COMPUTER-ASSISTED VERSUS PAPER-AND-PENCIL ADMINISTRATION OF QUESTIONNAIRES

In a field experiment using 95 employees, the results of computer-assi sted versus paper-and-pencil administration of questionnaires during c omputer training were compared. Unlike past research, the computer mod e of administration was made as similar as possible, in format, to the paper mode. No differences in means or reliabilities were found betwe en any variables across the two conditions. However, when the correlat ions were examined, different patterns of relationships were found acr oss the two conditions. Specifically, subjective or affective measures (software efficacy, playfulness, and training reaction) were more hig hly related when the measures were gathered by computer as opposed to paper-and-pencil. The relationships between subjective measures and mo re objective or factual measures (experience, performance, training tr ansfer) were not affected. Thus, it appears that, while differences in mode of administration may not be reflected in differences in means, there are differences in nomological validity.