for teaching, learning, and pedagogy have emerged thanks to a variety of technology advancements (computer, smartphone, tablet, etc.). In this respect, the contribution of digital technology to learning is constantly developing thanks to the evolution in using new technologies (the development of internet and search engines, the huge increase in information data-base, the innovation of “mobile” learning). In this sense, mobile media such as the smartphone or tablet, which are associated with unlimited access to internet, are leading to the development of “ubiquitous learning” (Amadieu and Tricot, 2014).  We can infer that the smartphone is becoming part of the new ‘ubiquitous learning’ strategies. In that, smartphone is an educational and pedagogical object.

From this point of view, this article focuses on two major facets of the adolescent smartphone relationship: social artifact and educational and pedagogical object. To do so, we rely mainly on the study by Jean-François Bach and his research team (2013).

3-1- The Smartphone: A Social Artifact

Jean-François Bach and his research team (2013) found that social networks are characterized by diversity of uses. In this respect, most adolescents and young people use social media as a space for experimentation and technological innovation. Therefore, this virtual digital space allows adolescents to both define themselves and their own surrounding world (Gallez and Labet-Marie, 2011). In this sens, the main issue is the ambivalence of the search for themselves and the search for socialization. Indeed, Gallez and Labet-Marie (2011) search on the homogeneous practices of young people to determine the typology of social media users. The three main typical profiles of social network are the territorialized profiles (forager, net chatterbox), the shadow profiles (free rider of the chat, Xtrem gamer) and the permanent profiles (club-member). This diversity of users expresses the wide variety of uses. In this sense, the positive or even negative aspects of these networks arise from this great variety of uses.

Bach and his research team (2013) explore the various positive aspects of using social media, which can be grouped into three main aspects: valuing social relationships, self-esteem and new forms of intimacy.

• The valorization of social relations

The valorization of social relationships refers to “the playground of relation creation and its spread” and “the strengthening and sustainability of existing and new social relationships” (Bach et al., 2013).  In this respect, social media play an active role in engaging adolescents in virtual social groups. Therefore, these networks make it easier to fully satisfy the needs for entertainment, communication and friendship. In this sense, because of their diversity, these social media provide a quick and easy way to make new contacts and keep in touch with friends. K. Hampton et al. (2011) assert that social networks are actively involved in strengthening real social relationships and allow adolescents to make new acquaintances. Nowadays, the majority of social networks such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter promote the restoration of lost relationships. In this way, teenagers get in touch with people who are close to them, who share the same passions, interests and preferences (music, fashion, stars, travel, technology, games, etc.).

Bach et al (2013) find that social media foster stronger and longer lasting relationships. In this, they detect the incessant development of interaction processes through social media tools (chats, notifications, sharing, admiration, comments, etc.). This phenomenon of interactions is explained by the decrease of all forms of social control. In this way, teenagers relate to themes that they would not normally interact with (politics, sexual relations, love, family problems, social problems, etc.).

• Self-esteem: new forms of self-staging

With regard to the adolescent’s smartphone, self-esteem considers new forms of self-staging and self-esteem building. In the first place, social networks are involved in the creation of new forms of self-staging. Indeed, the desire to show oneself, to see oneself exist, cohabits with the being, from birth and throughout one’s life. In this context, Winnicott DW (1971) affirms: “The desire to show oneself precedes in human existence that of hiding oneself: from birth, the little man desires to see himself exist in the eyes of his mother, and this continues throughout his life with everyone else” (Winnicott DW, 2013, p.61).

Web 2.0 serves this desire to build up a “social capital”. In this respect, Web 2.0 through the various social networks (“Facebook”, “Instagram” and “Twitter”, etc.) promotes the development of the three main channels of communication expressed by the human being. Secondly, social media help to strengthen self-esteem. Indeed, the level of self-esteem refers to both private and public self-esteem. Private self-esteem is, according to François Bach et al. (2013), what each person thinks of him or herself, while public self-esteem is what each person thinks of what others think of him or her. In this context, Facebook is one of the largest social networking sites used by the U.S. student population. This first social network was born from the idea of identifying students who live in different residential houses in the United States. In this context, Mark Zuckerberg (2004) justified his conception of Facebook by stating: “The idea for the website was motivated by a social need at Harvard to be able to identify people in other residential houses.” (Charles Steinfield et al., 2008, p.435).

In this vein, according to a study conducted by to Charles Steinfield and his team (2008), Facebook has become the most popular social network among undergraduate students, with usage rates of over 90% on most college campuses in the US (Lampe, Ellison, & Steinfield, 2006; Stutzman, 2006). In brief, Steinfield and his research team (2008) conclude that Facebook use promotes the enhancement of self-esteem and the strengthening of social capital.

• New forms of intimacy

Most social networks give rise to new forms of intimacy. In this sense, Tisseron (2011) notes that self-esteem and intimacy are very intrinsic human psychological behaviors, stating that: “The desire to show oneself is fundamental in human beings and is prior to the desire to have intimacy. The presentation of oneself is, throughout life, a way of looking for confirmation of oneself in the eyes of others – and, in a broader sense, in their reactions. The desire for intimacy, both physical and psychological, comes later” (Tisseron, 2011, p.84). Moreover, the articulation of these two opposing and complementary desires, which are self-presentation and intimacy, is then at the heart of the social bond. Interestingly, this articulation can only be achieved through new forms of intimacy that the author evokes when proposing a new notion that is inherent to it: ‘extimacy’. To explain, Tisseron (2011) notes: “The manifestation of the desire for extimacy is thus closely dependent on the satisfaction of the desire for intimacy: it is because we know we can hide that we wish to reveal certain privileged parts of ourselves” (Tisseron, 2011, p.84).

In fact, Tisseron (2011) proposes the word “extimacy” to account for the dynamics of intimacy. He uses the word ‘extimacy’ and gives it a different meaning. For the author, extimacy or privacy designates the process by which fragments of the intimate self are offered to the gaze of others in order to be validated. Thus, Maxime (2014) demonstrates that extimacy needs intimacy.  So, according to this researcher, the well-known social media is Facebook, to this day, the best way to integrate the desire for extimacy of the human being. Indeed, extimity according to Maxime (2014), is the action of revealing a part of ourselves in front of one or more other people in order to receive from them an opinion on the value to be given to this part of ourselves. Indeed, Tisseron notes that, on Facebook, the desire for extimacy is addressed to a multitude of people with whom the adolescent shares a certain affinity. This multitude of people is, according to L. Reichelt, an “ambient intimacy”. Hence, the complete construction of self-esteem, according to Tisseron (2011), involves both the desire for intimacy and the desire for extimacy.

3-2- Educational and pedagogical object

Being part of our daily life, the smartphone is becoming an active agent, capable of a multiplicity of digital educational and pedagogical functions as diverse as they are varied. In this respect, Bach and team (2013) note, according to the “3-6-9-12 rule”, that adolescence is the most ultimate age of intelligence. Indeed, these researchers focus on the new form of intelligence in the face of screens. In this, adolescent exercises a kind of intelligence in front of his smartphone. Indeed, from the age of 12, adolescent can master and use all the technological possibilities of his smartphone.

What distinguishes adolescence from other age groups is this sort of ‘disconnection’ of thought from reality. Indeed, adolescence is the age when proper reasoning develops. Researchers now recognize that adolescents carry out quantitative (number) and qualitative (categorization) processing according to logical propositions, ideas and hypotheses. In this respect, adolescence is the age of great ideals and the first “personal theories” (Jean-François Bach et al., 2013, p.71), whether political or scientific theories. Moreover, adolescents discover for the first time the power of their “hypothetical-deductive” thinking. This “hypothetical-deductive” thinking is a method of reasoning that is based on hypotheses in order to deduce consequences. In this context, the new digital technologies, including those of the smartphone, are unprecedentedly powerful tools for putting the brain into “hypothetic-deductive” mode and for exploring all possible modes. In this sense, research laboratories in cognitive sciences are specialized in the design of educational software such as Socrative, Netmaths, …etc.

Pierre Lena (2012) seeks to develop the intrusive circuits of young people’s intelligence when faced with the screens of the digital world (smartphone, tablet, computer, etc.). Indeed, from childhood, the human brain is confronted with a new and incredibly intrusive artefact. In this sense, the new emerging technologies participate in the neglect of “literary intelligence” (Bach et al., 2013). This form of ‘literary intelligence’ is, rather, a linear, deep and somehow ‘crystallized’ intelligence. However, smartphone intelligence turns out to be a form of thinking that is too fast, superficial, somewhat disordered and excessively fluid. In this context, Lena (2012) wonders about the procedure for introducing young people to the intelligence of the digital world. In this, he asks the following question: “How can we introduce young people to the intelligence of the digital world, to its power to free their creativity has conceived a future made of serious or non-serious games, software, applications of all kinds in all sectors of creation and society” (Léna, 2012, p.71).

In this respect, the various digital solutions such as “serious games,” software and educational and teaching applications are part of the aim of introducing young people to screen intelligence, and specifically to smartphone intelligence. Indeed, the main objective of these digital tools (Serious Game, didactic software and educational applications) is to apply the different learning strategies and to activate the various possibilities of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. In this context, Bach and his team (2013) distinguish an educational software, made for training purposes while using the various possibilities of motivation called a Serious Game.

Accordingly, they note that the importance of smartphone uses for adolescents as well as for children as part of the general context of increasing motivation (extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation). In this vein, the specificities and technological features of the smartphone ensure the perpetual activation of motivations, especially the different forms of intrinsic motivation: the security motivation and the innovation motivation. In this context, it is essential to mention that this motivation is achieved following several consultation and navigation interactions.

Bach and his team (2013) focused on the process via which intelligence is exercised in front of screens (smartphone, tablet, computer, etc.). Indeed, exercising a fluid and rapid intelligence, from childhood onwards, according to the “3-6-9-12 rule” is very important. This involves, among other things, implementing a pedagogy that addresses the prefrontal cortex. In this sense, Nicholas Carr (2011) states that the prefrontal cortex is very sensitive to any pedagogical exchange assisted by new emerging technologies. Indeed, research in neuroscience and scientific child psychology, emphasizes the role of education and pedagogical interventions in the sensitive period of childhood (pre-school age, school age and adolescence). So, to make the adaptation of the child’s prefrontal cortex to its ‘smart’ artifact is the most crucial stage in the process of the pedagogical and cognitive development of the adolescent. In this context, pedagogy addressing the prefrontal cortex is part of the desire to improve the brain’s executive functions. According to Bach and his team (2013), the different executive functions of the brain are:

• Inhibition in the positive sense: Learning to resist automatisms and habits.
• Switching: Flexibility to change.
• Working memory: holding and mentally manipulating information and

                                          instructions.

The scientific results show the positive impact of the contribution of the use of smart technology on pedagogy. In this respect, the researchers propose to involve parents, primary, secondary and high school teachers in order to integrate them into the ubiquitous learning process. In this sense, the authors refer to Nietzche’s famous thought: “The only valid thoughts come from walking”. To this end, the researchers emphasize the conditions that are indispensable for the successful development of ubiquitous learning. In this respect, it is essential to establish an education proposed and supervised by teachers and parents. Furthermore, it becomes obvious to preserve forms and moments of thought: periods of calm and “digital rest”. These periods are then necessary for personal cognitive synthesis and memorization. In this context, some researchers determine the contribution of ‘ubiquitous learning’ on the modification of knowledge, of pupils, and even of teachers. Better still, they determine the challenges of using tablets in primary schools; tactile intelligence and its capacity to enrich and increase pedagogy; and the relationship between digital technology and autonomous learning.

4- Conclusion

Based on the most recent studies on innovative new technology products, the main objective of this article is to reveal the new facets of the adolescent’s smartphone. Thus, the smartphone triggers the phenomenon of incorporating artificial intelligence technologies (connected microchips, smart retina, smart earpiece). In doing so, the focus is on the adolescent’s user experience. Better still, this essay attempts to determine some features of the relationship between the adolescent and his or her smartphone. In fact, the problematique of this experiment concerns the smartphone and the measurement of its appropriation by the adolescent. In this sense, we consider the value of interaction between smartphone and its adolescent user (HMI) in the formulation of these different facets. In other words, the problematic of this study is mainly based on the value of the experience of using the smartphone by its user (adolescent) in order to unveil the different facets.  In other words, it is a synthetic essay that consider the studies of Jean-François Bach and his research team (2013) entitled “The Child and Screen”.

According to Bach and his team (2013), the adolescent’s smartphone is a multi-faceted ‘smart’ object (social artifact, educational object, therapeutic tool, game console, etc.). In this respect, we have chosen to focus specifically on the two main facets of the adolescent’s smartphone: the smartphone as a social artefact and the smartphone as an educational and pedagogical object. In that, this paper answered the main two following hypotheses:

– Hypothesis 1: The smartphone acquires the status of an organic artifact through the interdependent relationship that links it to the adolescent.

– Hypothesis 2: The teenager’s user experience defines the main specificities of their smartphone.

From a first perspective, the teenager’s smartphone plays an active role in enhancing the teenager’s social relationships, strengthening the teenager’s self-esteem and developing new forms of intimacy. In a second perspective, the teenager’s smartphone is an educational and pedagogical object. In this respect, this small technological object is part of ‘ubiquitous learning’ strategies (Amadieu and al., 2012), the aim of which is to activate the various possibilities of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. As such, Lena (2012) notes the development of a new form of intelligence: digital world intelligence (a fluid and fast intelligence). In this context, Bach and his team of researchers (2013) find that adolescence is the age of ultimate intelligence.

The smartphone, this small object of ‘smart’ technology, seems to allow us to command the world, to propose our own world and to alienate ourselves from it (Bach et al., 2013). From now on, we are already witnessing a symbiotic phenomenon, which is constantly merging the two elements of a single unit: the smartphone and the human being. In this respect, we are dealing with the considerable emergence of a new paradigm: “the smartphone-adolescent” or “the smartphone-human”.

François Bach et al (2013) note that the international reports on smartphone use agree that “the smartphone seems to adhere to its most ultimate significance with adolescent use.” Indeed, adolescent can use all the possibilities of a smartphone (phoning, chatting via the various social networking applications, playing games, practicing image editing applications, using Microsoft, Adobe or other tools, etc.).

Bibliography List

• Amadieu, F. & Tricot, A. (2014). Apprendre avec le numérique : mythes et réalités.Paris : Retz.
• Bach, Jean-François & al. (2013). L’enfant et les écrans, Institut de France, Académie des sciences.
• Bodon, J. (2014). Le smartphone, entre dépendance et prothèse : Vers un Trans humanisme ?
• Carr, N. (2011), Internet rend-il bête ? : Réapprendre à lire et à penser dans un monde fragmenté, Robert Lafont.
• Lena, P. (2012). Enseigner, c’est espérer, plaidoyer pour l’école de demain, Essais et documents, Paris, Odile Jacobs.
• Tordo, F. (2019), Le Moi-Cyborg, Psychanalyse et neurosciences de l’homme connecté, Psychismes, Dunod.
• Winnicott, DW. (1971). Jeu et réalité. Éd. Gallimard.
• Feinberg, M., Willer, R., Stellar, J., & Keltner, D. (2012). The virtues of gossip: Reputational information sharing as prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5). pp.1015–1030.

 Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026650

• Desagher, Ch. (june 2012). Un jeune devant son jeu vidéo. Attention danger?. Fédération des associations de parents de l’enseignement officiel. Retrieved from https://www.fapeo.be/wp-content/analyses/analyses2012/jeuvideo.pdf
• Gallez, S. & Labet-Marie C. (2011). Les jeunes sur internet, « Se construire un autre chez soi », Communication Retrieved from https://communication.revues.org/1836
• Gutiérrez, C. & al. (2013), Providing a Consensus Definition for the Term « Smart Product», Engineering of Computer Based Systems (ECBS). 20th IEEE International Conference and Workshops.

Retrieved from http://oa.upm.es/25964/1/INVE_MEM_2013_162008.pdf

• Hampton, K. & al. (2011). « Les sites de réseaux sociaux et nos vies ». Pew Internet & American Research Center. Social Capital Gateway

Retrieved from https://www.socialcapitalgateway.org/content/paper/hampton-k-goulet-l-rainie-l-purcell-k-2011-social-networking-sites-and-our-lives-pew-i

• Lamiroy, M. (2014). Facebook : l’enjeu de l’extimité, séminaire de philosophie des sciences et techniques de Mme Pinsart (PHIL- B505)
• Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/11317652/Facebook_lenjeu_de_lextimité