The Evolving Nature of the Computer Self-Efficacy Construct: An Empirical Investigation of Measurement Construction, Validity, Reliability and Stability Over Time

This paper reports an empirical study intended to provide detailed comparisons amongst and between the varieties of available measures of computer self-efficacy (CSE). Our purpose is to ascertain their relative abilities to isolate the CSE construct from other related constructs and to capture variance in performance attributed to changes in CSE level. In addition, we investigate the importance of ensuring the measure being used is sufficiently aligned with the task domain of interest. Finally, we explore the stability of CSE measures as they relate to the current state of evolution within the computing domain. Marakas, Yi, and Johnson (1998) proposed a framework for the construction of instruments intended to measure the CSE construct that we have adopted as a basis for this series of investigations. To that end, we advance and test a set of hypotheses derived from the Marakas et al. (1998) framework. Results of the analyses support the need for adherence to the tenets of the proposed framework as well as provide evidence that CSE measures suffer from degradation of their explanatory power over time. Further, this study brings forth the importance of appropriately validating measures of CSE using approaches intended for a formative rather than a reflective construct. These results suggest that the common practices of instrument validation and reuse of long-standing instruments to measure CSE may not be the most effective approach to the study of the construct. Implications for future research are discussed.

[1]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  The mismeasure of man(agement) and its implications for leadership research , 2003 .

[2]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[3]  Robert W. Lent,et al.  Self-efficacy as a moderator of scholastic aptitude: Academic performance relationships. , 1989 .

[4]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[5]  Drew B. Brock,et al.  Attitudes toward computers: Construct validation and relations to computer use , 1994 .

[6]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Extending the technology acceptance model: the influence of perceived user resources , 2001, DATB.

[7]  Dallas E. Johnson,et al.  Analysis of messy data , 1992 .

[8]  Marilyn E. Gist,et al.  Self-Efficacy: A Theoretical Analysis of Its Determinants and Malleability , 1992 .

[9]  T. Busch.  Gender Differences in Self-Efficacy and Attitudes toward Computers , 1995 .

[10]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Diffusing the Internet in the Arab world: the role of social norms and technological culturation , 2003, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[11]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research , 2004, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[12]  William M. K. Trochim,et al.  Research methods knowledge base , 2001 .

[13]  Joseph J. Martocchio,et al.  Effects of conceptions of ability on anxiety, self-efficacy, and learning in training. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.

[14]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage , 1995 .

[15]  R. W. Stone,et al.  A Structural Equation Model Of End-User Satisfaction With A Computer-Based Medical Information System , 1994 .

[16]  A. Bandura.  Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. , 1977, Psychological review.

[17]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Developing and Validating an Observational Learning Model of Computer Software Training and Skill Acquisition , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[18]  A. Bandura.  Social learning theory , 1977 .

[19]  Deborah Compeau,et al.  Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test , 1995, MIS Q..

[20]  Richard D. Johnson,et al.  The Multilevel and Multifaceted Character of Computer Self-Efficacy: Toward Clarification of the Construct and an Integrative Framework for Research , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[21]  Kittipong Laosethakul,et al.  Are Gender Perceptions of Computing Changing over Time? , 2003, J. Comput. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Feng-Yang Kuo,et al.  Development and Validation of Ethical Computer Self-Efficacy Measure: The Case of Softlifting , 2001 .

[23]  Mark R. Young.  Windowed, Wired, and Webbed—Now What? , 2001, Journal of Marketing Education.

[24]  A. Bandura.  GUIDE FOR CONSTRUCTING SELF-EFFICACY SCALES , 2006 .

[25]  James M. Smith.  The Effects of Education on Computer Self-Efficacy. , 1994 .

[26]  A. Russon,et al.  Making computer instruction accessible: Familiar analogies for female novices , 1994 .

[27]  Marilyn E. Gist,et al.  Self-Efficacy: Implications for Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management , 1987 .

[28]  Steven D. Brown,et al.  Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. , 1991 .

[29]  Peter G. W. Keen,et al.  Mis Research: Reference disciplines and a Cumulative Tradition , 1980, ICIS.

[30]  Joseph J. Martocchio,et al.  MICROCOMPUTER USAGE AS AN OPPORTUNITY: THE INFLUENCE OF CONTEXT IN EMPLOYEE TRAINING , 2006 .

[31]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  Joseph J. Martocchio,et al.  EFFECTS OF FEEDBACK AND COGNITIVE PLAYFULNESS ON PERFORMANCE IN MICROCOMPUTER SOFTWARE TRAINING , 2006 .

[33]  G. Torkzadeh,et al.  Factorial Validity of a Computer Self-Efficacy Scale and the Impact of Computer Training , 1994 .

[34]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic - Mail Emotion/Adoption Study , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  R. Lennox,et al.  Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. , 1991 .

[36]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validation in Information Systems Research: A State-of-the-Art Assessment , 2001, MIS Q..

[37]  Robin L. West,et al.  Reliability and Validity of the Memory Self-Efficacy Questionnaire , 1989 .

[38]  Mable B. Kinzie,et al.  Computer Technologies in Teacher Education: The Measurement of Attitudes and Self-Efficacy. , 1993 .

[39]  Terence R. Mitchell,et al.  Predicting self-efficacy and performance during skill acquisition , 1994 .

[40]  Allison W. Harrison,et al.  An Examination of the Factor Structures and Concurrent Validities for the Computer Attitude Scale, the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale, and the Computer Self-Efficacy Scale , 1992 .

[41]  John R. Rossiter,et al.  The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing , 2002 .

[42]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Developing and validating an observational learning model of computer software training , 1998 .

[43]  A. Bandura.  Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy.

[44]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[45]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validating Instruments in MIS Research , 1989, MIS Q..

[46]  M. Gordon,et al.  The “Science of the Sophomore” Revisited: from Conjecture to Empiricism , 1986 .

[47]  Deborah Compeau,et al.  Application of Social Cognitive Theory to Training for Computer Skills , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[48]  Vallabh Sambamurthy,et al.  Research Report: The Evolving Relationship Between General and Specific Computer Self-Efficacy - An Empirical Assessment , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[49]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  A Short Form Measure of User Information Satisfaction: A Psychometric Evaluation and Notes on Use , 1987, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[50]  Richard D. Johnson,et al.  Research Report: The Role of Behavioral Modeling in Computer Skills Acquisition: Toward Refinement of the Model , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[51]  Philip Bobko,et al.  Self-efficacy beliefs: Comparison of five measures. , 1994 .

[52]  Cheryl Burke Jarvis,et al.  A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research , 2003 .

[53]  Thomas Hill,et al.  Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers. , 1987 .

[54]  Walter P. Vispoel,et al.  Measuring Self-Efficacy: The State of the Art. , 1990 .

[55]  I. Miura,et al.  The relationship of computer self-efficacy expectations to computer interest and course enrollment in college , 1987 .

[56]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test† , 1996 .

[57]  Richard T. Christoph,et al.  Overcoming barriers to training utilizing technology: The influence of self‐efficacy factors on multimedia‐based training receptiveness , 1998 .

[58]  R. Heinssen,et al.  Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale , 1987 .

[59]  D. Campbell.  Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. , 1960, Psychological review.

[60]  Barbara L. Grabowski,et al.  The effects of computer self-efficacy on direction-following behavior in computer assisted instruction , 1992 .

[61]  H. Winklhofer,et al.  Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development , 2001 .

[62]  Michel Ferrari,et al.  Computer-related attitudes and actions of teacher candidates , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[63]  Paula Jorde-Bloom,et al.  Factors Influencing Early Childhood Administrators' Decisions regarding the Adoption of Computer Technology , 1988 .

[64]  Peter A. Todd,et al.  Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[65]  A. Bandura.  Reflections on self-efficacy , 1978 .

[66]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Changing patterns or patterns of change: the effects of a change in technology on social network str , 1990 .

[67]  Thomas Hill,et al.  Communicating Innovations: Convincing Computer Phobics to Adopt Innovative Technologies , 1986 .

[68]  Robert W. Stone,et al.  The development and validation of computer self-efficacy and outcome expectancy scales in a nonvolitional context , 1997 .

[69]  A. Adam.  Whatever happened to information systems ethics? Caught between the devil and the deep blue sea , 2004 .

[70]  S. Owen,et al.  Development and Validation of the Computer Self-Efficacy Scale , 1989 .

[71]  Ron Henderson,et al.  Occupational differences in computer-related anxiety: implications for the implementation of a computerized patient management information system , 1995, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[72]  D. Cervone,et al.  Anchoring, Efficacy and Action: The Influence of Judgmental Heuristics on Self-Efficacy Judgments a , 1986 .

[73]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[74]  Larry N. Killough,et al.  Testing the Interaction Effects of Task Complexity in Computer Training Using the Social Cognitive Model , 2001, Decis. Sci..

[75]  Marilyn E. Gist,et al.  EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE TRAINING METHODS ON SELF-EFFICACY AND PERFORMANCE IN COMPUTER SOFTWARE TRAINING , 1989 .

[76]  Jane Webster,et al.  The Differential Effects of Software Training Previews on Training Outcomes , 1995 .

[77]  A. Bandura,et al.  Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational Management , 1989 .

[78]  Clarice P. Gressard,et al.  Reliability and Factorial Validity of Computer Attitude Scales , 1984 .