پیش‌بینی نگرش به کامپیوتر بر اساس سرسختی روان‌شناختی، خودکارآمدی و انگیزش پیشرفت

محورهای موضوعی : فن‎آوری اطلاعات

اعظم مرادی ¹ , افسانه بنی طالبی ² , سحر پژوهش ³

1 - استادیار گروه روان‌شناسی، بخش علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی، دانشگاه پیام نور
2 - مربی گروه مهندسی کامپیوتر و فن‌آوری اطلاعات، بخش فنی و مهندسی، دانشگاه پیام نور
3 - کارشناس روانشناسی

تاریخ دریافت : 1392/09/01 تاریخ پذیرش : 1392/08/10 تاریخ انتشار : 1393/02/11

کلید واژه: دانشجویان, دانشگاه پیام نور, خودکارآمدی, نگرش به کامپیوتر, سرسختی روان‌شناختی,

چکیده مقاله :

هدف این تحقیق، تعیین سهم هر یک از متغیرهای سرسختی روان‌شناختی، خودکارآمدی و انگیزش پیشرفت در پیش‌بینی نگرش به کامپیوتر در دانشجویان دانشگاه پیام نور مرکز شهرکرد بود. نوع تحقیق، همبستگی از نوع پیش‌بینی بود. جامعه آماری، شامل تمام دانشجویان دانشگاه پیام نور مرکز شهرکرد در نیمسال اول سال تحصیلی 92-1391 بود. نمونه پژوهش عبارت بود از 100 نفر از جامعه آماری که به شیوه تصادفی طبقه‌ای (بر حسب رشته تحصیلی)، از 10 رشته این دانشگاه انتخاب شدند. برای اندازه‌گیری متغیرهای تحقیق از مقیاس نگرش به کامپیوتر (CAS)، پرسش‌نامه سرسختی اهواز (AHI)، مقیاس خودکارآمدی عمومی (GSE) و پرسش‌نامه انگیزش پیشرفت هرمنس استفاده شد. داده‌ها با استفاده از آمار توصیفی و تحلیل رگرسیون گام به گام مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. یافته‌ها نشان داد که سرسختی روان‌شناختی به طور معناداری نگرش به کامپیوتر دانشجویان را پیش‌بینی می‌کند (000/0 =P) و افزودن متغیر خودکارآمدی به متغیر سرسختی روان‌شناختی، قدرت پیش‌بینی نگرش به کامپیوتر دانشجویان را افزایش می‌دهد (000/0 = P)، اما، اضافه شدن متغیر انگیزش پیشرفت به معادله باعث افزایش معنادار قدرت پیش‌بینی نگرش به کامپیوتر در دانشجویان دانشگاه پیام نور مرکز شهرکرد نمی‎شود. نتیجه این‌که از جمله راه‌‌های بهبود نگرش دانشجویان به کامپیوتر، تقویت سرسختی روان‌شناختی و خودکارآمدی در آنها است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

The purpose of this study was to determine the share of psychological hardiness, self-efficacy and achievement motivation in predicting computer attitude of students in Payam Noor University of Shahre Kord. The type of the research was predictive correlation. The statistical population consisted of all students in Payam Noor University in the first semester of the academic year 2011-2012. For sampling, 100 students of 10 fields of study were selected by stratified random sampling method. Computer Attitude Scale (CAS), Ahvas Hardiness Inventory (AHI), General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) and Herman's achievement motivation questionnaire were used for measuring the research variables. Descriptive statistics and stepwise regression was used for data analysis. Results showed that psychological hardiness could significantly predict the computer attitude in students (P = 0.000), and adding self-efficacy to psychological hardiness increased significantly the predicting power of their computer attitude (P = 0.000); but adding achievement motivation variable to psychological hardiness and self-efficacy variables could not increase significantly the predicting power of computer attitude in these subjects.Consequently, according to the evidence, one of the ways to improve students' attitude to computer is strengthening the psychological hardiness and self-efficacy.  

منابع و مأخذ:

1. Ahmadi, E., & Jadidi, A. (2011). A study of the relationship of internet perceived complexity to internet perceived ease of use and internet perceived usefulness among school managers. Quarterly Journal of New Approaches in Educational Administration, 2(3(, 89-106. (in Persian).


2. Ahmadi Dehghotbaddini, M., Mashkani,M., & Mohammad Khani, A. (2010). Effects of computer self-efficacy and computer anxiety on Davis, technology acceptance model constructs: New perspectives of social psychology. Psychological Research, 13(1), 51-72. (in Persian).


3. Akbari Bourang, M., & Rezaian, H. (2008). Study of computer anxiety in Arak University students and its relationship with computer self-efficacy. Iranian Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology, 14(1), 90-92. (in Persian).


4. Aliabadi, K., & Moshtaghi Largani, S. (2006). Reliability of “computer attitude skills” (Persian form), determining its factorial structure and correlation between CAS and personal characteristics of Tehran Universities’ students. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 12(2), 111-126. (in Persian).


5. Askar, P., & Umay, A. (2001). Perceived computer self-efficacy of the students in the elementary mathematics teaching program Hacettepe University. Journal of Education, 33(21), 1-8.


6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall: New Jersey.


7. Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. Retrieved from www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/Banduraindex.html#guide


8. Cakir, O. (2012). Students' self confidence and attitude regarding computer: An international analysis based on computer availability and gender factor. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1017 – 1022.


9. Collins, C. J., Hanges, P. J., & Locke, E. A. (2004). The relationship of achievement motivation to entrepreneurial behavior: A meta-analysis. Human Performance, 17(1), 95-117.


10. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceive ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319- 339.


11. 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.


12. Durndell, A., & Haag, Z. (2002).  Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, attitudes towards the Internet and reported experience with the Internet, by gender, in an East European sample. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(5), 521-535.


13. Feyzi, A., Neshatdoust, H., & Naeli, H. (2002). Relationship between psychological hardiness and coping strategies in university students. Journal of Psychology, 5(4), 303-315. (in Persian).


14. Francis, L. J., Katz Y. J., & Jones, S. H. (2000). The reliability and validity of the Hebrew version of computer attitude scale. Computer & Education, 35(2), 149-159.


15. Fraser, C. (1994). Attitudes, social representations and widespread beliefs. Papers on social representations. Textessur lesions Sociales, 3 (1), 1- 138.


16. Gholamali Lavasani, M. (2003). The study of relationship between individual variables with computer anxiety among undergraduate students at University of Tehran. Journal of Psychology and Education, 32(2), 109-133. (in Persian).


17. Gholamali Lavasani, M. (2004). Preparation a structural equation modeling for computer anxiety among university students in Iran. Journal of Psychology and Education, 34(1), 77-97. (in Persian).


18. Gholamali Lavasani, M., Ezheei, J., Ghorban Jahromi, R., & Rastegar, A. (2009). The relationship between achievement goal and epistemological beliefs with computer anxiety. Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 462-475. (in Persian).


19. Hermans, H. J. M. (1970). A questionnaire measure of achievement motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(4), 353-363. (in Persian).


20. Hooman, H. A. (2001). Multivariate data analysis in scientific research. Tehran: Parsa Publishing. (in Persian).


21. Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1979). The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Retrieved Oct 7, 2006, from www.healthpsych.de


22. Kadijevich, D. (2000). The relationships between computer usage and computer-related attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(2), 145-154.


23. Karacas, A. (2012). Motivational attitudes of ELT students towards using computers for writing and communication. Teaching English with Technology, 11(3), 37-53.


24. Kiamarsi, A., Najarian, B., & Mehrabizadeh Honarmand, A. (1998). Construct and validate a scale to measure the psychological hardiness. Journal of Psychology, 2(3), 271-284. (in Persian).


25. Korobili, S., Togia, A., & Malliari, A. (2010).  Computer anxiety and attitudes among undergraduate students in Greece. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 399-405.


26. Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressfull life event, personality and health: An inquiry to hardiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1-11.


27. Kosaka, M. (1996). Relation between hardiness and psychological stress response. Journal of Performance Studies, 3, 35-40.


28. Kurbanoglu, S. S. (2003). Self-efficacy: A concept closely linked to information literacy and lifelong learning. Journal of Documentation, 59(6), 635-646.


29. Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1998). Computer use, confidence, attitudes, and knowledge: A causal analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 14, 125-46.


30. Maddi, S. R. (2006). Hardiness: The courage to grow from stresses. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 160-168.


31. McClelland, D. C. (1961). The Achieving Society. Princeton, NJ: Van No strand.


32. Moradi, A. (2010). The effect of self-esteem, self-efficacy and achievement motivation on quality of life and entrepreneurial behavior in young females: A model for individuals with physical-motor disability. Ph.D. thesis, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran. (in Persian).


33. Orr, E., & Wstman, M. (1990). Does hardiness moderate stress and how? A review. In M. Rosenbaum (ED). Learned Resourcefulness: On coping skills, self-control, and adaptive behavior (pp.64-94). New York: Springer.


34. Öztürk, M. C., & Ve Ayman, M. (2007). Using Web Sites for the public relations. Selçuk University Communication Faculty Academy Magazine, (4)4, 57-66.


35. Pajares, F. (1996). Self efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.


36. Parayitam, S., Desai, K. J., Desai, M. S., & Eason, M. K. (2010). Computer attitude as a moderator in the relationship between computer anxiety, satisfaction, and stress. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 345-352.


37. Popovich, P. M., Gullekson, N., Morris, S., & Morse, B. (2008). Comparing attitude towards computer usage by undergraduates from 1986 to 2005. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 986-992.


38. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and application. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall


39. Rajabi, G. R. (2006). Reliability and validity of the General Self-Efficacy Beliefs Scale (GSE-10). New Thoughts on Education, 2(1-2), 111-122. (in Persian).


40. Sarabadani, L., Bolvardi, A., & Ghiasi, M. (2012). Survey of relation between computer anxiety with academic achievement, self esteem and gender of veterans students in Tehran in 2011. Iranian Journal of War and Public Health, 4(1), 16-23. (in Persian).


41. Saracaloglu, A. S. (2000). Fen ve edebiyat fakülteleri örencilerinin öretmenlik mesleine ilikin görüleri. Izmir: E. U. Edebiyat Fakultesi Yayinari, No:100.


42. Saracaloglu, A. S., Serin, O., Serin, N. B., & Serin, U. (2010). Analyzing attitudes of candidate teachers towards computer in terms of various factors. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3494–3499.


43. Scholz, U., Gutierrez Doza, B., Sud, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2002). Is general self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18, 242-251.


44. Schwarzer, R. (1994). Optimism, vulnerability and self-beliefs as health related cognitions: A systematic overview. Psychology and Health, 9, 161-180.


45. Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In S. Wright, & M. Johnston, and J. Weinman, (Eds.). Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs (pp. 35-37). Windsor, UK: nferNelson.


46. Schwarzer, R., Bäßler, J., Kwiatek, P., Schröder, K., & Zhang, J. X. (1997). The assessment of optimistic self-beliefs: Comparison of the German, Spanish, and Chinese versions of the general self efficacy scale. Applied Psychology, 46(1), 69-88.


47. Schwarzer, R., Schmitz, G. S., & Tang, C. (2000). Teacher burnout in Hong Kong and Germany: A cross-cultural validation of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 13(3), 309-326.


48. Shapka, J. D., & Ferrari, M. (2003). Computer related attitudes and actions of teacher candidates. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 319-334.


49. Shokrkon, H., Boroumandnasab, M., Najarian, B., & Shehni Yeylagh, M. (2003). Examining sample and multi relationships between creativity, achievement motivation, and self-esteem with entrepreneurship in students of Shahid Chamran University. Journal of Education and Psychology, 9(3-4), 1-24. (in Persian).


50. Simsek, C. S. S. (2008). Students’ attitudes towards integration of ICT in a reading course: A case in Turkey. Computers & Education, 51, 200-211.


51. Slavin, R. E. (2006). Educational Psychology: Theory and application (Translated by Yahya Syed Mohammadi). Publisher: Ravan publishing.


52. Talebpour, A., A. Nouri, H. Moulavi. (2002). The effects of cognitive training on locus of control achievement motivation and academic performance of high school students. Journal of Psychology, 6(1), 18-29. (in Persian).


53. Tomte, C., & Hatlevic, O. (2011). Gender- differences in self-efficacy ICT related to various ICT-user profiles in Finland and Norway: How do self-efficacy, gender and ICT-user profiles relate to findings from PISA 2006. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1416-1424.


54. Warschauer, M. (1996). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing and communication. In Mark Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawai'i symposium. pp. 29–46.


55. Winter, S. J., Chudoba, K. M., & Gutek, B. A. (1998).  Attitudes toward Computers: When do they predict Computer use? Information & Management, 34(5), 275-284.


56. Wu, C. H. (2009). Factor analysis of the general self-efficacy scale and its relationship with individualism/collectivism among twenty –five countries: Application of multilevel confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 699-703.


57. Yu, S., & Yang, K. (2006). Attitudes toward web-based distance learning among public health nurses in Taiwan: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43, 767-774.