Evaluating dual performance measures on information dashboards: Effects of anchoring and presentation format

Journal of Information Systems

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 21-34

  Van Der Heijden, Hans ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Anchoring; Balanced scorecards; Dual performance measures; Information dashboards; Pictorial formats

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889852847     PISSN: 08887985     EISSN: 15587959     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/isys-50556     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Amazon Mechanical Turk. 2011. Requester Best Practices Guide. Amazon Web Services. Available at: http://mturkpublic.s3.amazonaws.com/docs/MTURK_BP.pdf
2. Banker, R. D., H.-H. Chang, and M. J. Pizzini. 2004. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of performance measures linked to strategy. The Accounting Review 79 (1): 1-23.
3. Beattie, V., and M. J. Jones. 2002. The impact of graph slope on rate of change judgments in corporate reports. Abacus 38 (2): 177-199
4. Department of Health. 2010. A&E Clinical Quality Indicators: Implementation Guidance. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130107105354/http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/@ps/documents/digitalasset/dh_123055.pdf
5. Department of Health. 2011. A&E Clinical Quality Indicators: Best Practice Guidance for Local Publication. Available at: http://www.wales.nhs.uk/documents/dh_1277801.pdf
6. Dull, R. B., and D. P. Tegarden. 1999. A comparison of three visual representations of complex multidimensional accounting information. Journal of Information Systems 13 (2): 117-131.
7. Economics & Regulation, Heathrow Airport Limited. 2011. The Heathrow Service Quality Rebate Scheme: An Overview of How the Scheme Is Implemented. Available at: http://www.heathrowairport.com/static/HeathrowAboutUs/Downloads/PDF/Heathrow_Service_Quality_Rebate_scheme_implementation_overview.pdf
8. Few, S. 2006. Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.
9. Harris, R. L. 1999. Information Graphics: A Comprehensive Illustrated Reference. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
10. Ittner, C. D., D. F. Larcker, and M. W. Meyer. 2003. Subjectivity and the weighting of performance measures: Evidence from a balanced scorecard. The Accounting Review 78 (3): 725-758.
11. Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
12. Kaplan, R. S., and D. P. Norton. 1996. The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
13. Kelton, A. S., R. R. Pennington, and B. M. Tuttle. 2010. The effects of information presentation format on judgment and decision making: A review of the information systems research. Journal of Information Systems 24 (2): 79-105.
14. Keppel, G. 1991. Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. Levin, I. P., S. L. Schneider, and G. J. Gaeth. 1998. All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 76 (2): 149-188.
16. Lipe, M. G., and S. Salterio. 2000. The balanced scorecard: Judgmental effects of common and unique performance measures. The Accounting Review 75 (3): 283-298.
17. Lipe, M. G., and S. Salterio. 2002. A note on the judgmental effects of the balanced scorecard's information organization. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27: 531-540.
18. Mason, W., and S. Suri. 2012. Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods 44 (1): 1-23.
19. McCandless, D. 2009. Information Is Beautiful. London, U.K.: Collins.
20. Moriarity, S. 1979. Communicating financial information through multidimensional graphics. Journal of Accounting Research 17 (1): 205-224.
21. Rose, J. M., F. D. Roberts, and A. M. Rose. 2004. Affective responses to financial data and multimedia: The effects of information load and cognitive load. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 5: 5-24.
22. Shaft, T. M., and I. Vessey. 2006. The role of cognitive fit in the relationship between software comprehension and modification. MIS Quarterly 30 (1): 29-55.
23. Stock, D., and C. J. Watson. 1984. Human judgment accuracy, multidimensional graphics, and humans versus models. Journal of Accounting Research 22 (1): 192-206.
24. U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. Age and Sex Composition: 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
25. U.S. Congress. 2002. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Public Law No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002). Washington, DC: GPO.
26. Vessey, I. 1991. Cognitive fit: A theory-based analysis of the graphs versus tables literature. Decision Sciences 22: 219-240.
27. Vessey, I., and D. Galletta. 1991. Cognitive fit: An empirical study of information acquisition. Information Systems Research 2 (1): 63-83.
28. Ware, C. 2004. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, Elsevier.
29. Yigitbasioglu, O. M., and O. Velcu. 2012. A review of dashboards in performance management: Implications for design and research. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13: 41-59.