Differences that do matter: A dialectic analysis of individual characteristics and personality dimensions contributing to computer anxiety

• Authors: Appa Rao Korukonda
• Venue: Computers in Human Behavior
• Year: 2007

Computer anxiety, as defined and operationalized in the human-computer studies literature, has been synonymous with negative thoughts and attitudes about the use of computers. This approach, together with correlational analyses that have formed the mainstay of research on computer anxiety, invokes two important points. First, it can be argued that computer anxiety, by definition, implies an attitude that is indicative of an extremity of thoughts and dispositions. Second, if one were to reject the strictly clinical definition of computer anxiety and adopt the more traditional measurements as well as the attendant statistical analyses based on the full sample, there is the clear possibility of dilution of statistically significant relations by observations in the middle range. This paper adopts Weil and Rosen's [Weil, M. M., & Rosen, L. D. (1995). The psychological impact of technology from a global perspective: a study of technological sophistication and computer anxiety in university students from twenty-three countries. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 95-133] definition of computer anxiety in terms of anxiety about interactions with computers and negative global attitudes, and ''negative cognitions'' or ''self-critical internal dialogs''. Using data from a study of 242 graduate and undergraduate students at a small private university in Western New York, the sample is segmented into high and low computer anxiety groups. These groups are then tested for significant differences in individual characteristics, including the Big Five personality dimensions, computer experience, math and verbal skills, and cognitive orientation. It is found that three of the personality dimensions (Neuroticism, Openness, and Agreeableness), one aspect of cognitive orientation (Flexibility), and verbal skills show statistically significant differences between the two groups. The evidence with respect to math skills and computer experience is mixed. Interpretation of results is presented. Limitations, delimitations, and potential directions for future research are discussed.