CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 182Gender and Technology in EducationCommunication in Education and HealthcareTechnology Use by Older Adults

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effect of communication, writing, and technology apprehension on likelihood to use new communication technologies

Scott, Craig R., Rockwell, Steven C.·1997·Communication Education
DOI 10.1080/03634529709379072
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study explores the role of computer anxiety, communication apprehension, and writing apprehension in predicting future use of new communication technologies. Past research has rarely examined these constructs as predictors of future use and has not considered the impact of writing and communication apprehension on text‐based and phone‐based technologies, which are used primarily for interaction. Survey results from 178 undergraduate students tend to support hypotheses about the relevance of computer anxiety and communication apprehension in predicting future technology use, but not those with regard to writing apprehension. Furthermore, past experience appears to be a strong predictor of future use; however, gender differences are rare. The implications of these findings for educational contexts are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/03634529709379072

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Artwohl M. J., 1989, What research says about keyboarding skills and computer anxiety
  2. Brod C., 1984, Technostress
  3. Champion S., 1988, School Library Journal, 35, 48
  4. Flaherty, L. M., Pearce, K. J., Barta, A. L. and Rubin, R. B. Uses of the Internet as a functional alternative to face‐to‐face communication. Paper presented at International Communication Association Conference. Chicago, IL. May.
  5. 10.2466/PR0.67.5.311-314 · DOI
  6. 10.2466/PR0.69.5.179-182 · DOI
  7. Lustig M. W., 1990, Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 5, 309
  8. McCroskey J. C., 1984, Avoiding communication: Shyness, reticence, and communication apprehension, 13
  9. Parasuraman, S. and Igbaria, M. Gender, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward microcomputers. Proceedings of the 1988 Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute. pp.588–591. Atlanta, GA: Decision Sciences Institute.
  10. Reinsch N. L., 1985, Office Systems Research Journal, 4, 9
  11. Seibold D. R., 1992, ACA Bulletin, 81, 19
  12. Williams S., 1994, Mobile Register, 9E

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 182

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Scott, C. R., & Rockwell, S. C.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
ORCID
Scott, Craig R.
Venue
Communication Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1997-01
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
44-62
ISSN
  • 0363-4523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1479-5795
DOI
10.1080/03634529709379072
OpenAlex
W1996905345
Cited by
182
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 9
FWCI
21.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Communication Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Communication in Education and Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Technology Use by Older Adults
Keywords
computer anxiety, communication apprehension, writing apprehension, intention to use technology, new communication technologies, text-based communication, prior experience, gender differences, undergraduate students, educational technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review