Computer Anxiety and Performance: An Application of a Change Model in a Pedagogical Setting.

This paper identifies the computer anxiety - performance effects and a means of implementing change to improve learning by applying a change management model. An application of the process and outcomes, guided by hypotheses on the computer anxiety - performance linkage, is analyzed. The pedagogical intervention results indicated a drop in the computer anxiety level of students in a beginning course on computers in business, nevertheless, with a negative finding of performance. Implications and suggestions are offered.

Computer literacy and learning in the higher education curriculum has become imperative in view of the pervasiveness of computer applications at the workplace. However, being a recent phenomenon, students, both the traditional high school graduates and the returning adults, find computer learning rather stressful. The stress due to the cognitive as well as psychological factors is identified as "Computer Anxiety" (Desai & Richards 1998). Consequently, the adverse effects of such computer anxiety on student performance must be recognized and remedial actions taken to mitigate the effects.

This paper reports an application of a change management process to a class on computers in business. The students are treated by a pedagogical intervention in attempts to reduce computer anxiety and improve their learning and performance in the course. The paper is organized as follows: (1) a model linking computer anxiety and performance; (2) a change process to weaken the negative effects in the linkage; (3) an application; and (4) discussion and implications.

Computer Anxiety - Performance Effects: A Model

Previous research findings have indicated that math anxiety is correlated to computer anxiety (Camber & Cook 1985, Igbaria & Parasuraman 1989, Sievert, et al. 1988, Shashaani 1995) and that computer anxiety is similar to test anxiety (Camber & Cook 1985, Fletcher & Deeds 1994, Todman & Lawrenson 1992). Computer anxiety may actually be a manifestation of test anxiety [8]. Hence, Desai and Richards (1998) used these correlations to establish the relationship between (1) math anxiety and performance, (2) math anxiety and computer anxiety and (3) computer anxiety and performance. In a meta-analysis, these authors found inverse relationships between math anxiety and performance and between math anxiety and computer anxiety. Consequently, it could be concluded that a negative relationship exists between computer anxiety and performance. However, current research evidence does not consistently indicate such a direct, linear negative correlation. Based on the subjects' self-perceptions and experience, some found a negative correlation (Hayek & Stephens 1989), Harrington 1988, George et al. 1992). Others found no relationship (Ward 1989, Dimock & Cornier 1991). Yet some of these authors (Hayek & Stephens 1989, Dimock & Cornier 1991) and others (Vogel 1994, Compeau & Higgens 1995, Bronson 1998) found other intervening or moderating variables influencing both positively and negatively. For example, computer anxiety discouraged computer use (Compeau & Higgens 1995, Bronson 1998) resulting in poor performance (Compeau & Higgens 1995). Extroverts and those with low computer anxiety had negative effects on performance (Vogel 1994). Students with positive attitudes towards computer performed better (Hayek & Stephens 1989, Dimock & Cornier 1991, Munger & Loyd 1989, Ferguson 1997). Lastly, a more complex relationship was found between computer anxiety and performance (Ferguson 1997). Another study found that the level of computer anxiety and perceived advantage rather than ease of use of computers contributed to computer ability (Marcolin et al. 1997).

The relationship between computer anxiety and performance is similar to the relationships previously found between goal setting and performance (Locke 1967) and stress and performance (Quick & quick 1984, Spector et al. 1988). In both cases it was found that moderate levels of each produce optimum performance while very difficult and very easy levels produce lower levels of performance. Similarly it was concluded that high and low computer anxiety results in lower levels of performance (Desai & Richards 1998, Mikulincer et al. 1990).

Two types of anxiety were identified by earlier researchers (Desai & Richards 1998, Mikulincer et al. 1990, Howard & Smith 1986): state anxiety, which is caused by a current situation and trait anxiety, which is defined as the disposition to react with worry, tension and fear of failure in an evaluative situation. They suggest two ways to improve performance: technical training and psychological or behavioral training.

Weakening the Negative Computer Anxiety-Performance Link: A Change Model

In view of the aforementioned challenges underlying learning and performance of computer applications, the traditional classroom lecture, discussion and demonstration alone are not sufficient in transferring the computer abilities and skills. What occurs here is a transformation of individual skill development from a no technology or low technology to a high technology level. The question then is, given the prior findings that a high level of anxiety inhibits computer ability and performance, how can individuals' anxiety be reduced and motivation towards this major change enhanced? We adapted a popular organization change model. This is the Force Field Analysis proposed by Lewin (1951). It can help understand and influence the propensity to change in the individual. Applying the model to the current issue of computer anxiety, we designed an exploratory study (Desai & Amba-Rao 1998). This was conducted as a preliminary step in the main study.

The Change Model

According to the Force Field Analysis, Figure 1, the strength of various positive and negative forces that influence change, in reducing anxiety and increasing the propensity to learn and perform, will determine the effective implementation of the desired change. Consequently, these forces from the individuals' viewpoint should be identified in specific situations, and their strength assessed (Cummings & Huse 1989). Then the positive forces (drivers) should be strengthened and the negative forces (barriers) should be reduced, reducing the barriers being more effective (Lewin 1951, Cummings & Huse 1989). For example, in a computer course explanation of the benefits in acquiring computer skills is a potential driver, while fear of failure is an inhibitor, of motivation and learning. The drivers and barriers together can determine the balance of computer anxiety level and its effects on motivation, learning and performance. The lengths of the lines in Figure 1 indicate the magnitude of the force, and the relative importance of each factor.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The Exploratory Study

The study was conducted using a core of six students out of a total of 18 students in an introductory course on computers in business, taught by one of the authors of this paper, in Summer 1997. The first session of the course was devoted to orientation of the students to the nature and objectives of the course. The class was conducted without any particular distinction among the students in terms of their prior exposure to computer skills. A wide gap was found in the grades of these six students and the remaining 12 students in their mid-term test which was a hands-on, application test. They expressed frustration, worry and anxiety about their inability to perform adequately in their test, particularly with the time constraint. Thus, the students manifested a combination of test and computer anxiety. The instructor decided on action at two levels: behavioral change and technical/educational change (Steizer & Gray 1988). He provided personal attention, guidance, counseling, coaching and practice, with "enhancers" and "barriers" in view and aimed exclusively at these six students. He gave a make-up mid-term application test, pointing out errors while requiring the students to determine the solutions. The outcomes were expressed reduction of test anxiety and computer anxiety, and grade improvement by at least one letter grade.

Thus, in several ways, the instructor engaged in intrusive guidance and counseling with the six students, while maintaining the treatment of the other members in the normal mode. The efforts included, first, releasing the pressure of anxiety and tension, thus addressing the negative forces. Then offering additional opportunities for comprehension and repetitive learning, thus utilizing the positive forces of change (Lewin 1952). The overall effects are that the computer anxiety - motivation/performance negative link was weakened and performance improved.

The ongoing coaching, counseling and monitoring, as needed, continued until the finals. The new learning and improved performance were sustained and reflected in the final test grades. The mean class score for the mid-term application test was 64 out of 70. In the similar final test it was 66 out of 70, the final course score being 340 out of 400 (85 percent).

The exploratory study suggests beneficial outcomes in addressing computer anxiety by a recognized, planned method (Lewin 1951). Consequently, we conducted another study as a next step to further examine the process and outcome in learning computer skills by a more systematic means. We felt it appropriate to conduct the study in incremental stages of complexity so that we could observe the changes on a micro, individual basis and include some objective measures. The next and a future stage of the study, therefore, can be designed on a more rigorous basis. For the current application we adapted Lewin's Change Process (Lewin 1952), which is a development over his Force Field Analysis (Lewin 1951).

Lewin's Change Process

Applying his Force Field Analysis, Lewin (1952) proposed a change process that involves three steps: unfreezing the current state, introducing the planned change and refreezing the new state to sustain it (see Table 1). The objective in the computer course is to bring about the new state of reduced computer anxiety and increased performance reflected in course grades. In the unfreezing stage considering and balancing the drivers and barriers of change disturb the status quo. For example, explaining the need for change and "what's in it" for the students are drivers. The task complexity is a barrier (see listing in Table 1). Thus, these can also be viewed as the consequences of status quo versus change. The perceived balance can affect computer anxiety, learning, and performance.

Table 1
The Change Process in the Computer Course

     Unfreeze         Interventions (change)           Refreeze

                          Individualized             Stabilizing/
      Drivers         counseling and coaching   Reinforcement Measures

* Grade improvement   * Instructor student      * Monitoring and
* Gaining strong        interactions to           guidance of
  foundation in a       recognize concerns        students trials
  software tool       * Explore problems        * Continued practice
* Opportunities         and means of coping     * Performance feedback
  with new skills     * Demonstrate computer    * Clarifying questions
                        techniques/operations   * Recognition
     Barriers         * Student trials

* Fear of failure
* Task complexity/
  demand
* Testing within
  time constrains

In the second stage, the change technique, or the intervention, is implemented. The intervention in this case is the individualized counseling and coaching/training, involving the psychological, behavioral and educational efforts. It consists of two activities. First, the counseling function wherein the instructor interacts with the student to recognize his/her concerns and explore problems and means of coping, which addressed the trait anxiety. Second, the coaching or training where the instructor delves into the methods and techniques of computer operations, their practical aspects, demonstration by the instructor and trials by the student. The instructional intervention as well as computer use decreases anxiety (Reznich 1996). Thus we focused on the pedagogy and practice to treat state anxiety. However, introducing the change does not ensure that it will sustain, therefore, a third stage, "refreezing" is involved.

"Refreezing" stage is reinforcing or locking-in the new state. This stage is critical, for unless close attention is paid to this stage the desired new behaviors may be short-lived. In the computer course, the desired new behaviors of reduced anxiety, effective learning, and use of computer skills are achieved by ongoing monitoring and guidance of student trials (see Table 1).

The above steps are not necessarily discrete as stated; there could be overlap and even reversion to the previous steps as the instructor goes back and forth in motivating and enabling the student to learn, decrease anxiety and frustration, gain confidence and build the needed comprehension and skills. These steps and the components may appear to be obvious and simple. However, the instructor needs to take planned and deliberate actions, and be persistent in anticipating and resolving problems arising out of the interactions. Similarly, tensions arising out of perceptual and other individual differences involved in implementing the intense counseling and coaching/training need to be addressed.

An Application of the Change Process

We conducted another investigation as a follow-up of the exploratory study described above. Two hypotheses are stated, derived from the Desai and Richards (1998) and Desai and Amba-Rao (1998) studies, explained earlier, linking computer anxiety and performance and the means to weaken the negative effects in the relationship. These are:

Students with a moderate level of computer anxiety will perform better in the computer course than students who have a high level of computer anxiety.

The link between computer anxiety and negative performance effects can be weakened by identifying and addressing the drivers and barriers (positive and negative forces) in learning / performance.

Method and Application

A sample of fifteen students in the course, The Computer in Business, in spring 1999 was used for the pilot study. A qualitative measure of computer anxiety was used. The measure was based on the responses by the students to questions related to the use of computer and the ability of the students to perform on the computer-related assignments. Prior to the mid-term test, the students were asked about their perceptions of the computer project assignments, the level of difficulty in completing their assignments, whether they understood the assignments and the concepts used. The same questions were asked prior to the final test. The students were also administered a test anxiety instrument twice, before the mid-term and the final tests. The instrument had 20 self-reporting statements, using a Likert type scale of three degrees of responses: "Never", "sometimes" and "usually", with values of 1, 2 and 3, respectively.

In initiating the change process, an orientation to the course was given, presenting the benefits and challenges of the computer course. Determining the level of computer and test anxiety was next, followed by the mid-term test. After the mid-term test the instructional intervention process began. Additional drivers and barriers discussed in the model above came into play. Factors relating to computer skill acquisition and successful completion of the course were addressed. The barriers, in particular, were discussed with means of mitigating them. Explaining the instructor's strategy, they were appraised of the study and the means that the instructor will adopt to assist the students in their efforts to be successful in the course. This was the unfreezing stage. Next, the actual intervention of counseling and coaching took place between the mid-term and the final tests. The students were provided individualized attention as needed. Additional training and coaching with practice sessions, including outside the class, were included. Students were encouraged to express their personal concerns in learning and test taking, and they were given opportunity to take two samples of the final application test. The purpose of these mock-up final tests was to afford students an opportunity to practice the test as well as make them feel relaxed and at ease and to adapt to the time constraint. It was assumed that after practicing for their finals their anxiety level will drop and they will feel relaxed and subsequently be able to improve their performance. Students were also provided with suggestions on how to reduce their anxiety and handle the final test. Other reinforcing actions included feedback by reaffirming their correct responses and pointing out errors while allowing them to ask questions and find solutions. These and other behavioral and technical means of encouraging and monitoring progress were adopted. Thus, these actions comprised the refreezing stage of the change process.

Results

It was expected that the class in general would experience, initially, a notable level of computer anxiety and test anxiety. We anticipated that, after the intervention the students' anxiety level will drop to a desired level and, consequently, improve performance in the final test.

Initially, the students indicated both computer anxiety and test anxiety. First, in queries to their computer learning, the general response of the students was that they could not remember the commands and the sequence of steps in accomplishing certain portions of the assignments. They expressed difficulty dealing with recalling formulae and working with multiple sheets and files. In the second round prior to their final test, however, the response of the students regarding computer anxiety implied that they were very comfortable with the assignments than before and that the test simulations helped them reduce their stress in facing the final test. The students also appeared relaxed while taking the final test. Thus it is reasonable to believe that their computer anxiety level had reduced. As for the test anxiety level, the scores in the two periods showed practically no difference, with mean scores of 32.2 and 34, out of possible 60 points. This we consider an average or moderate level of test anxiety. However, the performance in the final test fell below that in the mid-term test, with class averages of 80.33 percent in the final versus 84 percent in the mid-term test.

Thus, hypothesis (1) that students with a moderate level of computer anxiety will perform better in the computer course than students who have a high level of computer anxiety was not supported. Hypothesis (2) that identifying and addressing the positive and negative forces in learning/performance can weaken the link between computer anxiety and negative performance effects is not clear from the evidence.

Discussion and Implications

Our first hypothesis that moderate levels of computer anxiety will result in better performance than high levels of anxiety was not substantiated with this group of students in the introductory course on computers in business. Addressing learning and performance issues in this course appeared to have reduced trait and test anxiety to a desired (moderate) level and motivated the students to learn. However, it is intriguing that the results in performance had not materialized. On the contrary, the opposite had occurred, there was a noticeable drop in the performance score between the mid-term and final tests (84 versus 80 percent). The question then is that, if test anxiety was found to be at a consistently moderate level and computer anxiety had reduced why was performance level low? Could it be that computer anxiety was low (rather than moderate) that it followed the inverted cup relationship where high and low levels of computer anxiety result in low performance (Desai & Richards 1998, Mikulincer 1990). Our interpretation and explanation based on the findings, instructor observations, student interactions and feedback are as follows.

The students assumed that after practicing the two simulated final tests it would be easy to handle the real final test. The decline in performance can be attributed to the "over drop" in computer anxiety since the objectively measured test anxiety before mid-term and final remained at a moderate level. The test anxiety did not increase but the perceived computer ability was up and computer anxiety reduced. Consequently, the students had a sense of relief from tension and fear of failure. Their confidence about their ability to handle the computer exercise in the final test appears to have been very high. They assumed that taking the mock-up tests would enable them to handle the final test well, therefore had low anxiety and, in turn, lower performance (Desai & Richards 1998, Mikulincer 1990). Familiarity can raise the understanding of computers, reduce anxiety and increase the potential for performance (Artwohl 1989). This seems to be in agreement with the computer anxiety and performance model proposed by (Desai & Richards 1998, Mikulincer 1990) where individuals with a moderate level of computer anxiety perform better than those who have either a high level or a low level of computer anxiety -- the inverted cup relationship. In the present pilot study the students' behavior appears to fall in the lower end of the model, that is, the students experienced anxiety below the moderating level resulting in reduced performance.

The second hypothesis states that identifying and attending to the drivers and barriers in learning/performance can weaken the link between computer anxiety and the negative performance effects. This means that balancing the forces involved will reduce computer anxiety and its adverse effects on performance. In the pilot study students were provided with informal counseling and training in order to reduce their computer anxiety. Intensive efforts made to reduce both trait and state dimensions of anxiety, by paying attention to many positive and negative forces in learning/performance (see Table 1). Although they were not exhaustive computer anxiety was clearly reduced. This implied that the students' performance would improve. However, the results and observations indicate that the computer anxiety was reduced below the moderating level leading to performance lower than the optimum level. Thus it was not clear whether the link between computer anxiety and negative performance effects was weakened. Further insights into why or how the computer anxiety is exceedingly reduced are: (1) a reduction in trait anxiety - putting students overly at ease by various means, particularly by showing ease of the use of computers, and assurances by the instructor of learning, performing and scoring in the tests with the additional student efforts; (2) reduction in state anxiety because of additional time and practice, including the simulated final test, resulting in a false sense of both self-efficacy (Bronson 1998), that is skill ability, and ease of scoring in final test. In this case the students might have been able to use the computer as a tool performing some basic operations, but may not have paid attention or sufficiently mastered the task knowledge. Consequently, there may have been application errors along with a "programming anxiety" (Gos 1996) while performing the application (hands-on) test.

The important and interesting implication is the caution that, in treating high anxiety levels, one should pay close and sustained attention to consequences, in order to avoid a drop in anxiety level from high to too low. Students do not lose sight of their objectives and goals, as has appeared to be the case in the current study. Trait and state anxieties as different sources should be identified in individual cases and treated accordingly. In treating high levels of anxiety future courses that involve computer use should include additional technical and behavioral or psychological elements. Technical elements include demonstrating multiple ways to perform certain tasks and providing opportunities for student practice. In addition the purpose of the assignments should be clearly stated. The students' active role and responsibility in the process also plays a critical part in the overall improvement of their performance.

The study has some limitations, particularly in view of its preliminary nature. The sample size is small, although an indepth qualitative analysis is provided. A qualitative measure of computer anxiety used in this study is one of the means to test the computer anxiety and performance model (Desai & Richards 1998, Mikulincer 1990). An instrument that provides a quantitative measure of computer anxiety level, such as the Computer Anxiety Index (CAIN) instrument (Hayek & Stephens 1989) may be used in a future study. Further we have not clearly distinguished between students who have high and low levels of anxiety; instead, we determined the level of anxiety for the class as a whole. With a larger sample a distinction can be made to study the differences in anxiety and performance, with appropriate treatments for the two groups. For example, they may need more or less of remediation of either trait or state aspects of anxiety. There are several antecedents influencing computer anxiety that are not considered in this study because of the entry level course in business computer applications, the preliminary nature of the study and the need to locus on the type of anxiety and it's effects on performance. Other studies have included or identified several situational and individual factors (Marcolin et al. 1997, Gos 1996, Schuh 1996, Hemby 1998, Bozionelos 1997, Al-Jabri & Al-Khaldi 1997). Using the current study as a base, further studies can build on it with additional factors.

References

Al-Jabri, Ibrahim M., Muhammad A. Al-Khaldi. (Spring 1997). "Effects of user characteristics on computer attitudes among undergraduate business students," Journal of End User Computing, 9(2), 16-22.

Artwohl, Mary Jane. (1989). "What Research Says about Keyboarding Skills and Computer Anxiety" ERIC: ED312444.

Bozionelos, Nicholas. (June, 1997). "Psychology of computer use: computer anxiety and learning style." Perceptual and motor skills, 84(3), Pt 1: 753-754.

Bronson, M. J. (September, 1998). "The impact of computer anxiety and self-efficacy upon performance." Journal of computer assisted learning, 14(3), 223-234.

Cambre, Marjorie A. and Desmond L. Cook. (1985). "Computer Anxiety: Definition, Measurement, and Correlates." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1(1), 37-54.

Compeau, Deborah R. and Christopher A. Higgens. (1995). "Computer Self-Efficacy: Development of a Measure and Initial Test." MIS Quarterly; 189-206.

Cummings, Thomas G. and Edgar F. Huse. (1989). Organization Development and Change, Fourth Edition, New York: West Publishing Company.

Desai, Mayur S. and Sita Amba-Rao. (1998). "Computer Anxiety), and Performance: A Pilot Study of a Change Model in a Pedagogical Settings," Table Topic, SWFAD conference in Dallas, TX.

Desai, Mayur S. & Thomas C. Richards. (Fall/Winter 1998). "Computer Anxiety, Training and Education: A Meta Analysis". Journal of Information Systems Education, 9(1 & 2): 49-54.

Dimock, Paul H. and Pierre Cormier. (Oct 1991). "The effects of format differences and computer experience on performance and anxiety on a computer-administered test." Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 24(3), 119-126.

Ferguson, Colin. (May 1997). "The effects of microcomputers on the work of professional accountants." Accounting and Finance, 37(1), 41-67.

Fletcher, William E. and Jacquelyn P. Deeds. (1994). "Computer Anxiety and Other Factors Preventing Computer Use among United States Secondary Agricultural Educators." Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(2), 16-21.

George, Clay E., Scott J. Lankford, and Sheri E. Wilson. (1992). "The effects of Computerized versus Paper-and-Pencil Administration on Measures of Negative Affect." Computers in Human Behavior, 8(2), 203-209.

Gos, Michael W. (May-June 1996). "Computer anxiety and computer experience: a new look at an old relationship." Clearing house, 69(5), 271-276.

Harrington, Kermith V. (Fall 1988). "Computer anxiety: A cloud on the horizon of technological interventions." Organization Development Journal, 6(3), 51-55.

Hayek, Linda M. and Larry Stephens. (Sum 1989). "Factors Affecting Computer Anxiety in High School Computer Science Students". Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 8(4), 73-76.

Hemby, K. Virginia. (May 1998). "Self-directedness in nontraditional college students: A behavioral factor in computer anxiety?" Computers in Human Behavior, 14(2), 303-319.

Howard, G. S. and R. Smith. (1986). "Computer Anxiety in Management Reality?" Communications of the ACM, 29(7), 611-615.

Igbaria, Magid and Saroj Parasuraman (September 1989). "A Path Analytic Study of Individual Characteristics, Computer Anxiety and Attitudes Toward Microcomputers." Journal of Management, 15(3), 373-388.

Lewin, K. (1952q) "Group Decision and Social Change," in T M. Newcome and Hartley, E. L. (Eds.) Readings in Social Psychology. New York: Holt, 2nd Edition: 459-73.

Lewin, K. (1951). Theory, in Social Science. New York: Harper and Row.

Locke, E. A. (1967). "Relationship of Goal Level to Performance Level." Psychological Reports, 20, 1968.

Marcolin, Barbara L, Malcolm C. Munro, Kevin G. Campbell. (Summer 1997). "End use ability: Impact of job and individual differences," Journal of End User Computing, 9(2), 3-12.

Mikulincer, Mario, Dov Paz, and Peri Kedem. (1990). "Anxiety and Categorization-2. The Structure and Boundaries of Mental Categories." Personality and Individual Differences, 11(8), 815-821.

Mikulincer, Mario, Peri Kedem, and Dov Paz. (1990). "Anxiety and Categorization- I: The Structure and Boundaries of Mental Categories." Personality and Individual Differences, 11(8), 805-814.

Munger, Gail F. and Brenda H. Loyd. (1989). "Gender and Attitudes toward Computers and Calculators: Their Relationship to Math Performance." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(2), 167-77.

Quick, J. C, and Quick, J. D. (1984). Organizational Stress and Preventive Management. New York, McGraw-Hill.

Reznich, Christopher B. (Summer 1996). "Applying minimalist design principles to the problem of computer anxiety." Computers in Human Behavior, 12(2), 245-261.

Schuh, Kathy Lynn. (1996). "The lecture classroom environment and its effects on change in computer anxiety of students taking computer proficiency class." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 15(3), 241-259.

Shashaani, Lily. (May-June 1995). "Gender Differences in Mathematics Experience and Attitude and Their Relation to Computer Attitude." Educational Psychology, 35(3), 32-38.

Shermis, Mark D. and Danielle Lombard. (January 1998). "Effects of computer-based test administrations on test anxiety and performance." Computers in Human Behavior, 14(1), 111-123.

Sievert, MaryEllen, Rosie Albritton, Paula Roper, and Nina Clayton. (September 1988). "Investigating Computer Anxiety in an Academic Library." Information Technology & Libraries, 7(3), 243-252.

Spector, P. E., Dwyer, D. J. and Jex, S. M. February (1988). "Relation of Job Stressors to Affective, Health and Performance Outcomes: A Comparison of Multiple Data Sources," Journal of Applied Psychology), 11-19.

Steizer, Patrick T. and Robert A. Gray. (Fall 1988). "Training Adults to Use Microcomputers: A Technical and Psychological Approach," Government Accountant Journal, 37(3), 35-39.

Todman, John and Helen Lawrenson. (1992). "Computer Anxiety in Primary School Children and University Students." British Educational Research Journal, 18(1), 63-72.

Vogel, Lora Ann. (1994). "Explaining Performance on P&P versus Computer Mode of Administration for the Verbal Section of the Graduate Record Exam." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 11(4), 369-383.

Ward, Thomas J. (1989) "The Effects of Computerized Tests on the Performance and Attitudes of College Students." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(3), 327-333.

Dr. Mayur S. Desai, Assistant Professor of Management Information Systems, School of Business, Indiana University - Kokomo.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Mayur S. Desai, Assistant Professor of Management Information Systems, School of Business, Indiana University - Kokomo, Kokomo, Indiana, Email: [e-mail]