File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Technology dominance in complex decision making: The case of aided credibility assessment

TitleTechnology dominance in complex decision making: The case of aided credibility assessment
Authors
Keywordsdecision making
credibility
credibility assessment
deception
deception detection
decision aids
theory of technology dominance (TTD)
Issue Date2010
Citation
Journal of Management Information Systems, 2010, v. 27, n. 1, p. 175-201 How to Cite?
AbstractDecision aids have long been an important source of help in making structured decisions. However, decision support for more complex problems has been much more difficult to create. Decision aids are now being developed for very complex problems, and their effects among low- and high-task-knowledge individuals are still being explored. One such task is credibility assessment, in which message recipients or observers must determine a message's veracity and trustworthiness. Credibility assessment is made difficult by lack of constraints, hidden or incomplete information, and mistaken beliefs of the assessor.The theory of technology dominance (TTD) proposes that technology is most effectively applied in intelligent decision aids when an experienced user is paired with a sophisticated decision aid. This work examines TT D in the complex task of credibility assessment. To assist in credibility assessment, we created a decision aid that augments the capabilities of the user-whether novice or professional. Using hypotheses based on TT D, we tested the decision aid using high-stakes deception in recorded interviews and involved both student (novice) and law enforcement (professional) users. Both professionals and novices improved their assessment accuracy by using the decision aid. Consistent with TTD, novices were more reliant on the decision aid than were professionals. However, contrary to TTD, there was no significant difference in the way novices and professionals interacted with the system, and the decision aid was not more beneficial to professionals. Novices and professionals frequently discounted the aid's recommendations, and in many cases professionals did not view explanations when the decision aid contradicted their assessments. Potential reasons for these findings, as well as limitations and future research opportunities, are discussed. © 2010 M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/233802
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.025
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 3.036

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJensen, Matthew L.-
dc.contributor.authorLowry, Paul Benjamin-
dc.contributor.authorBurgoon, Jude K.-
dc.contributor.authorNunamaker, Jay F.-
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-27T07:21:41Z-
dc.date.available2016-09-27T07:21:41Z-
dc.date.issued2010-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Management Information Systems, 2010, v. 27, n. 1, p. 175-201-
dc.identifier.issn0742-1222-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/233802-
dc.description.abstractDecision aids have long been an important source of help in making structured decisions. However, decision support for more complex problems has been much more difficult to create. Decision aids are now being developed for very complex problems, and their effects among low- and high-task-knowledge individuals are still being explored. One such task is credibility assessment, in which message recipients or observers must determine a message's veracity and trustworthiness. Credibility assessment is made difficult by lack of constraints, hidden or incomplete information, and mistaken beliefs of the assessor.The theory of technology dominance (TTD) proposes that technology is most effectively applied in intelligent decision aids when an experienced user is paired with a sophisticated decision aid. This work examines TT D in the complex task of credibility assessment. To assist in credibility assessment, we created a decision aid that augments the capabilities of the user-whether novice or professional. Using hypotheses based on TT D, we tested the decision aid using high-stakes deception in recorded interviews and involved both student (novice) and law enforcement (professional) users. Both professionals and novices improved their assessment accuracy by using the decision aid. Consistent with TTD, novices were more reliant on the decision aid than were professionals. However, contrary to TTD, there was no significant difference in the way novices and professionals interacted with the system, and the decision aid was not more beneficial to professionals. Novices and professionals frequently discounted the aid's recommendations, and in many cases professionals did not view explanations when the decision aid contradicted their assessments. Potential reasons for these findings, as well as limitations and future research opportunities, are discussed. © 2010 M.E. Sharpe, Inc.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Management Information Systems-
dc.subjectdecision making-
dc.subjectcredibility-
dc.subjectcredibility assessment-
dc.subjectdeception-
dc.subjectdeception detection-
dc.subjectdecision aids-
dc.subjecttheory of technology dominance (TTD)-
dc.titleTechnology dominance in complex decision making: The case of aided credibility assessment-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.2753/MIS0742-1222270108-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-77955043195-
dc.identifier.volume27-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage175-
dc.identifier.epage201-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats