www.sharexxx.net - free books & magazines
www.sharexxx.net - free books & magazines
www.sharexxx.net - free books & magazines
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
(5) a serious problem<br />
(4) a rather serious problem<br />
(3) a significant problem<br />
(2) a slight problem<br />
(1) not really a problem<br />
Relating Cognitive Problem-Solving Style to User Resistance 193<br />
In the light of the previous discussion, the R-score was assumed to be a valid<br />
measure of user resistance, despite its novelty. Of course it can be argued that the<br />
R-score might change with the nature of the researcher conducting the interview.<br />
It was beyond the scope of this study to investigate such a conjecture, but since it<br />
was sufficient to show resistance in the relative sense only (comparing resistance<br />
between systems investigated by the same person), this criticism was not considered<br />
significant.<br />
The Role of Cognitive Problem-Solving Styles<br />
A submission based on A-I theory, made earlier was that user resistance is<br />
associated with differences in developer-user cognitive problem-solving styles.<br />
This can now be stated as the following hypothesis:<br />
HI: The user’s R-score is positively associated with the absolute analystuser<br />
KAI score difference for a given information system<br />
Further hypotheses were thus formulated for testing. For example, a user<br />
should tend to see an analyst who is more innovative than himself spend surprisingly<br />
little time studying the system requirements. This follows from the tendency of<br />
innovators to not to wed themselves too long to any system, and to seek continued<br />
novelty of activity. Since the user will consider the analyst an “expert” (lacking in the<br />
beginning a frame of reference to consider him anything else), he should also assume<br />
that the analyst has absorbed all the details in this surprisingly short time. The degree<br />
to which a user will see the analyst as more innovative or adaptive than himself is<br />
measurable as the algebraic difference between their KAI scores. Hence the<br />
hypothesis:<br />
H2(a): The analyst-user KAI score difference is positively associated<br />
with the user’s seven- point rating of how quickly the analyst absorbed<br />
(grasped) the system requirements<br />
According to Kirton (1984), innovators tend to pursue a course of action with<br />
more apparent certainty than do adaptors. This leads to the obvious conjecture that<br />
Copyright © 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written<br />
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.