nach oben

Education and Information Technologies

Erschienen in:

25.10.2017

Examining gender issues in perception and acceptance in web-based end-user development activities

verfasst von: Tzafilkou Katerina, Protogeros Nicolaos

Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies | Ausgabe 3/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

In the recent years in the End-User Development (EUD) research there is a shift from the study of tools that focus on desktop graphical applications, to the development of EUD for web environments. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research has shown significant gender differences while users interact with EUD systems. However, most of this research focuses on desktop spreadsheet environments. In this paper we examine the potential gender differences in perception and acceptance in modern web-based EUD environments. We step on previous gender research in the fields of EUD and Technology Acceptance to concentrate a set of appropriate items and examine a set of related hypotheses. To check out our research hypotheses we have conducted a field test using a prototype web-based EUD tool based on a natural language approach (named ‘simple talking’), to assist end-users in creating database-driven mobile applications. The results of the field test show significant gender differences in Risk-Perception and Perceived-Ease of Use. As it was predicted, male users perceived significantly higher ease of use and female users perceived significantly higher risk. Gender differences also exist in the correlations between different pairs of perception and acceptance items.

Vorheriger Artikel Basic school teachers’ perspective to digital teaching and learning in Ghana

Nächster Artikel Digital competencies among student populations in Kosovo: the impact of inclusion, socioeconomic status, ethnicity and type of residence

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361–391.CrossRef

Agarwal, R., Sambamurthy, V., & Stair, R. M. (2000). Research report: the evolving relationship between general and specific computer self-efficacy—an empirical assessment. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 418–430.CrossRef

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.

Beckwith, L. (2003) Gender HCI issues in end-user software engineering. IEEE Symposium on Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments 2003 Proceedings, pp. 273–274.

Beckwith, L. (2007) Gender HCI issues in end-user programming, Ph.D. Thesis, Oregon State University.

Beckwith, L., & Burnett, M. (2004). “Gender: an important factor in end-user programming environments?” 2004 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages - Human Centric Computing, pp. 107–114.

Beckwith, L., Sorte, S., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Chintakovid, T., & Cook, C. (2005). Designing features for both genders in end-user programming environments. In Proceedings of the 2005 I.E. Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VLHCC '05) IEEE computer society, Washington, DC, pp. 153–160.

Beckwith, L., Burnett, M., Grigoreanu, M., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2006a). Gender HCI: what about the software? Computer, Nov. 2006, pp. 83–87.

Beckwith, L., Kissinger, C., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Lawrance, J., Blackwell, A., & Cook, C. (2006b). Tinkering and gender in end-user programmers' debugging. In R. Grinter, T. Rodden, P. Aoki, E. Cutrell, R. Jeffries, & G. Olson (Eds.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI '06) (pp. 231–240). New York: ACM.CrossRef

Beyer, S., Rynes, K., Perrault, J., Hay, K., & Haller, S. (2003) Gender differences in computer science students. SIGCSE: Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education, pp. 49–53.

Blackwell, A. (2002). First steps in programming: a rationale for attention investment models. In IEEE Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environments, pp. 2–10.

Blackwell, A., & Green, T.R.G. (1999). Investment of attention as an analytic approach to cognitive dimensions. In T.R.G. Green, T. Abdullah, & P. Brna (Eds.), 11th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, pp. 24–35.

Blackwell, A. F., Rode, J. A., & Toye, E. F. (2009). How do we program the home? Gender, attention investment, and the psychology of programming at home. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67, 324–341.CrossRef

Brosnan, M. (1998). The role of psychological gender in the computer-related attitudes and attainments of primary school children (Aged 6–11). Computers and Education, v30 n3–4 203–08, Apr–May 1998.

Burnett, M. (2009). What is end-user software engineering and why does it matter? End-User Development, pp. 15–28.

Burnett, M. (2010). Gender HCI: what about the software? In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication (SIGDOC '10) ACM. New York, pp. 251–251.

Burnett, M. M., & Scaffidi, C. (2011). End-user development. In M. Soegaard & R. F. Dam (Eds.), Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction. Aarhus: The Interaction-Design.org Foundation.

Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S. Grigoreanu, V., Subrahmaniyan, N., Beckwith, L., & Kissinger, C. (2008). Gender in end-user software engineering. In Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on End-user software engineering (WEUSE '08) ACM, New York. pp. 21–24.

Burnett, M., Fleming, S., Iqbal, S. (2010) Gender differences and programming environments: across programming populations. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement.

Burnett, M. M., Beckwith, L., Wiedenbeck, S., Fleming, S. D., Cao, J., Park, T. H., Grigoreanu, V., et al. (2011). Gender pluralism in problem-solving software. Interacting with Computers, 23(5), 450–460.CrossRef

Burnett, M., Stumpf, S., Macbeth, J., Makri, S., Beckwith, L., Kwan, I., Peters, A., & Jernigan, W. (2016). GenderMag: a method for evaluating Software's gender inclusiveness. Interacting with Computers. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwv046.

Cao, J., Rector, K., Park, T., Fleming, S., Burnett, M. & Wiedenbeck, S. (2010). A debugging perspective on end-user mashup programming. In Proc. IEEE visual languages and human-centric computing (pp. 149–156). IEEE: Los Alamitos.

Chang, I.-C., Hwang, H.-G., Hung, W.-F., & Li, Y.-C. (2007). Physicians’ acceptance of pharmacokinetics-based clinical decision support systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(2), 296–303.CrossRef

Cheng, D., Liu, G., Qian, C. & Song, Y.F. (2008). Customer acceptance of internet banking: integrating trust and quality with UTAUT model. IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics, Beijing, 12–15 October.

Colley, A., & Comber, C. (2003). Age and gender differences in computer use and attitudes among secondary school students: what has changed? Educational Research, 45(2), 155–165.CrossRef

Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Noe, R. A. (2000). Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: a meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 678–707.CrossRef

Compeau, D., Higgins, C. (1995). Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 118–143. Computers in Human Behaviour, 17, 21–33.

Costabile, M.F., Fogli, D., Letondal, C., Mussio, P., & Piccinno, A. (2003a). Domain-expert users and their needs of software development. Proc. Special Session on EUD, UAHCI Conference, Crete, Greece, pp. 532–536.

Costabile M.F., Fogli, D., Fresta, G., Mussio, P., & Piccinno, A. (2003b). Building environments for end-user development and tailoring, human centric computing languages and environments, 2003. Proceedings. 2003 I.E. Symposium on, 2003, pp. 31–38.

Cuccurullo, S., Francese, R., Risi, M. & Tortora, G. (2011). MicroApps development on mobile phones. In M. Costabile, Y. Dittrich, G. Fischer, & A. Piccinno, (Eds.), End-User Development, vol. 6654 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 289–294). Berlin: Springer.

Danado, J. & Paternò, F. (2012a). A prototype for EUD in touch-based mobile devices. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC '12), pp. 83–86.

Danado, J. & Paternò, F. (2012b) Puzzle: a visual-based environment for end user development in touch-based mobile phone. Human-Centered Software Engineering, vol. 7623 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 199–216.

Danado, J., Davies, M., Ricca, P. & Fensel, A. (2010). An authoring tool for user generated mobile services. In A. Berre, A. Gomez-Pérez, K. Tutschku, & D. Fensel (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd future internet conference on future internet (FIS '10) (pp. 118–127) Springer.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived-usefulness, perceived-ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.CrossRef

De Angeli, A., Battocchi, A. Roy C. S., Rodriguez, C., & Daniel, F., Casati, F. (2011). Conceptual design and evaluation of WIRE: a wisdom-aware EUD tool. Technical Report DISI-11-353, Ingegneria e Scienza dell'Informazione, University of Trento.

Durndell, A., & Thomson, K. (1997). Gender and computing: a decade of change? Computers & Education, 28(1), 1–9.CrossRef

Durndell, A., Hagg, Z., & Laithwaite, H. (2000). Computer self-efficacy and gender: a cross cultural study of Scotland and Romania. Personality and Individual Differences, 28(6), 1037–1044.CrossRef

Farahat, T. (2012) Applying the technology acceptance model to online learning in the Egyptian universities. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, Volume 64, 9 November 2012, pp. 95–104.

Finucane, M. L., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Flynn, J., & Satterfield, T. A. (2000). Gender, race, and perceived risk: the 'white male' effect. Health, Risk, & Society, 2(2), 159–172.CrossRef

Ghiani, G., Paternò, F. & Spano, L. D. (2011) Creating mashups by direct manipulation of existing web applications. End-User Development, vol. 6654 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 42–52). Springer, Berlin.

Ghiani, G., Paternò, F., Spano, L. D., & Pintori, G. (2016). An environment for end-user development of web mashups. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 87, March 2016, 38–64.CrossRef

Goswami, A., & Dutta, S. (2016). Gender differences in technology usage—a literature review. Open Journal of Business and Management, 4, 51–59.CrossRef

Grigoreanu, V., Beckwith, L., Fern, X., Yang, S., Komireddy, C., Narayanan, V., Cook, C., & Burnett, M.M. (2006). Gender differences in end-user debugging, revisited: what the miners found. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing. pp. 19–26.

Grigoreanu, V., Cao, J., Kulesza, T., Bogart, C., Rector, K., Burnett, M. & Wiedenbeck, S. (2008). Can feature design reduce the gender gap in end-user software development environments? In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VLHCC '08). IEEE computer society, Washington, DC, USA, 149–156.

Grigoreanu, V., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Cao, J., Rector, K., & Kwan, I. (2012). End user debugging strategies: a sense making perspective. Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 19(1), 5.CrossRef

Harshbarger, N.L., & Rosson, M.B. (2012). wProjects: data-centric web development for female nonprogrammers. Proceedings of 2012 I.E. Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, pp. 67–70.

Hartzel, K. (2003). How self-efficacy and gender issues affect software adoption and use. Communications of the ACM, 46(9), 167–171.CrossRef

Hoxmeier, J. A., Nie, W., & Purvis, G. T. (2000). The impact of gender and experience on user confidence in electronic mail. Journal of organizational and end user computing (JOEUC), 12(4), 10.

Hu, P. J., Chau, P. Y. K., Sheng, O. R. L., & Tam, K. Y. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 91–112.CrossRef

Hubona G.S., and Shirah G.W. (2004). The gender factor performing visualization tasks on computer media. In Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'04) - Track 4 - Volume 4 (HICSS '04), Vol. 4. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 40097.3.

Hung, Y.H., Wang, Y.S. & Chou, S.C.T. (2007). User acceptance of e-government services, Pacific Asia conference on information systems, Natl sun Yat-Sen university, Kaohsiung, Auckland, 4–6 July.

Jason, B., Calitz, A., Greyling, J. (2010). The evaluation of an adaptive user interface model. In Proceedings of the 2010 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists (SAICSIT ‘10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 132–143.

Johnson, R. D., Li, Y., & Dulebohn, H. J. (2016). Unsuccessful performance and future computer self-efficacy estimations: attributions and generalization to other software applications. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), 28(1 (January 2016), 1–14.CrossRef

Kim, Y. M. (2010). Gender role and the use of university library website resources: A social cognitive theory perspective. Journal of Information Science, 36(5), 603–617.

Kim, J. K., & Ritter, F. E. (2015). Learning, forgetting, and relearning for keystroke- and mouse-driven tasks: relearning is important. Human–Computer Interaction, 30(1), 1–33.CrossRef

Kissinger, C., Burnett, M., Stumpf, S., Subrahmaniyan, N., Beckwith, L., Yang, S., Rosson, M., (2006). Supporting end user debugging: What do users want to know? Advanced Visual Interfaces, ACM, pp. 135–142.

Ko, A. J., Myers, B. A. (2004). Designing the Whyline: A Debugging Interface for Asking Questions About Program Failures. CHI 2004, Vienna, Austria, April 24–29, 151–158.

Kulesza, T., Wong, W., Stumpf, S., Perona, S., White, R., Burnett, M.M., Oberst, I., and Ko, A.J. (2009) Fixing the program my computer learned: barriers for end users, challenges for the machine. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on intelligent user interfaces (IUI '09) (pp. 187–196) ACM: New York.

Kulesza, T., Stumpf, S., Wong, W., Burnett, M., Perona, S., Ko, A., & Oberst, I. (2011). Why-oriented end user debugging of naïve Bayes text classification. ACM trans. Interact. Intell. Syst. 1, 1, Article 2 (October 2011), 31 pages.

Lee, Y. C. (2008). The role of perceived resources in online learning adoption. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1423–1438.CrossRef

Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. T. (2003). The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information System, 12(1), 752–780.

Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., & Wulf, V. (2006). End User Development: an emerging paradigm. End User Development, 9, 1–8.CrossRef

Lin, J., Wong, J., Nichols, J., Cypher, A. & Lau, T.A. (2010). End-user programming of mashups with vegemite. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on intelligent user interfaces (IUI '09), pp. 97–106, February 2009.

Liu, S.H., Liao, H.L., Chung Yuan, C.J. (2005). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online e-learning users’ acceptance behaviour. Issues in Information Systems, 6(2), 95–104.

Liu, G., Huang, S.-P. & Zhu, X.-K. (2008). User acceptance of internet banking in an uncertainand risky environment. The 2008 international conference on Risk Management & Engineering Management, Beijing, 4–6 November.

Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: a review and reinterpretation. Psychology Bulletin, 116(1), 75–98.CrossRef

Macías, J. A., & Paternò, F. (2008). Customization of web applications through an intelligent environment exploiting logical interface descriptions. Interacting with Computers, 20(1), 29–47.CrossRef

Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2003). Unlocking the clubhouse. Cambridge: MIT Press.MATH

Martinson, A. M. (2005). Playing with technology: Designing gender sensitive games to close the gender gap. In Working Paper SLISWP-03-05. School of Library and Information Science: Indiana University.

Miller, R.C., Bolin, M.L., Chilton, B., Little, G., Webber, M. & Chen-Hsiang, Y. (2010). Rewriting the web with chicken foot. In No code required: giving users tools to transform the web (pp. 39–62) Burlington: Elsevier.

Moolla, A., & Bisschoff, C. (2012). Validating a model to measure the brand loyalty of fast moving consumer goods. Journal of Social Sciences, 31(2), 101–115.CrossRef

Moon, J., & Kim, Y. (2001). Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Information Management, 38(4), 217–230.CrossRef

Moss, G. A., & Gunn, R. W. (2009). Gender differences in website production and preference aesthetics: preliminary implications for ICT in education and beyond. Behaviour & Information Technology, 28(5), 447–460.CrossRef

Nestler, T., Namoun, A. & Schill, A. (2011). End-user development of service-based interactive web applications at the presentation layer. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems (EICS '11), June 2011, pp. 197–206.

Nichols J., & Lau, T. (2008). Mobilization by demonstration: Using traces to re-author existing web sites. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on intelligent user interfaces (IUI '08), pp. 149–158.

Nunnally, J. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw.

Ong, C., & Lai, J. (2006). Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behaviour, 22(5), 816–829.CrossRef

Padilla-Melendez, A., Garrido-Moreno, A., & Del Aguila-Obra, A. R. (2008). Factors affecting e-collaboration technology use among management students. Computers & Education, 51(2), 609–623.CrossRef

Padilla-Meléndez, A., del Aguila-Obra, A. R., & Garrido-Moreno, A. (2013). Perceived playfulness, gender differences and technology acceptance model in a blended learning scenario. Computers & Education, 63(April 2013), 306–317.CrossRef

Park, S. (2009). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students’ Behavioural intention to use e-learning. Education Technology & Society, 12(3), 150–162.MathSciNet

Paternò, F. (2013). End user development: survey of an emerging field for empowering people. ISRN Software Engineering. vol. 2013, Article ID 532659, 11 pages.

Protogeros, N., & Tzafilkou, K. (2015). Simple-talking database development: Let the end-user design a relational schema by using simple words. Computers in Human Behaviour, 48(July 2015), 273–289.

Repenning, A., & Ioannidou, A. (2006). What makes end-user development tick? 13 Design guidelines. In H. Lieberman, F. Paternò, & V. Wulf (Eds.), End-user development: empowering people to flexibly employ advanced information and communication technology. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Rode, J. A. (2008). An ethnographic examination of the relationship of gender and end-user programming, Ph.D. Thesis, University of California Irvine.

Rode, J., Rosson, M.B., & Pérez-Quiñones, J. (2006). End user development of web applications. End User Development , Human-Computer Interaction Series Volume 9, 2006, pp 161–182.

Rosson, M.B., Sinha, H., Bhattacharya, M., & Zhao, D. (2007). Design planning in end-user web development. In Proceedings of 2007 I.E. Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, pp. 189–196.

Rosson, M.B., Sinha, H., & Edor, T. (2010). Design planning in end-user web development: gender, feature exploration and feelings of success. In Proceedings of 2010 I.E. Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, pp. 141–148.

Saadé, G., Nebebe, F., & Tan, W. (2007). Viability of the technology acceptance model in multimedia learning environments: a comparative study. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 175–184.

Saadé, R. G., Kira, D., & Otrakji, C. A. (2012). Gender differences in interface type task analysis. International Journal of Information Systems and Social Change, 3(2), 1–23.CrossRef

Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. A., & Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitudes toward the internet: a study among undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 205–219.

Scaffidi, C. C., Bogart, M. M., Burnett, A., Cypher, B., & Myers, M. S. (2010). Using traits of web macro scripts to predict reuse. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 21(5), 277–291.CrossRef

Seifert, J., Pfleging, B., Bahamóndez, E., Hermes, M., Rukzio, E. and Schmidt, A. (2011). Mobidev: a tool for creating apps on mobile phones. In proceedings of the 13th international conference on human computer interaction with mobile devices and services (MobileHCI '11), pp. 109–112, ACM.

Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3–4), 591–611.MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Soriano, J., Lizcano, D., Canas, M. A, Reyes, M. & Hierro, J.J. (2007). Fostering innovation in a mashup-oriented enterprise 2.0 Collaboration environment. In Proceedings of the SIWN international conference on adaptive business systems (ICABS '07), pp. 62–669, Chengdu, China.

Spahn, M., Dörner, C., & Wulf, V. (2008). End user development: approaches towards a flexible software design questions to answer. ECIS 2008, 9th – 11th June 2008, Galway, Ireland.

Stipek, D., & Gralinski, J. H. (1991). Gender differences in children’s achievement-related beliefs and emotional responses to success and failure in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3).

Subrahmaniyan, N., Beckwith, L., Grigoreanu, V., Burnett, M., Wiedenbeck, S., Narayanan, V., Bucht, K., Drummond, R., Fern, X. (2008). Testing vs. code inspection vs. what else? Male and female end users’ debugging strategies. In ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 617–626). New York: ACM.

Sumak, B., Polancic, G. & Hericko, M. (2010). An empirical study of virtual learning environment adoption using UTAUT. Second international conference on mobile, hybrid, and on-line learning, pp. 17–22.

Sundar, S. S., Bellur, S., Oh, J., Xu, Q., & Jia, H. (2014). User experience of on-screen interaction techniques: an experimental investigation of clicking, sliding, zooming, hovering, dragging, and flipping. Human–Computer Interaction, 29(2), 109–152.CrossRef

Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: model development and test. Computers & Education, 57(4), 1–25.CrossRef

Teo, T. S. H., & Lim, V. K. G. (2000). Gender differences in internet usage and task preferences. Behaviour & Information Technology, 19(4), 283–295.CrossRef

Terzis, V., & Economides, A. A. (2011). The acceptance and use of computer based assessment. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1032–1044.CrossRef

Terzis, V., & Economides, A. A. (2012). Computer based assessment: gender differences in perceptions and acceptance. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27(6, November 2011), 2108–2122.CrossRef

Tzafilkou, K., Protogeros, N., Charagiannidis, C., & Koumpis, A. (2016). Gender-based behavioral analysis for end-user development and the ‘RULES’ attributes. Education and Information Technologies, 22, 1–42.

Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. L. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50(3), 838–852.CrossRef

Vekiri, I., & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1392–1404.CrossRef

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived-ease of use: development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451–481.CrossRef

Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behaviour. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115–139.CrossRef

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.CrossRef

Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., Maruping, L. M., & Bala, H. (2008). Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 483–502.CrossRef

Wang, Y. S., & Shih, Y. W. (2009). Why do people use information kiosks? A validation of theunified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 158–165.CrossRef

Wang, Y.-S., Wu, M.-C., & Wang, H.-Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92–118.CrossRef

Wang, H.-Y., Chan, T.-J., Huang, Y.-F., Wang, N.-C., & Chang, Y.-S. (2010). “Research hypotheses for gender activities in mobile internet”, IWCMC’10, Caen, 28 June-2 July.

Williams, M. D., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(3), 443–488.CrossRef

Wong, K.-T., Teo, T., & Russo, S. (2012). Influence of gender and computer teaching efficacy on computer acceptance among Malaysian student teachers: An extended technology acceptance model. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(7), 1190–1207.CrossRef

Wu, Y. L., Tao, Y. H., & Yang, P. C. (2007). Using UTAUT to explore the behavior of 3G mobile communication users. In M. Helander, M. Xie, M. Jaio, & K. C. Tan (Eds.), International conference on industrial engineering and engineering management (Vol. 1, pp. 199–203). Singapore: IEEE.

Wu, Y.-L., Tao, W.-H., & Yang, P.-C. (2008). The use of unified theory of acceptance and use of technology to confer the behavioural model of 3G mobile telecommunication users. Journal of Statistics & Management Systems, 11(5), 919–949.CrossRefMATH

Yurdugül, H. (2008). Minimum sample size for Cronbach’s coefficient alpha: a Monte-Carlo study. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(35), 397–405.

Zbick, J., Jansen, M., & Milrad, M. (2014). Towards a web-based framework to support end-user programming of mobile learning activities. In 2014 I.E. 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 204–208. IEEE Press IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.

Zhang, J., Huang, J., & Chen, J. (2010). Empirical research on user acceptance of mobile searches. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 15(2), 235–245.CrossRef

Zhou, T. (2008). Exploring mobile user acceptance based on UTAUT and contextual offering. International symposium on electronic commerce and security, pp. 241–245.

Titel: Examining gender issues in perception and acceptance in web-based end-user development activities
verfasst von: Tzafilkou Katerina
Protogeros Nicolaos
Publikationsdatum: 25.10.2017
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Education and Information Technologies / Ausgabe 3/2018
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9650-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2018

A hybrid recommender system integrated into LAMS for learning designers

No name, no game: Challenges to use of collaborative digital textbooks

Measuring ICT orientation: Scale development & validation

Examining pre-service teachers’ opinions about digital story design

Ready for digital learning? A mixed-methods exploration of surveyed technology competencies and authentic performance activity

Basic school teachers’ perspective to digital teaching and learning in Ghana