PERCEPCIONES SOBRE LAS TECNOLOGÍAS DE MONITOREO EN LA ADMINISTRACIÓN PÚBLICA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/revgeov17n5-103Palabras clave:
Usabilidad, Gobernanza Digital, Monitoreo, Contratos Públicos, Análisis DiscursivoResumen
Este artículo analiza la percepción de asistentes y monitores sobre la usabilidad de tecnologías digitales aplicadas al monitoreo de contratos públicos. El corpus, compuesto por 42 textos, fue procesado con IRaMuTeQ, generando 137 segmentos y una clasificación jerárquica descendente (CHD) que organizó 78,1% del material en seis clases léxicas. Los resultados revelan dos bloques discursivos: uno práctico-operacional, centrado en la recolección de datos, formularios, fotos y problemas de acceso; y otro técnico-estratégico, enfocado en usabilidad, integración de sistemas, adaptabilidad y geolocalización. Las percepciones positivas de simplicidad e interfaz intuitiva se asociaron a la aceptación tecnológica, mientras que fallas y problemas técnicos redujeron la efectividad percibida. Además, se observaron diferencias de perfil: los asistentes valoraron la facilidad y rapidez en campo, mientras los monitores enfatizaron confiabilidad institucional y seguridad de la información. El estudio confirma todas las hipótesis planteadas y contribuye a la literatura sobre gobernanza digital, demostrando que la adopción tecnológica en el sector público depende de la interacción entre diseño, desempeño técnico y contexto institucional. Se señalan implicaciones prácticas para la capacitación diferenciada, la estabilidad tecnológica y la transparencia por diseño, así como limitaciones y líneas futuras de investigación.
Descargas
Referencias
Bardin, L. (2011). Análise de conteúdo (4ª ed.). Edições 70.
Bangor, A., Kortum, P., & Miller, J. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 24(6), 574–594 https://doi.org/10. 1080/10447310802205776
Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2017). Pesquisa qualitativa com texto, imagem e som: Um manual prático (13ª ed.). Vozes.
Benzécri, J. P. (1992). Correspondence analysis handbook. CRC Press. https://doi.org/ 10.1201/ 9780429040635
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.03 .001
Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781498710411-35
Camargo, B. V., & Justo, A. M. (2013). IRaMuTeQ: Um software gratuito para análise de dados textuais. Temas em Psicologia, 21(2), 513–518. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2013.2-16
Cordella, A., & Tempini, N. (2015). E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.03.005
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dawes, S. S., Vidiasova, L., & Parkhimovich, O. (2016). Planning and designing open government data programs: An ecosystem approach. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.01.003
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748
Faria, E. R., & Sousa, M. P. (2019). Usabilidade e aceitação de sistemas de informação: Uma análise com base em métodos lexicométricos. Revista Eletrônica de Administração, 25(3), 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.250.96274
Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE.
Gao, S. (2016). Understanding mobile application for field data collection: A user acceptance perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 635–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb .2016.04.017
Hassenzahl, M., & Tractinsky, N. (2006). User experience – A research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(2), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330331
Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B. T. (2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi .2009.07.002
Hornbæk, K. (2006). Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 64(2), 79–102. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002
Ketikidis, P. H., Dimitrovski, T., Lazuras, L., & Bath, P. A. (2012). Acceptance of health information technology in health professionals: An application of the revised technology acceptance model. Health Informatics Journal, 18(2), 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458211435 425
Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE.
Kortum, P., & Bangor, A. (2013). Usability ratings for everyday products measured with the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 29(2), 67–76. https: //doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2012.681221
Lewis, J. R. (2018). Measuring perceived usability: The SUS, UMUX, and CSUQ. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(12), 1148–1156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.20 17.1418805
Petter, S., DeLone, W., & McLean, E. R. (2008). Measuring information systems success: Models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(3), 236–263. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.15
Ratinaud, P., & Marchand, P. (2015). Application de la méthode ALCESTE à de “gros” corpus et stabilité des “mondes lexicaux”: Analyse du “CableGate” avec IraMuTeQ. Lexicometrica, 19, 1–15. http://lexicometrica.univ-paris3.fr
Reinert, M. (1990). Alceste: Une méthodologie d’analyse des données textuelles et une application: Aurelia de Gerard de Nerval. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 26(1), 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/075910639002600103
Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2016). Quantifying the user experience: Practical statistics for user research (2nd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2015-0-01799-8
Schatz, R., & Egger, S. (2012). Vienna subjective quality test: Assessing voice quality in telecommunications. IEEE Communications Magazine, 50(4), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.11 09/MCOM.2012.6178835
Souza, M. P., Faria, E. R., & Sousa, M. C. (2021). Textual analysis of public policy evaluations: Applying IRaMuTeQ to health monitoring. Revista de Administração Pública, 55(2), 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220200083
Sun, Y., Fang, Y., Lim, K. H., & Straub, D. (2011). Understanding the determinants of consumer mobile payment usage: A modified TAM approach. Information Systems Research, 22(3), 361–381. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0343
Ssemugabi, S., & de Villiers, M. R. (2010). Effectiveness of heuristic evaluation in usability testing of e-learning applications in higher education. South African Computer Journal, 45, 26–39. https://doi.org/10.18489/sacj.v45i0.66
Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0953-5438(00)00031-X
Tullis, T., & Albert, W. (2013). Measuring the user experience: Collecting, analyzing, and presenting usability metrics (2nd ed.). Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2011-0-00091-8
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/ 30036540
Yen, P. Y., & Bakken, S. (2012). Review of health information technology usability study methodologies. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 19(3), 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2010-000020
Zaharias, P., & Poylymenakou, A. (2009). Developing a usability evaluation method for e-learning applications: Beyond functional usability. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 25(1), 75–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802546716
Zhao, Y., Ni, Q., & Zhou, R. (2014). Understanding mobile learning adoption in higher education: A theoretical model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 793–806. https://doi. org/10.1111/bjet.12144.
