COMPUTER SELF-EFFICACY - Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Foundations - page 219

enthusiasm, can enhance CSE. The few studies that have been undertaken in this area (Table
11.A2) have found a negative relationship between anxiety and CSE (Havelka, 2003; Johnson and
Marakas, 2000; Martocchio, 1992; Staples et al., 1999).
In summary, a small number of studies have examined one or more of the primary sources of
computer self-efficacy information. However, only one study, that by Kelley et al. (2000), has
examined all four sources of CSE simultaneously. These investigations reported, for the most
part, significant relationships between the four sources of information—enactive mastery, vicari-
ous experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological and affective states—and CSE. Yet overall,
we still explain relatively little of the variance in CSE through these variables.
Other Self-Efficacy Cues
Bandura focuses on the four principal sources of self-efficacy information. Yet Gist and Mitchell
(1992) propose that the SE development process includes the assessment of a large number of exter-
nal cues (e.g., tasks, and resources) and internal cues (e.g., motivation, and performance strategies).
According to Gist and Mitchell (1992), internal cues comprise immediate affect or mood, personal-
ity factors (e.g., self-esteem, and personality types), and the general physical condition of an indi-
vidual that produces arousal, whereas external cues include environmental factors (e.g., distractions,
physical or psychological risk, physical conditions, and geographic settings), the complexity of the
task, and the amount of resources required to complete the task successfully (e.g., material resources,
time, and staff).
According to Schunk (1991), individuals cognitively filter the information conveyed by the
four sources of SE by weighing, interpreting, and combining the contributions of personal factors
(e.g., numbers and patterns of successful and unsuccessful performances) and situational factors
(e.g., extent of external assistance received). For example, Type A personality (an internal cue) is
generally associated with higher levels of psychological arousal. In addition, vicarious experience
may provide external cue information on task ability and complexity or psychological strategies
such as coping with anxiety (Gist and Mitchell, 1992). Each of these cues may then influence the
development of self-efficacy.
As demonstrated in Table 11.A2, IS studies in this area have examined a wide range of internal
and external cues outside of the four sources of SE information theorized by Bandura. In fact, our
review of the literature reveals a range of antecedent cues (see table for specific studies) such as
support, ease of use, task difficulty, complexity and novelty, physical conditions, teamwork, com-
puter attitude, family income level, personal innovativeness, and more. Yet, little effort has yet
been made to systematically explore the relationship of these internal and external cues to the four
sources of CSE and the manner in which these cues operate through the four sources. Nevertheless,
these studies provide early evidence that internal and external cues influence the formation of self-
efficacy (Martocchio, 1994; Ryan et al., 2000; Sheng et al., 2003).
Summary
Our review indicates that CSE is influenced by all four of Bandura's sources of self-efficacy infor-
mation. Moreover, consistent with Gist and Mitchell (1992), other influences also contribute to the
formation of these judgments. However, the evidence on the antecedents of CSE remains less volu-
minous than that related to its outcomes, and we lack a holistic picture of how CSE judgments are
formed and changed over time.