Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Articles
Published: 2021-12-31

Perceived technostress while learning a new mobile technology: Do individual differences and the way technology is presented matter?

Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk, Poland
Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk & Department of Psychology, Medical University of Gdansk Poland
Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk, Poland
technostress dispositional anxiety attitudes towards ICT mobile technology

Abstract

A growing body of research demonstrates that using technology can – despite the obvious benefits – be associated with stress. The aim of this study was to explore how perceived technostress while learning a new pro-healthy technology may be grounded in dispositional anxiety, attitudes towards ICT (Information and Communication Technologies), and the way technology is presented. Verifying the hypotheses, a study was conducted with the participation of N = 1,037 individuals, in which the 'technology presentation' was manipulated and selected individual differences were measured. As expected, it was found that presenting the new technology in the form of a popular science article was associated with the perception of this technology as more threatening and overloading compared to the situation in which the technology was presented in the form of a marketing leaflet with an unequivocally positive message. Moreover, it was shown that people characterized by higher dispositional anxiety perceived the new technology as more stressful in terms of examined categories of techno-stressors. Support was also found for the hypothesis that attitudes towards ICT corelate to selected dimensions of perceived technostress in regard to newly learned technology. However, the small extents of the effect obtained in the study indicated the need to continue searching for substantial factors that would predict technostress at the early stages of learning a new technology.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., & Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: Technological antecedents and implications. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 35(4), 831–858. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409963
  2. Barlow, D. H. (1988). Anxiety and its disorders: The nature and treatment of anxiety and panic. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  3. Borle, P., Reichel, K., Niebuhr, F., & Voelter-Mahlknecht, S. (2021). How Are Techno-Stressors Associated with Mental Health and Work Outcomes? A Systematic Review of Occupational Exposure to Information and Communication Technologies within the Technostress Model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168673
  4. Brod, C. (1982). Managing technostress: Optimizing the use of computer technology. Personnel Journal, 61, 753–757.
  5. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Professional manual: revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. https://doi.org/10.1037//1040-3590.4.1.5
  6. Day, A., Barber, L. K., & Tonet, J. (2019). Information Communication Technology and Employee Well-Being. In The Cambridge Handbook of Technology and Employee Behavior (pp. 580–607). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108649636.022
  7. Devaraj, S., Easley, R. F., & Crant, J. M. (2008). Research Note: How Does Personality Matter? Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use. Information Systems Research, 19(1), 93–105. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23015423
  8. Fischer, T., Pehböck, A., & Riedl, R. (2019). Is the Technostress Creators Inventory Still an Up-To-Date Measurement Instrument? Results of a Large-Scale Interview Study. 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, 1820–1852. Siegen.
  9. Kelton, A. S., Pennington, R. R., & Tuttle, B. M. (2010). The Effects of Information Presentation Format on Judgment and Decision Making: A Review of the Information Systems Research. Journal of Information Systems, 24(2), 79–105. https://doi.org/10.2308/jis.2010.24.2.79
  10. Krishnan, S. (2017). Personality and espoused cultural differences in technostress creators. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 154–167. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.039
  11. La Torre, G., De Leonardis, V., & Chiappetta, M. (2020). Technostress: how does it affect the productivity and life of an individual? Results of an observational study. Public Health, 189, 60–65. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.09.013
  12. La Torre, G., Esposito, A., Sciarra, I., & Chiappetta, M. (2019). Definition, symptoms and risk of techno-stress: a systematic review. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 92(1), 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1352-1
  13. Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71–94.
  14. Lee, Y.-K., Chang, C.-T., Lin, Y., & Cheng, Z.-H. (2014). The dark side of smartphone usage: Psychological traits, compulsive behavior and technostress. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 373–383. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.047
  15. Maier, C., Laumer, S., Wirth, J., & Weitzel, T. (2019). Technostress and the hierarchical levels of personality: a two-wave study with multiple data samples. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(5), 496–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2019.1614739
  16. Olech, M., & Jurek, P. (2022). TECHNOSTRES. Skale do pomiaru sposobu postrzegania technologii [TECHNOSTRESS. Scales for measuring the perception of technology]. Gdańsk: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych i Pedagogicznych.
  17. R Core Development Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.r-project.org/.
  18. Ragu-Nathan, T. S., Tarafdar, M., Ragu-Nathan, B. S., & Tu, Q. (2008). The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: Conceptual development and validation. Information Systems Research, 19, 417–433. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0165
  19. Shepperd, J. A., Grace, J., Cole, L. J., & Klein, C. (2005). Anxiety and outcome predictions. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(2), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271322
  20. Shu, Q., Tu, Q., & Wang, K. (2011). The impact of computer self-efficacy and technology dependence on computer-related technostress: A social cognitive theory perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 27, 923–939.
  21. Siuta, J. (2009). Inwentarz Osobowości NEO-PI-R Paula T. Costy Jr I Roberta R. McCrea. Adaptacja polska. Podręcznik. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych PTP.
  22. Srivastava, S. C., Chandra, S., & Shirish, A. (2015). Technostress creators and job outcomes: Theorising the moderating influence of personality traits. Information Systems Journal, 25(4), 355–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12067
  23. Tarafdar, M., Cooper, C. L., & Stich, J.-F. (2019). The technostress trifecta - techno eustress, techno distress and design: Theoretical directions and an agenda for research. Information Systems Journal, 29(1), 6–42. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12169
  24. Tarafdar, M., Tu, Q., Ragu-Nathan, B. S., & Ragu-Nathan, T. S. (2007). The impact of technostress on role stress and productivity. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24, 301–328. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240109
  25. Wojciechowski, A., Wiśniewska, A., Pyszora, A., Liberacka-Dwojak, M., & Juszczyk, K. (2021). Virtual reality immersive environments for motor and cognitive training of elderly people – a scoping review. Human Technology, 17(2), 145–163. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2021.17-2.4

How to Cite

Jurek, P., Olech, M., & Brycz, H. (2021). Perceived technostress while learning a new mobile technology: Do individual differences and the way technology is presented matter?. Human Technology, 17(3), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2021.17-3.2