The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Multilevel and Multifaceted Character of Computer Self-Efficacy: Toward Clarification of the Construct and an Integrative Framework for Research
Abstract
Despite the recent empirical interest and advances in research with regard to the construct of computer self-efficacy (CSE), the results obtained to date have, in some cases, been either equivocal or contradictory. We suggest that such results may be attributable to a general lack of attention to the dynamic, multileveled, and multifaceted nature of the computer self-efficacy construct. We offer examples from the extant CSE literature suggesting weaknesses in existing measures of the construct as well as issues associated with manipulations and the need for control of antecedent and consequent factors directly associated with CSE. The objectives of this paper are: (1) to provide a thorough review of the extant literature related to CSE; (2) to present an integrated model of empirical findings, constructed from a wide variety of disciplines, that comprehensively defines the multifaceted nature of task-specific CSE in terms of its antecedent, consequent, and moderating factors; (3) to present a conceptual model of CSE at the general versus task-specific level; and (4) to use the two models of CSE to proffer guidelines for both measurement and manipulation of the construct. Through our review of the CSE literature, we offer several thoughts regarding the nature of the empirical results obtained to date. The combined objectives serve as a basis for establishing a foundation upon which future research investigating the CSE construct can be based.
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
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
“Stress: appraisal and coping,”
Folkman, S. (2013) · Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_215 · Cited by 27,833
Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency
Bandura, A. (1982) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122 · Cited by 15,975
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144 · Cited by 8,815
The Self-Efficacy Scale: Construction and Validation
Sherer, M., Maddux, J. E., Mercandante, B., Prentice-Dunn, S., Jacobs, B., & Rogers, R. W. (1982) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663 · Cited by 4,028
A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x · Cited by 3,802
Cited by
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250951 · Cited by 4,726
Sun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y., & Yeh, D. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007 · Cited by 2,726
A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information Systems Research
Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2011) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1954824 · Cited by 1,849
A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review
Okoli, C. (2015) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03743 · Cited by 1,413
Yi, M. Y., Jackson, J. D., Park, J. S., & Probst, J. C. (2006) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2005.08.006 · Cited by 1,139
Self-citationHong, W., Thong, J. Y. L., Wong, W.-M., & Tam, K.-Y. (2002) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2002.11045692 · Cited by 827
Ahuja, M. K., & Bennett, J. (2005) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148691 · Cited by 818
The influence of technology on the future of human resource management
Stone, D. L., Deadrick, D. L., Lukaszewski, K. M., & Johnson, R. (2015) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.01.002 · Cited by 618
Self-citationUser acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model
Lee, D. Y., & Lehto, M. R. (2013) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.001 · Cited by 565
Internet Privacy Concerns: An Integrated Conceptualization and Four Empirical Studies1
Hong, W., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37.1.12 · Cited by 540
Shu, Q., Tu, Q., & Wang, K. (2011) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.555313 · Cited by 434
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Lai, C.-H. (2011) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650210377091 · Cited by 390
Research Note—Two Competing Perspectives on Automatic Use: A Theoretical and Empirical Comparison
Kim, S. S., Malhotra, N. K., & Narasimhan, S. (2005) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1050.0070 · Cited by 381
The adoption of information technology in the sales force
Schillewaert, N., Ahearne, M. J., Frambach, R. T., & Moenaert, R. K. (2005) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.013 · Cited by 362
(2004) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 315
Information and communication technology: Implications for job stress and employee well-being
Day, A., Scott, N., & Kevin Kelloway, E. (2010) · Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being · doi:10.1108/s1479-3555(2010)0000008011 · Cited by 218
Self-efficacy and acceptance of robots
Latikka, R., Turja, T., & Oksanen, A. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.017 · Cited by 200
Polites, G. L., & Karahanna, E. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37.1.10 · Cited by 174
YouTube stickiness: the needs, personal, and environmental perspective
Chiang, H.-S., & Hsiao, K.-L. (2015) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-11-2013-0236 · Cited by 161
From concerns to benefits: A comprehensive study of ChatGPT usage in education
Jo, H. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00471-4 · Cited by 146
Exploring the influence of perceptual factors in the success of web-based spatial DSS
Jarupathirun, S., & Zahedi, F. “. (2007) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.024 · Cited by 145
I Know I Can, But Can We?: Culture and Efficacy Beliefs in Global Virtual Teams
Hardin, A. M., Fuller, M. A., & Davison, R. M. (2007) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/1046496406297041 · Cited by 132
Aesaert, K., van Nijlen, D., Vanderlinde, R., & van Braak, J. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.03.013 · Cited by 132
Teacher Training Institute, M., Cheok, M. L., Wong, S. L., & Faculty of Educational Studies, U. P. M. (2015) · International Journal of Instruction · doi:10.12973/iji.2015.816a · Cited by 127
Agogo, D., & Hess, T. J. (2018) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2018.1435230 · Cited by 121
Matook, S., Cummings, J., & Bala, H. (2015) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2014.1001282 · Cited by 117
Pamuk, S., & Peker, D. (2009) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.004 · Cited by 111
Perceived versus actual computer-email-web fluency
Bunz, U., Curry, C., & Voon, W. (2007) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.03.008 · Cited by 106
Cao, J., Li, J., Wang, Y., & Ai, M. (2022) · Security and Communication Networks · doi:10.1155/2022/2904447 · Cited by 61
“For instance, the general sense of efficacy significantly affects the self-efficacy of mobile auctions [17]; general computer efficacy positively affects a certain specific computer efficacy [50]; general network self-efficacy positively affects the self-efficacy of a certain network service [22].”
BackgroundRetractedA Model of the Relationship among Consumer Trust, Web Design and User Attributes
Zhang, X., Prybutok, V. R., Ryan, S., & Pavur, R. (2009) · Journal of Organizational and End User Computing · doi:10.4018/joeuc.2009040103 · Cited by 32
(2015) · International Conference on Information Systems · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Marakas, G. M., Yi, M. Y., & Johnson, R. D.
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 1998-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 126-163
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W2146733310
- Cited by
- 892
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 34.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
