Comparing Data Analysis, Communication and Information Technologies Expertise Levels in Undergraduate Psychology Students

Authors: Ana Cázares

Abstract:

Aims for this study: first, to compare the expertise level in data analysis, communication and information technologies in undergraduate psychology students. Second, to verify the factor structure of E-ETICA (Escala de Experticia en Tecnologias de la Informacion, la Comunicacion y el Análisis or Data Analysis, Communication and Information'Expertise Scale) which had shown an excellent internal consistency (α= 0.92) as well as a simple factor structure. Three factors, Complex, Basic Information and Communications Technologies and E-Searching and Download Abilities, explains 63% of variance. In the present study, 260 students (119 juniors and 141 seniors) were asked to respond to ETICA (16 items Likert scale of five points 1: null domain to 5: total domain). The results show that both junior and senior students report having very similar expertise level; however, E-ETICA presents a different factor structure for juniors and four factors explained also 63% of variance: Information E-Searching, Download and Process; Data analysis; Organization; and Communication technologies.

Keywords: Data analysis, Information, Communications Technologies, Expertise'Levels.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1083391

References:

[1] ISTE National Educational Technology Standards (NETS-S) and Performance Indicators for Students, ISTE, 2007.
[2] L. Markauskaite, "Exploring the structure of trainee teachers- ICT literacy: the main components of, and relationships between, general cognitive and technical capabilities" Educational Technology, Resaerch and development, 55, pp. 547-572, 2007.
[3] JD. G. Oblinger & J.L. Oblinger, (2009, February 10). Educating the Net Generation Available: http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen/5989.
[4] OECD, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, "Are students ready for a technology-rich world? Briefing Notes for Japan", is available from the OECD-s Online Bookshop (www.oecd.org).
[5] A. Cázares, "Proficiency and attitudes toward Data Analysis and Information Technologies' use in Psychology Undergraduate", Computers in Human Behavior, submitted for publication.
[6] L. J. Cronbach & P. E. Meehl, "Construct validity in psychological test", Offprinted from the Psychological Bulletin, vol. 52, No. 4, July, 1955.
[7] J.G. Benitez., Los modelos causales como metodología para la validez de constructo, Barcelona, España: Alamex, S.A., 1986, pp. 25-27.
[8] C.C. Kuhlthau, "Information skills for an information society: A review of research". ERIC Clearinghouse on Information Resources, Syracuse, New York, December 1987.
[9] T. M. Vitolo and Ch. Coulston, "Taxonomy of information literacy competencies", Journal of Information Technology Education, vol 1, no. 1, pp. 43 -50, 2002.
[10] T. F. N. Laird and G. D. Kuh, "Students experiences with information technology and their relationship to other aspects of student engagement", Research in Higher Education, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 211-233, March 2005.
[11] B.S. Bloom, B.S. (Ed.), M.D. Engelhart,, Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & rathwohl, D.R. (1956). "Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals". Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay, 1956.
[12] Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of selfefficacy. Retrieved December 20, 2008. Available: http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/eff.html.
[13] Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (pp. 71-81). New York, NY: Academic Press.