BibTex RIS Cite

The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy

Year 2011, Volume: 2 Issue: 3, 177 - 187, 01.09.2011

Abstract

This study examined the relationship between computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy of students and teachers in elementary and secondary schools. The sample included a total of 845 subjects from two private school systems in Turkey. The Oetting’s Computer Anxiety Scale was used to measure computer anxiety whereas the Murphy’s Computer Self-Efficacy Scale was used to measure computer self-efficacy of subjects. The results demonstrated that elementary students were less-anxious than secondary students; males had lower anxiety scores than females; and the difference between anxiety scores of students and teachers was not significant. However, students had higher self-efficacy scores than their teachers; elementary students were more self-efficient than secondary students; and males had higher computer self-efficacy scores than females. The correlation between the variables of computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy was moderate, negative, and significant.

References

  • Arani, O. K. (2001). Researching computer self-efficacy. International Education Journal, 2(4), 17-25.
  • Badagliacco, J. M. (1990). Gender and race differences in computing attitudes and experience. Social Science Computer Review, 8, 42-64.
  • Beckers, J. J. & Schmidt, H. G. (2001). The structure of computer anxiety: A six-factor model. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 35-49.
  • Brosnan, M. J. (1998). The impact of computer anxiety and self-efficacy upon performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 223-234.
  • Chou, C. (2003). Incidences and correlates of Internet anxiety among high school teachers in Taiwan. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 731–749
  • Chua, S. L., Chen, D., & Wong, A. F. L. (1999). Computer anxiety and its correlates: A meta- analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 609-623.
  • Compeau, D. R. & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development for a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
  • Doyle, E., Stamouli, I., & Huggard, M. (2005, October). Computer anxiety, self-efficacy, and computer experience: An investigation throughout a computer science degree. Paper presented at the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Indianapolis, USA.
  • Gordon, M., Killey, M., Shevlin, M., McIlroy, D., & Tierney, K. (2003). The factor structure of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale and the Computer Thoughts Survey. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 291–298
  • Hackett, G. (1985). The role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-related majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 47- 56.
  • Hasan, B. (2003). The influence of specific computer experiences on computer self-efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 443-450.
  • Harrington, K. V., McElroy, J. C., Morrow, P. C. (1990). Computer anxiety and computer-based training: A laboratory experiment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 343- 358.
  • Johnson, R. D. (2005). An empirical investigation of sources of application specific computer self-efficacy and mediators of the efficacy-performance relationship. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 62(6), 737-758.
  • Karsten, R. & Roth, R. M. (1998). Computer self-efficacy: A practical indicator of student computer competency in introductory IS courses. Informing Science, 1(3), 61-68.
  • Kinzie, M. B., Delcourt, M. A. B., Powers, S. M. (1994). Computer technologies: Attitudes and self-efficacy across undergraduate disciplines. Research in Higher Education, 35, 745- 768.
  • Konerding, U. (2007). The effects of two computer-related university courses on computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy. Retrieved on March 3, 2007 from: http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/mv/forschung/zero.thm
  • Koroboli, S. & Togia, A., & Malliari, A. (2010). Computer anxiety and attitudes among undergraduate students in Greece. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 399-405.
  • Liang, J. C. & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Internet self-efficacy and preferences toward constructivist Internet-based learning environments: A study of pre-school teachers in Taiwan. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 226-237.
  • Maurer, M. M. (1994). Computer anxiety correlates and what they tell us: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 10(3), 369–376.
  • McIlroy, D., Bunting, B., Tierney, K., & Gordon, M. (2001). The relation of gender and background experience to self-reported computing anxiety and cognitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 21-33.
  • Miura, I. T. (1987). The relationship of computer self-efficacy expectations to computer interest and course enrollment in college. Sex Roles, 16(5-6), 303-311.
  • Roslan, S. & Mun, T. C. (2005). Relationships between sources and dimensions of computer anxiety. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 2(2), 41-49.
  • Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. A., Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward the Internet: A study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 205-219.
  • Shaw, F. S. & Giacquinta, J. B. (2000). A survey of graduate students as end users of computer technology: New roles for the faculty. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 18(1), 21-39.
  • Tourkzadeh, G. & Angula, I. E. (1992). The concept and correlates of computer anxiety. Behavior and Information Technology, 11, 99-108.
  • Tourkzadeh, G. & Koufterous, X. (1994). Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813-921.
  • Webster, J. & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 201-226.
  • Weil, M. M. & Rosen, L. D. (1995). The psychological impact of technology from a global perspective: A study of technological sophistication and technophobia in university students from twenty three countries. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 95-133.
  • Zhang, Y. & Espinoza, S. (1998). Relationships among computer self-efficacy, attitudes toward computers, and desirability of learning computing skills. Journal of Research on Technology in education, 30(4), 420-436.
  • Correspondence: Ali Simsek, Professor, Institute of Communication Sciences, Anadolu
  • University, Yunus Emre Campus, Eskisehir 26470, Turkey
Year 2011, Volume: 2 Issue: 3, 177 - 187, 01.09.2011

Abstract

References

  • Arani, O. K. (2001). Researching computer self-efficacy. International Education Journal, 2(4), 17-25.
  • Badagliacco, J. M. (1990). Gender and race differences in computing attitudes and experience. Social Science Computer Review, 8, 42-64.
  • Beckers, J. J. & Schmidt, H. G. (2001). The structure of computer anxiety: A six-factor model. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 35-49.
  • Brosnan, M. J. (1998). The impact of computer anxiety and self-efficacy upon performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 223-234.
  • Chou, C. (2003). Incidences and correlates of Internet anxiety among high school teachers in Taiwan. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 731–749
  • Chua, S. L., Chen, D., & Wong, A. F. L. (1999). Computer anxiety and its correlates: A meta- analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 609-623.
  • Compeau, D. R. & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development for a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
  • Doyle, E., Stamouli, I., & Huggard, M. (2005, October). Computer anxiety, self-efficacy, and computer experience: An investigation throughout a computer science degree. Paper presented at the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Indianapolis, USA.
  • Gordon, M., Killey, M., Shevlin, M., McIlroy, D., & Tierney, K. (2003). The factor structure of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale and the Computer Thoughts Survey. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 291–298
  • Hackett, G. (1985). The role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-related majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 47- 56.
  • Hasan, B. (2003). The influence of specific computer experiences on computer self-efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 443-450.
  • Harrington, K. V., McElroy, J. C., Morrow, P. C. (1990). Computer anxiety and computer-based training: A laboratory experiment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 343- 358.
  • Johnson, R. D. (2005). An empirical investigation of sources of application specific computer self-efficacy and mediators of the efficacy-performance relationship. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 62(6), 737-758.
  • Karsten, R. & Roth, R. M. (1998). Computer self-efficacy: A practical indicator of student computer competency in introductory IS courses. Informing Science, 1(3), 61-68.
  • Kinzie, M. B., Delcourt, M. A. B., Powers, S. M. (1994). Computer technologies: Attitudes and self-efficacy across undergraduate disciplines. Research in Higher Education, 35, 745- 768.
  • Konerding, U. (2007). The effects of two computer-related university courses on computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy. Retrieved on March 3, 2007 from: http://www.educat.hu-berlin.de/mv/forschung/zero.thm
  • Koroboli, S. & Togia, A., & Malliari, A. (2010). Computer anxiety and attitudes among undergraduate students in Greece. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 399-405.
  • Liang, J. C. & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Internet self-efficacy and preferences toward constructivist Internet-based learning environments: A study of pre-school teachers in Taiwan. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 226-237.
  • Maurer, M. M. (1994). Computer anxiety correlates and what they tell us: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 10(3), 369–376.
  • McIlroy, D., Bunting, B., Tierney, K., & Gordon, M. (2001). The relation of gender and background experience to self-reported computing anxiety and cognitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 21-33.
  • Miura, I. T. (1987). The relationship of computer self-efficacy expectations to computer interest and course enrollment in college. Sex Roles, 16(5-6), 303-311.
  • Roslan, S. & Mun, T. C. (2005). Relationships between sources and dimensions of computer anxiety. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 2(2), 41-49.
  • Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. A., Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward the Internet: A study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 205-219.
  • Shaw, F. S. & Giacquinta, J. B. (2000). A survey of graduate students as end users of computer technology: New roles for the faculty. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 18(1), 21-39.
  • Tourkzadeh, G. & Angula, I. E. (1992). The concept and correlates of computer anxiety. Behavior and Information Technology, 11, 99-108.
  • Tourkzadeh, G. & Koufterous, X. (1994). Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813-921.
  • Webster, J. & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 201-226.
  • Weil, M. M. & Rosen, L. D. (1995). The psychological impact of technology from a global perspective: A study of technological sophistication and technophobia in university students from twenty three countries. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 95-133.
  • Zhang, Y. & Espinoza, S. (1998). Relationships among computer self-efficacy, attitudes toward computers, and desirability of learning computing skills. Journal of Research on Technology in education, 30(4), 420-436.
  • Correspondence: Ali Simsek, Professor, Institute of Communication Sciences, Anadolu
  • University, Yunus Emre Campus, Eskisehir 26470, Turkey
There are 31 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA35YC36MG
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Ali Simsek This is me

Publication Date September 1, 2011
Published in Issue Year 2011 Volume: 2 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Simsek, A. (2011). The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Educational Technology, 2(3), 177-187.
AMA Simsek A. The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Educational Technology. September 2011;2(3):177-187.
Chicago Simsek, Ali. “The Relationship Between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy”. Contemporary Educational Technology 2, no. 3 (September 2011): 177-87.
EndNote Simsek A (September 1, 2011) The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Educational Technology 2 3 177–187.
IEEE A. Simsek, “The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy”, Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 177–187, 2011.
ISNAD Simsek, Ali. “The Relationship Between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy”. Contemporary Educational Technology 2/3 (September 2011), 177-187.
JAMA Simsek A. The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Educational Technology. 2011;2:177–187.
MLA Simsek, Ali. “The Relationship Between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy”. Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 2, no. 3, 2011, pp. 177-8.
Vancouver Simsek A. The Relationship between Computer Anxiety and Computer Self-Efficacy. Contemporary Educational Technology. 2011;2(3):177-8.