The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating the Impact of DSS, Cognitive Effort, and Incentives on Strategy Selection
Abstract
Decision support system (DSS) researchers have long debated whether or not the provision of a DSS would lead to greater decision-making effectiveness, efficiency, or both. The work described in this paper examines how DSS designers can guide users towards employing more normative decision strategies. Working from notions of restrictiveness and decisional guidance (Silver 1990) supplemented by the cost-benefit framework of cognition, we explain how DSS capabilities influence decision behavior and performance through the manipulation of effort. The results of this work should assist DSS developers to devise directed or nondirected approaches to effect desired behaviors.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“However, in decision support systems and group support systems use contexts (e.g., Mennecke & Valacich, 1998;Speier et al., 2003), incentive has been found to be an important factor (see Todd & Benbasat, 1999).”
From Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions (2008) · cites this paper as Todd & Benbasat, 1999
Citations
Cites
Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs.
Tsoukias, A., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1994) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.2307/2584151 · Cited by 8,414
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/208954 · Cited by 4,610
Leave, C., Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1994) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.2307/2584298 · Cited by 3,318
Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs.
Smith, A., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1977) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2345300 · Cited by 2,323
The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes
Celsi, R. L., & Olson, J. C. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209158 · Cited by 2,070
Payne, J. W. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90022-2 · Cited by 1,974
Adaptive strategy selection in decision making.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.534 · Cited by 1,955
BOUNDED RATIONALITY, AMBIGUITY, AND THE ENGINEERING OF CHOICE
March, J. G. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511598951.004 · Cited by 1,687
Bounded rationality, ambiguity and the engineering of choice
March, J. G. (1978) · The Bell Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/3003600 · Cited by 1,539
Research works printed but not linked: 5
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x · Cited by 8,159
Benbasat, I., & Zmud, R. W. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036527 · Cited by 1,525
Self-citationBenbasat, I., Barki, H., & Montréal, H. (2007) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00126 · Cited by 1,456
Self-citationOrlikowski, W. J., & Barley, S. R. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250927 · Cited by 1,255
Online peer and editorial recommendations, trust and choice in virtual markets
Smith, D., Menon, S., & Sivakumar, K. (2005) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.20041 · Cited by 683
Metadata
- Authors
- Todd, P., & Benbasat, I.
- Affiliations
- University of Houston (US)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- ORCID
- Benbasat, Izak
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 356-374
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W2045808844
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 61
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 14.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Information Systems Research (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Luonnontieteiden ja Tekniikan Tutkimuksen Toimikunta
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Decision Support System Applications
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Complex Systems and Decision Making
- Keywords
- decision support system, decision strategies, cognitive effort, incentives, restrictiveness, behavioral decision making, decision-making effectiveness, decision-making efficiency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
