The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cognitive Style as a Basis for MIS and DSS Designs: Much ADO About Nothing?
Abstract
It is commonly believed that the user's cognitive style should be considered in the design of Management Information Systems and Decision Support Systems. In contrast, an examination of the literature and a consideration of some of the broader issues involved in MIS and DSS design lead to the conclusions that: (1) the currently available literature on cognitive style is an unsatisfactory basis for deriving operational design guidelines, and (2) further cognitive style research is unlikely to provide a satisfactory body of knowledge from which to derive such guidelines. The article presents six specific bases for these two conclusions. From a manager's pespective, the outcome of the study is a suggestion: maintain a healthy skepticism if it is suggested that paper and pencil assessments of the user's cognitive style should be used as a basis for MIS or DSS designs. From a researcher's viewpoint, the study raises two questions: (1) If our research interest is MIS and DSS design, does it seem that further research in cognitive style is a wise allocation of our research resources? (2) If our research interest is cognitive style, does it seem that the use of cognitive style as a basis for MIS and DSS designs will become an important application area?
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
Human problem solving: The state of the theory in 1970.
Simon, H. A., & Newell, A. (1971) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0030806 · Cited by 635
Cited by
User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 · Cited by 25,709
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use
Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.40.4.440 · Cited by 1,540
Cognitive Fit: An Empirical Study of Information Acquisition
Vessey, I., & Galletta, D. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.1.63 · Cited by 705
A review of dashboards in performance management: Implications for design and research
Yigitbasioglu, O. M., & Velcu, O. (2012) · International Journal of Accounting Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2011.08.002 · Cited by 398
Reinecke, K., & Bernstein, A. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37.2.06 · Cited by 243
Process Tracing Methods in Decision Support Systems Research: Exploring the Black Box
Todd, P., & Benbasat, I. (1987) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/248979 · Cited by 224
Computer-mediated knowledge sharing and individual user differences: an exploratory study
Taylor, W. A. (2004) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000484 · Cited by 134
The Use of Dashboards in Performance Management: Evidence from Sales Managers
Yigitbasioglu, O. M., & Velcu-Laitinen, O. (2012) · The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research · doi:10.4192/1577-8517-v12_2 · Cited by 58
Metadata
- Authors
- Huber, G. P.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 1983-05
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 567-579
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2134155359
- Cited by
- 357
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.16
- 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
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.