The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
User Response Data: The Potential for Errors and Biases
Abstract
Surveys that require users to evaluate or make judgments about information systems and their effect on specific work activities can produce misleading results if respondents do not interpret or answer questions in the ways intended by the researcher. This paper provides a framework for understanding both the cognitive activities and the errors and biases in judgment that can result when users are asked to categorize a system, explain its effects, or predict their own future actions and preferences with respect to use of a system. Specific suggestions are offered for wording survey questions and response categories so as to elicit more precise and reliable responses. In addition, possible sources of systematic bias are discussed, using examples drawn from published IS research. Recommendations are made for further research aimed at better understanding how and to what extent judgment biases could affect the results of IS surveys.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317
Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.3.1.60 · Cited by 10,697
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Bem, D. J. (1972) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60024-6 · Cited by 5,241
Mathieson, K. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.173 · Cited by 4,216
From acts to dispositions the attribution process in person perception
Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60107-0 · Cited by 3,424
Context theory of classification learning
Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.85.3.207 · Cited by 3,061
Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing.
Arkes, H. R. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.486 · Cited by 764
Cited by
Strategic assets and organizational rent
Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250140105 · Cited by 8,425
Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology
Hu, P. J., Chau, P. Y. K., Sheng, O. R. L., & Tam, K. Y. (1999) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1999.11518247 · Cited by 1,951
Understanding the elusive black Box of dynamic capabilities
Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2011) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2010.00287.x · Cited by 1,329
Strategic purchasing, supply management, and firm performance
Chen, I. J., Paulraj, A., & Lado, A. A. (2004) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2004.06.002 · Cited by 940
Understanding User Responses to Information Technology: A Coping Model of User Adaptation1
Beaudry, A., & Pinsonneault, A. (2005) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148693 · Cited by 869
Metadata
- Authors
- Hufnagel, E. M., & Conca, C.
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 1994-03
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 48-73
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W2059961961
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 23.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: User Response Data: The Potential for Errors and Biases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/isre.5.1.48
- The paper
- Hufnagel, E. M., & Conca, C. (1994). User Response Data: The Potential for Errors and Biases. Information Systems Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.5.1.48
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
