IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v21y2010i2p305-326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Screening and Evaluation Decision Support Systems: A Resource-Matching Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Chuan-Hoo Tan

    (Department of Information Systems, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong)

  • Hock-Hai Teo

    (Department of Information Systems, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117590, Singapore)

  • Izak Benbasat

    (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z2, Canada)

Abstract

This research explores how consumers use online decision aids with screening and evaluation support functionalities under varying product attribute-load conditions. Drawing on resource-matching theory, we conducted a 3 × 2 factorial experiment to test the interaction between decision aid features (i.e., low versus high-screening support, and aids with weight assignment and computation decision tools) and attribute load (i.e., large versus small number of product attributes) on decision performance. The findings reveal that: (1) where the decision aids render cognitive resources that match those demanded for the task environment, consumers will process more information and decision performance will be enhanced; (2) where the decision aids render cognitive resources that exceed those demanded for the task environment, consumers will engage in less task-related elaboration of decision-making issues to the detriment of decision performance; and (3) where the decision aids render cognitive resources that fall short of those demanded for the task environment, consumers will use simplistic heuristic decision strategies to the detriment of decision performance or invest additional effort in information processing to attain a better decision performance if they perceive the additional investments in effort to be manageable.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:21:y:2010:i:2:p:305-326
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1080.0232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1080.0232
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1080.0232?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. 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.
    2. Keller, Kevin Lane & Staelin, Richard, 1987. "Effects of Quality and Quantity of Information on Decision Effectiveness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(2), pages 200-213, September.
    3. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Perracchio, Laura A & Meyers-Levy, Joan, 1997. "Evaluating Persuasion-Enhancing Techniques from a Resource-Matching Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(2), pages 178-191, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Glover, Steven M. & Prawitt, Douglas F. & Spilker, Brian C., 1997. "The Influence of Decision Aids on User Behavior: Implications for Knowledge Acquisition and Inappropriate Reliance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 232-255, November.
    8. Ramesh Sharda & Steve H. Barr & James C. McDonnell, 1988. "Decision Support System Effectiveness: A Review and an Empirical Test," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 139-159, February.
    9. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. "An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    10. Keller, Punam Anand & Block, Lauren G, 1997. "Vividness Effects: A Resource-Matching Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(3), pages 295-304, December.
    11. Mantel, Susan Powell & Kellaris, James J, 2003. "Cognitive Determinants of Consumers' Time Perceptions: The Impact of Resources Required and Available," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 531-538, March.
    12. Gerald Häubl & Valerie Trifts, 2000. "Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 4-21, May.
    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. Guarino Neto, Luigi & Geraldo Vidal Vieira, José, 2023. "An investigation of consumer intention to use pick-up point services for last-mile distribution in a developing country," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    2. Heng Tang & Chang Boon Patrick Lee & Kwee Keong Choong, 2017. "Consumer decision support systems for novice buyers – a design science approach," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 881-897, August.
    3. Heng Tang & Chang Boon Patrick Lee & Kwee Keong Choong, 0. "Consumer decision support systems for novice buyers – a design science approach," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-17.
    4. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    5. Fengchun Tang, 2020. "The more interactivity the better? Investigating interactivity, task complexity, and product knowledge in online purchase decisions," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 179-189, September.
    6. Barney Tan & Cheng Yi & Hock C. Chan, 2015. "Research Note—Deliberation Without Attention: The Latent Benefits of Distracting Website Features for Online Purchase Decisions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 437-455, June.
    7. Collier, Joel E. & Moore, Robert S. & Horky, Alisha & Moore, Melissa L., 2015. "Why the little things matter: Exploring situational influences on customers' self-service technology decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 703-710.
    8. Biao Gao & Yiming Wang & Huiqin Xie & Yi Hu & Yi Hu, 2023. "Artificial Intelligence in Advertising: Advancements, Challenges, and Ethical Considerations in Targeting, Personalization, Content Creation, and Ad Optimization," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    9. Huang, Liqiang & Zhang, Jie & Liu, Yuan, 2017. "Antecedents of student MOOC revisit intention: Moderation effect of course difficulty," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 84-91.
    10. Jingjun (David) Xu & Izak Benbasat & Ronald T. Cenfetelli, 2014. "Research Note ---The Influences of Online Service Technologies and Task Complexity on Efficiency and Personalization," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 420-436, June.

    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. Alan L. Montgomery & Kartik Hosanagar & Ramayya Krishnan & Karen B. Clay, 2004. "Designing a Better Shopbot," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 189-206, February.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Aksoy, Lerzan & Cooil, Bruce & Lurie, Nicholas H., 2011. "Decision Quality Measures in Recommendation Agents Research," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 110-122.
    5. Christina Schamp & Mark Heitmann & Robin Katzenstein, 2019. "Consideration of ethical attributes along the consumer decision-making journey," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 328-348, March.
    6. Martin S. Schilling & Nadine Oeser & Cornelius Schaub, 2007. "How Effective Are Decision Analyses? Assessing Decision Process and Group Alignment Effects," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 227-242, December.
    7. Choudhary, Vidyanand & Currim, Imran & Dewan, Sanjeev & Jeliazkov, Ivan & Mintz, Ofer & Turner, John, 2017. "Evaluation Set Size and Purchase: Evidence from a Product Search Engine," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 16-31.
    8. Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2004. "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 391-406, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Chen Liang & Zhan (Michael) Shi & T. S. Raghu, 2019. "The Spillover of Spotlight: Platform Recommendation in the Mobile App Market," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 1296-1318, December.
    11. Young Eun Lee & Izak Benbasat, 2011. "Research Note ---The Influence of Trade-off Difficulty Caused by Preference Elicitation Methods on User Acceptance of Recommendation Agents Across Loss and Gain Conditions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 867-884, December.
    12. Popkowski Leszczyc, Peter T.L. & Qiu, Chun & He, Yongfu, 2009. "Empirical Testing of the Reference-Price Effect of Buy-Now Prices in Internet Auctions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 211-221.
    13. O'Keefe, Robert M., 2016. "Experimental behavioural research in operational research: What we know and what we might come to know," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 899-907.
    14. Garaus, Marion & Wagner, Udo & Manzinger, Sandra, 2017. "Happy grocery shopper: The creation of positive emotions through affective digital signage content," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-305.
    15. 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.
    16. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann, 2007. "Die Zufriedenheit mit dem Entscheidungsprozess als Determinante der Kundenbindung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 530-566, August.
    17. Chang, Chia-Chi & Chen, Po-Yu, 2019. "Which maximizes donations: Charitable giving as an incentive or incentives for charitable giving?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 65-75.
    18. Xitong Li & Jörn Grahl & Oliver Hinz, 2022. "How Do Recommender Systems Lead to Consumer Purchases? A Causal Mediation Analysis of a Field Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 620-637, June.
    19. Shuk Ying Ho & David Bodoff & Kar Yan Tam, 2011. "Timing of Adaptive Web Personalization and Its Effects on Online Consumer Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 660-679, September.
    20. Fengchun Tang, 2020. "The more interactivity the better? Investigating interactivity, task complexity, and product knowledge in online purchase decisions," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 179-189, September.

    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:21:y:2010:i:2:p:305-326. 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.