B.A.

ECONOMICS FIELD SURVEY 2009-10

On
MOBILE PHONE USAGE IN THE CAMPUS
(Trends and Possible Solutions to Mobile Menace within the Campus)
Conducted by SH College Thevara, BA Economics Batch 2007-10

1. Introduction
A mobile phone or mobile (also called cellphone and handphone) is an electronic device
used for mobile telecommunications (mobile telephone, text messaging or data transmission) over a cellular
network of specialized base stations known as cell sites. Most current cell phones connect to a cellular
network consisting of switching points and base stations (cell sites) owned by a mobile network operator. In
addition to the standard voice function, current mobile phones may support many additional services, and
accessories, such as SMS for text messaging, email, packet switching for access to the Internet, gaming,
Bluetooth, infrared, camera with video recorder and MMS for sending and receiving photos and video, MP3
player, radio and GPS. The International Telecommunication Union estimated that mobile cellular
subscriptions worldwide would reach approximately 4.6 billion by the end of 2009. Mobile phones have
gained increased importance in the sector of information and communication technologies for development
in the 2000s and have effectively started to reach the bottom of the economic pyramid.

The Indian telecommunication industry, with about 506.04 million mobile phone
connections (Nov 2009), is the third largest telecommunication network in the world and the second largest
in terms of number of wireless connections (after China). India has become one of the fastest-growing
mobile markets in the world. The mobile services were commercially launched in August 1995 in India. In
the initial 5–6 years the average monthly subscribers additions were around 0.05 to 0.1 million only and the
total mobile subscribers base in December 2002 stood at 10.5 millions. However, after the number of
proactive initiatives taken by regulator and licensor, the monthly mobile subscriber additions increased to
around 2 million per month in the year 2003-04 and 2004-05.

Kerala is the state with highest teledensity and the number of subscribers in the state has
crossed 1.7 million. The increase in mobile phone usage in Kerala had been led by the growth in the state’s
non-resident population and the fall in call rates. In its backward Malappuram district with a huge expat
population, already there are more phones than people.
 It is with this understanding and regard that the mobile phone market has been burgeoning in
India that we proceed to conduct this survey as an attempt to understand the mobile phone use pattern
among the specific group - youth, by narrowing down the study in the campus of Sacred Heart College,
Thevara. Over the years the bad side of technology has also been brought to forefront placing the onus of
bad behaviour as always on the youth. It is an accepted fact that mobile technology has corroded the lives of
many young people and has reduced their productivity within the college campus. This study, then, while
being a trend analysis survey, is also relevant in the context that it attempts to bring out solutions to this
problem of “mob menace-on-campus” on the basis of the responses of the students (purported victims) in
question.

2. Objectives
The objectives of this survey may be drawn out as follows;
a. To identify the average number of students using mobile phones within the campus
b. To identify the income versus consumption pattern with respect to purchase and further
spending on mobile phones by students who use mobile phones
c. Sketch the current trends in mobile phone usage among students
d. Understand whether a majority have the propensity to get into trouble using mobile phones
e. Come up with possible solutions to reducing mobile phone menace within the campus

3. Methodology
In keeping with the above stated objectives, we adopted the methodology of simple random
sampling to attain a sample of 77 students in the ratio of 1:2:4 for 1st years, 2nd years and 3rd years
respectively, accounting for a total of 11 departments offering undergraduate courses within the college.
Therefore we have a total of 11 first years, 22 second years and 44 third years. The third years who have
been acclimatized with the college surroundings provide the most reliable and consistent data, first years
stand on unsure ground and 2nd years show rebellious tendencies. Of these, a majority of trends were
analysed on the basis of responses of only 64 (out of 77) students who possessed mobiles within the
campus.
The survey was conducted with the help of a written questionnaire consisting of a variety of
questions numbering a total of 31 (see Appendix I).

2
4. Findings and Conclusions
Before moving to the major conclusions derived from the survey, it would be worthwhile to
understand the basic characteristics of the sample of 77 students surveyed.
4.1 Basic Characteristics1
Among those surveyed:
a. 58% are females, with relatively more male samples (55%) coming only among second years
b. 56% fall under the age group 18-20, the remaining in 20-22 group
c. Arts and Science groups together contribute more to the total sample strength, in keeping with the
relatively greater number of departments that they have in the college.
d. 75% of the respondents are day-scholars
e. A small percentage of 31% of respondents are engaged in any form of part-time or other income
earning activities along with their studies, with the greatest contribution coming from 3rd year
students of upto 34%.
f. Overall 52% of the respondents claim monthly incomes of over Rs. 5000, but internal vagaries can
be noted with about 36% of II year students putting their monthly income at only Rs. 1500-3000.
g. Among those surveyed, a majority i.e. 83% confess to bringing and using mobile phones within the
campus. The highest usage may be seen among the III years (91%) and lowest among II years
(68%). From this we can deduce that on an average between 65 to 80% of all students in the college
are using mobile phones within the campus.

4.2 Income-Spending Patterns in Mobile Use

As against popular belief, mobiles are mostly seen as utilities rather than prestige goods by
the students in that while 52% claimed incomes above Rs.5000 only 31% of the respondents actually
possessed mobile phones ranging above Rs.5000. The entire 5% of respondents, who possess mobile costing
over Rs.10, 000 not surprisingly, consists of male respondents reflecting male fondness for gadgets.

1
For detailed statistics see Appendix II
3
 Distribution of Respondents by Income (in Rs.)

4%

21%

Less than 1500

1500-3000
52% 3000-5000
5000 and above

23%

Distribution of Respondents by Price of Mobiles (in Rs.)

5%

28%

31% 1500-3000
3000-5000
5000-10000
10000 & above

36%

A. Ownership of Mobile

4
 Ownership of Mobiles

28%

Own
Parents purchased

72%

We also see that parents consider it a matter of great necessity that their wards possess mobile phones as
even though 31% of the respondents worked, only 28% had purchased the mobile out of their own income.
A big majority, 72% students, possessed mobiles with the complete knowledge and acceptance of parents.

B. Monthly Spending on Mobile

Average Monthly Spending on Mobiles

90%
80% 79%
Percentage of Respondents

70%
67%
60%
50% 48%
40%

30%
24%
22% 24%
20% 21%

10% 9%
4%
2%
0% 0 0
less than 300 300-500 500-800 1000 and above
Average Monthly Spending (in Rs.)

Males Females Total

It is interesting to note that females are considerably frugal when it comes to spending money on mobile
phones in lieu of recharges or normal bill payments, never going beyond an average of Rs.500/month.
Males still have a tendency to cross Rs.500 with 24% of then doing so and a very small percentage (4%)
dare to cross Rs.1000 a month. On an average, however, a good majority of 67% are able to limit their

5
monthly expenses to less than Rs.300. This may be attributed primarily to the fact they use pre-paid mobile
connections offering minimal top-up recharge cards aplenty in the market.

4.3 Trends in Mobile Usage

To identify the current trends among mobile users in college we use the responses of 83% of
respondents who confirm that they bring and use mobiles within the campus. The following are the major
trends noticed.

A. The most used mobile handsets: Nokia

Number of Users by Make of Mobile

45 42
40
Number of Respondents

35

30
26
25
20
16
15
10
10
6 5 5
4 4 4
5 2 2 2
0 0
0
Nokia Samsung Sony Ericsson Motorola LG
Mobiles

Males Females Total

B. The most used type of mobile connection: Pre-paid

6
 Respondents' Preferred Mobile Connections

8; 13%

Pre-paid
Post-paid

56; 87%

56 of the 64 respondents prefer to use pre-paid and not post-paid connections. The reasons may be that it
allows cheap and easy recharge and prevents too much interference from the parents regarding usage and
convoluted processes of bill payments. Further it also prevents over-the-budget use of mobiles by restricting
the number of calls, messages etc that one can make during a given recharge period.

C. Preferred Mobile Network: Airtel

Preferred Mobile Service Providers

2%
15%

Aircel
6%
36% Airtel
BSNL
Docomo
11%
Idea
Reliance
Vodafone

13%
17%

The top three mobile service providers among the students surveyed are Airtel, BSNL, and Vodafone. While
Airtel being the leading provider was not a surprise result, BSNL emerging the second most popular service

7
provider was quite against the expectations, given the recurrent troubles in connectivity and overall poor
performance. However the attractively priced student plans must provide the incentive to purchase the
connection.

D. Most Communications go to Friends/Classmates

Persons Most Communicated Using Mobiles

11%
2%

41% Family
Friends/Classmates
Colleagues
Boyfriend/Girfriend

46%

While overall we see that friends/classmates surpass family in receiving communications from students, this
marginal overtaking occurred in case of the III years alone. Among I years and II years family comes first in
terms of maximum communications. Again, the 11% of people who agree to communicating most with their
boyfriend/girlfriend may also seem as too small a percentage. Here again the III years (almost 9%,
especially boys) were more given to accepting that they had relationships and frequently communicated
with them.
E. Primary time of use: Evening

8
 Distribution of respondents by time of Use

40 38

35

Number of Respondents 30

25

20

15 12
11
10

5 3

0
Morning During Class Hours Evening Late Night
Time

F. Service Most Used: SMS

Services Used by Respondents

80%
73%
70%
61%
Percentage of Respondents

58%
60%

50%

40%

30% 25%

20%
13%
10%

0%
SMS Calls GPRS FM/Music Player Camera/Video
Service

The top two services for which the mobile is used are to send SMSes and to enjoy music. Calls (ironically,
the primary purpose of mobiles) come only third. The fact that GPRS facility is least used points to the fact
that a good majority of students are still not much acquainted with mobiles having higher end facilities.
While analyzing the use of important mobile services, it would also help to separately present the behaviour
of males and females in this regard. Even though females form a greater number of respondents, only 5%
actually use the GPRS facility against 24% of males. A similar trend is seen in case of Camera/Video usage
and also FM/music player.

9
 Gender Difference is Service Use

80% 74%
72% 72%
70% 64%
Percentage of Respondents
60% 54% 54%
50%
40%
40%

30% 24%

20% 15%

10% 5%

0%
SMS Calls GPRS FM/Music Player Camera/Video
Service

Males Females

G. Most Popular form of communications: Forwards

Most Popular Forms of Communication

3%

27%

Phone Calls
42% Missed Calls
Forwarded Messages
Personal Messages

28%

A whopping 42% of all respondents prefer to communicate via forwarded messages alone. This is primarily
because of the numerous “free SMS” plans provided by the pre-paid connections. While they could make
use of this facility to send personalized messages, a lack of sufficient personal thoughts to send to one’s
friends and classmates (whom one meets everyday) and a relatively larger store of forwards traveling
through the mobile networks, it affords a cheap and easy way to stay in touch. The second most preferred
method of staying in touch is found to be missed calls.

10
H. Main reason for bringing mobiles to college: Family

Main Reasons for Bringing Mobiles to College

120%

100% 4% 0%
Percentage of Respondents

26%
80% 28%
Impression
Music/Entertainment
60% 30%
28% Friends in other departments
Family
40%

20% 40% 44%

0%
Males Females
Gender and Reasons

While this may seem quite contradictory to the earlier result, note that earlier it was mentioned that only III
years gave friends/classmates precedence to family. The trend is similar in this case as well. But over all
keeping in touch with family is believed to be the main reason to bring mobiles to college. Our earlier
conjecture that mobiles are no longer luxuries or prestige goods is revalidated here with only 4% of boys
affirming that they bring mobiles in order to impress others. We can also safely state that the entertainment
value of mobiles is of great importance to the students with an overall of 27% agreeing that they bring the
mobiles to college only in order to listen to music or play games during free hours.

4.4 Mobiles: Danger or Saviour?

Now, it is necessary to tackle the issue of propensity of the youth to entangle themselves in
serious problems by using/misusing the services of mobiles. The survey shows interesting results.
A. Mobile as a tool for social networking? No!

11
 Social Networking through Mobile

13%

Yes
No

87%

A majority of students seem to be aware of the dangers of making friends through the mobile and hence
have successfully avoided any attempts to network using mobiles. But among the 13% of those who have
been adventurous, it is quite disturbing to note that 75% are male students.

B. Trends of Disturbing Calls/Messages?

Trends of Receiving and Sending Unknown Calls/Messages

120%

100%
Percentage of Respondents

27%
80%

60% 78%

40% 73%

20%
22%
0%
Received Sent
Whether Received/Sent

Yes No

While a majority claim that they have definitely at various times received disturbing calls/messages from
random unknown persons, only 22% admit to having sent such calls or messages. Again, the propensity to
do so is higher in males (40% in males as against 10% in females).

C. Knowledge of troubles related to Mobiles in college: Very Less

12
 Knowledge of Friends in Mobile related troubles

19%

Yes
No

81%

D. Mobile as a Saviour?

Mobiles as trouble savers

17%

Yes
No

83%

4.4 Possible Solutions to Mobile Menace

In order to postulate solutions to mobile phone menace on campus, we must first find out
whether the students feel that mobile phones are actually a menace on campus. From the above section what
we understand is that a good majority of students using mobiles are rational and mature preferring to stay
away from troubles, known or unknown. And they have most often felt that mobiles are more helpful in
contacting their close ones in times of difficulty. In this line, the result is that 44% don’t think mobiles are a
menace (including those who don’t possess mobiles in campus). But at the same time 30% are also
undecided between the advantages and disadvantages of having a mobile in college. Hence these results

13
cannot be taken at face value. We need to probe further with regard to two specific problems namely,
camera phones and loss of attentiveness in class.

Mobile as a Menace in College

26%
30%

Yes
No
Can't Say

44%

A. Yes to a Camera Ban

Respondents complying to Camera Ban

90%
84%
80%
70%
Percentage of Students

67%
60% 60% 60% 59%
55%
50% 50%
40%
36%
30%
20%
17%
10%
0%
I year II year III year
Year of the course

Males Females Total

Females, naturally being concerned about their safety, over the 3 years of college, uniformly support a ban
on camera phones in college campuses. The trend among males is quite peculiar. A majority of first years
and third years are in support whereas the number drastically falls in the case of second years. This can only
be attributed to the fact that a majority of second years often go through a phase of rebellion within the
college, where rational thinking becomes faint. The result is purposeful disregard of all bans and
regulations, which is very evident throughout the survey.

14
B. Yes to Mobile Jammer

Possible Compliance to Mobile Jammer

70%
67%
60% 60%
Percentage Respondents

55%
52%
50% 48%

40% 40%

30%
25%
23%
20% 20%

10%

0%
I year II year III year
Year of Course

Males Females Total

In case of the possible use of mobile jammer too we see that I years in all eagerness to please and learn are
willing to comply with its use during class hours. The II year students are more prone to bunking, disregard
and involvement in extra-curricular activities and hence both males and females are quite against the idea of
mobile jamming during class hours (as that is when they would require the mobile most!). Again, once
students enter III year being more conscientious and exam-oriented, they are more willing to comply with
such a possible jam. Therefore the compliance behaviour of students varies greatly with their mental
makeup, objectives and peer behaviour which changes from year to year. Universally it was felt that I year
and III year responses were more grounded, rational and in keeping with objective decision-making process.

C. Provision of Mobile Phones by College: A Possible Solution

While camera ban may be partially effective, recurrent programmes and festivals prevent it
from becoming fully functional. Mobile jammers (especially of partial formats) can involve huge
technological costs and also real costs in terms of time lost in communicating between departments not only
for students but also for faculty and other staff. Then what can be done? What we did with
laptops/computers; make it available to students. It is obvious that even after successive bans mobiles are
being used in the campus. The main reason as we have found is the need to stay in touch with family and
friends, due to odd timings, blocks and other transportation problems, and also as a source of entertainment.
So what would be the response of students to a possible offer from the college to provide low end basic
15
phones (all of which nowadays come with FM/Music player) to be used during the period of graduation?
The only condition we put was an extra payment of Rs.500 (which can be seen as a refundable caution
deposit) at the beginning of the course. And quite surprisingly, without any other incentive, 40% responded
in affirmative; they are willing to use this facility. The most promising response came from III years where
50% said yes, and among I years 36%, but it was least in II years at 23%.

Willingness to adopt College Mobile Phones

70%

60% 60%
Percentage of Respondents

50% 52%
50%
47%
40%
36%
30% 30%
23%
20%
17% 17%
10%

0%
I year II year III year
Year of Course

Males Females Total

While 40% may seem as a small number, it is also important to understand that the remaining 60% doesn’t
completely disown this scheme. Instead there is a very important group; the ‘Can’t Say’ group. It has always
been seen that these are the people who make or break plans. As much as 17% are undecided regarding the
adoption of the scheme. They represent the group of people who carefully weigh incentives and take
decisions. Since they have not received all information they desist from committing to the programme. On
the other hand a string of incentives such as – free connections, group calling cards, self-payment (without
interference, atleast at superficial levels, from college), pre-fed numbers for emergencies etc. would
considerably shift the 17% towards yes. In case of indecision also we see that the II years are ahead,
whereas III years who have confidence in the system, and understanding of the utility of mobiles have least
indecision. One can ponder over the cost elements of making such a provision available, but doing that
would not fall under the purview of this study. But a general note should be made that most companies
would be willing to provide such facilities within the campus at low cost (in case of bulk supply).

16
 Indecision regarding use of College Mobile Phones

35%
33%
32%
30% 30%
Percentage Students

25%

20% 20%
18%
17%
15%

10% 10%
9%
7%
5%

0%
I year II year III year
Year of Course

Males Females Total

It is also interesting to note that among the 17% of students who don’t possess mobile
phones, 38% (comprising of 60% girls) said yes, an equal number were undecided and only 24% said a
strict no. They perhaps represent those students who are totally averse to use of mobile technology itself.
Recent reports in newspapers surrounding this debate have also shown that parents are
willing to accept such a provision (some parents themselves put forward this idea). Our survey shows that, if
it is implemented when students enter first year itself, there is a high chance of gaining uniformity in mobile
usage (preventing any possible demonstration effects), almost completely eliminating camera phones (with
the agreement of students), and a knowledge that ultimately it is the property of the college and must be
returned with the trust that authorities have reposed in them would decrease chances of misuse. The idea is
to come up with an incentivised plan to encourage students to make use of the facility if put into effect. It
would also encourage teachers and students to reduce barriers and open all channels of communications at
all times.

In Conclusion: The mobile technology has undoubtedly spread through the college, but mostly as a utility
rather than a luxury. But the fact that it provides outlet for entertainment makes it more endearing for the
students. Male students are more likely to venture into the technological sides of the mobile while girls keep
it basic. The spending is kept generally within limits of Rs.300/month. Other trends include a majority use
of Nokia handsets with pre-paid connections, to communicate with family/friends. A good majority treats
mobiles with safety and stay away from dangerous use. But the boys have a greater tendency to take risks in

17
this regard. Generally mobiles are perceived more as a saviour than a danger. There is no possibility hence
that they will stop using mobile phones, thereby making a ban ineffective. But logical sense prevails in that
they are aware that camera bans are meant for their safety and security. Overall 44% are also tending toward
a possible partial (during class hours only) use of mobile jammers as well. But it seems that if the college is
willing to invest in low-end mobile phones for students, while it may not ensure 100% compliance and
riddance to technology related problems, it can go a long way in ensuring uniformity, constant
communications and closer links between authorities and students on the basis of trust and confidence.

APPENDIX I

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FIELD SURVEY 2009-2010

ON USAGE OF MOBILE PHONES IN THE CAMPUS

1. Name (optional):
2. Age:
3. Sex: M/F
4. Course:
 Arts
 Commerce
 Science
 Computer Applications

5. Year: I year/ II year/ III year

6. You live:
 At home, with parents
 In the hostel/ Paying Guest

7. Do you work part-time or other wise?

 Yes
 No

8. Average monthly income (in Rs.) of the family?

 Less than 1500
 1500-3000
 3000-5000
 5000 and above

9. Do you have a mobile phone when at college?

 Yes
 No

10. If yes, is this your own mobile phone?

 Yes, I purchased it from my own income.
18
  No, my parents gave it to me.
 No, a friend gave it to me.

11. Which is the make of your mobile phone?

 Nokia
 Samsung
 Sony Ericsson
 Motorola
 Other (Please Specify________________)

12. What is the average price range of your handset?

 Rs. 1500 – 3000
 Rs. 3000 – 5000
 Rs. 5000 – 10,000
 Rs. 10,000 and above

13. Which connection do you use?

 Pre-paid (Specify provider _________________)
 Post-paid (Specify provider_________________)

14. Do you have more than one mobile connection?

 Yes
 No

15. If yes, are your parents aware of it?

 Yes
 No

16. On an average, what would be your spending on recharge/bill payment for the phone?
 Less than Rs.300/month
 Rs. 300 – 500
 Rs. 500 – 800
 Rs. 800 – 1000
 Above Rs.1000

17. With whom do you communicate most using the mobile phone?
 Parents/Family/Relatives
 Friends/Classmates
 Colleagues (if you are working somewhere)
 Boyfriend/Girlfriend

18. During what time do you use the mobile most?

 Morning
 During Class hours
 Evening
 Late night
19
19. What services in your mobile are most frequently used? (you can tick more than one)
 SMS/MMS (including forwards)
 Calls
 GPRS
 Camera/Video
 FM/Music player
 Other (Please Specify________________)

20. What do you send and receive the most?

 Phone calls
 Missed Calls
 Forwarded Messages
 Personal Messages

21. Have you made new/unknown friends by using the mobile?

 Yes
 No

22. Have you ever continuously received calls/messages from unknown people?
 Yes
 No

23. Have to ever continuously sent calls/messages to people who don’t know you?
 Yes
 No

24. Have you ever been involved or known of your friend/relative/classmate being involved in illegal
activities through the mobile?
 Yes
 No

25. Has the mobile phone ever helped to get you out of trouble by allowing you to communicate easily with
family/friends?
 Yes
 No

26. What is the main reason for bringing mobiles to college?

 To keep in touch with family
 To keep in touch with friends from other departments
 To impress others
 To listen to music/play games/other entertainment

27. Do you think mobile phones are a problem in the college?

 Yes
 No

20
  Can’t Say

28. Do you think camera phones should not be used in the college, for security reasons?
 Yes
 No
 Can’t Say

29. Do you think mobile jammers should be used during class hours only, so as to increase attentiveness of
the students?
 Yes
 No
 Can’t Say

30. If by paying, say Rs.500 more, the college is willing to provide all students normal mobile phones, to be
used during the period of graduation (within and outside college) and then returned, will you be willing to
make use of such a facility?
 Yes
 No
 Can’t Say

31. Could you suggest some other ways to reduce mobile phone related problems in the campus?
________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX II

Basic Characteristics of Sample

A. Sex-wise Distribution
Sex I Year Percentage II Year Percentage III Year Percentage Total Percentage
Male 5 45% 12 55% 15 34% 32 42%
Female 6 55% 10 45% 29 66% 45 58%
Total 11 100% 22 100% 44 100% 77 100%

B. Age-wise Distribution
Age Male Percentage Female Percentage Total Percentage
18-20 21 67% 22 49% 43 56%
20-22 11 33% 23 51% 34 44%
Total 32 100% 45 100% 77 100%

C. Course-wise Distribution
Course No. of persons Percentage

21
Arts 25 32%
Science 25 32%
Commerce 16 21%
Computer Applications 11 15%
Total 77 100%

D. Residential Distribution
Residence I year Percentage II year Percentage III year Percentage Overall Percentage
Home 3 27% 19 86% 36 82% 58 75%
Hostel/PG 8 73% 3 14% 8 18% 19 25%
Total 11 100% 22 100% 44 100% 77 100%

E. Distribution of Working Students

Whether
working* I year Percentage II year Percentage III year Percentage Overall Percentage
Yes 2 18% 7 32% 15 34% 24 31%
No 9 82% 15 68% 29 66% 53 69%
Total 11 100% 22 100% 44 100% 77 100%
* Part-time or otherwise
F. Income-wise Distribution
Avg. Monthly
Family Income I year Percentage II year Percentage III year Percentage Overall Percentage
Less than 1500 0 - 2 10% 1 2% 3 4%
1500-3000 3 28% 8 36% 5 11% 16 21%
3000-5000 4 36% 6 27% 8 18% 18 23%
5000 and above 4 36% 6 27% 30 69% 40 52%
Total 11 100% 22 100% 44 100% 77 100%

G. Mobile Usage within Campus

Bring Mobile
to College I year Percentage II year Percentage III year Percentage Overall Percentage
Bring 9 82% 15 68% 40 91% 64 83%
Do not Bring 2 18% 7 32% 4 9% 13 17%
Total 11 100% 22 100% 44 100% 77 100%

22