The concept of self – efficacy was introduced by Bandura in (1977). In his further research, Bandura (1997) observed that self – efficacy is the belief in one’s capacity to organize and execute the courses of action required to attain a given goal.
Since that time, researches in many areas of human endeavour have demonstrated the power of self – efficacy perceptions in human performance, learning, sports, perception and motivation (Bandura, 1993). Self – efficacy was initially conceptualized as personal belief of an individual about his/her ability to successfully execute behaviours required to produce a desired out come (Bandura, 1977).
            Self – efficacy involves one’s self – judgments of personal capabilities to initiate and successfully perform specified task at designated levels, expending greater effort and persevering in the face of adversity (Bandura, 1986). Research shows that self – efficacy is a relatively new construct in academic research (Ren, 2000; Schunk, 1994). Although self – efficacy is examined with greater depth in therapeutic contexts; recent studies show that self – efficacy holds significant power for predicting and explaining academic performance in various domains (Walker (Debus, 1991, Schunk, 1994).
Self – efficacy has been variously conceptualized by researchers and discussed under three dimensions of magnitude, strength and generality to provide a more focused definition. Researchers discussed the magnitude of self – efficacy as the level of task difficulty an individual believes that he or she can attain; strength was seen as the confidence one has in attaining a particular level of difficulty; while generality was seen as the degree to which the expectation is generalized across situations and circumstances (Gist, 1987, Lee ( Boko, 1994). In his research on sources of efficacy expectations, Bandura (1997) identified mastery experiences, physiological and emotional states, social persuasion and vicarious expectations. He observed that mastery experiences is the most powerful source, hence, the perception that teaching has been successful due to mastery raises expectations that teaching will be proficient in future, unless the success required such massive work that the individual could not sustain the level of effort needed. Except failure is seen as providing clues about more potentially successful strategies, the perception that one’s teaching has been a future lowers efficacy beliefs thereby contributing to the expectation that future performances will also be inept. Since feelings of tension seem to be interpreted as anxiety and fear that failure is imminent or as excitement (being “psyched” for a good class), it is pertinent to note that interpretations of emotions and physiological arousal can add to the feeling of mastery or competence.(Vroom,1964).
            The concept of expectancy is the corner stone of the cognitive school of motivation, hence, self – efficacy seems to be related to the expectancy theory. Expectancy theory states that individuals choose among a set of alternatives on the basis of the motivational force of each alternative (Vroom, 1964). The multiplicative combination of expectancy, instrumentality and valence will yield the motivational force which will in turn boost the self – efficacy of the employee Bandura (1977) opined that when an observer closely identifies a model, there is a stronger impact on the observer’s self – efficacy. Therefore, vicarious experiences are those in which some else models a skill, so when a credible model teaches well, the efficacy of the observer increases. But, when the model performs poorly, there is decrease in the expectations of the observer, so, a “pep talk” or specific performance feedback may be required from a supervisor, colleague or other students in form of social or verbal persuation. Bandura (1986) observed that despite the limited impact of social persuation, it may be used to boost the observers morale against occasional set backs because the potency of persuation depends on the credibility expertise and trust worthiness of the persuader. Hence, student’s evaluation of instructions can be a form of verbal persuation for better or worse. With his seminal work on self – efficacy, Bandura (1977) sort to address the related question of what mediates knowledge and action. Bandura (1986) defines the performance components of self – efficacy as people’s judgment of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances. It is concerned with judgments of what one can do using available strategies but is not concerned with the strategies one has. This is why students feel self – efficacious when they see themselves making effort towards a task to succeed in challenging situations (Bandura 19). It is the contention of Bandura (1977, 1986) that self perception of efficacy influences ones belief to successfully deal with challenging situations using appropriate coping strategies. Hence, one’s self – efficacy may determine one’s level of engagement in academic activity and the amount of effort to be invested on a given academic task perceived to be challenging.
            Different researchers have documented in the literature the relationship of self – efficacy to learning they have also observed that one challenge to instructional technologists is to investigate new methods of raising self – efficacy level of learners through the use of appropriate technological innovation (Schunk, 1994; Ifeagwazi, 2005). Perceived self – efficacy to have received considerable attention in some academic domains including specific situations of computer proficiency and technological education (Galtisker ( Hlavka (1992). Also, Bandura (1977; 1986) opined that self – efficacy is both domain  specific, task specific and situation specific, hence, percepts of efficacy pertain to criteria tasks and situations in which they are studied. Through the help of these perspectives, researchers can gain deeper understanding of the interactive relationship between self – efficacy and performance. However, people seem to be generally gifted with the capability of symbolizing which allow learners to process abstract experiences into models that guide their learning and performance in an academic context. But, within the model of triadic reciprocity, the ability to influence various personal determinants could be influenced by five basic human capabilities forethought, vicarious, symbolizing, self – effective and self – regulatory. Again, in an academic context, computer proficiency improves workers self – efficacy, allow learners to process abstract experiences into models that guide their learning and performance. Hence, Macmillian, Liu and Timmons (1997) observed that rapid implementation of information technology in education and computer proficiency of workers through proper technical support and training will impact positively on the self – efficacy of workers.
Equipping University staff with proper knowledge of computer to make them proficient will motivate them to work harder and improve their self – efficacy. Being proficient in computer opens many windows of opportunity for the university staff to observe, vocalize computer, research and search within the scope of his or her capabilities (Bandura, 1997). Vicarious capability occurs by observing others and vicariously experiencing what they do, while forethought is the cognitive representation of future events which is a powerful causal influence on one’s learning.
            Bandura (1986), said that if we had to experience everything we learn directly, we would learn very much through models thinking – thought text – based soliloquy. Through direct experience, an observer may be directed on how to conceptualize a mathematics calculation or over come self – doubts about successful performance. By determining what capacities they have regarding a given task, learners usually self – regulate themselves and compare those capabilities with the standards they maintain for themselves. Hence, persistence in learner’s effort to achieve a given goal tends to depend on their level of self – efficacy concerning the existing task (Comber, 1997). Severally, people compare their performance with their colleagues in various contexts and in their work places to determine their level of abilities.
            Consequently, the accuracy of their assessments determine whether they over estimate or under estimate their capabilities be cause accurate self – reflection is critical to the development of self – efficacy (Ryan ( Deci, 2008). Despite the fact that computer proficiency level in developed nations is high, some of the developing nations like Nigeria are still lagging behind. However, performance technology has made a considerable impact on almost every aspect of the society such that a working familiarity with information communication Technology (ICT) is becoming increasingly relevant, especially in the work place (Ginsburg (Bronstein, 1993). It is the contention of Finlayson and Roggers (2003), that every aspect of life from education, Leisure work influenced by computer technology because, knowledge, skills and confidence with computer technology are now asset for those entering the competitive labour market. Research shows that computer technology improves proficiency of workers and has good results on job satisfaction (Hokanso (Floope, 2002) other studies by porter and Lawler (1963) suggest that employee reinforcement play a vital role in the development of achievement motivation which contributes to job satisfaction.
            Different researchers have documented in the literature the role of gender on employee self – efficacy, job satisfaction and motivation hence, demographic attributes such as gender has been severally implicated in the self – efficacy and job satisfaction literature (Greenberg, Goldberg, Hamill, Onheil ( payne, 1989; Reuther ( Bisslands, 1990). However, there has been inconsistencies regarding gender influence on self – efficacy and job satisfaction due to fluctuating reports from research. While some researcher reported less intrinsic satisfaction on the part of women (Greenberg and Baron, 1993); others found that women are more intrinsically satisfied than men (MC Neely, 1984; Tuch and Martin, 1991; and Mi aris, 1996); yet others found no significant job satisfaction differences between male and female service workers and public relations workers (Bilgic, 1998; Abu-Baber, 2005). However, the role of computer proficiency and gender on self – efficacy of workers cannot be overemphasized as it has not been fully ascertained; this motivated the researcher to carry out this research. The concept of computer self – efficacy (CSF) emerged from the self – efficacy literature and has been conceptualized as a “judgment of one’s capability” to apply computer technology to achieve expected out come in specific tasks such as preparing electronic presentations, sending electronic files to friends, browsing, e – mailing tellers and text – messages (Compeau ( Higgins, 1995). These tasks or skills are dependent upon technologically related abilities needs to be computer proficient. In other words, computer self – efficacy can be defined as an individuals belief in his or her ability to use apply computer technology in problem solving, decision making, gathering and disseminating information. The concept of computer self – efficacy has been variously conceptualized by different researchers, but it can be dimentionally Operationalzed into general computing behavioural level and specific computer application level (Marakas, Yi, (Johnson, 1998).
            However, the various forms of self – efficacy have attracted the interest of researchers. On that note, task specific computer self – efficacy (TCSE) examines self – efficacy in relation to specific computer – related tasks while general computer self – efficacy considers self – efficacy across multiple technological platforms. Therefore, it is the contention of the present study to investigate the role of computer proficiency and gender on self – efficacy. Considerations should therefore be given to the type of self – efficacy to be studied by researchers and the individual characteristics to adopt the appropriate self – efficacy tool/ scale (Bandura, 2001).

            It was the contention of Bandura (1997) that self – efficacy beliefs contribute to effective performance by increasing motivation, task focus, and decreasing anxiety and self – defeating negative thinking. In other words, self – efficacy of employees is sine – qua – non to realization of organizational goals. However, it has been established that computer proficiency translates into higher self – efficacy, success and job satisfaction, which has implication on organizational performance. Hence, introduction of computer to organizations has boosted self –efficacy of workers and their commitment. Therefore, the study attempts to provide answers to the following question:
(1)       Do workers on high computer proficiency differ from their counterparts on low computer proficiency in their self – efficacy?
(2)       Do male workers differ from female workers in their self – efficacy?
            The purpose of the study is
1.         To investigate whether workers on high computer proficiency differ significantly from their counterparts low in computer proficiency on self - efficacy
2.         To find out whether male workers differ from their female counterparts in self – efficacy.
1)        COMPUTER PROFICIENCY: This refers to the ability to operate and make use of computer system as measured by the computer proficiency scale in this work.
2)        SELF – EFFICACY: This refers to a person belief that he/she is capable of producing a desired outcome in a given task or situation as measured in this work by self – efficacy scale.
Share on Google Plus


The publications and/or documents on this website are provided for general information purposes only. Your use of any of these sample documents is subjected to your own decision NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin