This study investigated whether gender and administration mode (computer vs. pencil and paper) influenced mean scores on four noncognitive psychological instruments (Equity Sensitivity Instrument, Rosenberg's Measure of Self-Esteem, Mach V Scale, and Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding). Undergraduate participants (N = 874) with previous computer experience voluntarily completed the instruments in either a computer or pencil-and-paper administration. Results indicated no statistically significant interaction effect between gender and administration mode, although statistically significant main effects for both gender and administration mode were found. These results offer promise that with respondents who have computer experience, gender does not appear to interact with administration mode to be a source of unaccounted-for variance when computers are used as an integral part of data collection.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, P. L. (1987). Individual differences in skill learning: An integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 3-27.
2.
Anderson, R. E. (1987). Females surpass males in computer problem solving: Findings from Minnesota computer literacy assessment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 39-53.
3.
Arch, E. C. , & Cummins, D. E. (1989). Structured and unstructured exposure to computers: Sex differences in attitude and use among college students. Sex Roles, 20, 245-254.
4.
Badagliacco, J. M. (1990). Gender and race differences in computing attitudes and experience. Social Science Computer Review, 8, 42-63.
5.
Booth-Kewley, S. , Edwards, J. E., & Rosenfeld, P. (1992). Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference? Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 562-566.
6.
Christie, R. , & Geis, F L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic Press.
7.
Fish, L. J. (1988). Why multivariate methods are usually vital. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 21, 130-137.
8.
Form, W. , & McMillen, D. (1983). Women, men, and machines. Work and Occupations, 10, 147-178.
9.
Freedman, S. M. , & Phillips, J. S. (1988). The changing nature of research on women at work. Journal of Management, 14, 231-251.
10.
Gattiker, U. E. (1992). Computer skills acquisition: A review and future directions for research. Journal of Management, 18, 547-574.
11.
Gattiker, U. E. , & Nelligan, T. W. (1988). Computerized offices in Canada and the United States: Investigating dispositional similarities and differences. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9, 77-96.
12.
Gutek, B. A. , & Bikson, T. K. (1985). Differential experiences of men and women in computerized offices. Sex Roles, 13, 123-136.
13.
Hackett, E. J. , Mirvis, P. H., & Sales, A. L. (1991). Women's and men's expectations about the effects of a new technology at work. Group and Organization Studies, 16, 60-85.
14.
Heinssen, R. K. Jr. , Glass, C. R., & Knight, L. A. (1987). Assessing computer anxiety: Development and validation of the Computer Anxiety Rating Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 3, 49-59.
15.
Honeyman, D. S. , & White, W. J. (1987). Computer anxiety in educators learning to use the computer: A preliminary report. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 20, 129-138.
16.
Johnson, R. T. , Johnson, D. W., & Stanne, M. B. (1986). Comparison of computer-assisted cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 382-393.
17.
Jordan, E. W. , & Stroup, D. F (1982). The behavioral antecedents of computer fear. Journal of Data Education, 22, 7-9.
18.
King, W. R. , Premkumar, G., & Ramamurthy, K. (1990). An evaluation of the role of a decision support system in business education. Decision Sciences, 21, 642-659.
19.
Lambert, M. E. (1991). Effects of computer use during coursework on computer aversion. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 319-331.
20.
Lautenschlager, G. J. , & Flaherty, V. L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability? Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 310-314.
21.
Levin, T. , & Gordon, C. (1989). Effect of gender and computer experience on attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 69-88.
22.
Loyd, B. , & Gressard, C. (1984). Reliability and factorial validity of computer attitude scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44, 501-505.
23.
Meier, S. T. , & Lambert, M. E. (1991). Psychometric properties and correlates of three computer aversion scales. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 23, 9-15.
24.
Miles, E. W. , Hatfield, J. D., & Huseman, R. C. (1989). The equity sensitivity construct: Potential implications for worker performance. Journal of Management, 15, 581-588.
25.
Nickell, G. S. , & Pinto, J. N. (1986). The Computer Attitude Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 2, 301-306.
26.
Parish, R. A. (1986). Differences in the perceptions of computer-assisted instruction between men and women medical students. Journal of Medical Education, 61, 774.
27.
Paulhus, D. L. (1991a). Assessing self-deception and impression management in self-reports: The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (Reference manual for Version 6). Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia.
28.
Paulhus, D. L. (1991b). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
29.
Pope-Davis, D. B. , & Twing, J. S. (1991). The effects of age, gender, andexperience on measures of attitude regarding computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 333-339.
30.
Popovich, P. M. , Hyde, K. R., & Zakrajsek, T. (1987). The development of the Attitudes Toward Computer Usage Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, 261-269.
31.
Raub, A. C. (1982). Correlates of computer anxiety in college students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 4775A.
32.
Rosen, L. D. , & Maguire, P. (1990). Myths and realities of computerphobia: A meta-analysis. Anxiety Research, 3, 175-191.
33.
Rosen, L. D. , Sears, D. C., & Weil,M. M. (1987). Computerphobia. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19, 167-179.
34.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
Smith, S. D. (1986). Relationships of computer attitudes to sex, grade-level, and teacher influence. Education, 106, 338-344.
36.
Weil, M. M. , Rosen, L. D., & Wugalter, S. E. (1990). The etiology of computerphobia. Computers in Human Behavior, 6, 361-379.
