IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Is timely information always better? The effect of feedback frequency on decision making

  • Lurie, Nicholas H.
  • Swaminathan, Jayashankar M.
Registered author(s):

    Recent advances in information technology make it possible for decision makers to track information in real-time and obtain frequent feedback on their decisions. From a normative sense, an increase in the frequency of feedback and the ability to make changes should lead to enhanced performance as decision makers are able to respond more quickly to changes in the environment and see the consequences of their actions. At the same time, there is reason to believe that more frequent feedback can sometimes lead to declines in performance. Across four inventory management experiments, we find that in environments characterized by random noise more frequent feedback on previous decisions leads to declines in performance. Receiving more frequent feedback leads to excessive focus on and more systematic processing of more recent data as well as a failure to adequately compare information across multiple time periods. These results suggest that caution be used in the design and implementation of real-time information systems.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

    Volume (Year): 108 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 2 (March)
    Pages: 315-329

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:108:y:2009:i:2:p:315-329
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Hau L. Lee & V. Padmanabhan & Seungjin Whang, 1997. "Information Distortion in a Supply Chain: The Bullwhip Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 546-558, April.
    2. Jayashankar M. Swaminathan & Sridhar R. Tayur, 2003. "Models for Supply Chains in E-Business," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(10), pages 1387-1406, October.
    3. Kishore Sengupta & Tarek K. Abdel-Hamid, 1993. "Alternative Conceptions of Feedback in Dynamic Decision Environments: An Experimental Investigation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 411-428, April.
    4. Don N. Kleinmuntz, 1985. "Cognitive Heuristics and Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Environment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 680-702, June.
    5. Srinagesh Gavirneni & Roman Kapuscinski & Sridhar Tayur, 1999. "Value of Information in Capacitated Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 16-24, January.
    6. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
    7. Bettman, James R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Payne, John W., 1990. "A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 111-139, February.
    8. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Gérard P. Cachon, 2000. "Decision Bias in the Newsvendor Problem with a Known Demand Distribution: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 404-420, March.
    9. Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa, 1989. "The Effect of Task Demands and Graphical Format on Information Processing Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 285-303, March.
    10. Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
    11. Mark Paich & John D. Sterman, 1993. "Boom, Bust, and Failures to Learn in Experimental Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(12), pages 1439-1458, December.
    12. Lurie, Nicholas H, 2004. " Decision Making in Information-Rich Environments: The Role of Information Structure," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(4), pages 473-86, March.
    13. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2000. "Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(2), pages 773-806, 04.
    14. Bettman, James R & Kakkar, Pradeep, 1977. " Effects of Information Presentation Format on Consumer Information Acquisition Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(4), pages 233-40, March.
    15. Diehl, Ernst & Sterman, John D., 1995. "Effects of Feedback Complexity on Dynamic Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 198-215, May.
    16. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    17. Charles C. Holt & Franco Modigliani & Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Linear Decision Rule for Production and Employment Scheduling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-30, October.
    18. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    19. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2001. "The Internet and the Investor," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 41-54, Winter.
    20. Lohse, Gerald L. & Johnson, Eric J., 1996. "A Comparison of Two Process Tracing Methods for Choice Tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 28-43, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:108:y:2009:i:2:p:315-329. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.