Dr. Jalil Fallad Chávez. Universidad de Guadalajara

Transcription

1 Dr. Jalil Fallad Chávez Universidad de Guadalajara Diciembre, 2012

2 In the last 2 centuries technology became an integral part in our everyday lives. People have reacted in many different ways. Two main different groups; 1. Technophobes who believe that technology have dehumanized people and make our life hard to live 2. Technophiles who believe that technology is an answer for all people s needs, known as.

3 Jay had defined it as (1981, p 41; cited by Brosnan, 1998) resistance to talking about computers or even thinking about computers fear or anxiety towards computers and hostile or aggressive thoughts about computers. More recently (Rose and Weil, 1990) anxiety about current or future interactions with computers or computer-related technology. Negative global attitudes about computers, their operation or their social impact.

4 But these definitions are not only applied to computers they are also applied to some other technologies as basic as wrist watches (Norman, 1988). Technophobia is not only related to computer use; it is dealing with all ways where technology is involved such as Biotechnology or any other form of technology.

5 isn't a disease that requires medical attention. It's a general term describing an attitude or reaction that produces symptoms of anxiety. Human resources training managers can learn to recognize the signs: rejection of new gadgets, reluctance to learn, ineffectiveness on the job and increased absenteeism.

6 The phobia prevents 75 percent of employees from using information technology properly. Most people bumble along, using only 10 to 25 percent of the capabilities of any software program. And an astounding 75 percent secretly wonder "What's software, anyhow?" (Boles & Paik, 1998).

7 This phenomenon occurs almost everywhere where technology is present; in private sector in public sector. In private sector we can include industries like large chain of supermarkets, enterprises like accounting and health clinics, service businesses among others. In public sector schools, law enforcement agencies, libraries (Crawford & Norman, 1995).

8 A U.S. survey conducted by Dell Computer Corporation reports that 55% of U. S. citizens felt technophobic (Ganzel, 1998). Harper (1995) mentioned that 49% of computer users consider themselves as a cyberphobes and only 12% consider themselves as technology adapters. Almost everyone has experienced technophobia (Snider & Culp, 1997). Other authors suggest that nearly 60 percent of technology users, mostly workers, are technophobes (Boles & Paik, 1998).

9 Figure 1. Percent reporting "unadequated skills" Australia & New Zealand 21% United Kingdom & Ireland 22% United States 16% Canada 16% Continental Europe 25% Source: The twenty-first-century workplace. Vancouver, CA, 1990; cited by Priority management systems, Inc

10 US (%) Europe (%) Comfortable Computer usage Feel Easy to use Technophobia comparison in the U.S. and Europe. Source (Mckenna, 1993).

11 In order to solve this problem, experts suggest that training is a reliable solution. The technology user could go through the transformation from Technophobe to Technocompetent because the technophobia is based on ignorance about emerging technology (Comaford, 1996) but, Ignoring technophobia can be in detrimental of any organization (Snider & Culp, 1997).

12 The theory of Diffusion of Innovation provides an alternative theorical explanation This theory may explains why people differentially embraces new technology when it is implemented for the use of the consumer which this is the case of the current study (Rogers, 1962).

13 Innovator s 2.5% Early adopters 13.5% Early majority 34% Late majority 34% Laggar ds 16%

14 Some experts suggest that technophobia has a cultural basis (Brosnan, 1998). About gender, a general perception about technology is more related towards males rather than females. Gender and technophobia become important issue because, as some authors suggest, more female are technophobes. Kantrowitz & Rosenberg (1994) reported that 37% of women and 27% of men are technophobic (Harler, 1995).

15 But Technophobia is one part of people s technology perception; there is also Technophilia. In the book of Ellen Ullman Close to the Machine: Technophilia and its Discontents (Ullman,1997). The author does not define Technophilia, but it is apparently referring to an obsession with technology, specifically computer technology, perhaps more accurately called Technomania.

16 Ullman (1997) reveals the compulsive, irrational character of technology, despite the fact that computer programming. Technomania also suggests the euphoric embrace of technology. On the other end of Technomania (with the nerd as the most extreme case) is technophobia.

17 We would like to consider, however, the notion of Technophilia as still another way of approaching technology. By Technophilia, we would like to understand something closer to a practical virtue than to an obsession. The extremes in the case of technology are on the one hand Technomania as being possessed by it, and on the other, technophobia as contempt for it.

18 Technophobia and Technophilia are not in the edges on how people perceive technology. As Technophobia is the result of people s ignorance about emerging technology. Technophilia is the result about how technology can make our lives easier, which does not mean better.

19 A case about Technophilia is mentioned by Dupont (2002). He suggests that during the past 50 years, policing has embraced many technological innovations, shifting from a labour intensive to a capital-intensive occupation. While yesterday's police officers could patrol their beat on foot, equipped with a baton, a gun and a whistle, Today's police officers require a car, radio-equipment and a wide array of appointments in order to venture out in the streets. But it is certainly in the area of investigations that some of the most notable modernization has occurred.

20 Thus, the development of computers and associated technologies, such as expert systems, computer applications that perform tasks that could otherwise be performed by a human expert, and the pervasiveness of telecommunication services in our everyday lives, constitute a tempting combination for police investigators. They believe it offers them new and more efficient means to gather evidence. The best-known are surveillance devices (Dupont, 2002).

21 Technology can make us smart, in the sense of being better prepared to think, to reason, to make judgments. But technology comes in many forms, and there are no questions that it has negative consequences (Norman, 1993). Technologies are not neutral. They affect the course of society, aiding some actions, impeding others, independent of the morality or necessity of those actions. Technology has also its side effects, both physical and mental.

22 Technology can aid as much as it can detract. It really is up to us, both as individuals and as a society, to decide which course we shall take. Not all of the technology of cognition has failed. Some has served us well. Technology has also its side effects, both physical and mental.

23 It really is up to us, both as individuals and as a society, to decide which course we shall take. The course followed so far is not necessarily the appropriate one. Not all of the technology of cognition has failed. Some has served us well. There is an appropriate way to use technology.

24 I would like to suggest an intermediate point between both perceptions, where we can use technology in order to increase our life s quality by discriminating and discarding those technologies that does not fit in our everyday lives but with a positive learning attitude towards emerging technology.