Premium
AN EMPIRICAL ASSESSMENT OF COMPUTER‐ASSISTED DECISION ANALYSIS *
Author(s) -
Aldag Ramon J.,
Power Daniel J.
Publication year - 1986
Publication title -
decision sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.238
H-Index - 108
eISSN - 1540-5915
pISSN - 0011-7315
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1986.tb00243.x
Subject(s) - decision quality , decision aids , decision analysis , assertion , psychology , affect (linguistics) , dysfunctional family , decision support system , quality (philosophy) , decision process , perception , computer science , empirical research , management science , knowledge management , medicine , artificial intelligence , clinical psychology , team effectiveness , statistics , alternative medicine , mathematics , philosophy , communication , epistemology , pathology , neuroscience , economics , programming language
Decision analysis tools often are used in semistructured and ill‐structured situations. While some researchers have argued that computerized decision analysis programs may improve decision quality in such situations, research support for this assertion is weak. In this laboratory study, business students used a computerized decision‐analysis program with short strategic‐management cases to prepare decision reports. Independent raters' perceptions of aided and unaided decision performance were contrasted, attitudes of students toward the program were assessed, individual differences were correlated with attitudes, and the program's impact on students' perceptions of their decision processes and performance was examined. Student attitudes toward the computerized aid were favorable, and individual differences in reactions generally were as predicted. However, the program did not improve the independent ratings of students' decision reports and recommendations. These findings suggest that computerized decision aids should be adopted cautiously. If such aids result in positive user affect and heightened decision confidence without corresponding improvements in decision quality, they may be dysfunctional. Rigorous research methodologies which incorporate independent evaluations of analyses and decisions are recommended for use in future research on computerized decision‐analysis programs.