Relationships between Computer Self-Efficacy,Technology,Attitudes and Anxiety: Development of the Computer Technology Use Scale (CTUS)

Abstract

Two studies are reported which describe the development and evaluation of a new instrument, the Computer Technology Use Scale (CTUS), comprising three domains: computer self-efficacy, attitudes to technology, and technology related anxiety. Study 1 describes the development of the instrument and explores its factor structure. Study 2 used confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate the stability of the factors identified and to examine relationships between computer self-efficacy, attitudes, and anxiety. There were 479 (Study 1) and 352 (Study 2) University—recruited subjects who volunteered for the project. The initial five factor solution of the CTUS scale was confirmed which include the following factors: computer efficacy, technology related anxiety, complexity, positive attitudes, and negative attitudes. Computer efficacy was positively related to positive attitudes and negatively related to other factors. The relationship between the factors is discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arbuckle

J. L.

(2005). Amos user's guide version 6.0. Chicago, IL: Smallwaters Corporation.

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control (Vol. ix). New York: W. H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.

Bandura

(1998). Personal and collective efficacy in human adaptation and change. In Adair

D. J. G. E. B.

& Dion

K. L.

(Eds.), Advances in psychological science personal, and cultural aspects. Hove: Taylor & Francis.

Bandura

(1999a). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 2(1), 21–41.

Bandura

(2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.

Bandura

(2000b). Self-efficacy: The foundation of agency. In Perrig

A. W. J. E. G.

(Ed.), Control of human behavior, mental processes and consciousness: Essays in honor of the 60th birthday of August Flammer (pp. 17–33). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 3(3), 265–299.

10.

Bandura

Caprara

G. V.

Barbaranelli

Gerbino

, & Pastorelli

(2003). Role of affective self-regulatory efficacy in diverse spheres of psychosocial functioning. Child Development, 74(3), 769–782.

11.

Barki

, & Hartwick

(1994). Measuring user participation, user involvement and user attitudes. MIS Quarterly, 18(1), 59.

12.

Beas

M. I.

, & Salanova

(2006). Self-efficacy beliefs, computer training and psychological well-being among information and communication technology workers. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(6), 1043–1058.

13.

Bentler

(1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.

14.

Bentler

, & Bonnett

D. G.

(1980. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.

15.

Brown

, & Inoye

(1978). Learned helplessness through modelling: The role of perceived similarity in competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 900–908.

16.

Browne

M. W.

, & Cudeck

(1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen

K. A.

& Long

J. S.

(Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

17.

Cassidy

, & Eachus

(2002). Developing the Computer User Self-Efficacy (CUSE) Scale: Investigating the relationship between computer self-efficacy, gender and experience with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(2), 133–153.

18.

Chang

S. E.

(2005). Computer anxiety and perception of task complexity in learning programming-related skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(5), 713–728.

19.

Culpan

(1995). Attitudes of end-users towards information technology in manufacturing and service industries. Information and Management, 28(3), 167–176.

20.

Davis

F. D.

Bagozzi

R. P.

, & Warshaw

P. R.

(1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

21.

Eagly

, & Chaiken

(1993). The psychology of attitudes. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

22.

Folkman

, & Lazarus

R. S.

(1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 21, 219–239.

23.

Galagan

(1983). Treating computer anxiety with training. Training and Development Journal (July), 57–60.

24.

Harris

R. J.

(1985). A primer of multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). Orlando: Academic Press.

25.

Hartwick

, & Barki

(1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science, 40(4), 440–465.

26.

Heinssen

R. K.

Glass

C. R.

, & Knight

L. A.

(1987). Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 3(1), 49–59.

27.

Hill

T. N.

Smith

, & Mann

F. A.

(1987). Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(2), 307–313.

28.

Jöreskog

K. G.

, & Sörbom

(1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

29.

Kay

R. H.

(1989). A practical and theoretical approach to assessing computer attitudes: The Computer Attitude Measure (CAM). Journal of Research on Computing in Education (Summer), 457–463.

30.

Koslowsky

Hoffman

, & Lazar

(1990). Predicting behavior on a computer from intentions, attitudes, and experience. Current Psychology: Research and Reviews, 9(1), 75–83.

31.

LaLomia

M. J.

, & Sidowski

J. B.

(1991). Measurements of computer attitudes: A review. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 3(2), 171–197.

32.

LaLomia

M. J.

, & Sidowski

J. B.

(1993). Measurement of computer anxiety: A review. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 5, 239–266.

33.

Lee

(1970). Social attitudes and the computer revolution. Public Opinion Quarterly, 35, 53–59.

34.

Locke

E. A.

, & Latham

G. P.

(1990). Work motivation and satisfaction: Light at the end of the tunnel. Psychological Science, 1(4), 240–246.

35.

Loyd

, & Gressard

(1984). Reliability and factorial validity of computer attitudes scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44, 501–505.

36.

Marsh

H. W.

Balla

J. R.

, & Hau

K. L.

(1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: A classification of mathematical and empirical properties. In Marcoulides

G. A.

& Schumacker

R. E.

(Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling, issues and techniques (pp. 315–353). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

37.

Meier

S. T.

(1988). Predicting individual differences in performance on computer-administered tests and tasks: Development of the Computer Aversion Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 4(3), 175–187.

38.

Reber

(1985). Dictionary of psychology. London: Penguin Books.

39.

Rousseau

G. K.

Jamieson

B. A.

Rogers

W. A.

Mead

S. E.

, & Sit

R. A.

(1998). Assessing the usability of on-line library systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 17(5), 274–281.

40.

Salanova

Grau

Cifre

, & Llorens

(2000). Computer training, frequency of usage and burnout: The moderating role of computer self-efficacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(6), 575–590.

41.

Schumacker

R. E.

, & Lomax

R. G.

(2004). A beginner's guide to structural education modeling (2nd ed.), New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

42.

Smith

Caputi

, & Rawstorne

(2000). Differentiating computer experience and attitudes toward computers: An empirical investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(1), 59–81.

43.

Steiger

J. H.

(1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180.

44.

Tabachnick

B. G.

, & Fidell

L. S.

(1996). Using Multivariate Statistics (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.

45.

Torkzadeh

, & Angulo

I. E.

(1992). The concept and correlates of computer anxiety. Behaviour & Information Technology, 11(2), 99–108.

46.

Torkzadeh

Pfughoeft

, & Hall

(1999). Computer self-efficacy, training effectiveness and user attitudes: An empirical study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 18(4), 299–309.

47.

Tucker

L. R.

, & Lewis

(1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.

48.

Turkle

(1995). Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.

49.

Venkatesh

Morris

Davis

, & Davis

F. D.

(2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

50.

Wallston

K. A.

(1992). Hocus-pocus, the focus isn't strictly on locus: Rotter's social learning theory modified for health. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 16(2), 183–199.

51.

Wilder

Mackie

, & Cooper

(1985). Gender and computers: Two surveys of computer related attitudes. Sex Roles, 13, 215–228.

52.

Yan

(2006). Different experiences, different effects: A longitudinal study of learning a computer program in a network environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(3), 364–380.