• RQ 1: What are the global trends in DCE-CDC research?

• RQ 2: What is the knowledge structure of DCE-CDC research?

• RQ 3: What are the directions for the future research agenda in the DCE-CDC field?

The massive use of digital media in recent years has made the concept of Digital Citizenship increasingly popular among the public. Facts show that Billions of people worldwide use various technologies, thus creating a digital society (Ribble & Bailey, 2007), with activities increasingly connected to digital resources ranging from creating, consuming, socializing, communicating, education, medical access, and employment (Richardson & Milovidov, 2022; Sincar, 2012a; Yildiz et al., 2020). Digital Citizenship highlights the importance of digital literacy and security to reduce the risk of cybercrime (Mahmoudi-Dehaki & Nasr-Esfahani, 2025), as well as participation in political and social life in digital spaces (Ryland, 2018). In this context, education, as a preventive measure, is obligated to guide students to become responsible digital citizens (Fonseca & Bettencourt, 2020; Kim & Choi, 2018) through a pedagogical approach that permeates the overall educational practice (Iskandar et al., 2025; Komalasari et al., 2024).

Programmatically, Digital Citizenship is actualized in the DCE format. The Council of Europe defines DCE as an educational program that aims to provide every individual with the opportunity to master all citizenship competencies (Richardson & Milovidov, 2022) through a holistic approach (Webster, 2025). This approach is implemented to ensure that students acquire essential skills for navigating the digital world, such as critical thinking and empathy (Panjaburee et al., 2025; Pukallus & Arthur, 2024). Some learning practices implemented include findings indicating that teachers are teaching more about digital law, digital commerce, and digital security (E. K. Chong & Pao, 2021). In other situations, experiential learning is crucial for strengthening the competencies required for democratic participation (Barrett et al., 2018). To cultivate participatory citizens, Jones & Mitchell (2016) proposed a project-based digital citizenship curriculum to help students build skills and experience across various aspects of civic engagement.

The future of democratic life is greatly influenced by the extent to which both citizens and the government implement a democratic culture. Culture does not exist on its own; it requires a set of competencies as prerequisites. The Council of Europe (2021) developed a comprehensive CDC model comprising 20 competencies grouped into four clusters: values, attitudes, skills, knowledge, and critical understanding. In the realm of formal education, CDC is developed in the form of a reference framework, which is expected to be integrated into the curriculum, teacher education format, pedagogy, and assessment (Barrett et al., 2018; Council of Europe, 2021), so that it can be more effective for the purpose of strengthening CDC. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the CDC as a complex and systemic structure, both in the curriculum and in the cultural context within the school environment (Barrett et al., 2018; Iskandar et al., 2025; Jónsson & Rodriguez, 2021), which is outlined in the four domains of the CDC (Council of Europe, 2021). The values and attitudes domain emphasizes motivation to commit to human dignity, diversity, and democracy; the skills domain emphasizes practical skills such as critical thinking, collaboration, and conflict resolution; and the knowledge and critical understanding domain strengthens the ability to understand political institutions and procedures and to interpret social, cultural, and political issues responsibly (Barrett et al., 2018; Council of Europe, 2021).

The Council of Europe’s CDC document explicitly classifies 20 CDCs into 10 digital domains as the basis for the overall concept of Digital Citizenship. These ten domains are grouped into three core areas: online, well-being online, and rights online (Council of Europe, 2021). Within these 10 digital domains, DCE is developed by integrating values, attitudes, skills, knowledge, and critical understanding, and actualizing them holistically and comprehensively in the digital ecosystem ( Figure 1).

In the CDC framework, DCE is a pedagogical approach packaged as an instructional strategy to strengthen CDC in digital spaces. CDC refers to the democratic competencies that students must master, such as rights and obligations in the digital space, to enable them to participate effectively in democratic life while upholding human rights and intercultural understanding (Council of Europe, 2021; Richardson & Milovidov, 2022). Thus, the correlation between DCE and CDC is not limited to educational programs aimed at achieving the ultimate goal; rather, it is a causal relationship in which CDC serves as the basis for DC development and is implemented pedagogically and instructionally to strengthen CDC.

Publications were tracked using Boolean techniques, with the main keywords DCE and CDC, along with their respective synonyms, in the format TITLE-ABS-KEY, followed by the DCE and CDC term groups. The first term represents DCE, such as “digital citizenship,” “digital citizen,” and “digital citizenship education. The second term uses 20 CDC indicators, as defined by the Council of Europe (2021). In this section, only examples of terms are shown for the sake of brevity, such as “rights and responsibilities,” “democracy,” “critical thinking,” “empathy,” “self-efficacy,” “digital ethics,” “privacy,” and “security,” etc. The two groups of terms are linked with AND, while synonyms within each group are linked with OR. No inclusion or exclusion parameters were applied to the search results, as the research objective was to comprehensively map the research landscape (Meiliati et al., 2026). The search results identified 219 publications; two documents lacked author names, so both were excluded, leaving a total of 217 publications for analysis.

Bibliometric analysis is a systematic analytical method that supports mapping and investigating the dynamics of development, progress patterns, and trends in scientific publications on a topic using large-scale data (Bozkurt et al., 2021; Li & Li, 2025; Orbe et al., 2024; Saleh, Saputra, et al., 2025a). Using VOSviewer and Bibliometrix, this study produced a bibliometric map of publication distribution by publication year, document type, author, and other factors, presented as a network visualization in thematic clusters (Basumatary et al., 2024; Ge et al., 2023; Yan & Wu, 2021; Zhao et al., 2023). Publish or perish was used to present general metrics from publication bibliographic data ( Table 1).

Documents by Year

Between 2008 and 2026, publications were relatively low in number until 2023, and then increased through 2025 ( Figure 2).

Figure 2 shows a relatively low distribution of publications in the first three years, with only one publication each. In 2011, there was an increase (n = 6), followed by fluctuations in the following years, with a stable trend until 2022. In 2023, a positive trend began to form, with 23 publications, and it continued to increase sharply in 2024 (n = 38), peaking in 2025 (n = 65), with an increase of almost three times that of 2023.

Documents by Type and Subject Area

Based on the type and subject area, the documents show a variety of types and subject areas ( Figure 3).

Figure 3 shows that articles dominate, with the largest percentage, namely 58.00%, followed by book chapters with 22.80%, conference papers with 13.20%, books with 2.30%, reviews with 1.80%, conference reviews with 0.90%, data papers with 0.50%, and finally type notes with 0.50%. Social science occupies the largest subject area with 40.20%, followed by computer science (19.60%), engineering (7.90%), business, management, and accounting (5.80%), psychology (5.60%), arts and humanities (4.00%), economics, econometrics, and finance (3.20%), medicine (2.60%), multidisciplinary (2.60%), decision sciences (2.40%), and other (6.10%).

Most Relevant Source

Based on the most relevant source category, documents were published in various sources. The following are the ten most relevant sources in the analyzed fields ( Figure 4).

A total of 63 sources contributed to the DCE-CDC research. As shown in Figure 4, publications were distributed across various sources, with Frontiers in Psychology emerging as the most productive. The relatively low number of publications among the leading sources indicates that DCE-CDC research remains scattered across publication venues and has not yet established a specific outlet that consistently accommodates DCE-CDC research.

Documents by Authors

An analysis of the author category shows the top 10 most productive and cited authors ( Figure 5). Among the top ten most productive authors, there was no significant difference in the number of publications (2–4 documents). However, among the top ten most-cited authors, there was a considerable difference in the number of publications.

The ten most productive authors were Rohman, H, with the most publications (n = 4), followed by Beauchere, J.F., Choi, M., Prasetiyo, W.H., Sari, B.I., Xu, S., and Zheng, Y., with three documents each, and the last three authors with two documents each, namely Adams, S., Akcil, U., and Azevedo, A. Furthermore, the ten most cited authors, with the highest number of citations being 292 by Choi, M, followed by Cristol, D. S (n = 284), Jones, L. M, and Mitchell, K. J, (n = 249 each), Glassman, M (n = 177), Citron, D. K, and Norton, H. I each with 170, then Hutson, E, Kelly, S. A, and Militello, L. K with 155, and finally Choi, D (n = 130). The document count by author indicates that productivity and citations are not always linear. This pattern indicates that productivity and citation impact are not always aligned; for example, examining them from different perspectives, across different countries, and through different analyses yields studies in new contexts. Simultaneously, citations play an important role in shaping the direction of DCE-CDC research because they influence the field of study, for example, the theoretical framework or research design that is widely referred to by subsequent studies.

Documents by Country

Over the past 18 years, the 10 countries with the highest number of publications and citations have also been the focus of this research. This analysis enriches the research landscape by revealing the United States as the dominant country in both categories ( Figure 6).

There is a striking difference in numbers between the top country and the second- to tenth-ranked countries in both categories. The United States consistently ranked as the country with the most publications (n = 40) and the highest number of citations (n = 1123). Turkey ranks second in both publications (n = 21) and citations (n = 159), but is quite far behind. Third, the most productive country was Spain (n = 12), while the highest citation country was South Korea (n = 144). These two categories also reveal that countries in Asia, Europe, and North America pay close attention to the DCE-CDC research landscape ( Figure 7).

Figure 7 shows the colors indicating the countries with the highest number of occurrences in the DCE-CDC documents. The light gray area indicates countries not included in the analyzed categories.

Documents by Citation Number

Analysis of documents with the highest number of citations places the top 10 countries that published in 2011–2024 ( Table 2).

In this category, Jones and Mitchell (2016) ranked first (n = 250), followed by Choi et al. (2017) with 178 citations, and Citron and Norton (2011) in third place. Cain (2024) ranked sixth, ranked highest on the FWCI criteria (n = 27.56).

Co-occurrence of All Keywords

Co-occurrence analysis using the all-keywords method was performed on 1,051 keywords with a minimum threshold of five occurrences. As a result, 38 terms met the threshold and were included in the network mapping. Examples of keywords in the five clusters, showing links (n = 238) and total link strength (n = 637), are listed in Table 3.

Table 3 shows the dominant themes, significant supporting themes, and specific subthemes that form the research trend map in DCE-CDC. This indicates the complexity and thematic diversity of the field; the topic is quite broad and rich, offering various perspectives and approaches. However, despite the established network, research on learning models remains rare, as indicated by the absence of this term from the network. In Figure 8, the learning field for the term “digital citizenship” is connected to only two terms: teaching (small node, distant) and e-learning (small node). However, when traced to the specific DCE term, the network is connected to only one learning term, namely e-learning (small node, distant), and surprisingly to only one CDC indicator, namely self-efficacy.

The network visualization shows that digital citizenship is a central term in the research landscape, connected to a limited number of CDC indicators: democracy, rights and responsibilities, and self-efficacy. There are 10 keywords with co-occurrence and total link strength: digital citizenship (n = 110:184), students (n = 16:61), citizenship (n = 14:63), teaching (n = 14:59), education (n = 14:39), Internet (n = 13:57), social media (n = 13:23), e-learning (n = 12:38), digital literacy (n = 12:28), and ethical technology (n = 11:32).

Co-occurrence by Title and Abstract

The co-occurrence analysis using the title-and-abstract method yielded 5,479 terms with a minimum threshold of ten occurrences. A total of 203 terms met the criteria, of which 122 were the most relevant for mapping in the network. This analysis produced six clusters, 3,287 links, and 24.885 total link strength ( Table 4).

Table 4 shows the clusters formed by the research trends. We reiterate that the terms “learning” and “assessment models” in the DCE-CDC landscape are important for designing learning programs and for assessing students’ CDC, thereby shaping citizens with democratic cultural competencies in the digital era. In Figure 9, the term “learning” (small node) is already connected to “citizenship” (a ubiquitous term that does not address digital aspects). However, when traced using the term ‘digital citizenship skill,’ there was no evidence of a network. This finding indicates limited attention to learning models in the DCE-CDC literature.

Co-occurrence analysis of titles and abstracts shows that “citizenship” has the highest occurrence rate (n = 422), followed by nine other terms, namely “education” (n = 168), “citizen” (n = 98), “information” (n = 80), “right” (n = 65), “child” (n = 58), “program” (n = 46), “cyberbullying” (n = 45), “self-efficacy” (n = 44), and “educator” (n = 41).

Directions for the Future Research Agenda

We complemented this research analysis by presenting overlay visualizations of both co-occurrence methods, namely, all keywords, title, and abstract ( Figure 10), as a strategic effort to navigate potential central themes in the future. The overlay visualization shows widely used new terms in research, with green-yellow and yellow nodes representing the current research.

Figure 10 shows the widely studied potential themes, including digital interaction, ethical behavior, the digital world, ethical implications, ethical technology, and engineering education. Similar to the all keywords method, the title and abstract method also shows central research themes concentrated in the realm of attitudes and several in other realms, namely attitude, digital ethics, critical thinking, TikTok, digital citizenship skills, privacy, higher education, cybersophy, digital responsibility, social media users, and digital empathy.

This study has two limitations: (1) the database used for publication searches was limited to Scopus, so potential publications from other databases were not included in the analysis, and (2) publication searches were limited to the keyword DCE and several relevant synonyms and terms that only refer to the CDC and its 20 indicators, so that publications using other keywords such as digital democracy and online civic engagement were not analyzed. We recommend expanding the search database to be more diverse and adding the terms digital democracy’ and ‘online civic engagement’ to obtain a more comprehensive analysis.

We would like to thank The Indonesian Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) on behalf of The Indonesian Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology and managed under the EQUITY Program (Contract No. 4314/B3/DT.03.08/2025 and No. 352/UN40/HK.00.10/2025) for facilitating the funding of this research.

•  Al-Otaibi N: Cultural intelligence and its relationship to digital citizenship skills among university students. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 2025; 12(1). Publisher Full Text
•  Al-Qallaf FJ: Exploring the Role of Digital Empathy and Emotional Intelligence in Reducing Cyberbullying Behaviors Among High School Students in Kuwait. Educational Process: Int. J. 2025; 18. Publisher Full Text
•  Aytekin I, Ozlem CG: Digital citizenship. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2014; 13(1): 73–77. Reference Source
•  Barrett M, Black L d B, Byram M, et al.: Reference Framework of Competences. Council of Europe Publishing; 2018; vol. 1. . Reference Source
•  Basumatary B, Robin K, Arvind, et al.: Mapping of Indigenous Knowledge Research in India: A Review of Growth, Emerging Topics and Future Research Directions based on Scientometric Tools. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies. 2024; 11(4): 148–168. Publisher Full Text
•  Beauchere JF: Encouraging digital civility: What companies and others can do. IGI Global; 2018; 262–274. Publisher Full Text
•  Biagi F, Bracci L: A Democratic Reflective Syllabus in a Second Language Acquisition Context: In-person, Digital and Hybrid Experiences. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research. 2022; 10(3): 43–60. Publisher Full Text
•  Bohara S, Bisht V, Suri P, et al.: Online marketing and brand awareness for HEI: A review and bibliometric analysis. F1000Res. 2024; 12: 76–21. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
•  Bota-avram, C. analysis of sustainable business performance : where are we going ? A. science map of the field: Bibliometric analysis of sustainable business performance: where are we going ? A science map of the field. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 2023; 36(1): 2137–2176. Publisher Full Text
•  Bozkurt M, Eryilmaz O, Boyraz C: Science Mapping Research on Citizenship Education: A Bibliometric Review. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences. 2021; 3(4): 670–695. Publisher Full Text
•  Cain W: Prompting Change: Exploring Prompt Engineering in Large Language Model AI and Its Potential to Transform Education. TechTrends. 2024; 68(1): 47–57. Publisher Full Text
•  Cartelli A: E-learning and e-Citizenship between PKM and PST. Academic Conferences Limited; 2008; Vol. 1. : pp. 169–177. [email protected]. Reference Source
•  Choi M, Cristol D, Gimbert B: Teachers as digital citizens: The influence of individual backgrounds, internet use and psychological characteristics on teachers’ levels of digital citizenship. Comp. Educ. 2018; 121: 143–161. Publisher Full Text
•  Choi M, Glassman M, Cristol D: What it means to be a citizen in the internet age: Development of a reliable and valid digital citizenship scale. Comput. Educ. 2017; 107: 100–112. Publisher Full Text
•  Chong EK-M, Pao S-S, Ho LK-K, et al.: After the Social Movements in 2019: Examining the Association between Online Civic Participation of Hong Kong’s Young People and their Real-life Civic Participation. Journal of Social Studies Education Research. 2021; 12(4): 22–46. Reference Source
•  Chong EK, Pao SS: Promoting digital citizenship education in junior secondary schools in Hong Kong: supporting schools in professional development and action research. Asian Education and Development Studies. 2021; 11(4): 677–690. Publisher Full Text
•  Citron DK, Norton H: Intermediaries and hate speech: Fostering digital citizenship for our information age. Boston University Law Review. 2011; 91(4): 1435–1484. Reference Source
•  Council of Europe: The Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture. Council of Europe; 2021. Reference Source
•  Crichton S, Stuewe N, Pegler K, et al.: Personal devices in public settings: Lessons learned from an iPod Touch/iPad project. Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, ICEL. Academic Conferences Limited; 2011; pp. 77–83. [email protected]. Reference Source
•  Donthu N, Kumar S, Mukherjee D, et al.: How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021; 133(April): 285–296. Publisher Full Text
•  Fernández-P JS, Lozano-Díaz A, Cuenca-piqueras C: Digital Citizenship and Education: State of the Art and Bibliometric Analysis.2020. March 2020. Publisher Full Text
•  Fonseca J, Bettencourt H: Cyber-Citizenship: A Challenge of the Twenty-First Century Education. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. 2020; 467–474. Publisher Full Text
•  Ge H, Bo Y, Zang W, et al.: Literature review of driving risk identification research based on bibliometric analysis. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition). 2023; 10(4): 560–577. Publisher Full Text
•  Hanewald R: From cyber bullying to cyber safety: Issues and approaches in educational contexts. Nova Science Publishers, Inc.; 2013. Reference Source
•  Harrison T, Polizi G: A cyber-wisdom approach to digital citizenship education. Perceptions of spanish teenagers. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham. Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University of Birmingham; 2021. Reference Source
•  Hill VJ: Digital citizenship in participatory culture. IGI Global; 2017; 60–73. Publisher Full Text
•  Hutson E, Kelly S, Militello LK: Systematic Review of Cyberbullying Interventions for Youth and Parents With Implications for Evidence-Based Practice. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing. Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2018; Vol. 15(1): pp. 72–79. [email protected]. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
•  Iskandar R, Maksum A, Marini A: Bridging the gap in digital citizenship literacy: Insights from young digital natives. Multidisciplinary Reviews. 2025; 8(12): 2025383. Publisher Full Text
•  Ismail SN, Ridzuan AR, Hassan MS, et al.: Measuring Psychometric Analysis of Sexting Prevention Competencies among Social Media Users in Malaysia. Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication. 2025; 41(3): 130–150. Publisher Full Text
•  Jones LM, Mitchell KJ: Defining and measuring youth digital citizenship. New Media Soc. 2016; 18(9): 2063–2079. Publisher Full Text
•  Jónsson ÓP, Rodriguez AG: Educating democracy: Competences for a democratic culture. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice. 2021; 16(1): 62–77. Publisher Full Text
•  Kim M, Choi D: Development of youth Digital Citizenship Scale and implication for educational setting. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2018; 21(1): 155–171. Reference Source
•  Komalasari K, Abdulkarim A, Sopianingsih P: Digital-Based Living Values Project Activities Learning Model for Strengthening Students’ Pancasila Character. New Educ. Rev. 2024; 75: 127–139. Publisher Full Text
•  Komalasari K: A bibliometric analysis of digital citizenship education and competences for democratic culture: global trends, knowledge structure, and future research agenda [Dataset]. Zenodo. 2026. Publisher Full Text
•  Kumari N, Sachdeva M, Verma K: Digital Citizenship Education in Higher Education: A Study in Indian Perspective. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice. 2023; 23(20): 150–158. Publisher Full Text
•  Li W, Li B: A bibliometric review of the integration of information technology into foreign language teaching: a visualized analysis using CiteSpace. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications. 2025; 12: 1–13. Publisher Full Text
•  Mahmoudi-Dehaki M, Nasr-Esfahani N: Nurturing responsible digital citizens in the online world. IGI Global; 2025; 99–121. Publisher Full Text
•  Malik K: Integrating digital citizenship education in the contemporary educational ecosystem.Sood K, Kalia P, Grima S, et al., editors. Digital Analytics Applications for Sustainable Training and Education. Apple Academic Press; 1st ed.2024; pp. 357–376. Publisher Full Text
•  Meiliati R, Mubarak I, Salido A: Exploration problem-based learning in mathematics learning in higher education: A bibliometric review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open. 2026; 13(December 2025): 102345. Publisher Full Text
•  Ning H: The fourth guiding principle for humans in the digital age: an initial exploration and framework construction of cybersophy. Gongcheng Kexue Xuebao/Chinese Journal of Engineering. 2025; 47(12): 2470–2478. Publisher Full Text
•  Orbe APG, Vásquez HT, Díaz JRJ, et al.: Bibliometric Profile of the Literature on Psychological Wellbeing in Women who Suffer Violence 2010-2024. AJIS. 2024; 13(4): 597. Publisher Full Text
•  Palaz T, Kilcan B, Çepni O: Science Mapping Research on Digital Citizenship Research in Education.2022; 9(November): 248–267. Publisher Full Text
•  Panjaburee P, Hwang G, Intarakamhang U: Modeling the sustainability perspectives on personalized digital games for digital citizenship education: A PLS-SEM approach. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2025; 9(April): 100498. Publisher Full Text
•  Pierantoni D: Children on the Internet: profiles of responsibility. Rivista Italiana Di Informatica e Diritto. 2024; 6(2). Publisher Full Text
•  Pucelj M, Bohinc R: Challenges for digital citizenship and ethics: Social media, deep fakes, and virtual communities. IGI Global; 2024. Publisher Full Text
•  Pukallus S, Arthur C: Combating Hate Speech on Social Media: Applying Targeted Regulation, Developing Civil-Communicative Skills and Utilising Local Evidence-Based Anti-Hate Speech Interventions. J. Dent. Med. 2024; 5(2): 467–484. Publisher Full Text
•  Rahimi B: Vahid online: Post-2009 Iran and the politics of citizen media convergence. Soc. Sci. 2016; 5(4). Publisher Full Text
•  Rasul A, Shin D: Unlocking the power of social media: Exploring how Facebook use attitude influences the political participation of young female adults. Atlantic Journal of Communication. 2025; 34: 133–149. Publisher Full Text
•  Ribble M, Bailey G: Digital Citizenship in Schools. The nine elements of Digital Citizenship. International Society for Technology in Education; 2007; Vol. 3777. . Reference Source
•  Richardson J, Milovidov E: Digital Citizenship Education Handbook. Council of Europe Publishing; 2022. Reference Source
•  Ryland M: Digital Citizens, Not Just Consumers: Defining Digital Citizenship for Democracy.Carr PR, Hoechsmann M, Thésée G, editors. Critical Media Literacies Series. Brill Academic Publishers; 2018; Vol. 1. : pp. 49–64. Publisher Full Text
•  Saleh AY, Saputra DAY, Valentina R, et al.: Ginkgo Biloba as a niche theme cognitive enhancer agent, 1420 dokumen of Scopus database. A bibliometric study from 1988 to 2024. F1000Res. 2025a; 14: 275–265. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
•  Saleh AY, Valentina R, Susanto TD, et al.: Beyond stroke therapy, neuroaid (a chinese herbal) has an effect on cognition and neurogenesis, a bibliometric study. F1000Res. 2025b; 13: 799–732. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
•  Schallegger R: Towards a Digital Humanity: Transhumanism and Cyber-Citizenship in Videogaming. Brill; 2019; 41–50. Publisher Full Text
•  Schulz W, Ainley J, Fraillon J, et al.: Education for Citizenship in Times of Global Challenge IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education Study 2022 International Report (Revised edition) IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education STUDY 2022. 5–5.2023. Reference Source
•  Silor AC, Silor FSC: Harnessing TVET for New Literacies: An Experimental Study on Enhancing 21st Century Competencies. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research. 2025; 24(11): 144–160. Publisher Full Text
•  Sincar M: An Analysis of Prospective Teachers' Digital Citizenship Behaviour Norms. International Journal of Cyber Ethics in Education. 2012a; 1: 25–40. Publisher Full Text
•  Sincar M: An Analysis of Prospective Teachers’ Digital Citizenship Behaviour Norms. IGI Global; 2012b; vol. 1. : 757–771. Publisher Full Text
•  Sleem F, Nicolas S: Lebanese teachers’ perceptions of digital citizenship and professional development needs for effective digital citizenship education. Social Sciences and Humanities Open. 2025; 12: 101881. Publisher Full Text
•  Sulkipani S, Komalasari K, Sapriya S, et al.: Online Learning in Civic Education Research Trend: A Bibliometric Analysis. Int. Rev. Res. Open Dist. Learn. 2025; 26(2): 59–88. Publisher Full Text
•  Trixa J, Kaspar K: Information literacy in the digital age: information sources, evaluation strategies, and perceived teaching competences of pre-service teachers. Front. Psychol. 2024; 15. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
•  Warraich NF, Ali I, Tahira M: Measuring the relationship of smartphone competence and information literacy self-efficacy with digital citizenship in online environment. Inf. Dev. 2025. Publisher Full Text
•  Webster J: Defining digital citizenship and digital citizenship education: a Delphi study. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2025; 1–16. Publisher Full Text
•  Wilsa AW, Hartono, Subali B, et al.: Research Trends of Augmented Reality in Biology Learning: Content and Bibliometric Mapping Analysis. Malays. J. Learn. Instr. 2025; 22(1): 157–180. Publisher Full Text
•  Wohleb E, Skinner L, Witte MM: Examining the benefits of integrating social media into the classroom. IGI Global; 2014; 665–674. Publisher Full Text
•  Yan M, Wu X: Prosody in linguistic journals: a bibliometric analysis. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications. 2021; 11(2024). Publisher Full Text
•  Yang F, Ripley-gonzalez JW, Tang J, et al.: Dance therapy in rehabilitation: a two-decade bibliometric analysis (2000–2024). Humanities & Social Sciences Communications. 2026; 13(8): 1–15. Publisher Full Text
•  Yildiz EP, Çengel M, Alkan A: Determination of digital citizenship levels of university students at sakarya university Turkey. International Journal of Higher Education. 2020; 9(3): 300–308. Publisher Full Text
•  Zhao M, Liu W, Saif ANM, et al.: Blockchain in Online Learning: A Systematic Review and Bibliographic Visualization. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2023; 15(2). Publisher Full Text
•  Zheng Y, Mo Y, Chen S, et al.: How the timing of using digital games in courses influences students’ learning: a study on digital citizenship education. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2025; 34: 1062–1081. Publisher Full Text
•  Zhong J, Zheng Y, Huang X, et al.: Study of the Influencing Factors of Cyberbullying Among Chinese College Students Incorporated With Digital Citizenship: From the Perspective of Individual Students. Front. Psychol. 2021; 12. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

Current Reviewer Status:

AWAITING PEER REVIEW

AWAITING PEER REVIEW

?