SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  12
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
www.pewresearch.org 
JUNE 5, 2013 
Smartphone Ownership — 2013 Update 
56% of American adults now own a smartphone of some kind; Android and iPhone owners account for half of the cell phone user population. Higher income adults and those under age 35 lead the way when it comes to smartphone ownership. 
Aaron Smith Senior Researcher, Pew Research Center 
http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Smartphone-Ownership-2013.aspx 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: 
Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project 
1615 L St., N.W., Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Media Inquiries: 
202.419.4500
pewinternet .org 2 
56% of American adults are now smartphone owners 
For the first time since the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project began systematically tracking smartphone adoption, a majority of Americans now own a smartphone of some kind. Our definition of a smartphone owner includes anyone who says “yes” to one—or both—of the following questions: 
 55% of cell phone owners say that their phone is a smartphone. 
 58% of cell phone owners say that their phone operates on a smartphone platform common to the U.S. market.1 
Taken together, 61% of cell owners said yes to at least one of these questions and are classified as smartphone owners. Because 91% of the adult population now owns some kind of cell phone, that means that 56% of all American adults are now smartphone adopters. One third (35%) have some other kind of cell phone that is not a smartphone, and the remaining 9% of Americans do not own a cell phone at all. Changes in smartphone ownership, 2011–2013 % of all U.S. adults who own… Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project April 26-May 22, 2011, January 20-February 19, 2012, and April 17-May 19, 2013 tracking surveys. For 2013 data, n=2,252 adults and survey includes 1,127 cell phone interviews. All surveys include Spanish-language interviews. 
1 This includes anyone who identified their phone as an iPhone, Android phone, Blackberry, or Windows phone 
35% 
48% 
17% 
46% 
41% 
12% 
56% 
35% 
9% 
0% 
20% 
40% 
60% 
80% 
100% 
Smartphone 
Other cell phone 
No cell phone 
May 2011 
February 2012 
May 2013
pewinternet .org 3 
Demographic trends in smartphone ownership 
As has consistently been the case since we began measuring smartphone adoption two years ago, ownership is particularly high among younger adults, especially those in their twenties and thirties (although a majority of Americans in their mid-forties through mid-fifties are now smartphone adopters) and those with relatively high levels of household income and educational attainment. 
Every major demographic group experienced significant year-to-year growth in smartphone ownership between 2012 and 2013, although seniors—defined as those 65 and older—continue to exhibit relatively low adoption levels compared with other demographic groups. Some 18% of Americans age 65 and older now own a smartphone, compared with 13% in February 2012. 
Smartphone ownership by demographic group— gender, age, race/ethnicity 
% within each group who own a smartphone Own a smartphone All adults (n=2,252) 56% Gender 
a 
Men (n=1,029) 
59b 
b 
Women (n=1,223) 
53 Age 
a 
18-24 (n=243) 
79cdef 
b 
25-34 (n=284) 
81cdef 
c 
35-44 (n=292) 
69def 
d 
45-54 (n=377) 
55ef 
e 
55-64 (n=426) 
39f 
f 
65+ (n=570) 
18 Race/ethnicity 
a 
White, Non-Hispanic (n=1,571) 
53 
b 
Black, Non-Hispanic (n=252) 
64a 
c 
Hispanic (n=249) 
60 
Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.3 percentage points based on all adults (n=2,252). 
Note: Percentages marked with a superscript letter (e.g., a) indicate a statistically significant difference between that row and the row designated by that superscript letter, among categories of each demographic characteristic (e.g. age).
pewinternet .org 4 
Smartphone ownership by demographic group— education, household income, geography 
% within each group who own a smartphone Own a smartphone All adults (n=2,252) 56% Education attainment 
a 
Less than high school (n=168) 
36 
b 
High school grad (n=630) 
46a 
c 
Some College (n=588) 
60ab 
d 
College + (n=834) 
70abc Household income 
a 
Less than $30,000/yr (n=580) 
43 
b 
$30,000-$49,999 (n=374) 
52a 
c 
$50,000-$74,999 (n=298) 
61a 
d 
$75,000+ (n=582) 
78abc Urbanity 
a 
Urban (n=763) 
59c 
b 
Suburban (n=1,037) 
59c 
c 
Rural (n=450) 
40 
Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.3 percentage points based on all adults (n=2,252). 
Note: Percentages marked with a superscript letter (e.g., a) indicate a statistically significant difference between that row and the row designated by that superscript letter, among categories of each demographic characteristic (e.g. age). 
Though growth in smartphone ownership has occurred up and down the economic spectrum, adoption still varies significantly by household income. However, that variation is unevenly distributed across different age groups. Younger adults—regardless of income level—are very likely to be smartphone owners. Conversely, for older adults smartphone ownership is more of an “elite” phenomenon: smartphones tend to be quite prevalent at the upper end of the income distribution but much less common among those with lower income levels.
pewinternet .org 5 
Smartphone ownership by income/age grouping % within each age/income grouping who own a smartphone (example: 77% of 18-29 year olds with an annual household income of less than $30,000 are smartphone owners) Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.3 percentage points based on all adults (n=2,252). 
Trends in platform adoption 
Since 2011, the proportion of cell owners who say they own either an iPhone or an Android device have each grown dramatically. Android owners now represent 28% of all cell owners (up from 15% in May 2011), while iPhone owners now represent 25% of the cell owner population (up from 10% in May 2011). Meanwhile, the proportion of cell owners who say they own a Blackberry device has fallen from 10% in May 2011 to just 4% in our most recent survey. 
77% 
47% 
22% 
8% 
81% 
68% 
40% 
21% 
90% 
87% 
72% 
43% 
0% 
20% 
40% 
60% 
80% 
100% 
18-29 
30-49 
50-64 
65+ 
Less than $30,000 
$30,000-$74,999 
$75,000 or more
pewinternet .org 6 
Cell owner platform choices, 2011–2013 % of cell phone owners who say their phone is … Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project April 26-May 22, 2011, January 20-February 19, 2012, and April 17-May 19, 2013 tracking surveys. For 2013 data, n=2,252 adults and survey includes 1,127 cell phone interviews. All surveys include Spanish-language interviews. 
Android and iPhone owners are equally common within the cell owner population as a whole, although this ratio differs across various demographic groups. Cell phone owners from a wide range of educational and household income groupings have similar levels of Android adoption, but those from the upper end of the income and education spectrum are much more likely than those with lower income and educational levels to say they own an iPhone. Indeed, fully half—49%—of cell owners with a household income of $150,000 or more say their phone is an iPhone. And African-American cell owners are more likely than whites or Latinos to say that their phone is an Android device as opposed to an iPhone. 
10% 
19% 
25% 
15% 
20% 
28% 
10% 
6% 
4% 
2% 
2% 
1% 
0% 
20% 
40% 
60% 
80% 
May 2011 
February 2012 
May 2013 
iPhone 
Android 
Blackberry 
Windows
pewinternet .org 7 
Demographic differences in iPhone and Android ownership 
% of cell owners in each group who own an iPhone or Android % who say their phone is an iPhone % who say their phone is an Android All cell owners (n=2,076) 25% 28% Gender 
a 
Men (n=967) 
24 
31b 
b 
Women (n=1,109) 
26 
26 Age 
a 
18-24 (n=238) 
31ef 
43cdef 
b 
25-34 (n=279) 
34def 
40def 
c 
35-44 (n=283) 
29ef 
33ef 
d 
45-54 (n=354) 
25f 
27ef 
e 
55-64 (n=392) 
19f 
17f 
f 
65+ (n=478) 
11 
7 Race/ethnicity 
a 
White, Non-Hispanic (n=1,440) 
27b 
26 
b 
Black, Non-Hispanic (n=238) 
16 
42ac 
c 
Hispanic (n=235) 
26b 
27 Education attainment 
a 
Less than high school (n=144) 
11 
25 
b 
High school grad (n=565) 
17a 
27 
c 
Some College (n=545) 
27ab 
31 
d 
College + (n=799) 
38abc 
29 Household income 
a 
Less than $30,000/yr (n=504) 
13 
28 
b 
$30,000-$49,999 (n=345) 
23a 
27 
c 
$50,000-$74,999 (n=289) 
25a 
31 
d 
$75,000+ (n=570) 
40abc 
31 
Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.4 percentage points based on cell phone owners (n=2,076). 
Note: Columns marked with a superscript letter (a) or another letter indicate a statistically significant difference between that row and the row designated by that superscript letter. Statistical significance is determined inside the specific section covering each demographic trait.
pewinternet .org 8 
Survey Questions 
Spring 2013 Tracking Survey 
Final Topline 
5/21/2013 
Data for April 17-May 19, 2013 
Princeton Survey Research Associates International for 
the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project 
Sample: n=2,252 national adults, age 18 and older, including 1,127 cell phone interviews 
Interviewing dates: 04.17.2013 – 05.19.2013 
Margin of error is plus or minus 2.3 percentage points for results based on Total [n=2,252] 
Margin of error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points for results based on all internet users [n=1,895] 
Margin of error is plus or minus 2.4 percentage points for results based on all cell phone owners [n=2,076] 
Q10 Next... [IF REACHED ON A LANDLINE, READ: Please tell me if you happen to have the following items, or not.] Do you have... [INSERT ITEMS IN ORDER]? 
YES 
NO 
DON’T KNOW 
REFUSED 
a. A cell phone2 
Current 
91 
9 
0 
* 
December 2012 
87 
13 
* 
0 
November 2012 
85 
15 
0 
* 
Sept 2012 
85 
15 
* 
0 
August 2012 
89 
10 
0 
* 
April 2012 
88 
12 
* 
* 
February 2012 
88 
12 
0 
* 
December 2011 
87 
13 
0 
* 
August 2011 
84 
15 
* 
* 
May 2011 
83 
17 
* 
0 
January 2011 
84 
16 
* 
* 
December 2010 
81 
19 
* 
* 
November 2010 
82 
18 
0 
* 
September 2010 
85 
15 
* 
* 
May 2010 
82 
18 
* 
0 
January 2010 
80 
20 
0 
* 
December 2009 
83 
17 
0 
* 
September 2009 
84 
15 
* 
* 
April 2009 
85 
15 
* 
* 
Dec 2008 
84 
16 
* 
* 
July 2008 
82 
18 
* 
-- 
May 2008 
78 
22 
* 
0 
April 2008 
78 
22 
* 
-- 
January 2008 
77 
22 
* 
-- 
2 Question was asked of landline sample only. Results shown here have been recalculated to include cell phone sample in the "Yes" percentage. Beginning September 2007, question/item was not asked of the cell phone sample, but trend results shown here reflect Total combined Landline and cell phone sample. In past polls, question was sometimes asked as an independent question and sometimes as an item in a series. Wording may vary from survey to survey.
pewinternet .org 9 
Dec 2007 
75 
25 
* 
-- 
Sept 2007 
78 
22 
* 
-- 
April 2006 
73 
27 
* 
-- 
January 2005 
66 
34 
* 
-- 
November 23-30, 2004 
65 
35 
* 
-- 
SMART1 Some cell phones are called “smartphones” because of certain features they have. Is your cell phone a smartphone or not, or are you not sure?3 
Based on cell phone owners 
YES, SMARTPHONE 
NO, NOT A SMARTPHONE 
NOT SURE/DON’T KNOW 
REFUSED 
Current [N=2,076] 
55 
39 
5 
* 
December 2012 [N=1,954] 
52 
41 
6 
* 
November 2012 [N=1,992] 
55 
38 
6 
* 
September 2012 [N=2,581] 
53 
40 
6 
* 
April 2012 [N=1,954] 
46 
44 
10 
* 
February 2012 [N=1,961] 
45 
46 
8 
* 
May 2011 [N=1,914] 
33 
53 
14 
* 
SMART2 Which of the following best describes the type of cell phone you have? Is it an iPhone, a Blackberry, an Android phone, a Windows phone, or something else?4 
Based on cell phone owners 
CURRENT 
FEB 2012 
DEC 2011 
MAY 2011 
% 
25 
iPhone 
19 
15 
10 
4 
Blackberry 
6 
8 
10 
28 
Android 
20 
20 
15 
1 
Windows 
2 
2 
2 
n/a 
Palm 
1 
2 
2 
15 
Basic cell phone – unspecified (VOL.) 
16 
18 
8 
7 
Flip phone – unspecified (VOL.) 
4 
6 
3 
5 
Samsung – unspecified (VOL.) 
8 
7 
7 
3 
LG – unspecified (VOL.) 
5 
4 
5 
1 
Tracfone (VOL.) 
3 
2 
2 
1 
Motorola – unspecified (VOL.) 
2 
2 
3 
1 
Nokia – unspecified (VOL.) 
1 
2 
2 
* 
Pantech – unspecified (VOL.) 
1 
1 
1 
3 
Something else (SPECIFY) 
6 
7 
16 
5 
Don’t know 
4 
4 
13 
1 
Refused 
* 
* 
1 
[n=2,076] 
[n=1,961] 
[n=2,771] 
[n=,1914] 
3 September 2012 through December 2012, question wording was: “Some cell phones are called “smartphones” because of certain features they have. Is your cell phone a smartphone, such as an iPhone, Android, Blackberry or Windows phone, or are you not sure?” 
4 Prior to the current survey, question wording was: “Which of the following best describes the type of cell phone you have? Is it an iPhone, a Blackberry, an Android phone, a Windows phone, a Palm, or something else?”
pewinternet .org 10 
Methods 
This report is based on the findings of a survey on Americans' use of the Internet. The results in this report are based on data from telephone interviews conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International from April 17 to May 19, 2013, among a sample of 2,252 adults, age 18 and older. Telephone interviews were conducted in English and Spanish by landline (1,125) and cell phone (1,127, including 571 without a landline phone). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. For results based on Internet users5 (n=1,895), the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting telephone surveys may introduce some error or bias into the findings of opinion polls. 
A combination of landline and cellular random digit dial (RDD) samples was used to represent all adults in the United States who have access to either a landline or cellular telephone. Both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International, LLC (SSI) according to PSRAI specifications. Numbers for the landline sample were drawn with equal probabilities from active blocks (area code + exchange + two- digit block number) that contained three or more residential directory listings. The cellular sample was not list-assisted, but was drawn through a systematic sampling from dedicated wireless 100-blocks and shared service 100-blocks with no directory-listed landline numbers. 
New sample was released daily and was kept in the field for at least five days. The sample was released in replicates, which are representative subsamples of the larger population. This ensures that complete call procedures were followed for the entire sample. At least 7 attempts were made to complete an interview at a sampled telephone number. The calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chances of making contact with a potential respondent. Each number received at least one daytime call in an attempt to find someone available. For the landline sample, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult male or female currently at home based on a random rotation. If no male/female was available, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult of the other gender. For the cellular sample, interviews were conducted with the person who answered the phone. Interviewers verified that the person was an adult and in a safe place before administering the survey. Cellular sample respondents were offered a post-paid cash incentive for their participation. All interviews completed on any given day were considered to be the final sample for that day. 
Weighting is generally used in survey analysis to compensate for sample designs and patterns of non- response that might bias results. A two-stage weighting procedure was used to weight this dual-frame sample. The first-stage corrected for different probabilities of selection associated with the number of adults in each household and each respondent’s telephone usage patterns.6 This weighting also adjusts for the overlapping landline and cell sample frames and the relative sizes of each frame and each sample. 
5 Internet user definition includes those who use the internet or email at least occasionally or access the internet on a mobile handheld device at least occasionally. 
6 i.e., whether respondents have only a landline telephone, only a cell phone, or both kinds of telephone.
pewinternet .org 11 
The second stage of weighting balances sample demographics to population parameters. The sample is balanced to match national population parameters for sex, age, education, race, Hispanic origin, region (U.S. Census definitions), population density, and telephone usage. The Hispanic origin was split out based on nativity; U.S born and non-U.S. born. The basic weighting parameters came from the US Census Bureau’s 2011 American Community Survey data. The population density parameter was derived from Census 2010 data. The telephone usage parameter came from an analysis of the January-June 2012 National Health Interview Survey. 
Following is the full disposition of all sampled telephone numbers: 
Sample Disposition 
Landline 
Cell 
41,291 
24,698 
Total Numbers Dialed 
1,755 
411 
Non-residential 
1,516 
88 
Computer/Fax 
12 
---- 
Cell phone 
24,344 
9,674 
Other not working 
2,038 
226 
Additional projected not working 
11,626 
14,299 
Working numbers 28.2% 57.9% Working Rate 
679 
75 
No Answer / Busy 
3,442 
3,668 
Voice Mail 
41 
16 
Other Non-Contact 
7,464 
10,540 
Contacted numbers 64.2% 73.7% Contact Rate 
450 
1,537 
Callback 
5,786 
7,097 
Refusal 
1,228 
1,906 
Cooperating numbers 16.5% 18.1% Cooperation Rate 
45 
68 
Language Barrier 
---- 
684 
Child's cell phone 
1,183 
1,154 
Eligible numbers 96.3% 60.5% Eligibility Rate 
58 
27 
Break-off 
1,125 
1,127 
Completes 95.1% 97.7% Completion Rate 
10.0% 13.0% Response Rate 
The disposition reports all of the sampled telephone numbers ever dialed from the original telephone number samples. The response rate estimates the fraction of all eligible respondents in the sample that were ultimately interviewed. At PSRAI it is calculated by taking the product of three component rates:
pewinternet .org 12 
 Contact rate – the proportion of working numbers where a request for interview was made 
 Cooperation rate – the proportion of contacted numbers where a consent for interview was at least initially obtained, versus those refused 
 Completion rate – the proportion of initially cooperating and eligible interviews that were completed 
Thus the response rate for the landline sample was 10 percent. The response rate for the cellular sample was 13 percent.

Contenu connexe

Tendances

ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014
ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014
ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014ThinkNow
 
Social networking 2013
Social networking 2013Social networking 2013
Social networking 2013Genaro Bardy
 
ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018
ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018
ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018ThinkNow
 
United States digital access update February 2014
United States digital access update February 2014United States digital access update February 2014
United States digital access update February 2014Prayukth K V
 
Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...
Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...
Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...CrimsonPublishersGGS
 
Digital Cult To Digital Culture
Digital Cult To Digital CultureDigital Cult To Digital Culture
Digital Cult To Digital Culturenextmediaevents
 
Making Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody Hanson
Making Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody HansonMaking Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody Hanson
Making Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody HansonALATechSource
 
Information 2.0 and beyond where are we going
Information 2.0 and beyond  where are we goingInformation 2.0 and beyond  where are we going
Information 2.0 and beyond where are we goingHero Wa
 
Age Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR Codes
Age Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR CodesAge Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR Codes
Age Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR CodesJennifer Romano Bergstrom
 
2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting
2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting
2012 pip teens smartphones_and_textingDustianne North
 
Entefy's research report on information overload and digital complexity
Entefy's research report on information overload and digital complexityEntefy's research report on information overload and digital complexity
Entefy's research report on information overload and digital complexityEntefy
 
How do children use social networking sites?
How do children use social networking sites?How do children use social networking sites?
How do children use social networking sites?- Mark - Fullbright
 

Tendances (18)

ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014
ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014
ThinkNow Research - Mobile Trends Study 2014
 
Social networking 2013
Social networking 2013Social networking 2013
Social networking 2013
 
ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018
ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018
ThinkNow Mobile App Report 2018
 
United States digital access update February 2014
United States digital access update February 2014United States digital access update February 2014
United States digital access update February 2014
 
Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...
Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...
Self-Reported Mobile Phone Use & Workplace Productivity between Age Groups_ C...
 
Digital Cult To Digital Culture
Digital Cult To Digital CultureDigital Cult To Digital Culture
Digital Cult To Digital Culture
 
My Digital Library: Leveraging Today’s Mobile and Participatory Information E...
My Digital Library: Leveraging Today’s Mobile and Participatory Information E...My Digital Library: Leveraging Today’s Mobile and Participatory Information E...
My Digital Library: Leveraging Today’s Mobile and Participatory Information E...
 
It Ain’t Heavy, It’s My Smartphone: American teens and the infiltration of mo...
It Ain’t Heavy, It’s My Smartphone: American teens and the infiltration of mo...It Ain’t Heavy, It’s My Smartphone: American teens and the infiltration of mo...
It Ain’t Heavy, It’s My Smartphone: American teens and the infiltration of mo...
 
Whos not-online-and-why
Whos not-online-and-whyWhos not-online-and-why
Whos not-online-and-why
 
Making Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody Hanson
Making Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody HansonMaking Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody Hanson
Making Mobile Services Work for Your Library by Cody Hanson
 
The benefits and potential risks that young people face online: A look at wha...
The benefits and potential risks that young people face online: A look at wha...The benefits and potential risks that young people face online: A look at wha...
The benefits and potential risks that young people face online: A look at wha...
 
Information 2.0 and beyond where are we going
Information 2.0 and beyond  where are we goingInformation 2.0 and beyond  where are we going
Information 2.0 and beyond where are we going
 
Information 2.0 and Beyond: Where are we, where are we going?
Information 2.0 and Beyond: Where are we, where are we going?Information 2.0 and Beyond: Where are we, where are we going?
Information 2.0 and Beyond: Where are we, where are we going?
 
Age Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR Codes
Age Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR CodesAge Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR Codes
Age Differences in the Knowledge and Usage of QR Codes
 
Teens, Social Media & Technology Overview 2015
Teens, Social Media & Technology Overview 2015Teens, Social Media & Technology Overview 2015
Teens, Social Media & Technology Overview 2015
 
2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting
2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting
2012 pip teens smartphones_and_texting
 
Entefy's research report on information overload and digital complexity
Entefy's research report on information overload and digital complexityEntefy's research report on information overload and digital complexity
Entefy's research report on information overload and digital complexity
 
How do children use social networking sites?
How do children use social networking sites?How do children use social networking sites?
How do children use social networking sites?
 

En vedette

Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...
Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...
Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...Smart Chicago Collaborative
 
Eliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team Presentation
Eliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team PresentationEliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team Presentation
Eliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team PresentationSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...
Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...
Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...Smart Chicago Collaborative
 
Libre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheets
Libre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheetsLibre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheets
Libre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheetsSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
Libre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and Charts
Libre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and ChartsLibre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and Charts
Libre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and ChartsSmart Chicago Collaborative
 

En vedette (13)

Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...
Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...
Completed Pacer postcards from May 1, 2015 Law Day Event at John Marshall Law...
 
Youth-led Tech Curriculum Days 1-9
Youth-led Tech Curriculum Days 1-9Youth-led Tech Curriculum Days 1-9
Youth-led Tech Curriculum Days 1-9
 
Eliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team Presentation
Eliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team PresentationEliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team Presentation
Eliminate the Digital Divide Capstone Team Presentation
 
Youth ledtechcurriculumday6
Youth ledtechcurriculumday6Youth ledtechcurriculumday6
Youth ledtechcurriculumday6
 
Youth-Led Tech Curriculum, All days (PDF)
Youth-Led Tech Curriculum, All days (PDF)Youth-Led Tech Curriculum, All days (PDF)
Youth-Led Tech Curriculum, All days (PDF)
 
Youth ledtechcurriculumday10
Youth ledtechcurriculumday10Youth ledtechcurriculumday10
Youth ledtechcurriculumday10
 
Plan for-economic-growth-and-jobs
Plan for-economic-growth-and-jobsPlan for-economic-growth-and-jobs
Plan for-economic-growth-and-jobs
 
Youth-Led Tech Curriculum Day 24
Youth-Led Tech Curriculum Day 24Youth-Led Tech Curriculum Day 24
Youth-Led Tech Curriculum Day 24
 
Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...
Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...
Experimental Modes of Civic Engagement in Civic Tech: Meeting people where th...
 
CUTGroup 15 - CPS.edu
CUTGroup 15 - CPS.eduCUTGroup 15 - CPS.edu
CUTGroup 15 - CPS.edu
 
Libre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheets
Libre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheetsLibre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheets
Libre Office Calc Lesson 1: Introduction to spreadsheets
 
Time to Tech: Tech Outreach to Youth
Time to Tech: Tech Outreach to YouthTime to Tech: Tech Outreach to Youth
Time to Tech: Tech Outreach to Youth
 
Libre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and Charts
Libre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and ChartsLibre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and Charts
Libre Office Impress Lesson 4: Spreadsheets and Charts
 

Similaire à Smartphone Ownership — 2013 Update

Pip tablets and e readers update-101813
Pip tablets and e readers update-101813Pip tablets and e readers update-101813
Pip tablets and e readers update-101813PDA Ekniga
 
Use of new media technologies part 1
Use of new media technologies part 1Use of new media technologies part 1
Use of new media technologies part 1drj4teenhealth
 
Over 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation Z
Over 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation ZOver 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation Z
Over 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation ZGregg L. Witt
 
Nigeria: An analysis of the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic Classes
Nigeria: An analysis of  the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic ClassesNigeria: An analysis of  the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic Classes
Nigeria: An analysis of the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic ClassesEniola Moronfolu
 
42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks
42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks 42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks
42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks Sumit Roy
 
Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report
Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report
Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report Philippe Dumont
 
Estudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketer
Estudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketerEstudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketer
Estudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketerAllan V. Braverman
 
The Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate Athletics
The Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate AthleticsThe Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate Athletics
The Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate AthleticsMarina Carrier
 
Are you caught on the web
Are you caught on the webAre you caught on the web
Are you caught on the webNicole William
 
Digital differences
Digital differencesDigital differences
Digital differencesPrayukth K V
 
Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01
Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01
Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01Dale Sternberg
 
Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...
Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...
Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...Ericsson Latin America
 
A first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphone
A first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphoneA first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphone
A first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphoneSara Calderon
 

Similaire à Smartphone Ownership — 2013 Update (20)

Pip tablets and e readers update-101813
Pip tablets and e readers update-101813Pip tablets and e readers update-101813
Pip tablets and e readers update-101813
 
Use of new media technologies part 1
Use of new media technologies part 1Use of new media technologies part 1
Use of new media technologies part 1
 
Older Adults and Internet Use: (Some of) What we know
Older Adults and Internet Use: (Some of) What we knowOlder Adults and Internet Use: (Some of) What we know
Older Adults and Internet Use: (Some of) What we know
 
Pew Research Center: Digital Differences
Pew Research Center: Digital DifferencesPew Research Center: Digital Differences
Pew Research Center: Digital Differences
 
Americans and Mobile Computing: Key Trends in Consumer Research
Americans and Mobile Computing: Key Trends in Consumer ResearchAmericans and Mobile Computing: Key Trends in Consumer Research
Americans and Mobile Computing: Key Trends in Consumer Research
 
Over 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation Z
Over 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation ZOver 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation Z
Over 100 Eye Opening Stats About Generation Z
 
Mobile Philanthropy
Mobile PhilanthropyMobile Philanthropy
Mobile Philanthropy
 
Nigeria: An analysis of the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic Classes
Nigeria: An analysis of  the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic ClassesNigeria: An analysis of  the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic Classes
Nigeria: An analysis of the Mobile Behavior of Social Economic Classes
 
42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks
42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks 42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks
42% Adults Use Multiple Social Networks
 
Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report
Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report
Bank of America 2015 Consumer Mobility Report
 
Estudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketer
Estudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketerEstudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketer
Estudio "Millennials Roundup 2014" by eMarketer
 
The Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate Athletics
The Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate AthleticsThe Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate Athletics
The Importance and Application of Social Media in Collegiate Athletics
 
Are you caught on the web
Are you caught on the webAre you caught on the web
Are you caught on the web
 
Libraries 2020: Imagining the library of the (not too distant) future
Libraries 2020: Imagining the library of the (not too distant) futureLibraries 2020: Imagining the library of the (not too distant) future
Libraries 2020: Imagining the library of the (not too distant) future
 
Sony Xperia Campaign Proposal
Sony Xperia Campaign ProposalSony Xperia Campaign Proposal
Sony Xperia Campaign Proposal
 
Digital differences
Digital differencesDigital differences
Digital differences
 
Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01
Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01
Liberationfromlocationlatam 150427161221-conversion-gate01
 
Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...
Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...
Liberation from Location: Ericsson ConsumerLab Insight Report, Latin America ...
 
A first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphone
A first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphoneA first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphone
A first: Majority of U.S. adults now own a smartphone
 
The Mobile Difference
The Mobile DifferenceThe Mobile Difference
The Mobile Difference
 

Plus de Smart Chicago Collaborative

Microsoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with Confidence
Microsoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with ConfidenceMicrosoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with Confidence
Microsoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with ConfidenceSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
Inclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 Presentation
Inclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 PresentationInclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 Presentation
Inclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 PresentationSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church
5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church
5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical ChurchSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
Final Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal Homepage
Final Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal HomepageFinal Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal Homepage
Final Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal HomepageSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
Juvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community Trust
Juvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community TrustJuvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community Trust
Juvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community TrustSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
CUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective Call
CUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective CallCUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective Call
CUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective CallSmart Chicago Collaborative
 
Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1
Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1
Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1Smart Chicago Collaborative
 
2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors
2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors
2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech InstructorsSmart Chicago Collaborative
 

Plus de Smart Chicago Collaborative (20)

Chicago School of Data Book
Chicago School of Data BookChicago School of Data Book
Chicago School of Data Book
 
10/18/17 Array of Things Public Meeting Flyer
10/18/17 Array of Things Public Meeting Flyer10/18/17 Array of Things Public Meeting Flyer
10/18/17 Array of Things Public Meeting Flyer
 
Microsoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with Confidence
Microsoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with ConfidenceMicrosoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with Confidence
Microsoft DigiSeniors Module: Computing with Confidence
 
DigiSeniors Curriculum - Leaders Guide
DigiSeniors Curriculum - Leaders GuideDigiSeniors Curriculum - Leaders Guide
DigiSeniors Curriculum - Leaders Guide
 
Inclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 Presentation
Inclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 PresentationInclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 Presentation
Inclusive Smart Cities - Net Inclusion 2017 Presentation
 
5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church
5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church
5.20.17 Community Technology Forum at Windsor Park Lutheran Evangelical Church
 
Juvenile Expungement Help Desk Presentation
Juvenile Expungement Help Desk PresentationJuvenile Expungement Help Desk Presentation
Juvenile Expungement Help Desk Presentation
 
Quick facts about Juvenile Expungement
Quick facts about Juvenile ExpungementQuick facts about Juvenile Expungement
Quick facts about Juvenile Expungement
 
LAF Chicago Juvenile Expungement Clinics
LAF Chicago Juvenile Expungement ClinicsLAF Chicago Juvenile Expungement Clinics
LAF Chicago Juvenile Expungement Clinics
 
Juvenile Expungement Help Desk Flyer
Juvenile Expungement Help Desk FlyerJuvenile Expungement Help Desk Flyer
Juvenile Expungement Help Desk Flyer
 
Final Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal Homepage
Final Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal HomepageFinal Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal Homepage
Final Report for CUTGroup #28 - City of Chicago Open Data Portal Homepage
 
Juvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community Trust
Juvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community TrustJuvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community Trust
Juvenile Expungement Presentation to The Chicago Community Trust
 
CUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective Call
CUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective CallCUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective Call
CUTGroup Detroit Slides for CUTGroup Collective Call
 
Final Report for CUTGroup #24 - OpenGrid
Final Report for CUTGroup #24 - OpenGridFinal Report for CUTGroup #24 - OpenGrid
Final Report for CUTGroup #24 - OpenGrid
 
Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1
Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1
Connect Chicago Digital Skills Road Map Working Group #1
 
2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors
2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors
2016 Smart Chicago Collaborative Youth-Led Tech Instructors
 
Interview template
Interview templateInterview template
Interview template
 
Component type
Component typeComponent type
Component type
 
App template
App templateApp template
App template
 
App inventor basics
App inventor basicsApp inventor basics
App inventor basics
 

Smartphone Ownership — 2013 Update

  • 1. www.pewresearch.org JUNE 5, 2013 Smartphone Ownership — 2013 Update 56% of American adults now own a smartphone of some kind; Android and iPhone owners account for half of the cell phone user population. Higher income adults and those under age 35 lead the way when it comes to smartphone ownership. Aaron Smith Senior Researcher, Pew Research Center http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Smartphone-Ownership-2013.aspx FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project 1615 L St., N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 Media Inquiries: 202.419.4500
  • 2. pewinternet .org 2 56% of American adults are now smartphone owners For the first time since the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project began systematically tracking smartphone adoption, a majority of Americans now own a smartphone of some kind. Our definition of a smartphone owner includes anyone who says “yes” to one—or both—of the following questions:  55% of cell phone owners say that their phone is a smartphone.  58% of cell phone owners say that their phone operates on a smartphone platform common to the U.S. market.1 Taken together, 61% of cell owners said yes to at least one of these questions and are classified as smartphone owners. Because 91% of the adult population now owns some kind of cell phone, that means that 56% of all American adults are now smartphone adopters. One third (35%) have some other kind of cell phone that is not a smartphone, and the remaining 9% of Americans do not own a cell phone at all. Changes in smartphone ownership, 2011–2013 % of all U.S. adults who own… Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project April 26-May 22, 2011, January 20-February 19, 2012, and April 17-May 19, 2013 tracking surveys. For 2013 data, n=2,252 adults and survey includes 1,127 cell phone interviews. All surveys include Spanish-language interviews. 1 This includes anyone who identified their phone as an iPhone, Android phone, Blackberry, or Windows phone 35% 48% 17% 46% 41% 12% 56% 35% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Smartphone Other cell phone No cell phone May 2011 February 2012 May 2013
  • 3. pewinternet .org 3 Demographic trends in smartphone ownership As has consistently been the case since we began measuring smartphone adoption two years ago, ownership is particularly high among younger adults, especially those in their twenties and thirties (although a majority of Americans in their mid-forties through mid-fifties are now smartphone adopters) and those with relatively high levels of household income and educational attainment. Every major demographic group experienced significant year-to-year growth in smartphone ownership between 2012 and 2013, although seniors—defined as those 65 and older—continue to exhibit relatively low adoption levels compared with other demographic groups. Some 18% of Americans age 65 and older now own a smartphone, compared with 13% in February 2012. Smartphone ownership by demographic group— gender, age, race/ethnicity % within each group who own a smartphone Own a smartphone All adults (n=2,252) 56% Gender a Men (n=1,029) 59b b Women (n=1,223) 53 Age a 18-24 (n=243) 79cdef b 25-34 (n=284) 81cdef c 35-44 (n=292) 69def d 45-54 (n=377) 55ef e 55-64 (n=426) 39f f 65+ (n=570) 18 Race/ethnicity a White, Non-Hispanic (n=1,571) 53 b Black, Non-Hispanic (n=252) 64a c Hispanic (n=249) 60 Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.3 percentage points based on all adults (n=2,252). Note: Percentages marked with a superscript letter (e.g., a) indicate a statistically significant difference between that row and the row designated by that superscript letter, among categories of each demographic characteristic (e.g. age).
  • 4. pewinternet .org 4 Smartphone ownership by demographic group— education, household income, geography % within each group who own a smartphone Own a smartphone All adults (n=2,252) 56% Education attainment a Less than high school (n=168) 36 b High school grad (n=630) 46a c Some College (n=588) 60ab d College + (n=834) 70abc Household income a Less than $30,000/yr (n=580) 43 b $30,000-$49,999 (n=374) 52a c $50,000-$74,999 (n=298) 61a d $75,000+ (n=582) 78abc Urbanity a Urban (n=763) 59c b Suburban (n=1,037) 59c c Rural (n=450) 40 Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.3 percentage points based on all adults (n=2,252). Note: Percentages marked with a superscript letter (e.g., a) indicate a statistically significant difference between that row and the row designated by that superscript letter, among categories of each demographic characteristic (e.g. age). Though growth in smartphone ownership has occurred up and down the economic spectrum, adoption still varies significantly by household income. However, that variation is unevenly distributed across different age groups. Younger adults—regardless of income level—are very likely to be smartphone owners. Conversely, for older adults smartphone ownership is more of an “elite” phenomenon: smartphones tend to be quite prevalent at the upper end of the income distribution but much less common among those with lower income levels.
  • 5. pewinternet .org 5 Smartphone ownership by income/age grouping % within each age/income grouping who own a smartphone (example: 77% of 18-29 year olds with an annual household income of less than $30,000 are smartphone owners) Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.3 percentage points based on all adults (n=2,252). Trends in platform adoption Since 2011, the proportion of cell owners who say they own either an iPhone or an Android device have each grown dramatically. Android owners now represent 28% of all cell owners (up from 15% in May 2011), while iPhone owners now represent 25% of the cell owner population (up from 10% in May 2011). Meanwhile, the proportion of cell owners who say they own a Blackberry device has fallen from 10% in May 2011 to just 4% in our most recent survey. 77% 47% 22% 8% 81% 68% 40% 21% 90% 87% 72% 43% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 18-29 30-49 50-64 65+ Less than $30,000 $30,000-$74,999 $75,000 or more
  • 6. pewinternet .org 6 Cell owner platform choices, 2011–2013 % of cell phone owners who say their phone is … Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project April 26-May 22, 2011, January 20-February 19, 2012, and April 17-May 19, 2013 tracking surveys. For 2013 data, n=2,252 adults and survey includes 1,127 cell phone interviews. All surveys include Spanish-language interviews. Android and iPhone owners are equally common within the cell owner population as a whole, although this ratio differs across various demographic groups. Cell phone owners from a wide range of educational and household income groupings have similar levels of Android adoption, but those from the upper end of the income and education spectrum are much more likely than those with lower income and educational levels to say they own an iPhone. Indeed, fully half—49%—of cell owners with a household income of $150,000 or more say their phone is an iPhone. And African-American cell owners are more likely than whites or Latinos to say that their phone is an Android device as opposed to an iPhone. 10% 19% 25% 15% 20% 28% 10% 6% 4% 2% 2% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% May 2011 February 2012 May 2013 iPhone Android Blackberry Windows
  • 7. pewinternet .org 7 Demographic differences in iPhone and Android ownership % of cell owners in each group who own an iPhone or Android % who say their phone is an iPhone % who say their phone is an Android All cell owners (n=2,076) 25% 28% Gender a Men (n=967) 24 31b b Women (n=1,109) 26 26 Age a 18-24 (n=238) 31ef 43cdef b 25-34 (n=279) 34def 40def c 35-44 (n=283) 29ef 33ef d 45-54 (n=354) 25f 27ef e 55-64 (n=392) 19f 17f f 65+ (n=478) 11 7 Race/ethnicity a White, Non-Hispanic (n=1,440) 27b 26 b Black, Non-Hispanic (n=238) 16 42ac c Hispanic (n=235) 26b 27 Education attainment a Less than high school (n=144) 11 25 b High school grad (n=565) 17a 27 c Some College (n=545) 27ab 31 d College + (n=799) 38abc 29 Household income a Less than $30,000/yr (n=504) 13 28 b $30,000-$49,999 (n=345) 23a 27 c $50,000-$74,999 (n=289) 25a 31 d $75,000+ (n=570) 40abc 31 Source: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, April 17-May 19, 2013 Tracking Survey. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish and on landline and cell phones. Margin of error is +/-2.4 percentage points based on cell phone owners (n=2,076). Note: Columns marked with a superscript letter (a) or another letter indicate a statistically significant difference between that row and the row designated by that superscript letter. Statistical significance is determined inside the specific section covering each demographic trait.
  • 8. pewinternet .org 8 Survey Questions Spring 2013 Tracking Survey Final Topline 5/21/2013 Data for April 17-May 19, 2013 Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project Sample: n=2,252 national adults, age 18 and older, including 1,127 cell phone interviews Interviewing dates: 04.17.2013 – 05.19.2013 Margin of error is plus or minus 2.3 percentage points for results based on Total [n=2,252] Margin of error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points for results based on all internet users [n=1,895] Margin of error is plus or minus 2.4 percentage points for results based on all cell phone owners [n=2,076] Q10 Next... [IF REACHED ON A LANDLINE, READ: Please tell me if you happen to have the following items, or not.] Do you have... [INSERT ITEMS IN ORDER]? YES NO DON’T KNOW REFUSED a. A cell phone2 Current 91 9 0 * December 2012 87 13 * 0 November 2012 85 15 0 * Sept 2012 85 15 * 0 August 2012 89 10 0 * April 2012 88 12 * * February 2012 88 12 0 * December 2011 87 13 0 * August 2011 84 15 * * May 2011 83 17 * 0 January 2011 84 16 * * December 2010 81 19 * * November 2010 82 18 0 * September 2010 85 15 * * May 2010 82 18 * 0 January 2010 80 20 0 * December 2009 83 17 0 * September 2009 84 15 * * April 2009 85 15 * * Dec 2008 84 16 * * July 2008 82 18 * -- May 2008 78 22 * 0 April 2008 78 22 * -- January 2008 77 22 * -- 2 Question was asked of landline sample only. Results shown here have been recalculated to include cell phone sample in the "Yes" percentage. Beginning September 2007, question/item was not asked of the cell phone sample, but trend results shown here reflect Total combined Landline and cell phone sample. In past polls, question was sometimes asked as an independent question and sometimes as an item in a series. Wording may vary from survey to survey.
  • 9. pewinternet .org 9 Dec 2007 75 25 * -- Sept 2007 78 22 * -- April 2006 73 27 * -- January 2005 66 34 * -- November 23-30, 2004 65 35 * -- SMART1 Some cell phones are called “smartphones” because of certain features they have. Is your cell phone a smartphone or not, or are you not sure?3 Based on cell phone owners YES, SMARTPHONE NO, NOT A SMARTPHONE NOT SURE/DON’T KNOW REFUSED Current [N=2,076] 55 39 5 * December 2012 [N=1,954] 52 41 6 * November 2012 [N=1,992] 55 38 6 * September 2012 [N=2,581] 53 40 6 * April 2012 [N=1,954] 46 44 10 * February 2012 [N=1,961] 45 46 8 * May 2011 [N=1,914] 33 53 14 * SMART2 Which of the following best describes the type of cell phone you have? Is it an iPhone, a Blackberry, an Android phone, a Windows phone, or something else?4 Based on cell phone owners CURRENT FEB 2012 DEC 2011 MAY 2011 % 25 iPhone 19 15 10 4 Blackberry 6 8 10 28 Android 20 20 15 1 Windows 2 2 2 n/a Palm 1 2 2 15 Basic cell phone – unspecified (VOL.) 16 18 8 7 Flip phone – unspecified (VOL.) 4 6 3 5 Samsung – unspecified (VOL.) 8 7 7 3 LG – unspecified (VOL.) 5 4 5 1 Tracfone (VOL.) 3 2 2 1 Motorola – unspecified (VOL.) 2 2 3 1 Nokia – unspecified (VOL.) 1 2 2 * Pantech – unspecified (VOL.) 1 1 1 3 Something else (SPECIFY) 6 7 16 5 Don’t know 4 4 13 1 Refused * * 1 [n=2,076] [n=1,961] [n=2,771] [n=,1914] 3 September 2012 through December 2012, question wording was: “Some cell phones are called “smartphones” because of certain features they have. Is your cell phone a smartphone, such as an iPhone, Android, Blackberry or Windows phone, or are you not sure?” 4 Prior to the current survey, question wording was: “Which of the following best describes the type of cell phone you have? Is it an iPhone, a Blackberry, an Android phone, a Windows phone, a Palm, or something else?”
  • 10. pewinternet .org 10 Methods This report is based on the findings of a survey on Americans' use of the Internet. The results in this report are based on data from telephone interviews conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International from April 17 to May 19, 2013, among a sample of 2,252 adults, age 18 and older. Telephone interviews were conducted in English and Spanish by landline (1,125) and cell phone (1,127, including 571 without a landline phone). For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 2.3 percentage points. For results based on Internet users5 (n=1,895), the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting telephone surveys may introduce some error or bias into the findings of opinion polls. A combination of landline and cellular random digit dial (RDD) samples was used to represent all adults in the United States who have access to either a landline or cellular telephone. Both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International, LLC (SSI) according to PSRAI specifications. Numbers for the landline sample were drawn with equal probabilities from active blocks (area code + exchange + two- digit block number) that contained three or more residential directory listings. The cellular sample was not list-assisted, but was drawn through a systematic sampling from dedicated wireless 100-blocks and shared service 100-blocks with no directory-listed landline numbers. New sample was released daily and was kept in the field for at least five days. The sample was released in replicates, which are representative subsamples of the larger population. This ensures that complete call procedures were followed for the entire sample. At least 7 attempts were made to complete an interview at a sampled telephone number. The calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chances of making contact with a potential respondent. Each number received at least one daytime call in an attempt to find someone available. For the landline sample, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult male or female currently at home based on a random rotation. If no male/female was available, interviewers asked to speak with the youngest adult of the other gender. For the cellular sample, interviews were conducted with the person who answered the phone. Interviewers verified that the person was an adult and in a safe place before administering the survey. Cellular sample respondents were offered a post-paid cash incentive for their participation. All interviews completed on any given day were considered to be the final sample for that day. Weighting is generally used in survey analysis to compensate for sample designs and patterns of non- response that might bias results. A two-stage weighting procedure was used to weight this dual-frame sample. The first-stage corrected for different probabilities of selection associated with the number of adults in each household and each respondent’s telephone usage patterns.6 This weighting also adjusts for the overlapping landline and cell sample frames and the relative sizes of each frame and each sample. 5 Internet user definition includes those who use the internet or email at least occasionally or access the internet on a mobile handheld device at least occasionally. 6 i.e., whether respondents have only a landline telephone, only a cell phone, or both kinds of telephone.
  • 11. pewinternet .org 11 The second stage of weighting balances sample demographics to population parameters. The sample is balanced to match national population parameters for sex, age, education, race, Hispanic origin, region (U.S. Census definitions), population density, and telephone usage. The Hispanic origin was split out based on nativity; U.S born and non-U.S. born. The basic weighting parameters came from the US Census Bureau’s 2011 American Community Survey data. The population density parameter was derived from Census 2010 data. The telephone usage parameter came from an analysis of the January-June 2012 National Health Interview Survey. Following is the full disposition of all sampled telephone numbers: Sample Disposition Landline Cell 41,291 24,698 Total Numbers Dialed 1,755 411 Non-residential 1,516 88 Computer/Fax 12 ---- Cell phone 24,344 9,674 Other not working 2,038 226 Additional projected not working 11,626 14,299 Working numbers 28.2% 57.9% Working Rate 679 75 No Answer / Busy 3,442 3,668 Voice Mail 41 16 Other Non-Contact 7,464 10,540 Contacted numbers 64.2% 73.7% Contact Rate 450 1,537 Callback 5,786 7,097 Refusal 1,228 1,906 Cooperating numbers 16.5% 18.1% Cooperation Rate 45 68 Language Barrier ---- 684 Child's cell phone 1,183 1,154 Eligible numbers 96.3% 60.5% Eligibility Rate 58 27 Break-off 1,125 1,127 Completes 95.1% 97.7% Completion Rate 10.0% 13.0% Response Rate The disposition reports all of the sampled telephone numbers ever dialed from the original telephone number samples. The response rate estimates the fraction of all eligible respondents in the sample that were ultimately interviewed. At PSRAI it is calculated by taking the product of three component rates:
  • 12. pewinternet .org 12  Contact rate – the proportion of working numbers where a request for interview was made  Cooperation rate – the proportion of contacted numbers where a consent for interview was at least initially obtained, versus those refused  Completion rate – the proportion of initially cooperating and eligible interviews that were completed Thus the response rate for the landline sample was 10 percent. The response rate for the cellular sample was 13 percent.