See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/337550101

A pre-post study to assess the impact of an information-problem solving

intervention on university students’ perceptions and self-efficacy towards
search engines

Article in Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · January 2019

DOI: 10.18162/ritpu-2019-v16n1-05

CITATIONS READS

8 716

5 authors, including:

Marioleni Parissi Konstantinos Lavidas

University of Patras University of Patras
13 PUBLICATIONS 20 CITATIONS 90 PUBLICATIONS 1,357 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Gabriel Dumouchel
Université du Québec à Chicoutimi
51 PUBLICATIONS 556 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Konstantinos Lavidas on 09 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 RITPU|IJTHE
Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire
[Link] | [Link]

International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education

ISSN 1708-7570 Volume 16, n°1, p. 68-87 2019

A pre-post study to assess the impact Marioleni PARISSI

University of Patras, Greece
of an information-problem solving parisima@[Link]
intervention on university students’ Vassilis KOMIS
University of Patras, Greece
perceptions and self-efficacy towards komis@[Link]
search engines Konstantinos LAVIDAS
University of Patras, Greece
Interventions portant sur la résolution de problèmes lavidas@[Link]
en contexte de recherche d'information : quels
Gabriel DUMOUCHEL
impacts sur les perceptions d'auto-efficacité Université du Québec à Chicoutimi
d'étudiants universitaires? gabriel_dumouchel@[Link]
[Link]
Thierry KARSENTI
Université de Montréal
[Link]@[Link]

Abstract
This study investigates the changes in university students’ perceptions towards the use of Web
search engines after their exposure to a teaching intervention centered on the information
problem-solving process. A total of 138 students of the Department of Educational
Sciences and Early Childhood Education of the University of Patras were surveyed to measure
perceived ease of use and usefulness of search engines and search engine self-efficacy. A
questionnaire, part of which was based on the Technology Acceptance Model, was developed
and distributed to respondents, both before and after the course, to measure their perceptions.
The results revealed statistically significant improvement for the ease of use and usefulness of
search engines, as well as for search engine self-efficacy.

Keywords
Information literacy, Big6 model, information problem solving, search engine, self-efficacy of
web information searching

Résumé
Cette étude examine l'évolution des perceptions des étudiants universitaires quant à l'utilisation
des moteurs de recherche après leur exposition à une intervention pédagogique centrée sur le

©Auteurs. Cette oeuvre, disponible à [Link] est distribuée sous licence

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International [Link]

68
M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

processus de résolution de problèmes informationnels. Au total, 138 étudiants du Département

des Sciences de l'Education - Section Préscolaire de l'Université de Patras ont été interrogés pour
mesurer leur perception de l'utilité et de la facilité d'utilisation des moteurs de recherche. Un
questionnaire, basé en partie sur le modèle d'acceptation technologique TAM, a été élaboré et
distribué aux répondants avant et après le cours afin de mesurer leurs perceptions. Les résultats
ont révélé une amélioration statistiquement significative de la facilité d'utilisation et de l'utilité
des moteurs de recherche, ainsi que pour leur sentiment d'auto-efficacité à l'égard des moteurs de
recherche.

Mots-clés
Littératie informationnelle, modèle « Big6 », résolution de problèmes informationnels, moteur de
recherche, auto-efficacité de la recherche d'information sur le web

1. Introduction
In the twenty-first century, the definition of literacy has increasingly reflected the ability to use
technology for gathering and communicating information (Pilgrim & Martinez, 2013).
Information and technology literacy consists of a set of basic skills that an individual should
possess today. Not only does the modern citizen need to be able to use computers, but he should
also be able to apply computer skills to real situations and needs (Lavidas, Komis, & Voulgari,
2017). Computer skills are required in order to search for information that constitutes or supports
solutions to simple or more complex problems (Mawby, Foster, & Ellis, 2015). These problems
are called information problems (Walraven, Brand-Gruwel, & Boshuizen, 2008), since they
require information to be found and used. One of the many kinds of “information retrieval
systems” is the search engine, an essential tool for finding useful information on the World Wide
Web (Web). According to Sterling (2017), Google is by far the most popular search engine and
is used all over the world, with hundreds of millions of search queries every single day.
In the past few years, information systems have come to dominate modern life, whether people
are fully aware of their use or not. Different factors seem to affect their degree of use. Perceived
ease of use (PEOU) and usefulness (PU) as well as self-efficacy have been widely credited with
influencing the behavioural intention of users to use an information system (Almaiah, 2018;
Davis, 1989). According to Surendran (2012), PEOU and PU are major factors in computer use
behaviour based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), developed by Davis (1989).
Moreover, Rose, and Fogarty’s (2006) study found that self-efficacy is a significant predictor of
PEOU and PU. Self-efficacy in the field of information seeking studies and, more specifically, in
Wilson’s general model of information behaviour (1997) is conceived as one of the activating
mechanisms of information seeking behaviour.
At the same time, several studies highlight the importance of IPS instruction in helping students
perform effective searches on the Web (Brand-Gruwel, Wopereis & Walraven, 2009; Wopereis
et al., 2008). A review of the literature reveals that different information problem-solving models
exist that can be used to teach students the information problem-solving (IPS) process (Brand-
Gruwel et al., 2009). The Information Search Process (ISP) model (Kuhlthau, 2004) and the Big
Six Skills Model (Eisenberg & Berkowitz, 1990) are considered to be two of the most widely
adopted process models in the field of information literacy (Gross, Armstrong & Latham, 2012).

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 69

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Thus, this article studies the effects of a teaching intervention, based on the Big6 model, on
university students’ perceptions and self-efficacy regarding the use of search engines. Big6
([Link] is a process model for information problem-solving. Developed in 1987 by
Mike Eisenberg and Bob Berkowitz (2011), it is a well-known approach to teaching information
and technology skills. It integrates information search tools with information technology tools in
a systematic process to find, use, apply, and evaluate information for specific needs and tasks.

2. Background
During the past few decades, research in the field of Information Systems has focused on
understanding the effect of perceived self-efficacy, ease of use and usefulness on behaviours of
information system users (John, 2013; Rose & Fogarty, 2006). The TAM model (Davis, 1989;
Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989) has been widely applied in studies conducted to explain the
acceptance behaviour of individuals using information technology and information systems
(Surendran, 2012). In this model, the construct of “perceived usefulness” (PU) is defined as a
user’s subjective perception of the extent to which a computer system will aid work
performance, while “perceived ease of use” (PEΟU) refers to the extent to which the user
expects a computer system or software to be easy to learn and use. The results of Amoako-
Gyampah's study (2007) revealed that PEOU influences users’ behaviours and system usage,
either directly or indirectly, through the system’s usefulness. Amoako-Gyampah also asserts that
the easier it is to use a technology, the greater the benefits that can be expected from it. On the
other hand, PU is related to individual impacts, such as improved individual productivity and
performance (Seddon, 1997).
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) declares that beliefs about outcomes are insufficient if
individuals have doubts regarding their capabilities to undertake behaviours (Bandura, 1977).
Bandura asserts that self-efficacy, in combination with outcome expectations, must be examined.
The term “self-efficacy” refers to people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce desired
effects by their own actions. Bandura (1977) reports that self-efficacy is a major determinant of
people's choice of activities, how much effort they will expend and how long they will sustain
effort in dealing with stressful situations. In their study, Aharony and Gazit (2018) underline the
importance of increasing students' intrinsic motivation in order to improve their information
literacy self-efficacy that may help them in the academy, as well as in other aspects of their life
in the future. Even though today's students are 'digital natives' and regularly use computers, some
feel stressed when they have to handle vast amounts of information. Based on the results of
Adalier and Serin’s study (2012), the more self-efficacy a person has, the higher the information
searching performance level can be expected. In their study, Keshavarz, Esmaeili Givi, and
Vafaeian (2016) have also noted that the users’ sense of self- efficacy plays an important role in
successful information seeking. Similarly, while a study conducted (Parissis, Tselios, & Komis,
2010) to investigate the relationship between the participants’ search engine self-efficacy and the
effectiveness of the expressed search actions, it was found that student’s self-efficacy is related
to their expressed task performance.
Educational interventions can enhance students’ sense of self-efficacy in using search engines
(Cordes, 2014; Van Dinther, Dochy, & Segers, 2011; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). Students with
procedural knowledge on how to use search engines will have more information on how easy or
difficult the system is to use (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). In addition, perceived ease of use and
perceived usefulness seem to have a positive association with variables for involvement and

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 70

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

control (Cordes, 2014). Cordes’s findings also reveal that when users have a stronger sense of
control when using a search tool in terms of system feedback and interactivity, they find it easier
to use and may spend less time performing searches. As a result, this permitted them to become
more involved in developing effective searches, leading to better results and stronger perceptions
of usefulness. Moreover, a review by Van Dinther et al. (2011) shows that it is possible to
influence students’ self-efficacy through an educational program. More specifically, eighty
percent of the intervention studies across several domains revealed a significant correlation
between an intervention program and students’ self-efficacy. As for the information systems in
particular, an educational program can help individuals familiarize themselves with the systems’
characteristics and applications.
A study conducted shows that students who have followed embedded instruction for information
problem solving (IPS) regulate the IPS process and judge the information found more often than
students who did not receive this instruction (Wopereis et al., 2008). Therefore, today's
educational system is required to make individuals capable of solving information problems
effectively while using the Internet. In fact, teaching interventions about the information
problem-solving process can positively affect perceived ease of use and usefulness as well as
self-efficacy regarding the use of Internet search tools. Venkatesh and Bala (2008), confirm that
teaching interventions that help users obtain accurate perceptions of the characteristics and
benefits of a system are of crucial importance during the initial phase of learning the system.
Moreover, they are deemed essential for helping to minimize initial resistance to a new system
and for helping to provide users with a realistic preview of it, which will help them develop an
accurate perception of the features of a specific system and how it can help them accomplish
their task. Y. H. Chen and Chengalur-Smith’s (2015) research outcomes regarding the
information literacy instruction used as an intervention in their work found that training could
shape user beliefs, foster favorable attitudes, and facilitate use. The above factors could, in turn,
influence the behavioural intentions of students to use Web search tools. Web search tools are
used to facilitate the process of searching the desired piece of information and are therefore
included in information problem-solving models.
One of the prevailing models for teaching students how to solve an information problem is the
Big6, due to its simplicity and its user-friendly approach to what are often extremely complex
tasks (Thomas, Crow, & Franklin, 2011). In the following section, we argue why our study will
use the Big6 as a basis to teach students how to solve information problems with the aid of Web
search tools.
2.1. The Big6 Teaching Model for the Information Problem-Solving Process
A strong body of anecdotal research highlights the usefulness of the Big6 model, but only a
limited number of studies look into what makes it an effective model and how it affects problem
solving (L. C. Chen, Chen, & Ma, 2017). Several information problem-solving models exist for
the IPS process, but the Big6 model helps students develop the skills and understanding that are
necessary to find, process and use information effectively (Gross et al., 2012). Αs Santana-
Arroyo (2013) notes, the Big6 model is an information literacy curriculum, an information
problem-solving process, and a set of skills that provides a strategy for meeting information
needs effectively and efficiently. By learning through this curriculum, students should be able to
realize what they need to accomplish, decide whether a computer will help them to do so, and
then be able to use the computer as part of the process of accomplishing their task (Eisenberg &
Johnson, 2002).

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 71

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

The specific model is comprised of six major stages, each one containing two sub-stages, thus
covering the full scope of the information problem-solving process (see Table 1). The models’
significance lies in the fact that it is applicable to both professional and personal life. According
to one of its authors (Eisenberg, 2008), the Big6 differs from other models in that it provides a
broad-based, logical skill set that can be used as a structure for developing curriculums involving
distinct problem-solving skills. Eisenberg (2008) declares that the Big6 model doesn’t teach
“isolated” computer skills; it teaches “integrated” information and technology skills. Several
studies suggest that the Big6 model can be employed to teach how to use search engines (Foo
et al., 2014; Santana-Arroyo, 2013). By applying the specific model, search engine users will
understand how to select keywords and how to use Booleans operators and their possible
combinations in order to perform a specialized query in a search engine to generate the best
results.
Table 1
The Big6 Model (Eisenberg & Berkowitz ,1990)
Stage of the Big6 model Sub-step of the stage
1. Task definition 1.1 Define the information problem
1.2 Identify information needed
2. Information seeking strategies 2.1 Determine all possible sources
2.2 Select the best sources
3. Location and access 3.1 Locate sources (intellectually and physically)
3.2 Find information within sources
4. Use of information 4.1 Engage (e.g., hear, read, view)
4.2 Extract relevant information
5. Synthesize 5.1 Organize from multiple sources
5.2 Present the information
6. Evaluation 6.1 Judge the product (effectiveness)
6.2 Judge the process (efficiency)

The present study attempts to explore the extent to which a teaching intervention based on the
Big6 model1 can influence university students’ perceptions and self-efficacy towards the use of
search engines.

2.2. Research Questions

The goal of this study is to investigate the impact of a teaching intervention based on the Big6
model regarding the IPS process and Internet search tools on students’ perceptions and self-
efficacy regarding search engine use. More specifically, through this study, we attempt to answer
the following research questions:
Could a student’s teaching intervention focusing on the use of Web search engines to solve
information problems enhance:
– students’ perceptions regarding the ease of use of search engines?

1. The main sources we used for the development of the teaching intervention instructions are the Big6 website
([Link] Murrray (2015), and Eisenberg & Berkowitz (2007).

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 72

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

– students’ perceptions regarding the usefulness of search engines?

– students’ self-efficacy concerning the use of search engines?

3. Methodology
3.1. Research Design
This study made use of a quasi-experimental design to investigate whether a didactic
intervention on the IPS process and Web search tools has an effect on university students’
perceptions regarding the use search engines. This research design was suitable for determining
whether there is a causal relationship between the independent and the dependent variables. The
independent variable was the didactic intervention and the dependent variables were students'
perceived self-efficacy, usefulness and ease of use of search engines.

3.2. Participants
The research was conducted in the context of a compulsory course at the University of Patras
with a sample of 138 university students (mean age of 20.2 years; SD = 3.2 years). The sample
consisted of 5 male students and 133 female students. The course “ICT in Education” is held in
the second semester of the second year at the Department of Educational Sciences and Early
Childhood Education at the University of Patras in Greece. Therefore, the majority of the
participants (126) were second-year students. The sample also included ten third-year students,
one fourth-year student and one graduate student. The students, after being informed about the
objectives of the study and assured that the research data would be kept confidential, were asked
if they were willing to participate in the research study. All of the students agreed to participate
in the study.

3.3. Research Procedure

The research was conducted at the Department of Educational Sciences and Early Childhood
Education of the University of Patras, within the compulsory course “ICT in Education”, from
February to June 2011. This course aims to help students become familiar with the main
approaches to the introduction and integration of ICT in the educational process as well as the
main models of ICT introduction in education. It also helps students develop basic skills in using
current educational computer applications. A weekly three-hour lecture is given by the professor
for 13 consecutive weeks, while two teaching assistants are in charge of the compulsory
laboratory component (13 two-hour lessons). 138 undergraduates had enrolled in the course;
their attendance at the laboratory sessions was mandatory for passing the course. These students
were divided into seven groups of 20 students each, to match the number of workstations in the
lab. The goal of this study was to determine participants’ perceptions regarding the perceived
self-efficacy, usefulness and ease of use of search engines before and after an appropriate
intervention.

3.3.1. Pre-Test Stage

During this stage, the 138 students who attended the course were asked to complete a survey
during the first two-hour laboratory session. The survey included questions related to the
objectives of this study. Participants were provided with a link to the online data collection

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 73

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

platform SurveyMonkey, which gave them access to the survey. It took an average of 15 minutes
to complete the questionnaire.

3.3.2. The Intervention: IPS Instruction

Following the pre-test, the 138 students who participated in this research received a two-hour
intervention during the second two-hour laboratory session. The didactic intervention focused on
increasing awareness of the IPS process and teaching students how to seek information using
Web search engines.

3.3.3. Post-Test
The purpose of this stage was to determine the effect of the didactic intervention on the
participants' perceived self-efficacy, ease of use and usefulness regarding the use of search
engines. Consequently, all participants (138 students) were asked to answer the same
questionnaire (post-survey) during the last laboratory session (13th session).

3.4. Teaching Intervention

Research in higher education has revealed that university students depend on the Internet to look
for information to accomplish both academic and non–academic tasks, and that they do so
mainly by using general-purpose search engines such as Google (Salehi, Du, & Ashman, 2018).
Studies on the use of various search engines reveal that people of all ages have difficulties using
them. For example, seniors seem to have difficulty in finding the information they want about
search engines (Morrison, 2015). Aula, Khan, and Guan (2010) found that as task difficulty
increases, users issue more queries and are more likely to visit more Web pages and spend more
time on search engine result pages. Moreover, Walraven et al. (2008) show that children,
teenagers and adults have difficulties specifying search terms, judging search results, sources and
information. Their study also notes problems in the regulation of the process. Studies conducted
at the University of Patras have led to similar findings. For example, Ntoulas, Stamou,
Tzagarakis, and Christodoulakis (2001) reported that while users of search engines tend to use
the functions of the engines they already know in order to find the information they want from
the Web, they are not familiar with Boolean operators or search facilities that support them. The
results of another study (Parissis et al., 2010) conducted to investigate university students’
information search strategies showed that most students used multiple keywords to find the
required information and made limited use of logical operators and other logical expressions.
These findings illustrated that these students have little knowledge of how to use search engines
while seeking specific information. For this reason, a teaching intervention was developed to
teach students how to use search engines more effectively to solve information problems. The
instructional design of the intervention was based on the Big6 model of Eisenberg and Berkowitz
(1990) and the Problem-Solving Approach developed by University of Patras researchers
(Lavidas, Komis, & Gialamas, 2013; Lavidas et al., 2017).
Hence, as mentioned above, a teaching intervention concerning the information problem solving
process, the Internet and its basic applications was conducted during the second compulsory
laboratory session of the course “ICT in Education,” held in the spring semester of the academic
year 2010-2011. The intervention focused on search techniques and strategic approaches to
information retrieval (Notess, 2006). The intervention was divided into two parts. The first part
focused on clarifying the concept of information problems and on the IPS process. The main 6

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 74

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

steps and subcategories of the IPS process (Eisenberg & Berkowitz, 1990) were clearly presented
in this part. The second part consisted of the description of basic Web search tools (directories,
portals, search engines) and information-searching strategies on the Web. Specifically, during the
first part of the intervention after referring to the definition of the term “information problems,”
students were asked to think of examples of information problems they encounter in their daily
lives. The first part of the intervention was completed when several problems based on everyday
information needs were mentioned and it was perceived that students had a satisfactory
understanding of the term. The second part covered ways to approach and solve examples of
information problems containing suitable cognitive conflicts in order to help students acquire
more in-depth Internet skills for the purpose of solving similar problems. As claimed by de
Grave et al. (1996), cognitive conflicts lead to conceptual changes. Accordingly, after a detailed
presentation of the Big6 model and its stages by the teaching assistant, all students in each
laboratory group (18 to 20 students in each session) had to collaborate to solve, step by step,
several simple to more complex information problems of everyday life. For example, they were
asked to find out which movies were playing in theaters that day and how much it cost to see
them. In order to solve these problems they had to apply the steps of the model to each of the
different information problems. For example, they first had to define the problem they had at
hand and make the type of information needed as specific as possible (Lavidas et al., 2013).
Subsequently, they had to determine all possible information sources and decide on the best one.
In all cases, the Internet was considered the most suitable tool because of its quick access and the
fact that it instantly gives a range of results with possible answers. Third, after realizing that
search engines were the most suitable tools to help them find the desired information, they had to
develop a list of keywords associated with the topic and refine them throughout the research
process. They had to write down the topic, extract important words from that topic and find
synonyms or related words. They then had to decide which of the search results could give them
an answer based on the summary Google displays for each result. They extracted relevant
information, discussed together the different answers given and ended up choosing the most
appropriate one. Finally, they completed each solving procedure by judging the results and the
series of steps followed. This procedure was repeated for a number of examples that had some
interest for the students.

3.5. Research Instruments

The same survey instrument was used in the pre-and post-test to collect data from study
participants. The survey was composed of four parts: demographic information, perceptions
towards ease of use of search engines (PEOU), perceptions towards usefulness of search engines
(PU) and self-efficacy towards the use of search engines.
Part one of the survey instrument asked for general demographic information (e.g. age, gender,
education level, presence of a computer in their home, Internet access at home, length of time of
Internet use) of the survey participants.
Parts Two and Three of the survey instrument included two components referring to respondents'
perceptions of ease of use and usefulness of search engines. The two components were
developed based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Two of the five dimensions of
the TAM model were adapted: perceived ease of use (PEOU) and perceived usefulness (PU).
Both the PEOU and PU scales consisted of six items. All questions were measured on a 7-point
Likert scale (1 = very likely to 7 = very unlikely). The study required translating the survey

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 75

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

instrument into Greek: first, two translators converted the scale statements from English to
Greek, then two other translators converted the scale statements back to English. All four
translators worked independently so as not to be influenced by each other. After that, the two
English versions of the questionnaire were compared to the original English scales.
The Cronbach’s alpha for the 6 items consisting of the PEOU subscale was α = 0.879 for the pre-
test and α = 0.901 for the post-test survey, suggesting a good reliability for the subscales. The
Cronbach's alpha for the 6 items of the PU subscale was α = .932 and α = 0.912 respectively,
suggesting they also have good reliability (Field, 2013).
Part four consisted of a component of perceived self-efficacy in using advanced Google search
strategies. The term “perceived self-efficacy” refers to an identified level and strength of self-
efficacy, in which strength is measured by the degree of certainty that one can perform a specific
task (Bronstein, 2014). According to Kurbanoglu, Akkoyunlu, and Umay (2016), self-efficacy
should be measured directly by the use of self-report scales. Bronstein (2014) declares that these
scales consist of Likert items asking respondents to rate the strength of their perceptions of their
abilities to perform specific behaviours successfully. Therefore, the self-efficacy scale employed
in the current research is self-constructed (Bandura, 2006). The self efficacy scale, a 17-item
inventory that measures respondents’ beliefs about their abilities to implement advanced Google
search strategies, is based on Bandura’s concept of self- efficacy (Bandura, 2006). Students
asked to rate how confident they are could use Google’s advanced search features by selecting a
number on a 7-point scale, from “1 = not at all capable” to “7 = completely capable”. The Likert
items used were developed based on information found on Google's Advanced Search page,
launched in the year 2010. The search features on this page that can make a search easier and
more efficient were specifically included in the survey. Cronbach's alpha reliability for the search
engine self-efficacy scale (17 items) for both the pre- (α = .906) and the post- (α = .891)
intervention questionnaires, demonstrated good internal consistency.
The questions/statements of the survey instrument are presented in the tables of the results
section of the appendix.

4. Results
The quantitative analysis of the collected data was analyzed with SPSS 24. The data obtained
from 138 participants of the study were analyzed using descriptive statistics and paired-samples
t-tests (Field, 2013). The p < .05 standard was used to depict statistical significance throughout
the study. A one-tailed test was used because only one direction of change is of interest to us:
whether perceptions significantly improved after the intervention. Descriptive statistics were run
to analyze the data from the pre-post intervention questionnaire concerning perceived ease of
use, usefulness and search engine self-efficacy.
Table 2 shows the results of paired sample t-tests comparing the pre- and post-intervention mean
values of students’ answers to six questionnaire items related to their perceptions of ease of use
of search engines. The mean values of the students’ answers in the pre-intervention questionnaire
range from to 5.49 to 5.97 while the mean values of their answers in the post-intervention
questionnaire range from 5.77 to 6.16. Overall, the mean values of students' answers for all six
items and the overall score of perceived ease of use point to a statistically significant
improvement in students’ perceptions.

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 76

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Table 2
Measurements for Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU): Pre-and Post-Intervention (N = 138)
Pre- Post-
Item code Perceived ease of use intervention intervention
M SD M SD t df p
Learning to operate search engines is
PEOU1 5.96 0.86 6.16 0.77 2.61 137 .010
easy for me.
I find search engines to be flexible to
PEOU2 5.88 0.86 6.16 0.78 3.47 137 .001
interact with.
It is easy for me to become skillful at
PEOU3 5.87 0.89 6.07 0.84 2.29 137 .023
using search engines.
I find it easy to get search engines to
PEOU4 5.49 1.12 5.77 0.97 2.68 137 .008
do what I want to do.
PEOU5 I find search engines easy to use. 5.82 0.94 6.11 0.82 3.38 137 .001
My interaction with search engines
PEOU6 5.48 1.04 5.82 0.88 3.33 137 .001
is clear and understandable.
Overall PEOU 5.75 0.76 6.01 0.69 3.99 137 .000

The estimates of the effect size revealed a medium effect of the teaching intervention, since the
obtained values were between 0.2 ≤ r < 0.32 (Field, 2013).
Table 3 shows results of measurements before and after the teaching intervention relating to
students’ perceptions of usefulness of search engines. The mean values of the pre-intervention
questionnaire range from 6.09 to 6.50, while the mean values of the post-intervention
questionnaire range from 6.36 to 6.68. The mean values of answers to the six items as well as
the overall scale score of perceived usefulness given by the students in the post -intervention
questionnaire are significantly higher compared to the values of answers in the pre -
intervention questionnaire.
Table 3
Measurements for Perceived Usefulness (PU): Pre- and Post-Intervention (N = 138)
Item Pre- Post-
Perceived usefulness intervention intervention
code
M SD M SD t df p
Using search engines in my job would increase
PU1 6.20 1.03 6.45 0.72 2.73 137 .007
my productivity.
Using search engines in my job would enable
PU2 6.24 0.92 6.51 0.71 3.00 137 .003
me to accomplish tasks more quickly.
PU3 I find search engines useful in my job. 6.50 0.73 6.68 0.54 2.78 137 .006
Using search engines would enhance my
PU4 6.09 0.99 6.36 0.82 2.87 137 .005
effectiveness on the job.
Using search engines would improve my job
PU5 6.14 0.92 6.48 0.78 4.07 137 .000
performance.
Using search engines would make it easier to
PU6 6.30 0.90 6.59 0.66 3.93 137 .000
do my job.
Overall PU 6.24 0.07 6.51 0.05 3.94 137 .000

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 77

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

The estimates of the effect size revealed a medium effect of the teaching intervention, since the
obtained values were between 0.2 ≤ r < 0.32 (Field, 2013).
Table 4 shows results of measurements before and after the teaching intervention concerning
students’ perceived search engine self-efficacy. The mean values of respondents’ pre-
intervention answers for the 17 questions regarding the statements about perceived search engine
self-efficacy ranged from 2.92 to 5.20. The answer with the highest average score related to
respondents’ capability to change the language of results pages that are returned by the search
engine. The question with the lowest average answer referred to determining the time elapsed
since the last page update the search engine will display. The mean values of the answers the
students gave at the post-intervention questionnaire ranged from 3.64 to 5.48.
Table 4
Measurements for Perceived Search Engine Self-Efficacy: Pre and Post Intervention (N = 138
Item Advanced Google Pre- Post-
search strategies Intervention Intervention
M SD M SD t df p
1 Find exact phrase 4.91 1.23 5.15 1.13 3.76 137 .000
2 Search within a website 4.96 1.17 5.31 .86 3.68 137 .000
3 Exclude words 4.24 1.43 5.28 1.04 1.72 137 .088
Use the wildcard asterisk (*) to create searches where
4 there are unknown characters, multiple spellings or 3.06 1.55 3.78 1.51 2.11 137 .037
various endings
5 Exact match search on a single word 4.98 1.29 5.42 1.08 4.78 137 .000
Search for any one of one or more terms to match –OR
6 4.48 1.54 4.95 1.18 4.49 137 .000
operator
7 Define the number of search results on page 3.99 1.70 4.28 1.53 3.85 137 .000
8 Define the language of the search results displayed 5.20 1.48 5.48 1.19 4.70 137 .000
9 Choose the file type you want to search 3.86 1.48 4.59 1.43 5.56 137 .000
Define the date/time of last update of the websites
10 2.92 1.48 3.64 1.46 5.40 137 .000
displayed
11 Search within a specific domain 3.14 1.63 3.74 1.60 4.91 137 .000
Define where the term will appear in the webpage-like
12 2.97 1.55 3.70 1.60 2.70 137 .008
title or URL
13 Define the geographical location of the search results 2.96 1.73 3.85 1.58 3.65 137 .000
14 Search for a range of numbers 2.93 1.80 3.80 1.67 8.36 137 .000
15 Activate the safe search filter 3.08 1.69 3.91 1.63 4.58 137 .000
16 Find pages with similar content to a site given 4.65 1.43 5.08 1.28 3.29 137 .001
Find search results that contain hyperlinks to websites
17 3.74 1.64 4.34 1.47 2.07 137 .040
given
Οverall self-efficacy 3.89 0.96 4.47 0.82 7.8 137 .000

Analysis of the answers to the final questionnaire also revealed that the question with the lowest
evaluation was related to determining the last date and time of the results page, while the

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 78

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

question with the highest average score related to defining the language of Web pages. Results of
the paired samples t-test of the pre- and post-intervention measurements showed statistically
significant differences for all items of the “perceived self-efficacy” scale as well as overall self-
efficacy concerning the use of advanced search engine operations, except the item about the
ability to exclude words from search results.
The estimates of the effect size revealed a medium effect of the teaching intervention, since the
obtained values were between 0.2 ≤ r < 0.32 (Field, 2013).

5. Discussion
This research examined the effect of a Big6 teaching intervention on university students’
perceptions regarding the use of search engines on (i) perceived ease of use, (ii) perceived
usefulness; and (iii) sense of self-efficacy. To reach our research objectives, a statistical analysis
of the survey answers was conducted. From the research results, it is strongly evident that the
teaching intervention can improve students’ perceptions regarding the ease of use and usefulness
of search engines. The results displayed show that there are significant changes in the mean
average of the indicator of search engine self-efficacy after the teaching intervention, compared
to the corresponding mean average of the indicator before the intervention was applied. The
statistical analysis showed that the intervention had a positive impact on both students’
perceptions and self-efficacy towards Web search engines. The Big6 model used as a framework
to teach information problem-solving proved to be effective and supportive for university
students. It proved to be a satisfactory intervention for the majority of the students, because their
perceptions regarding the ease of use and usefulness as well as their self-efficacy beliefs about
their ability to use search engines improved. The Big6 intervention contributed to the
enhancement of students’ knowledge and understanding of the IPS process and how search
engines work. It appears that due to the intervention, search engines became more familiar to
participants and, as such, seemed easier to use. This is consistent with Davis and Venkatesh
(2004), who argued that in order for an individual to form stable perceptions of ease of use of a
system, he ought to have hands-on experience with the system.
DeLone and McLean (2003) also report that an individual performance impact can result when
an information system has given the user a better understanding of the decision context or has
changed the user’s perception of the usefulness of the information system. Venkatesh and Bala
(2008) state that the application of interventions during the pre-implementation phase of an
information system is of immense importance because it can ensure accurate perceptions of
system features and how the system can help them perform a task. They also mention that
information-related characteristics of a system will influence the determinant of perceived
usefulness, and that the system-related characteristics will influence the determinants of
perceived ease of use.
Furthermore, findings show that after students attended the specific course, their overall sense of
self-efficacy regarding advanced uses of search engines was improved. A review by Van Dinther
et al. (2011) reveals that within higher educational institutions, there is a significant correlation
between an intervention program and students’ self-efficacy. Programs based on social cognitive
theory have a stronger potential to enhance students’ self-efficacy. This observation is consistent
with our collaboratively structured intervention, as shown above. The university students had to
cooperate and apply the six stages of the Big6 model to solve examples of information problems
during the teaching intervention.

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 79

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

In this article we have reported the results of a small case study related to students’ perceptions
and self-efficacy regarding the use of search engines. We suggest that improvement in university
students’ perceptions and self-efficacy can have a positive effect on their search strategies and
behaviours.
Results from the present study cannot be generalized beyond the present setting. Studies with
larger samples should be conducted using both quantitative and qualitative data to reinforce their
results. Another limitation of the study, as with many other studies that are based on self-
reported behaviour, is that its accuracy is difficult to verify. In addition, it is possible there is a
bias as a result of the use of a quasi-experiment for this study. Most
notably, a control group should be used for comparison with the experimental group.
Research findings indicate that university students should be taught information literacy concepts
as well as how to apply the information problem-solving process and use Internet search tools.
Not only higher education institutions, but educational institutions of all levels as well should
incorporate teaching interventions in their programs concerning Internet search strategies and the
IPS process (Georgas, 2013; Malliari, Togia, Korobili, & Nitsos, 2014). In this sense,
information literacy programs are important for the educational process, but the impact of such
programs should also be informed by research that investigates their impact in detail.

References
Adalier, A., & Serin, O. (2012). Teacher candidates’ information literacy self-efficacy. Tojsat,
2(2), 71-78. Retrieved from [Link]
Aharony, N., & Gazit, T. (2018). Students’ information literacy self-efficacy: An exploratory
study. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science.
doi:10.1177/0961000618790312
Almaiah, M. A. (2018). Acceptance and usage of a mobile information system services in
University of Jordan. Education and Information Technologies, 23(5), 1873-1895.
doi:10.1007/s10639-018-9694-6
Amoako-Gyampah, K. (2007). Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioral intention:
An empirical study of ERP implementation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3),
1232–1248. doi:10.1016/[Link].2004.12.002
Aula, A., Khan, R. M., & Guan, Z. (2010). How does search behavior change as search becomes
more difficult? In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems (pp. 35-44). New York, US: ACM. doi:10.1145/1753326.1753333
Retrieved from Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering website:
[Link]
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 Retrieved
from CiteSeerX: [Link]
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.),
Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-337). Greenwich, US: Information Age.

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 80

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I., & Walraven, A. (2009). A descriptive model of information
problem solving while using Internet. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1207-1217.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2009.06.004
Bronstein, J. (2014). The role of perceived self-efficacy in the information seeking behavior of
library and information science students. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(2),
101-106. doi:10.1016/[Link].2014.01.010
Chen, L. C., Chen, Y. H., & Ma, W. I. (2017). Effects of integrated information literacy
on science learning and problem-solving among seventh-grade students. Malaysian
Journal of Library & Information Science, 19(2), 35-51. Retrieved from
[Link]
Chen, Y. H., & Chengalur-Smith, I. (2015). Factors influencing students’ use of a library Web
portal: Applying course-integrated information literacy instruction as an intervention. The
Internet and Higher Education, 26, 42-55. doi:10.1016/[Link].2015.04.005
Cordes, S. (2014). Student perceptions of search tool usability. Internet Reference Services
Quarterly, 19(1), 3-32. doi:10.1080/10875301.2014.894955
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. doi:10.2307/249008 Retrieved
from the author’s ResearchGate profile: [Link]
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology:
A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.
doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 Retrieved from F. D. Davis’s ResearchGate profile:
[Link]
Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004). Toward preprototype user acceptance testing of new
information systems: Implications for software project management. IEEE Transactions
on Engineering Management, 51(1), 31-46. doi:10.1109/TEM.2003.822468 Retrieved
from F. D. Davis’s ResearchGate profile: [Link]
De Grave, W. S., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Schmidt, H. G. (1996). Problem based learning:
Cognitive and metacognitive processes during problem analysis. Instructional Science,
24(5), 321-341. doi:10.1007/BF00118111 Retrieved from RePub repository:
[Link]
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of
information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 19(4), 9-30. doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 Retrieved
from CiteSeerX: [Link]
Eisenberg, M. B. (2008). Information literacy: Essential skills for the information
age. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 28(2), 39-47.
doi:10.14429/djlit.28.2.166 Retrieved from the author’s ResearchGate profile:
[Link]
Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (1990). Information problem solving: The Big Six Skills
approach to library & information skills instruction. Norwood, US: Ablex.

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 81

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (2007, May). Big6 basics webinar [Slideshow]. Retrieved
from M. B. Eisenberg’s website: [Link]
Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (2011). The Big6 workshop handbook: Implementation
and impact (4th ed.). Santa Barbara, US: ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Eisenberg, M. B., & Johnson. D. (2002). Learning and teaching information technology
computer skills in context (ERIC Document No. ED465377). Retrieved from ERIC:
[Link]
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Washington, US: Sage.
Foo, S., Majid, S., Azura Mokhtar, I., Zhang, X., Chang, Y. K., Luyt, B., & Theng, Y. L. (2014).
Information literacy skills of secondary school students in Singapore. Aslib Journal of
Information Management, 66(1), 54-76. Retrieved from S. Foo’s website:
[Link]
Georgas, H. (2013). Google vs. the library: Student preferences and perceptions when doing
research using Google and a federated search tool. portal: Libraries and the Academy,
13(2), 165-185. doi:10.1353/pla.2013.0011 Retrieved from CUNY Academics Works
repository: [Link]
Gross, M., Armstrong, B., & Latham, D. (2012). The Analyze, Search, Evaluate (ASE) process
model: Three steps toward information literacy. Community & Junior College Libraries,
18(3-4), 103-118. doi:10.1080/02763915.2012.780488
John, S. P. (2013). Influence of computer self-efficacy on information technology adoption.
International Journal of Information Technology, 19(1), 1-13. Retrieved from
[Link]
Keshavarz, H., Esmaeili Givi, M., & Vafaeian, A. (2016). Students’ sense of self-efficacy in
searching information from the Web: A PLS approach. Webology, 13(2), 16-31.
Retrieved from [Link]
Kuhlthau, C. (2004). Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services
(2nd ed.) Westport, US: Libraries Unlimited.
Kurbanoglu, S. S., Akkoyunlu, B., & Umay, A. (2006). Developing the information literacy self-
efficacy scale. Journal of Documentation, 62(6), 730-743.
doi:10.1108/00220410610714949 Retrieved from S. S. Kurbanoglu’s ResearchGate
profile: [Link]
Lavidas, K., Komis, V., & Gialamas, V. (2013). Spreadsheets as cognitive tools: A study of the
impact of spreadsheets on problem solving of math story problems. Education and
Information Technologies, 18(1), 113-129. doi:10.1007/s10639-011-9174-8
Lavidas, K., Komis, V., & Voulgari, I. (2017). Detecting errors during the construction of
mathematical formulas in a spreadsheet environment: An empirical study
involving novice users. SCIREA Journal of Education, 2(1), 1-17. Retrieved from
[Link]

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 82

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Malliari, A., Togia, A., Korobili, S., & Nitsos, I. (2017). Information literacy skills of Greek
high-school students: Results of an empirical survey. Qualitative and Quantitative
Methods in Libraries, 3(1), 271-281. Retrieved from [Link]
Mawby, J., Foster, A., & Ellis, D. (2015). Everyday life information seeking behaviour in
relation to the environment: Disposable information? Library Review, 64(6-7), 468-479.
doi:10.1108/LR-10-2014-0120 Retrieved from Aberystwyth Research Portal:
[Link]
Morrison, R. (2015). Silver surfers search for gold: A study into the online information-
seeking skills of those over fifty. Ageing International, 40(3), 300-310.
doi:10.1007/s12126-015-9224-4 Retrieved from the author’s ResearchGate profile:
[Link]
Murray, J. (updated 2015, October). Applying Big6™ skills, AASL standards and ISTE standards
to Internet research. Retrieved November 21, 2019 from the author’s website:
[Link]
Notess, G. R. (2006). Teaching Web search skills: Techniques and strategies of top trainers.
Medford, US: Information Today.
Ntoulas, A., Stamou, S., Tzagarakis, M., & Christodoulakis, D. (2001). Understanding search
engines: Requirements for explaining search results. In N. Avouris & N. Fakotakis
(Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st Panhellenic Conference with International Participation in
Human Computer Interaction (PCHCI). Retrieved from M. Tzagarakis’s ResearchGate
profile: [Link]
Parissis, M., Tselios, N., & Komis, V. (2010). Is searching self efficacy related to search
performance? A study of University studentsʼ Web information searching strategies. In
D. Benzie, K.-W. Lai, & C. Reffay (Eds), Proceedings of IFIP Working Conferencence –
New Developments in ICT and Education. Retrieved from [Link]:
[Link]
Pilgrim, J., & Martinez, E. E. (2013). Defining literacy in the 21st century: A guide to
terminology and skills. Texas Journal of Literacy Education, 1(1), 60-69. Retrieved from
ERIC: [Link]
Rose, J., & Fogarty, G. J. (2006). Determinants of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of
use in the technology acceptance model: Senior consumers’ adoption of self-service
banking technologies. In G. Ogunmokun, R. Gabbay, & J. Rose (Eds.), Proceedings of
the 2nd Biennial Conference of the Academy of World Business, Marketing and
Management Development: Business Across Borders in the 21st Century (Vol. 2,
pp. 122-129). Retrieved from USQ ePrints repository: [Link]
Salehi, S., Du, J. T., & Ashman, H. (2018). Use of Web search engines and personalisation in
information searching for educational purposes. Information Research: An International
Electronic Journal, 23(2). Retrieved from [Link]

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 83

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Santana Arroyo, S. (2013). Information literacy for health professionals:

Teaching essential information skills with the Big6 information literacy
model. Community & Junior College Libraries, 19(3-4), 77-91.
doi:10.1080/02763915.2014.953435 Retrieved from the author’s ResearchGate profile:
[Link]
Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS
success. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240-253. doi:10.1287/isre.8.3.240
Sterling, G. (2017, February 9). Data: Google monthly search volume dwarfs rivals because of
mobile advantage. Search Engine Land. Retrieved from [Link]
Surendran, P. (2012). Technology acceptance model: A survey of literature. International
Journal of Business and Social Research, 2(4), 175-178.
[Link]
Thomas, N. P., Crow, S. R., & Franklin, L. L. (2011). Information literacy and information skills
instruction: Applying research to practice in the 21st century school library. Santa
Barbara, US: Libraries Unlimited.
Van Dinther, M., Dochy, F., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in
higher education. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 95-108.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2010.10.003
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on
interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Retrieved from V. Venkatesh’s website: [Link]
Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2008). Information problem-solving: A
review of problems students encounter and instructional solutions. Computers in Human
Behavior, 24(3), 623-648. doi:10.1016/[Link].2007.01.030 Preprint retrieved from
CORE repository: [Link]
Wilson, T. D. (1997). Information behaviour: An interdisciplinary perspective.
Information Processing & Management, 33(4), 551-572. doi:10.1016/S0306-
4573(97)00028-9 Retrieved from the author’s ResearchGate profile:
[Link]
Wopereis, I., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Vermetten, Y. (2008). The effect of embedded instruction
on solving information problems. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3),
738-752. doi:10.1016/[Link].2007.01.024 Preprint retrieved from CORE repository:
[Link]

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 84

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Appendix – Survey
Dear Student,
The following survey is part of a research study with subject: Information seeking on the Web. It
is anonymous, so please answer the following questions as honestly as possible. We would be
very grateful to receive your responses to the survey, which should take approximately 10-15
minutes to fill out.

PART A: Demographic Information

Please circle the right answer, or fill in the requested information.

Age:

Year of study in the Department of Educational

Sciences and Early Childhood Education of the Second/Third/Fourth/Year of graduation
University of Patras:

Do you have any other undergraduate degree? Yes/No

If yes, from which department(s)?

Do you have a master's degree? Yes/No/In progress

Do you have a computer at home? Yes/No

Do you have Internet access at home? Yes/No

How many times per week do you use the computer? Daily/3-4 times per week/2-3 times per week/none

How many hours per day are you use the computer? 0-1hour/1-2 hours/2 hours and more

How many hours per day do you use the Internet? 0-1hour/1-2 hours/2 hours and more

How long have you been using the Internet? 0-6 months/6-12 months/1-2 years/2-3 years/3-4 years/5-……years

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 85

M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

PΑRΤ B: Perceived Ease of Use of Search Engines

Below are statements about the ease of use of search engines. Please choose the statement that
most applies to you (1 = very unlikely; 7 = very likely).
Very Unlikely Somewhat Un- Somewhat Likely Very
Item Perceived ease of use unlikely unlikely decided likely likely
Code
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Very Very
Learning to use search unlikely likely
PEOU1 2 3 4 5 6
engines is easy for me.
1 7
Very Very
PEOU2 I find search engines to be unlikely 2 3 4 5 6 likely
flexible to interact with.
1 7
I find it easy to get search Very Very
PEOU3 engines to do what I want unlikely 2 3 4 5 6 likely
to do. 1 7
It is easy for me to become Very Very
PEOU4 skilful at using search unlikely 2 3 4 5 6 likely
engines. 1 7
Very Very
I find search engines easy unlikely likely
PEOU5 2 3 4 5 6
to use.
1 7
My interaction with search Very Very
PEOU6 engines is clear and unlikely 2 3 4 5 6 likely
understandable. 1 7

PART C: Perceived Usefulness of Search Engines

Below are statements about usefulness of search engines. Please choose the statement that most
applies to you (1 = very unlikely; 7 = Very likely).
Item Very Unlikely Somewhat Un- Somewhat Likely Very
Perceived usefulness unlikely unlikely decided likely likely
Code
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Very Very
Using search engines in my job unlikely likely
PU1 would increase my productivity. 2 3 4 5 6
1 7
Using search engines in my job Very Very
PU2 would enable me to accomplish unlikely 2 3 4 5 6 likely
tasks more quickly. 1 7
Very Very
I find search engines useful in my unlikely likely
PU3 job. 2 3 4 5 6
1 7
Using search engines would Very Very
PU4 enhance my effectiveness on the unlikely 2 3 4 5 6 likely
job. 1 7
Very Very
Using search engines would unlikely likely
PU5 improve my job performance. 2 3 4 5 6
1 7
Very Very
Using search engines would unlikely likely
PU6 2 3 4 5 6
make it easier to do my job.
1 7

PART D: Self-Efficacy towards the Use of Search Engines

Please indicate how capable you feel you are in performing Google's advanced search strategies,
when searching for information on the Web. There are no “right” or “wrong” answers; the best
answer is the immediate, spontaneous one. I feel I am capable of….:

2019 – Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 16(1) [Link] 86

 M. Parissi, V. Komis, K. Lavidas, G. Dumouchel and T. Karsenti ... the impact of an information-problem solving intervention...

Not at all Not so A little Somewhat Fairly Very Totally

Item Advanced Google capable capable capable capable capable capable capable
Code search strategies
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Not at all Totally
1 Finding an exact phrase capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
1 7
Not at all Totally
2 Searching within a website capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
1 7
Not at all Totally
3 Excluding words capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
1 7
Using the wildcard asterisk (*) to
Not at all Totally
4 create searches where there are capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
unknown characters, multiple
spellings or various endings 1 7

Exacting match search on a single Not at all Totally

5 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
word 1 7
Searching for any one of one or more Not at all Totally
6 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
terms to match –OR operator 1 7
Defining the number of search results Not at all Totally
7 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
on page 1 7
Defining the language of the search Not at all Totally
8 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
results displayed 1 7
Choosing the file type you want to Not at all Totally
9 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
search 1 7
Defining the date/time of last update Not at all Totally
10 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
of the websites displayed 1 7
Not at all Totally
11 Searching within a specific domain capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
1 7
Defining where the term will appear in Not at all Totally
12 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
the webpage-like title or URL 1 7
Defining the geographical location of Not at all Totally
13 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
the search results 1 7
Not at all Totally
14 Searching for a range of numbers capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
1 7
Not at all Totally
15 Activating the safe search filter capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
1 7
Finding pages with similar content to Not at all Totally
16 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
a site given 1 7
Finding search results that contain Not at all Totally
17 capable 2 3 4 5 6 capable
hyperlinks to website given 1 7

2019 – International Journal of Technologies in Higher Education, 16(1) [Link] 87

View publication stats