Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing
Identifieur interne : 001567 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001566; suivant : 001568Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing
Auteurs : M. J BrosnanSource :
- Computers in Human Behavior [ 0747-5632 ] ; 1999.
Abstract
After theory of reasoned action, Davis (1986Davis, 1993) and Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) proposed the Technology Acceptance Model to account for how perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitudes predict behavioral intention to use computers. This study combined these factors with measures from Bandura's self efficacy theory (computer self efficacy and computer anxiety; Bandura 1977, 1986) in conjunction with assessments of current computer experience. A total of 147 undergraduates completed a series of questionnaires at the beginning and end of a 13-week semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that self-reported word-processor usage over a 13-week period was predicted by levels of usage at the beginning of the semester, expected usage, and perceived usefulness. Initial levels of usage and perceived usefulness were both predicted by levels of computer anxiety. A combination of the variables formulated by the Technology Acceptance Model and self efficacy theory account for 45% of the variance in self-reported computing behavior over a 13-week period. The theoretical implications are discussed.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title><author><name sortKey="Brosnan, M J" sort="Brosnan, M J" uniqKey="Brosnan M" first="M. J" last="Brosnan">M. J Brosnan</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8</idno><date when="1999" year="1999">1999</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001567</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001567</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title><author><name sortKey="Brosnan, M J" sort="Brosnan, M J" uniqKey="Brosnan M" first="M. J" last="Brosnan">M. J Brosnan</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Computers in Human Behavior</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">CHB</title><idno type="ISSN">0747-5632</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1999">1999</date><biblScope unit="volume">15</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="105">105</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="121">121</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0747-5632</idno></series><idno type="istex">190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X</idno><idno type="PII">S0747-5632(98)00020-X</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0747-5632</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">After theory of reasoned action, Davis (1986Davis, 1993) and Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) proposed the Technology Acceptance Model to account for how perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitudes predict behavioral intention to use computers. This study combined these factors with measures from Bandura's self efficacy theory (computer self efficacy and computer anxiety; Bandura 1977, 1986) in conjunction with assessments of current computer experience. A total of 147 undergraduates completed a series of questionnaires at the beginning and end of a 13-week semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that self-reported word-processor usage over a 13-week period was predicted by levels of usage at the beginning of the semester, expected usage, and perceived usefulness. Initial levels of usage and perceived usefulness were both predicted by levels of computer anxiety. A combination of the variables formulated by the Technology Acceptance Model and self efficacy theory account for 45% of the variance in self-reported computing behavior over a 13-week period. The theoretical implications are discussed.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><author><json:item><name>M.J Brosnan</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Computer anxiety</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Word processing</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Self efficacy theory</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Technology Acceptance Model</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>After theory of reasoned action, Davis (1986Davis, 1993) and Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) proposed the Technology Acceptance Model to account for how perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitudes predict behavioral intention to use computers. This study combined these factors with measures from Bandura's self efficacy theory (computer self efficacy and computer anxiety; Bandura 1977, 1986) in conjunction with assessments of current computer experience. A total of 147 undergraduates completed a series of questionnaires at the beginning and end of a 13-week semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that self-reported word-processor usage over a 13-week period was predicted by levels of usage at the beginning of the semester, expected usage, and perceived usefulness. Initial levels of usage and perceived usefulness were both predicted by levels of computer anxiety. A combination of the variables formulated by the Technology Acceptance Model and self efficacy theory account for 45% of the variance in self-reported computing behavior over a 13-week period. The theoretical implications are discussed.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>6.968</score><pdfVersion>1.2</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>468 x 680 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>4</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1138</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>6055</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>38763</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>17</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>164</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title><pii><json:string>S0747-5632(98)00020-X</json:string></pii><refBibs><json:item><author><json:item><name>I Ajzen</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>63</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Advances in Experimental Social Psychology</title></host><title>Attitudes, traits and actions: Dispositional prediction of behavior in personality and social psychology</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I Ajzen</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Fishbein</name></json:item></author><host><volume>84</volume><pages><last>918</last><first>888</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Bulletin</title></host><title>Attitude behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E Arch</name></json:item><json:item><name>D Cummins</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>254</last><first>245</first></pages><author></author><title>Sex Roles</title></host><title>Structured and unstructured exposure to computers: Sex differences in attitude and use among college students</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Bandura</name></json:item></author><host><volume>84</volume><pages><last>215</last><first>191</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Review</title></host><title>Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Bandura</name></json:item></author><host><volume>37</volume><pages><last>147</last><first>122</first></pages><author></author><title>American Psychologist</title></host><title>Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Bandura</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>98</last><first>77</first></pages><author></author><title>Anxiety Research</title></host><title>Self-efficacy conception of anxiety</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D Bowers</name></json:item><json:item><name>V Bowers</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>443</last><first>439</first></pages><issue>4</issue><author></author><title>Social Science Computer Review</title></host><title>Assessing and coping with computer anxiety in the social science classroom</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Brosnan</name></json:item></author><host><volume>21</volume><pages><last>37</last><first>29</first></pages><issue>1</issue><author></author><title>Educational Review</title></host><title>The fourth “R”: Are teachers hindering computer literacy in school children?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Brosnan</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Davidson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>78</last><first>73</first></pages><author></author><title>The Psychologist</title></host><title>Computerphobia: Is it a particularly female phenomenon?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Brosnan</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Davidson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>3</volume><pages><last>25</last><first>13</first></pages><issue>1</issue><author></author><title>Journal of Gender, Work and Organization</title></host><title>Psychological gender issues in computing</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T Busch</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>158</last><first>147</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Educational Computing Research</title></host><title>Gender differences in self efficacy and attitudes towards computers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B Cole</name></json:item><json:item><name>B.L Hopkins</name></json:item></author><host><volume>15</volume><pages><last>135</last><first>95</first></pages><issue>1/2</issue><author></author><title>Journal of Organizational Behavior Management</title></host><title>Manipulations of the relationship between reported self-efficacy and performance</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F.H Dambrot</name></json:item><json:item><name>M.A Watkins-Malek</name></json:item><json:item><name>M.S Silling</name></json:item><json:item><name>R.S Marshall</name></json:item><json:item><name>J.A Graver</name></json:item></author><host><volume>27</volume><pages><last>86</last><first>71</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Vocational Behavior</title></host><title>Correlates of sex differences in attitudes toward involvement with computers</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F Davis</name></json:item></author><host><volume>38</volume><pages><last>487</last><first>475</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Man–Machine Studies</title></host><title>User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F Davis</name></json:item><json:item><name>R Bagozzi</name></json:item><json:item><name>P Warshaw</name></json:item></author><host><volume>35</volume><pages><last>1003</last><first>982</first></pages><author></author><title>Management Science</title></host><title>User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Desmond</name></json:item></author><host><volume>29</volume><pages><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Computer World</title></host><title>Computer crashes: A case of mind over matter</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Dyck</name></json:item><json:item><name>J Smither</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>119</last><first>107</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Older adult's acquisition of word processing: The contribution of cognitive abilities and computer anxiety</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F Gilroy</name></json:item><json:item><name>H Desai</name></json:item></author><host><volume>25</volume><pages><last>719</last><first>711</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Man–Machine Studies</title></host><title>Computer anxiety: Sex, race and age</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Harris</name></json:item><json:item><name>N Grandgenett</name></json:item></author><host><volume>28</volume><pages><last>317</last><first>300</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Research on Computing in Education</title></host><title>Correlates among teachers anxieties, demographics and telecomputing activity</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R.K Heinssen, Jr.</name></json:item><json:item><name>C.R Glass</name></json:item><json:item><name>L.A Knight</name></json:item></author><host><volume>3</volume><pages><last>59</last><first>49</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R Henderson</name></json:item><json:item><name>F Deane</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Ward</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>31</last><first>23</first></pages><author></author><title>Behavior and Information Technology</title></host><title>Occupational differences in computer-related anxiety: Implications for the implementation of a computerized patient management information system</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R Hess</name></json:item><json:item><name>I Miura</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>203</last><first>193</first></pages><author></author><title>Sex Roles</title></host><title>Gender differences in enrolment in computer camps and classes</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T Hill</name></json:item><json:item><name>N.D Smith</name></json:item><json:item><name>M.F Mann</name></json:item></author><host><volume>72</volume><pages><last>313</last><first>307</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T Jay</name></json:item></author><host><volume>21</volume><pages><last>48</last><first>47</first></pages><author></author><title>Educational Technology</title></host><title>Computerphobia. What to do about it</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M.C Kernan</name></json:item><json:item><name>G.S Howard</name></json:item></author><host><volume>50</volume><pages><last>690</last><first>681</first></pages><author></author><title>Educational and Psychological Measurement</title></host><title>Computer anxiety and computer attitudes: An investigation of construct and predictive validity issues</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B.H Loyd</name></json:item><json:item><name>L.P Gressard</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>77</last><first>67</first></pages><author></author><title>AEDS Journal</title></host><title>The effects of sex, age and computer experience on computer attitudes</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D Mahar</name></json:item><json:item><name>R Henderson</name></json:item><json:item><name>F Deane</name></json:item></author><host><volume>22</volume><pages><last>692</last><first>683</first></pages><issue>5</issue><author></author><title>Personality and Individual Differences</title></host><title>The effects of computer anxiety, state anxiety and computer experience on users performance of computer based tasks</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G.A Marcoulides</name></json:item></author><host><volume>4</volume><pages><last>158</last><first>151</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Educational Computing Research</title></host><title>The relationship between computer anxiety and computer achievement</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L Markert</name></json:item></author><host><volume>22</volume><pages><last>29</last><first>21</first></pages><issue>2</issue><author></author><title>Journal of Technology Studies</title></host><title>Gender related to success in science and technology</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M.M Maurer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>10</volume><pages><last>376</last><first>369</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Computer anxiety correlates and what they tell us: A literature review</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S Meier</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>179</last><first>171</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Computer aversion</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S Meier</name></json:item></author><host><volume>4</volume><pages><last>187</last><first>175</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Predicting individual differences in performance on computer administered tests and tasks: Development of the Computer Aversion Scale</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I.T Miura</name></json:item></author><host><volume>16</volume><pages><last>311</last><first>303</first></pages><issue>5/6</issue><author></author><title>Sex Roles</title></host><title>The relationship of computer self efficacy expectations to computer interest and course enrolment in college</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N.I Moldafsky</name></json:item><json:item><name>I.W Kwon</name></json:item></author><host><volume>10</volume><pages><last>323</last><first>299</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Attributes affecting computer aided decision making—a literature survey</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C.F Munger</name></json:item><json:item><name>B.H Loyd</name></json:item></author><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>177</last><first>167</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Educational Computing Research</title></host><title>Gender and attitudes towards computers and calculators: The relationship to math performance</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P.M Popovich</name></json:item><json:item><name>K.R Hyde</name></json:item><json:item><name>T Zakrajsek</name></json:item><json:item><name>C Blumer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>47</volume><pages><last>269</last><first>261</first></pages><author></author><title>Educational and Psychological Measurement</title></host><title>The development of the Attitudes Toward Computer Usage Scale</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Radford</name></json:item><json:item><name>L Holdstock</name></json:item></author><host><volume>8</volume><pages><last>24</last><first>21</first></pages><author></author><title>The Psychologist</title></host><title>Does psychology need more boy appeal?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Radford</name></json:item><json:item><name>L Holdstock</name></json:item></author><host><volume>9</volume><pages><last>550</last><first>548</first></pages><author></author><title>The Psychologist</title></host><title>The growth of psychology</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L Rosen</name></json:item><json:item><name>P Maguire</name></json:item></author><host><volume>3</volume><pages><last>191</last><first>175</first></pages><author></author><title>Anxiety Research</title></host><title>Myths and realities of computerphobia: A meta-analysis</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L.D Rosen</name></json:item><json:item><name>D.C Sears</name></json:item><json:item><name>M.M Weil</name></json:item></author><host><volume>19</volume><pages><last>179</last><first>167</first></pages><author></author><title>Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers</title></host><title>Computerphobia</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L Rosen</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Weil</name></json:item></author><host><volume>11</volume><pages><last>31</last><first>9</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Computer availability, computer experience and technophobia among public school teachers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Sadri</name></json:item><json:item><name>I Robertson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>42</volume><pages><last>152</last><first>139</first></pages><author></author><title>Applied Psychology: An International Review</title></host><title>Self efficacy and word-related behavior: A review and meta-analysis</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C Scott</name></json:item><json:item><name>S Rockwell</name></json:item></author><host><volume>46</volume><pages><last>62</last><first>44</first></pages><author></author><title>Communication Education</title></host><title>The effect of communication, writing and technology apprehension on likelihood to use new communication technologies</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A Siann</name></json:item><json:item><name>H MacLeod</name></json:item><json:item><name>P Glissov</name></json:item><json:item><name>A Durndell</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>191</last><first>183</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers and Education</title></host><title>The effect of computer use on gender differences in attitudes towards computers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B Szajna</name></json:item></author><host><volume>54</volume><pages><last>934</last><first>926</first></pages><author></author><title>Educational and Psychological Measurement</title></host><title>An investigation into the predictive validity of computer anxiety and computer attitude</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B Szajna</name></json:item><json:item><name>J.M Mackay</name></json:item></author><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>369</last><first>361</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction</title></host><title>Predictors of learning performance in a computer-user training environment: A path-analytic study</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Todman</name></json:item><json:item><name>G Dick</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>203</last><first>199</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers and Education</title></host><title>Primary children and teacher's attitudes to computers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Todman</name></json:item><json:item><name>E Monaghan</name></json:item></author><host><volume>10</volume><pages><last>539</last><first>529</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Qualitative differences in computer experience, computer anxiety and students' use of computers: A path model</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Torkzada</name></json:item><json:item><name>X Koufteros</name></json:item></author><host><volume>54</volume><pages><last>821</last><first>813</first></pages><author></author><title>Educational and Psychological Measurements</title></host><title>Factorial validity of a computer self efficacy scale and the impact of computer training</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M.M Weil</name></json:item><json:item><name>L.D Rosen</name></json:item><json:item><name>D.C Sears</name></json:item></author><host><volume>19</volume><pages><last>184</last><first>180</first></pages><author></author><title>Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers</title></host><title>The Computerphobia Reduction Program. Year 1. Program development and preliminary results</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B Whitely</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>289</last><first>275</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Gender differences in computer related attitudes. It depends on what you ask</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B Whitely</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>22</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Gender differences in computer-related attitudes and behavior: A meta-analysis</title></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>15</volume><pii><json:string>S0747-5632(00)X0016-7</json:string></pii><pages><last>121</last><first>105</first></pages><issn><json:string>0747-5632</json:string></issn><issue>2</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1999</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X</json:string></doi><id>190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8</id><score>0.020273626</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>©1999 Elsevier Science Ltd</p></availability><date>1999</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content">Fig. 1: A model of word-processor usage. 1Measure taken at the end of a 13-week semester. All other measures taken at the beginning of the semester.</note><note type="content">Table 1: Distributions of experimental variables (n=147)</note><note type="content">Table 2: Sex differences in the experimental variables</note><note type="content">Table 3:</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">M.J</forename><surname>Brosnan</surname></persName><note type="biography">Requests for reprints should be addressed to Mark J. Brosnan, Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK. E-mail: m.j.brosnan@greenwich.ac.uk</note><affiliation>Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Computers in Human Behavior</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">CHB</title><idno type="pISSN">0747-5632</idno><idno type="PII">S0747-5632(00)X0016-7</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1999"></date><biblScope unit="volume">15</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="105">105</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="121">121</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X</idno><idno type="PII">S0747-5632(98)00020-X</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1999</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>After theory of reasoned action, Davis (1986Davis, 1993) and Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) proposed the Technology Acceptance Model to account for how perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitudes predict behavioral intention to use computers. This study combined these factors with measures from Bandura's self efficacy theory (computer self efficacy and computer anxiety; Bandura 1977, 1986) in conjunction with assessments of current computer experience. A total of 147 undergraduates completed a series of questionnaires at the beginning and end of a 13-week semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that self-reported word-processor usage over a 13-week period was predicted by levels of usage at the beginning of the semester, expected usage, and perceived usefulness. Initial levels of usage and perceived usefulness were both predicted by levels of computer anxiety. A combination of the variables formulated by the Technology Acceptance Model and self efficacy theory account for 45% of the variance in self-reported computing behavior over a 13-week period. The theoretical implications are discussed.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>Computer anxiety</term></item><item><term>Word processing</term></item><item><term>Self efficacy theory</term></item><item><term>Technology Acceptance Model</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1999">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier, elements deleted: ce:floats; body; tail"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 4.5.2//EN//XML" URI="art452.dtd" name="istex:docType"><istex:entity SYSTEM="gr1" NDATA="IMAGE" name="gr1"></istex:entity></istex:docType><istex:document><converted-article version="4.5.2" docsubtype="fla"><item-info><jid>CHB</jid><aid>204</aid><ce:pii>S0747-5632(98)00020-X</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X</ce:doi><ce:copyright year="1999" type="full-transfer">Elsevier Science Ltd</ce:copyright></item-info><head><ce:title>Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>M.J</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Brosnan</ce:surname><ce:cross-ref refid="CORR1">*</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:affiliation><ce:textfn>Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:correspondence id="CORR1"><ce:label>*</ce:label><ce:text>Requests for reprints should be addressed to Mark J. Brosnan, Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK. E-mail: m.j.brosnan@greenwich.ac.uk</ce:text></ce:correspondence></ce:author-group><ce:abstract><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>After theory of reasoned action, <ce:cross-ref refid="BIB16">Davis (1986</ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="BIB17">Davis, 1993</ce:cross-ref>) and Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) proposed the Technology Acceptance Model to account for how perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitudes predict behavioral intention to use computers. This study combined these factors with measures from Bandura's self efficacy theory (computer self efficacy and computer anxiety; <ce:cross-refs refid="BIB5 BIB7">Bandura 1977, 1986</ce:cross-refs>) in conjunction with assessments of current computer experience. A total of 147 undergraduates completed a series of questionnaires at the beginning and end of a 13-week semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that self-reported word-processor usage over a 13-week period was predicted by levels of usage at the beginning of the semester, expected usage, and perceived usefulness. Initial levels of usage and perceived usefulness were both predicted by levels of computer anxiety. A combination of the variables formulated by the Technology Acceptance Model and self efficacy theory account for 45% of the variance in self-reported computing behavior over a 13-week period. The theoretical implications are discussed.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract><ce:keywords class="keyword"><ce:section-title>Keywords</ce:section-title><ce:keyword><ce:text>Computer anxiety</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Word processing</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Self efficacy theory</ce:text></ce:keyword><ce:keyword><ce:text>Technology Acceptance Model</ce:text></ce:keyword></ce:keywords></head></converted-article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">M.J</namePart><namePart type="family">Brosnan</namePart><affiliation>Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK</affiliation><description>Requests for reprints should be addressed to Mark J. Brosnan, Division of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Greenwich, Southwood Site, Avery Hill Campus, Avery Hill Road, Eltham, London SE9 2HB, UK. E-mail: m.j.brosnan@greenwich.ac.uk</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1999</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1999</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">After theory of reasoned action, Davis (1986Davis, 1993) and Davis, Bagozzi, and Warshaw (1989) proposed the Technology Acceptance Model to account for how perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitudes predict behavioral intention to use computers. This study combined these factors with measures from Bandura's self efficacy theory (computer self efficacy and computer anxiety; Bandura 1977, 1986) in conjunction with assessments of current computer experience. A total of 147 undergraduates completed a series of questionnaires at the beginning and end of a 13-week semester. A multiple regression analysis revealed that self-reported word-processor usage over a 13-week period was predicted by levels of usage at the beginning of the semester, expected usage, and perceived usefulness. Initial levels of usage and perceived usefulness were both predicted by levels of computer anxiety. A combination of the variables formulated by the Technology Acceptance Model and self efficacy theory account for 45% of the variance in self-reported computing behavior over a 13-week period. The theoretical implications are discussed.</abstract><note type="content">Fig. 1: A model of word-processor usage. 1Measure taken at the end of a 13-week semester. All other measures taken at the beginning of the semester.</note><note type="content">Table 1: Distributions of experimental variables (n=147)</note><note type="content">Table 2: Sex differences in the experimental variables</note><note type="content">Table 3: </note><subject><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>Computer anxiety</topic><topic>Word processing</topic><topic>Self efficacy theory</topic><topic>Technology Acceptance Model</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>CHB</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><originInfo><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">19990301</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0747-5632</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0747-5632(00)X0016-7</identifier><part><date>19990301</date><detail type="volume"><number>15</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>2</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue pages"><start>105</start><end>254</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>105</start><end>121</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00020-X</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0747-5632(98)00020-X</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©1999 Elsevier Science Ltd</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>ELSEVIER</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Elsevier Science Ltd, ©1999</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001567 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001567 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:190D04CFE77B77C208281D4BE43C77EAF44A9FF8
|texte= Modeling technophobia: a case for word processing
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |