A mail survey of registered voters in California examines attitudes toward computer technology. Among both users and non-users, more positive attitudes are associated with greater exposure to computers. The influence of exposure extends to specific opinions and values as well as global affect. The fact of exposure, not benefits received or self-selection, appears to be the key factor in this shift of attitude. The results suggest that a "computer imperative" characterizes reactions to this technology. Keywords : social impact of technology, diffusion of innovations, home computers, computers and society, technological imperative, computer phobia, attitudes toward computers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bem, D. ( 1972). Self-perception theory In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 6 (pp. 1-62). New York: Academic Press.
2.
Cohen, J. (1982). Set correlation as a general multivariate data-analytic methodMultivanate Behavioral Research , 17, 301-341.
3.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Erlbaum.
4.
Danko, W.D., & MacLachlan, J.M. (1983). Research to accelerate the diffusion of a new innovation: The case of personal computersJournal of Advertising Research, 23, 39-43.
5.
Danziger, J.N. (1985). Social science and the social impacts of computer technologySocial Science Quarterly, 66, 3-21.
6.
Dickerson, M.D., & Gentry, J.W. (1983). Characteristics of adopters and non-adopters of home computersJournal of Consumer Research , 10, 225-235.
7.
Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method.New York: Wiley.
8.
Dutton, W.H., & Kraemer, K.L. (1978). Determinants of support for computerized m-formation systems: The attitudes of local government chief executivesMidwest Review of Public Administration, 12, 19-40.
9.
Dutton, W.H., Rogers, E.M. & Jun, S.H. (1987). Diffusion and social impacts of personal computers . Communication Research, 14, 219-250.
10.
Festmger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance.Stanford: Stanford University Press.
11.
Harrison, A. (1977). Mere exposure In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances m experimental social psychology, Vol. 10. New York: Academic Press.
12.
Louis Harris & Associates, (1983). The road after 1984: The impact of technology on societyPaper presented at the Eighth International Smithsonian Symposium , Washmgton, DC.
13.
McQuarrie, E.F. (1985). The computer imperative among owners of home computersComputers and the Social Sciences, 1, 155-162.
14.
McQuarrie, E.F. (1989). The impact of a discontinuous innovation: Outcomes experienced by owners of home computersComputers m Human Behavior, 5, 227-240.
15.
McQuarrie, E.F. & Langmeyer, D. (1985). Using values to measure attitudes toward discontinuous innovationsPsychology and Marketing, 2, 239-251.
16.
Rogers, E.M. (1983). Diffusion of innovationsNew York: The Free Press.
17.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values.New York: The Free Press.
18.
Rosenberg, M.J. (1956). Cognitive structure and attitudinal affectJournal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 367-372.
19.
Schuman, H. & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers m attitude surveys.New York: Academic Press.
20.
Shenf, M. & Hovland, C. (1964). Social judgmentNew Haven: Yale University Press.
21.
Venkatesh, A. & Vitalari, N. (1987). A post-adoption analysis of computing in the homeJournal of Economic Psychology, 8, 161-180.
22.
Wagman, M. (1983). A factor analytic study of the implications of the computer for the individual and societyBehavioral Research Methods & Instrumentation, 15, 413-419.
23.
Wmner, L. (1977). Autonomous technology: Technics-Out-of-Control as a theme in political thought.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24.
Zajonc, R.B. (1968). The attitudinal effects of mere exposureJournal of Personality and Social Psychology , 9 (Monogr. Suppl. 2, Part 2), 1-27.
