A process model cognitive biasing effects in information systems development and usage

Information and Management

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 153-165

  Kirs, Peeter J ^a   Pflughoeft, Kurt ^b   Kroeck, Galen ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

^b Market Probe Inc   (United States)

^c FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision maker; Information systems; IS designer

Indexed keywords

DATA STRUCTURES; DECISION THEORY; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS; PROCESS MODEL COGNITIVE BIASING EFFECTS;

MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 0035197092     PISSN: 03787206     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-7206(00)00062-8     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. R.P. Abelson, Psychological status of the script concept, American Psychologist, 1981.
2. Bar-Hillel M. The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. ACTA Psychology. 44:1980;211-213.
3. Barron F.H., John R. Assessment of multiplicative utility functions vias holistic judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 25:1980;365-374.
4. Benbasat I., Taylor R.N. Behavioral Aspects of information processing for the design of management information systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. 12(4):1982;439-450.
5. Borgida E., Nisbett R.E. The differential impact of abstract vs. concrete information in decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 7:1977;258-269.
6. Broadbent D.E. The well-ordered mind. American Educational Research Journal. 3:1966;281-297.
7. J.S. Brunner, R. Oliver, P.M. Greenfield, Studies in Cognitive Growth, Wiley, New York, 1966.
8. Domas P.A., Peterson C.R. Probabilistic information processing systems: evaluation with conditionally dependent data. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 7:1972;77-85.
9. Edwards W., Phillips L.D., Hays W.L., Goodman B.C. Probabilistic information processing systems: design and evaluation. IEEE Transactions in Systems, Science and Cybernetics (SSC). 4:1960;248-265.
10. H.J. Einhorn, Learning from experience and suboptimal rules in decision processing, in: T.S. Wallsten (Ed.), Cognitive Processes in Choice and Decision Behavior, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1980a, pp. 1-20.
11. H.J. Einhorn, Overconfidence in judgment, in: R.A. Shweder (Ed.), Fallible Judgment in Behavioral Research, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 1980b, pp. 1-16.
12. M. Eisenstadt, Tales of debugging from the front lines, in: C.R. Cook, J.C. Scholz, J.C. Spohrer (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Empirical Studies of Programmers, Norwood, NJ, 1993.
13. Fischhoff B. Fault trees: sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 4:1978;342-355.
14. B. Fischoff, For those condemned to study the past: reflections on historical judgment, in: R.A. Shweder (Ed.), Fallible Judgment in Behavioral Research, Jossey Bass, San Francsico, 1980, pp. 79-84.
15. D.L. Hamilton, Cognitive biases in the perception of social groups, in: J.S. Carroll, J.W. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and Social Behavior, Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1976.
16. Hogarth R.M., Makridakis S. Forecasting and planning: an evaluation. Management Science. 27(2):1981;115-138.
17. R.M. Hogarth, Judgment and Choice: The Psychology of Decisions, Wiley, New York, 1987.
18. G.P. Huber, The nature of organizational decision making and the design of decision support systems, MIS Quarterly (1981) 1-10.
19. E.E. Jones, G.R. Goethals, Order effects in impression formation: attribution context and the nature of the entity, in: E.E. Jones, D.E. Kanouse, H.H Kelley, R. Nisbett, S. Valins, B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ, 1972.
20. Keller L.R. The effects of problem representation on the sure thing and substitution principles. Management Science. 31:1985;738-751.
21. Kahneman D., Tversky A. On the psychology of prediction. Psychology Review. 80:1973;237-351.
22. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica. 47(2):1979;263-291.
23. T.W. Lauer, A.M. Jenkins, Implications of behavioral decision theory for decision support system implementation and research, Discussion paper no. 273, Division of Research, School of Business, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, 1984.
24. S. Makridakis, S.C. Wheelwright (Eds.), Forecasting, North-Holland, New York, 1979.
25. Moskowitz M., Schaefer R.E., Borcherding K. Irrationality of managerial judgments: implications for information systems. Omega. 4(2):1976;125-140.
26. U. Neisser, Cognition and Reality, Freeman, San Francisco, CA, 1976.
27. Nisbett R.E., Wilson T.D. Telling more than we know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review. 84(3):1977;231-259.
28. R.E. Nisbett, L. Ross, Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1980.
29. Paradice D.B., Courtney J.F. Controlling bias in user assertions in expert DSS. Journal of Management Information Systems. 3(1):1986;53-64.
30. Pryor J.B., Kriss M. The cognitive dynamics of salience in the attribution process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 35(1):1977;49-55.
31. E. Rosch, B.B. Lloyd, Cognition and Categorization, Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1978.
32. Rubie D.N., Feldman N.S. Order of concensus, distinctiveness, and consistency information and causal attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 42(5):1976;930-937.
33. Sage A.P. Behavioral and organizational considerations in the design of information systems and processes for planning and decision support. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. 11(9):1981;640-678.
34. H.A. Simon, Theories of decision making in economies and behavioral science, American Economic Review 49 (3), 1959.
35. H.A. Simon, Rationality as a process and as a product of thought, American Economic Review 69, 1978.
36. Slovic P., Lichtenstein S. Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 6:1971;649-744.
37. Stacy W., MacMillan J. Cognitive bias in software engineering. Communications of the ACM. 38(6):1995;57-63.
38. B. Teasley, L.M. Leventhal, S. Rohlman, Positive test bias in software testing by professionals: what's right and what's wrong, in: C.R. Cook, J.C Scholz, J.C. Spohrer (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Empirical Studies of Programmers, Norwood, NJ, 1993.
39. W. Teng, V. Sethi, Psychological studies of decision making and it's implications for DSS, in: Proceedings of the Decision Sciences Institute, Boston, 1987.
40. A. Tversky, Intransitivity of preferences, Psychological Review 76 (1), 1969.
41. Tversky A. Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology. 5:1973;207-232.
42. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science. 185:1974;1124-1131.
43. Tversky A., Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 211:1981a;453-458.
44. A. Tversky, D. Kahneman, Evidential impact of base rates, Technical Report 4, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, May 1981b.
45. Ward W.C., Jenkins H.M. The display of information and the judgment of contingency. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 19:1965;231-241.
46. Wong P.T.P., Weiner B. When people ask 'why' questions, and the heuristics of attributional search. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 40:1981;650-663.
47. Wright W.F. Cognitive information processing biases: implications for producers and users of financial information. Decision Sciences. 11:1980;284-298.