IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v20y2009i4p527-546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Incorporating Feedback Mechanisms in a DSS Affects DSS Evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Ujwal Kayande

    (College of Business and Economics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia)

  • Arnaud De Bruyn

    (ESSEC Business School, 95000 Cergy-Pontoise, France)

  • Gary L. Lilien

    (Smeal College of Business, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802)

  • Arvind Rangaswamy

    (Smeal College of Business, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802)

  • Gerrit H. van Bruggen

    (Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Model-based decision support systems (DSS) improve performance in many contexts that are data-rich, uncertain, and require repetitive decisions. But such DSS are often not designed to help users understand and internalize the underlying factors driving DSS recommendations. Users then feel uncertain about DSS recommendations, leading them to possibly avoid using the system. We argue that a DSS must be designed to induce an alignment of a decision maker's mental model with the decision model embedded in the DSS. Such an alignment requires effort from the decision maker and guidance from the DSS. We experimentally evaluate two DSS design characteristics that facilitate such alignment: (i) feedback on the upside potential for performance improvement and (ii) feedback on corrective actions to improve decisions. We show that, in tandem , these two types of DSS feedback induce decision makers to align their mental models with the decision model, a process we call deep learning, whereas individually these two types of feedback have little effect on deep learning. We also show that deep learning, in turn, improves user evaluations of the DSS. We discuss how our findings could lead to DSS design improvements and better returns on DSS investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Ujwal Kayande & Arnaud De Bruyn & Gary L. Lilien & Arvind Rangaswamy & Gerrit H. van Bruggen, 2009. "How Incorporating Feedback Mechanisms in a DSS Affects DSS Evaluations," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 527-546, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:20:y:2009:i:4:p:527-546
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1080.0198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1080.0198
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1080.0198?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nada R. Sanders & Karl B. Manrodt, 2003. "Forecasting Software in Practice: Use, Satisfaction, and Performance," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 33(5), pages 90-93, October.
    2. Gary L. Lilien & Arvind Rangaswamy & Gerrit H. Van Bruggen & Katrin Starke, 2004. "DSS Effectiveness in Marketing Resource Allocation Decisions: Reality vs. Perception," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 216-235, September.
    3. Goodman, Jodi S., 1998. "The Interactive Effects of Task and External Feedback on Practice Performance and Learning," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 223-252, December.
    4. Kai H. Lim & Lawrence M. Ward & Izak Benbasat, 1997. "An Empirical Study of Computer System Learning: Comparison of Co-Discovery and Self-Discovery Methods," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 254-272, September.
    5. Arkalgud Ramaprasad, 1987. "Cognitive Process as a Basis for MIS and DSS Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 139-148, February.
    6. William H. DeLone & Ephraim R. McLean, 1992. "Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 60-95, March.
    7. Stephen J. Hoch & David A. Schkade, 1996. "A Psychological Approach to Decision Support Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 51-64, January.
    8. Balzer, William K. & Sulsky, Lorne M. & Hammer, Leslie B. & Sumner, Kenneth E., 1992. "Task information, cognitive information, or functional validity information: Which components of cognitive feedback affect performance?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 35-54, October.
    9. Shelby H. McIntyre, 1982. "An Experimental Study of the Impact of Judgment-Based Marketing Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 17-33, January.
    10. Danièle Thomassin Singh & Pavan Pratap Singh, 1997. "Aiding DSS users in the use of complex OR models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 72(0), pages 5-27, January.
    11. Atkins, Paul W. B. & Wood, Robert E. & Rutgers, Philip J., 2002. "The effects of feedback format on dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 587-604, July.
    12. Mark S. Silver, 1990. "Decision Support Systems: Directed and Nondirected Change," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 47-70, March.
    13. Howard Kunreuther, 1969. "Extensions of Bowman's Theory on Managerial Decision-Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(8), pages 415-439, April.
    14. Peter Todd & Izak Benbasat, 1999. "Evaluating the Impact of DSS, Cognitive Effort, and Incentives on Strategy Selection," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 356-374, December.
    15. Dorothy Leonard-Barton & Isabelle Deschamps, 1988. "Managerial Influence in the Implementation of New Technology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(10), pages 1252-1265, October.
    16. Andreas I. Nicolaou & D. Harrison McKnight, 2006. "Perceived Information Quality in Data Exchanges: Effects on Risk, Trust, and Intention to Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 332-351, December.
    17. Sung S. Kim & Naresh K. Malhotra, 2005. "A Longitudinal Model of Continued IS Use: An Integrative View of Four Mechanisms Underlying Postadoption Phenomena," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 741-755, May.
    18. Alan L. Montgomery, 2005. "The implementation challenge of pricing decision support systems for retail managers," Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(4‐5), pages 367-378, July.
    19. Rajiv D. Banker & Robert J. Kauffman, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 281-298, March.
    20. Moez Limayem & Gerardine DeSanctis, 2000. "Providing Decisional Guidance for Multicriteria Decision Making in Groups," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 386-401, December.
    21. Wood, Robert & Bandura, Albert & Bailey, Trevor, 1990. "Mechanisms governing organizational performance in complex decision-making environments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 181-201, August.
    22. Iris Vessey & Dennis Galletta, 1991. "Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 63-84, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thorsten Wiesel & Koen Pauwels & Joep Arts, 2011. "Practice Prize Paper --Marketing's Profit Impact: Quantifying Online and Off-line Funnel Progression," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 604-611, July.
    2. Germann, Frank & Lilien, Gary L. & Fiedler, Lars & Kraus, Matthias, 2014. "Do Retailers Benefit from Deploying Customer Analytics?," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 587-593.
    3. Patton, Charles & Balakrishnan, P.V. (Sundar), 2012. "Negotiating when outnumbered: Agenda strategies for bargaining with buying teams," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 280-291.
    4. Michael Vössing & Niklas Kühl & Matteo Lind & Gerhard Satzger, 2022. "Designing Transparency for Effective Human-AI Collaboration," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 877-895, June.
    5. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    6. Mahmud, Hasan & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul & Ahmed, Syed Ishtiaque & Smolander, Kari, 2022. "What influences algorithmic decision-making? A systematic literature review on algorithm aversion," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Mahmud, Hasan & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul & Mitra, Ranjan Kumar, 2023. "What drives managers towards algorithm aversion and how to overcome it? Mitigating the impact of innovation resistance through technology readiness," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    8. Käki, Anssi & Kemppainen, Katariina & Liesiö, Juuso, 2019. "What to do when decision-makers deviate from model recommendations? Empirical evidence from hydropower industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 869-882.
    9. Josef Frysak & Edward W. N. Bernroider & Konradin Maier, 2017. "An Effort Feedback Perspective on Persuasive Decision Aids for Multi-Attribute Decision-Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(01), pages 161-181, January.
    10. Franses, Philip Hans & Legerstee, Rianne, 2013. "Do statistical forecasting models for SKU-level data benefit from including past expert knowledge?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 80-87.
    11. Leeflang, Peter, 2011. "Paving the way for “distinguished marketing”," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 76-88.
    12. Goerigk, Marc & Hartisch, Michael, 2023. "A framework for inherently interpretable optimization models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 310(3), pages 1312-1324.
    13. Yuan Li & William J. Kettinger, 2022. "Testing the Relationship Between Information and Knowledge in Computer-Aided Decision-Making," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 1827-1843, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kayande, U. & de Bruyn, A. & Lilien, G.L. & Rangaswamy, A. & van Bruggen, G.H., 2006. "How Feedback Can Improve Managerial Evaluations of Model-based Marketing Decision Support Systems," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-039-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    2. Gary L. Lilien & Arvind Rangaswamy & Gerrit H. Van Bruggen & Katrin Starke, 2004. "DSS Effectiveness in Marketing Resource Allocation Decisions: Reality vs. Perception," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 216-235, September.
    3. Clayton Arlen Looney & Andrew M. Hardin, 2009. "Decision Support for Retirement Portfolio Management: Overcoming Myopic Loss Aversion via Technology Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(10), pages 1688-1703, October.
    4. van Bruggen, G.H. & Wierenga, B., 2005. "When are CRM Systems Successful? The Perspective of the User and of the Organization," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-048-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    5. Gelderman, Maarten, 1997. "Task difficulty, task variability and satisfaction with management support systems: consequences and solutions ˜," Serie Research Memoranda 0053, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    6. Berend Wierenga & Gerrit H. Van Bruggen & Richard Staelin, 1999. "The Success of Marketing Management Support Systems," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 196-207.
    7. Chuan-Hoo Tan & Hock-Hai Teo & Izak Benbasat, 2010. "Assessing Screening and Evaluation Decision Support Systems: A Resource-Matching Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 305-326, June.
    8. Ivo Blohm & Christoph Riedl & Johann Füller & Jan Marco Leimeister, 2016. "Rate or Trade? Identifying Winning Ideas in Open Idea Sourcing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 27-48, March.
    9. Sun, Jonghak & Teng, James T.C., 2017. "The construct of information systems use benefits: Theoretical explication of its underlying dimensions and the development of a measurement scale," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 400-416.
    10. Lilien, G.L. & Rangaswamy, A. & Starke, K. & van Bruggen, G.H., 2001. "How and Why Decision Models Influence Marketing Resource Allocations," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-33-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Gudigantala, Naveen & Song, Jaeki & Jones, Donald, 2011. "User satisfaction with Web-based DSS: The role of cognitive antecedents," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 327-338.
    12. Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert & Andrew B. Whinston, 2001. "Research Commentary: Introducing a Third Dimension in Information Systems Design—The Case for Incentive Alignment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 225-239, September.
    13. Aladwani, Adel M. & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2018. "Towards a theory of SocioCitizenry: Quality anticipation, trust configuration, and approved adaptation of governmental social media," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 261-272.
    14. Lingling Gao & Kerem Aksel Waechter, 0. "Examining the role of initial trust in user adoption of mobile payment services: an empirical investigation," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    15. Gerald C. Kane & Maryam Alavi, 2008. "Casting the Net: A Multimodal Network Perspective on User-System Interactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 253-272, September.
    16. Attié, Elodie & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2022. "The acceptance and usage of smart connected objects according to adoption stages: an enhanced technology acceptance model integrating the diffusion of innovation, uses and gratification and privacy ca," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    17. Jackie London & Siyuan Li & Heshan Sun, 2022. "Seems Legit: An Investigation of the Assessing and Sharing of Unverifiable Messages on Online Social Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 978-1001, September.
    18. France Belanger & Rosann Webb Collins & Paul H. Cheney, 2001. "Technology Requirements and Work Group Communication for Telecommuters," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 155-176, June.
    19. Gelderman, M., 1995. "Factors affecting the success of management support systems: analysis and meta-analysis," Serie Research Memoranda 0020, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    20. Lurie, Nicholas H. & Wen, Na, 2014. "Simple Decision Aids and Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 511-523.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:20:y:2009:i:4:p:527-546. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.