The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Computer Proficiency Questionnaire: Assessing Low and High Computer Proficient Seniors
Open accessAbstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Computers and the Internet have the potential to enrich the lives of seniors and aid in the performance of important tasks required for independent living. A prerequisite for reaping these benefits is having the skills needed to use these systems, which is highly dependent on proper training. One prerequisite for efficient and effective training is being able to gauge current levels of proficiency. We developed a new measure (the Computer Proficiency Questionnaire, or CPQ) to measure computer proficiency in the domains of computer basics, printing, communication, Internet, calendaring software, and multimedia use. Our aim was to develop a measure appropriate for individuals with a wide range of proficiencies from noncomputer users to extremely skilled users. DESIGN AND METHODS: To assess the reliability and validity of the CPQ, a diverse sample of older adults, including 276 older adults with no or minimal computer experience, was recruited and asked to complete the CPQ. RESULTS: The CPQ demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach's α = .98), with subscale reliabilities ranging from .86 to .97. Age, computer use, and general technology use all predicted CPQ scores. Factor analysis revealed three main factors of proficiency related to Internet and e-mail use; communication and calendaring; and computer basics. Based on our findings, we also developed a short-form CPQ (CPQ-12) with similar properties but 21 fewer questions. IMPLICATIONS: The CPQ and CPQ-12 are useful tools to gauge computer proficiency for training and research purposes, even among low computer proficient older adults.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Czaja, S. J., Charness, N., Fisk, A. D., Hertzog, C., Nair, S. N., Rogers, W. A., & Sharit, J. (2006) · Psychology and Aging · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.333 · Cited by 2,113 · cited 4×
“The Technology Experience Questionnaire (TEQ; Czaja et al., 2006a) was also administered to all participants.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationFisk, A. D., Rogers, W. A., Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., & Sharit, J. (2004) · doi:10.1201/9781420023862 · Cited by 781
Self-citationDesigning for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches, Second Edition
Fisk, A. D., Czaja, S. J., Rogers, W. A., Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., & Sharit, J. (2018) · doi:10.1201/9781420080681 · Cited by 396
Self-citationOASIS Connections: Results From an Evaluation Study
Czaja, S. J., Lee, C. C., Branham, J., & Remis, P. (2012) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/gns004 · Cited by 29 · cited 1×
“In fact recent data from a study evaluating a community-based computer and Internet class designed for older adults indicated that an important area of needed course refinement was a method for matching the initial skill level of the course participants (Czaja, Lee, Branham, & Remis, 2012).”
MethodSelf-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- 2008, Development and validation of a computer expertise questionnaire for older adults, Behaviour & Information Technology, 27, 89, 10.1080/01449290701760633 · DOI
- 2002, An assessment of basic computer proficiency among active internet users: Test construction, calibration, antecedents and consequences, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 237, 10.3102/10769986027003237 · DOI
- 2009, Aging and information technology use potential and barriers, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 253, 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01647.x · DOI · Paper page
- 2006, Computer and Technology Experience Questionnaire. CREATE Technical Report CREATE-2006-03
- 2012, Designing training and instructional programs for older adults
- 1993, A practical research tool for assessing ability to use computers: The computer ability survey (CAS), Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26, 16, 10.1080/08886504.1993.10782074 · DOI
- 2008, The coming acceleration of global population ageing, Nature, 451, 716, 10.1038/nature06516 · DOI · Paper page
- 2004, When do older adults consider the internet? An exploratory study of benefit perception, Gerontechnology, 3, 89
- 2006, Older adults’ motivated choice for technological innovation: Evidence for benefit-driven selectivity, Psychology and Aging, 21, 190, 10.1037/0882-7974.21.1.190 · DOI · Paper page
- 2010, Older adults talk technology: Technology usage and attitudes, Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1710, 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.020 · DOI · Paper page
- 2008, Older adults’ training preferences for learning to use technology, 2047
- 1996, A survey of automatic teller machine usage across the adult life span, Human Factors, 38, 156, 10.1518/001872096778940723 · DOI
- 2008, The computer literacy scale (CLS) for older adults–development and validation, Mensch & Computer, 7
Cited by
From internet access to internet skills: digital inequality among older adults
Hargittai, E., Piper, A. M., & Morris, M. R. (2019) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-018-0617-5 · Cited by 616
Czaja, S. J., Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Rogers, W. A., & Sharit, J. (2018) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/gnw249 · Cited by 466
Self-citation“Who over 65 is online?” Older adults’ dispositions toward information communication technology
Vroman, K. G., Arthanat, S., & Lysack, C. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.018 · Cited by 458
Digital literacy as a new determinant of health: A scoping review
Arias López, M. D. P., Ong, B. A., Borrat Frigola, X., Fernández, A. L., Hicklent, R. S., Obeles, A. J. T., Rocimo, A. M., & Celi, L. A. (2023) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000279 · Cited by 422
Technology Adoption by Older Adults: Findings From the PRISM Trial
Mitzner, T. L., Savla, J., Boot, W. R., Sharit, J., Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., & Rogers, W. A. (2019) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/gny113 · Cited by 311
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., Sharit, J., Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., Mitzner, T., Lee, C. C., & Nair, S.
- Venue
- The Gerontologist
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-10-09
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 404-411
- ISSN
- 0016-9013 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-5341
- OpenAlex
- W2051865918
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 22.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Computer Proficiency Questionnaire: Assessing Low and High Computer Proficient Seniors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/geront/gnt117
- The paper
- Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Czaja, S. J., Sharit, J., Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., Mitzner, T., Lee, C. C., & Nair, S. (2015). Computer Proficiency Questionnaire: Assessing Low and High Computer Proficient Seniors. The Gerontologist. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnt117
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
