Technostress, Academic Self-Efficacy, and Resistance to Innovation: Buffering Roles of Knowledge Sharing Culture and Constructive Deviant Behavior

References

• King LG, McKim AJ, Raven MR, Pauley CM. New and emerging technologies: teacher needs, adoption, methods, and student engagement. J Agric Educ. 2019;60(3):277–290. doi:10.5032/jae.2019.03277
   Google Scholar
• VanDerSchaaf HP, Daim TU, Basoglu NA. Factors influencing student information technology adoption. IEEE Trans Eng Manage. 2021;70(2):631–643. doi:10.1109/TEM.2021.3053966
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayanajith G, Damunupola KA, Ventayen RJ. Impact of innovation and perceived ease of use on e-learning adoption. Asian J Bus Technol Stud. 2019;2(1):19–27.
   Google Scholar
• Ma L, Lee CS. Understanding the barriers to the use of MOOCs in a developing country: an innovation resistance perspective. J Educ Comput Res. 2019;57(3):571–590. doi:10.1177/0735633118757732
   Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Akhter S, Kumar T, Nguyen NT. Lack of emotional experience, resistance to innovation, and dissatisfied musicians influence on music unattractive education. Front Psychol. 2022;13:922400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betancor-Falcon S. A critical history of autonomous language learning: exposing the institutional and structural resistance against methodological innovation in language education. Stud Self Access Learn J. 2022;13(3):332–346. doi:10.37237/130303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gabbiadini A, Paganin G, Simbula S. Teaching after the pandemic: the role of technostress and organizational support on intentions to adopt remote teaching technologies. Acta Psychol. 2023;236:103936. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.103936
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veletsianos G, Shepherdson P. A systematic analysis and synthesis of the empirical MOOC literature published in 2013–2015. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2016;17(2):198–202. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.2448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badali M, Hatami J, Banihashem SK, Rahimi E, Noroozi O, Eslami Z. The role of motivation in MOOCs’ retention rates: a systematic literature review. Res Pract Technol Enhanc Learn. 2022;17(1):1–20. doi:10.1186/s41039-022-00181-3
   Google Scholar
• Lara-Prieto V, Flores-Garza GE. Iweek experience: the innovation challenges of digital transformation in industry. Int J Interact Des Manuf. 2022;16(1):81–98. doi:10.1007/s12008-021-00810-z
   Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol. 1982;37(2):122. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Ann Rev Psychol. 2001;52(1):1–26. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A. A sociocognitive analysis of substance abuse: an agentic perspective. Psychol Sci. 1999;10(3):214–217. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saleem F, Malik MI, Qureshi SS, Farid MF, Qamar S. Technostress and employee performance nexus during COVID-19: training and creative self-efficacy as moderators. Front Psychol. 2021;12:595119. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.595119
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Decataldo A, Fiore B. Digital-Insecurity and overload: the role of technostress in lecturers’ work-family balance. Ital J Soc Educ. 2022;14(3):75–102.
   Google Scholar
• Brod C. Technostress: The Human Cost of the Computer Revolution. Basic Books; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Ayyagari R, Grover V, Purvis R. Technostress: technological antecedents and implications. MIS Q. 2011;35(4):831–858. doi:10.2307/41409963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnetz BB, Wiholm C. Technological stress: psychophysiological symptoms in modern offices. J Psychosom Res. 1997;43(1):35–42. doi:10.1016/S0022-3999(97)00083-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ragu-Nathan TS, Tarafdar M, Ragu-Nathan BS, Tu Q. The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: conceptual development and empirical validation. Inf Syst Res. 2008;19(4):417–433. doi:10.1287/isre.1070.0165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarafdar M, Cooper CL, Stich J-F. The technostress trifecta - techno eustress, techno distress and design: theoretical directions and an agenda for research. Inf Syst J. 2017;29(6):6–42. doi:10.1111/isj.12169
   Google Scholar
• Lee YK. Impacts of digital technostress and digital technology self-efficacy on FinTech usage intention of Chinese Gen Z consumers. Sustainability. 2021;13(9):5077. doi:10.3390/su13095077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarafdar M, Pullins EB, Ragu-Nathan TS. Technostress: negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Inf Syst J. 2015;25(2):103–132. doi:10.1111/isj.12042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai S, Liu C, Wang T, Liu E, Liang JC. Effects of learning physics using Augmented Reality on students’ self‐efficacy and conceptions of learning. Brit J Educ Technol. 2021;52(1):235–251. doi:10.1111/bjet.13020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schunk DH. Self‐efficacy and classroom learning. Psychol Sch. 1985;22(2):208–223. doi:10.1002/1520-6807(198504)22:2<208::AID-PITS2310220215>3.0.CO;2-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A. Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2006;1:164–180. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elstad E, Christophersen KA. Perceptions of digital competency among student teachers: contributing to the development of student teachers’ instructional self-efficacy in technology-rich classrooms. Educ Sci. 2017;7(1):27. doi:10.3390/educsci7010027
   Google Scholar
• Wolverton CC, Hollier BNG, Lanier PA. The impact of computer self efficacy on student engagement and group satisfaction in online business courses. Electron J E-Learning. 2020;18(2):175–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A. A social cognitive perspective on positive psychology. Rev Psicol Soc. 2011;26(1):7–20. doi:10.1174/021347411794078444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Govender R, Mpungose C. Lecturers’ technostress at a South African university in the context of coronavirus (COVID-19). Cogent Educ. 2022;9(1):2125205. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2022.2125205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boahene KO, Fang J, Sampong F. Social media usage and tertiary students’ academic performance: examining the influences of academic self-efficacy and innovation characteristics. Sustainability. 2019;11(8):2431. doi:10.3390/su11082431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carberry AR, Gerber EM, Martin CK. Measuring the innovation self-efficacy of engineers. Int J Eng Educ. 2018;34(2):590–598.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schar M, Gilmartin S, Harris A, Rieken B, Sheppard S. Innovation self-efficacy: a very brief measure for engineering students. In: Proceedings for the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference; June 25–28; 2017. Columbus, OH.
   Google Scholar
• Hanke JJ, Saxberg BO. Isolates and deviants in the United States and Japan: productive nonconformists or costly troublemakers. Comp Soc Res. 1985;8:219–243.
   Google Scholar
• Galperin BL. Can workplace deviance be constructive? Misbehav Dysfunc Attitudes Organ. 2003;2003:154–170.
   Google Scholar
• Galperin BL. Exploring the nomological network of workplace deviance: developing and validating a measure of constructive deviance. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2012;42(12):2988–3025. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00971.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins DL, Galperin BL. Constructive deviance: striving toward organizational change in healthcare. J Manage Mark Res. 2010;5:1.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson SL, Bennett RJ. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidimensional scaling study. Acad Manage J. 1995;38(2):555–572. doi:10.2307/256693
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatzweiler A, Blazevic V, Piller FT. Dark side or bright light: destructive and constructive deviant content in consumer ideation contests. J Prod Innov Manag. 2017;34(6):772–789. doi:10.1111/jpim.12369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu Y, Zhang Z, Zhao H. The influence of the COVID-19 event on deviant workplace behavior taking Tianjin, Beijing and Hebei as an example. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(1):59. doi:10.3390/ijerph18010059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tekmen EE, Kaptangil K. The determinants of constructive deviant behaviour of frontline tourism employees: an exploration with perceived supervisory support and intrinsic motivation. J Tourism Sustain Wellbeing. 2022;10(1):58–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiou H, Jopling JK, Scott JY, et al. Detecting organizational innovations leading to improved ICU outcomes: a protocol for a double-blinded national positive deviance study of critical care delivery. BMJ Open. 2017;7(6):e015930. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015930
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halisah A, Jayasingam S, Ramayah T, Popa S. Social dilemmas in knowledge sharing: an examination of the interplay between knowledge sharing culture and performance climate. J Knowledge Manage. 2021;25(7):1708–1725. doi:10.1108/JKM-08-2020-0631
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Kurdi OF, El-Haddadeh R, Eldabi T. The role of organisational climate in managing knowledge sharing among academics in higher education. Int J Inf Manag. 2020;50:217–227. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arsawan IWE, Koval V, Rajiani I, Rustiarini NW, Supartha WG, Suryantini NPS. Leveraging knowledge sharing and innovation culture into SMEs sustainable competitive advantage. Int J Prod Perf Manag. 2022;71(2):405–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen TM, Nham TP, Froese FJ, Malik A. Motivation and knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis of main and moderating effects. J Knowledge Manage. 2019;23(5):998–1016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swanson E, Kim S, Lee SM, Yang JJ, Lee YK. The effect of leader competencies on knowledge sharing and job performance: social capital theory. J Hosp Tour Manag. 2020;42:88–96. doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brislin RW. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol. 1970;1(3):185–216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarafdar M, Tu Q, Ragu-Nathan BS, Ragu-Nathan TS. The impact of technostress on role stress and productivity. J Manage Inf Syst. 2007;24(1):301–328. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222240109
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen G, Gully SM, Eden D. Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Org Res Methods. 2001;4(1):62–83. doi:10.1177/109442810141004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosseini MH, Delaviz M, Derakhshide H, Delaviz M. Factors affecting consumer resistance to innovation in mobile phone industry. Int J Asian Soc Sci. 2016;6(9):497–509. doi:10.18488/journal.1/2016.6.9/1.9.497.509
   Google Scholar
• Connelly CE, Kelloway EK. Predictors of employees’ perceptions of knowledge sharing cultures. Leadersh Org Dev J. 2003;24(5):294–301. doi:10.1108/01437730310485815
   Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M, Danks NP, Ray S. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook. Springer Nature; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Sarstedt M, Ringle CM, Gudergan SP. Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. Sage Publications; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Market Res. 1981;18(1):39–50. doi:10.1177/002224378101800104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Guo J, Yang J, Wiley J, Ou X, Zhou Z, Whittemore R. Perceived stress and self‐efficacy are associated with diabetes self‐management among adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a moderated mediation analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2019;75(12):3544–3553. doi:10.1111/jan.14179
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong Y, Xu C, Chai CS, Zhai X. Exploring the structural relationship among teachers’ technostress, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), computer self-efficacy and school support. Asia Pac Educ Res. 2020;29:147–157. doi:10.1007/s40299-019-00461-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yener S, Arslan A, Kilinç S. The moderating roles of technological self-efficacy and time management in the technostress and employee performance relationship through burnout. Inf Technol People. 2021;34(7):1890–1919. doi:10.1108/ITP-09-2019-0462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gkontelos A, Vaiopoulou J, Stamovlasis D. Teachers’ innovative work behavior as a function of self-efficacy, burnout, and irrational beliefs: a structural equation model. Eur J Invest Health Psychol Educ. 2023;13(2):403–418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tus J. Self–concept, self–esteem, self–efficacy and academic performance of the senior high school students. Int J Res Cult Soc. 2020;4(10):45–59.
   Google Scholar
• Almusawi HA, Durugbo CM, Bugawa AM. Innovation in physical education: teachers’ perspectives on readiness for wearable technology integration. Comput Educ. 2021;167:104185. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Q, Bañuelos M, Liu Y, Xu D. Online instruction for a humanized learning experience: techniques used by college instructors. Comput Educ. 2022;189:104595. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris KJ, Harris RB, Valle M, et al. Technostress and the entitled employee: impacts on work and family. Inf Technol People. 2022;35(3):1073–1095. doi:10.1108/ITP-07-2019-0348
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solís García P, Lago Urbano R, Real Castelao S. Consequences of COVID-19 confinement for teachers: family-work interactions, technostress, and perceived organizational support. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(21):11259. doi:10.3390/ijerph182111259
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khedhaouria A, Cucchi A. Technostress creators, personality traits, and job burnout: a fuzzy-set configurational analysis. J Bus Res. 2019;101:349–361. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raza A, Ishaq MI, Zia H, Ur-Rehman Z, Ahmad R. Technostressors and service employees outcomes: a longitudinal study. Serv Ind J. 2022;42(13–14):1030–1053. doi:10.1080/02642069.2022.2081685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salanova M, Llorens S, Ventura M. Technostress: the dark side of technologies. In: The Impact of ICT on Quality of Working Life. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2014:87–103.
   Google Scholar
• Heiden M, Widar L, Wiitavaara B, Boman E. Telework in academia: associations with health and well-being among staff. High Educ. 2021;81(4):707–722. doi:10.1007/s10734-020-00569-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupșa D, Vîrga D, Maricuțoiu LP, Rusu A. Increasing psychological capital: a pre‐registered meta‐analysis of controlled interventions. Appl Psychol. 2020;69(4):1506–1556. doi:10.1111/apps.12219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar