Colleagues
A theme I find common in much learning literature is that the great
complexity of real world problems necessitates the use of computers to aid
in decision making. And yet, when applying computer technology to problem
solving with community environmental resource management groups here in
Australia, I find a strong aversion to the use of computers by many group
members.
Does anyone know of any empirical work on how people respond to the use of
computers as decision support systems. The computer use could be for a
variety of purposes such as: an aid to cognitive mapping, or to understand
the dynamics of systems, or to provide mathematical calculations to aid the
decision makers.
Alternatively, can anyone suggest which particular discipline might be
interested in this issue? Would this be in the realms of the information
technology people, maybe psychologists?
regards
John
------------------------------------------------------------------
John Wolfenden
New England Ecological Economics Group
(http://www.une.edu.au/cwpr/NEEEG/neeg.html)
Centre for Water Policy Research
University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
Phone (02) 67732420 Fax (02) 67733237
International 61 2 67732420 (ph); 61 2 67733237 (fax)
email jwolfend@metz.une.edu.au; Mobile 0412 245 234
Committee Member and Postgraduate Coordinator, Australia New Zealand
Society for Ecological Economics
negative response to use of computers
-
John Wolfenden
- Junior Member
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am
-
Phil Odence
- Junior Member
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am
negative response to use of computers
Specifically with respect to using computers for simulation, I think the
crux of argument (for those feeling averse) is Professor Forresters. To
paraphrase: You WILL simulate, the choice is whether to do it with a
computer or mentally.
To the extent stakeholders feel disconnected from the model being
simulated the less they are likely to buy in to the results. This
statement applies to mental models and mental simulation as well as
computer models. It is the argument for sharing mental models. Its also
the argument for keeping computer models as transparent and simple (i.e.
sharable) as possible, and for keeping stakeholders involved in model
development. An advantage of using the stock/flow language on the
whiteboard with stakeholders to conceptualize an issue is that it is
easier for them to see their inputs reflected in the ultimate model.
Unfortunately, no matter how good a job you do in keeping people
involved, there will always be others who need to be brought in after the
fact. Weve been focusing a lot of our attention on how to share insights
with someone whos not been involved in building the model. Learning
Environments with good coaching are a promising approach.
***************************************************************************
Phil Odence
High Performance Systems
45 Lyme Road, Suite 200
Hanover, NH 03755-1221
voice- 603 643 9636 x107, fx- 603 643 9502, web- http://www.hps-inc.com
From: Phil Odence <podence@hps-inc.com>
crux of argument (for those feeling averse) is Professor Forresters. To
paraphrase: You WILL simulate, the choice is whether to do it with a
computer or mentally.
To the extent stakeholders feel disconnected from the model being
simulated the less they are likely to buy in to the results. This
statement applies to mental models and mental simulation as well as
computer models. It is the argument for sharing mental models. Its also
the argument for keeping computer models as transparent and simple (i.e.
sharable) as possible, and for keeping stakeholders involved in model
development. An advantage of using the stock/flow language on the
whiteboard with stakeholders to conceptualize an issue is that it is
easier for them to see their inputs reflected in the ultimate model.
Unfortunately, no matter how good a job you do in keeping people
involved, there will always be others who need to be brought in after the
fact. Weve been focusing a lot of our attention on how to share insights
with someone whos not been involved in building the model. Learning
Environments with good coaching are a promising approach.
***************************************************************************
Phil Odence
High Performance Systems
45 Lyme Road, Suite 200
Hanover, NH 03755-1221
voice- 603 643 9636 x107, fx- 603 643 9502, web- http://www.hps-inc.com
From: Phil Odence <podence@hps-inc.com>
-
rjrahn@microtec.net (R. Joel Rah
- Junior Member
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am
negative response to use of computers
>
>Does anyone know of any empirical work on how people respond to the use of
>computers as decision support systems. The computer use could be for a
>variety of purposes such as: an aid to cognitive mapping, or to understand
>the dynamics of systems, or to provide mathematical calculations to aid the
>decision makers.
There has been a lot of work done in this area about 10 years ago, mainly by
MIS people. I dont have any references immediately available but I was on a
Masters thesis committee about that long ago in which the (MIS) student
developed a simple interface to a small database of competitiveness measures
and studied the reaction to the interface by people with different cognitive
styles. I believe he got a paper out of it in something like MIS Quarterly.
>Alternatively, can anyone suggest which particular discipline might be
>interested in this issue? Would this be in the realms of the information
>technology people, maybe psychologists?
Mostly MIS people with some psych background. MIS Quarterly might be a good
place to start. I am not really up on the journals in that field.
R. Joel Rahn
From: rjrahn@microtec.net (R. Joel Rahn)
>Does anyone know of any empirical work on how people respond to the use of
>computers as decision support systems. The computer use could be for a
>variety of purposes such as: an aid to cognitive mapping, or to understand
>the dynamics of systems, or to provide mathematical calculations to aid the
>decision makers.
There has been a lot of work done in this area about 10 years ago, mainly by
MIS people. I dont have any references immediately available but I was on a
Masters thesis committee about that long ago in which the (MIS) student
developed a simple interface to a small database of competitiveness measures
and studied the reaction to the interface by people with different cognitive
styles. I believe he got a paper out of it in something like MIS Quarterly.
>Alternatively, can anyone suggest which particular discipline might be
>interested in this issue? Would this be in the realms of the information
>technology people, maybe psychologists?
Mostly MIS people with some psych background. MIS Quarterly might be a good
place to start. I am not really up on the journals in that field.
R. Joel Rahn
From: rjrahn@microtec.net (R. Joel Rahn)
-
Tom Fiddaman
- Junior Member
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am
negative response to use of computers
The group decision support systems (GDSS) literature has a lot of general
work on how people, especially groups, interact with and react to computers.
Youll find this in a corner of the IT literature. The various proceedings
of Groupware 9x and the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative
Work are a good starting point (see below). Most of the work Ive read
focuses on how people use or fail to use available tools and information,
and how this affects performance. Im not familiar with any work on
reactions to computers at a more visceral level.
A few cites follow below, but Im about 3 years out of date on the subject,
and a lot has happened in those 3 years.
- Tom
Bakken, Bent Erik, "Learning and Transfer of Understanding in Dynamic
Decision Environments," PhD Dissertation, Sloan School of Management,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, January, 1993.
Boland, Richard J. Jr., David G. Schwartz, Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi, Anli K.
Maheshwari, and Dov Teeni, "Sharing Perspectives in Distributed Decision
Making," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported
Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November, 1992, pp. 306-313.
Coleman, David D., ed., Groupware 92, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann
Publishers, 1992.
Dennis, Alan R., Jay F. Nunamaker, Jr., and Douglas R. Vogel, "A Comparison
of Laboratory and Field Research in the Study of Electronic Meeting
Systems," Journal of Management Information Systems, 7:3, Winter 1990-91,
pp. 107-135.
Dennis, Alan R., Joey F. George, Len M. Jessup, Jay F. Nunameker, Jr., and
Douglas R. Vogel, "Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings,"
MIS Quarterly, December, 1988, pp. 591-619.
DeSanctis, Gerardine and R. Brent Gallupe, "A Foundation for the Study of
Group Decision Support Systems," Management Science, 33:5, May 1987, pp.
589-609.
Dewan, Prasun and Rajiv Choudhary, "A High-Level and Flexible Framework for
Implementing Multiuser User Interfaces," ACM Transactions on Information
Systems, 10:4, October 1992, pp. 345-380.
Dubs, Sheli, and Stephen C. Hayne, "Distributed Facilitation: A Concept
Whose Time Has Come?," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on
Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November, 1992, pp.
314-321.
Hiltz, Starr Roxanne and Murray Turoff, "Structuring Computer-Mediated
Communication Systems to Avoid Information Overload," Communications of the
ACM, 28:7, July 1985, pp. 680-689.
Hymes, Charles McLaughlin, and Gary M. Olson, "Unblocking Brainstorming
Through the Use of a Simple Group Editor," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM
Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November,
1992, pp. 99-XXX.
Lim, Lai-Haut and Izak Benbasat, "A Theoretical Perspective of Negotiation
Support Systems," Journal of Management Information Systems, 9:3, Winter
1992-93, pp. 27-44.
Olson, Judith S., Gary M. Olson, Marianne Storr=F8sten, and Mark Carter,=
"How
a Group-Editor Changes the Character of a Design Meeting as well as its
Outcome," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported
Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November, 1992, pp. 91-98.
Robertson, Scott P., Wayne Zachary, and John B. Black, eds., Cognition,
Computing, and Cooperation, Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corp.,
1990.
Sebenius, James K., "Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review,"
Management Science, 38:1, January 1992, pp. 18-38.
Sengupta, Kishore and Tarek K. Abdel-Hamid, "Alternative Conceptions of
Feedback in Dynamic Decision Environments: An Experimental Investigation,"
Management Science, 39:4, April 1993, pp. 411-428.
Sterman, John D., B & B Enterprises Management Flight Simulator , XXX
Todd, Peter and Izak Benbasat, "The Use of Information in Decision Making:
an Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Computer-Based Decision
Aids," MIS Quarterly, September, 1992, pp. 373-393.
Turner, Jon and Robert Kraut, eds., CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM
Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November,
1992, pp. 91-98.
Tyran, Craig K., Alan R. Dennis, Douglas R. Vogel, and J.F. Nunamaker, Jr.,
"The Application of Electronic Meeting Support Technology to Support
Strategic Management," MIS Quarterly, September 1992, pp. 313-334.
Wilson, Paul, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: An Introduction, Oxford:
Intellect, 1992.
****************************************************
Thomas Fiddaman, Ph.D.
Ventana Systems http://www.vensim.com
34025 Mann Road Tel (360) 793-0903
Sultan, WA 98294 Fax (360) 793-2911
http://home1.gte.net/tomfid/ tomfid@premier1.net
****************************************************
work on how people, especially groups, interact with and react to computers.
Youll find this in a corner of the IT literature. The various proceedings
of Groupware 9x and the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative
Work are a good starting point (see below). Most of the work Ive read
focuses on how people use or fail to use available tools and information,
and how this affects performance. Im not familiar with any work on
reactions to computers at a more visceral level.
A few cites follow below, but Im about 3 years out of date on the subject,
and a lot has happened in those 3 years.
- Tom
Bakken, Bent Erik, "Learning and Transfer of Understanding in Dynamic
Decision Environments," PhD Dissertation, Sloan School of Management,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, January, 1993.
Boland, Richard J. Jr., David G. Schwartz, Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi, Anli K.
Maheshwari, and Dov Teeni, "Sharing Perspectives in Distributed Decision
Making," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported
Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November, 1992, pp. 306-313.
Coleman, David D., ed., Groupware 92, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann
Publishers, 1992.
Dennis, Alan R., Jay F. Nunamaker, Jr., and Douglas R. Vogel, "A Comparison
of Laboratory and Field Research in the Study of Electronic Meeting
Systems," Journal of Management Information Systems, 7:3, Winter 1990-91,
pp. 107-135.
Dennis, Alan R., Joey F. George, Len M. Jessup, Jay F. Nunameker, Jr., and
Douglas R. Vogel, "Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings,"
MIS Quarterly, December, 1988, pp. 591-619.
DeSanctis, Gerardine and R. Brent Gallupe, "A Foundation for the Study of
Group Decision Support Systems," Management Science, 33:5, May 1987, pp.
589-609.
Dewan, Prasun and Rajiv Choudhary, "A High-Level and Flexible Framework for
Implementing Multiuser User Interfaces," ACM Transactions on Information
Systems, 10:4, October 1992, pp. 345-380.
Dubs, Sheli, and Stephen C. Hayne, "Distributed Facilitation: A Concept
Whose Time Has Come?," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on
Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November, 1992, pp.
314-321.
Hiltz, Starr Roxanne and Murray Turoff, "Structuring Computer-Mediated
Communication Systems to Avoid Information Overload," Communications of the
ACM, 28:7, July 1985, pp. 680-689.
Hymes, Charles McLaughlin, and Gary M. Olson, "Unblocking Brainstorming
Through the Use of a Simple Group Editor," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM
Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November,
1992, pp. 99-XXX.
Lim, Lai-Haut and Izak Benbasat, "A Theoretical Perspective of Negotiation
Support Systems," Journal of Management Information Systems, 9:3, Winter
1992-93, pp. 27-44.
Olson, Judith S., Gary M. Olson, Marianne Storr=F8sten, and Mark Carter,=
"How
a Group-Editor Changes the Character of a Design Meeting as well as its
Outcome," CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported
Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November, 1992, pp. 91-98.
Robertson, Scott P., Wayne Zachary, and John B. Black, eds., Cognition,
Computing, and Cooperation, Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corp.,
1990.
Sebenius, James K., "Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review,"
Management Science, 38:1, January 1992, pp. 18-38.
Sengupta, Kishore and Tarek K. Abdel-Hamid, "Alternative Conceptions of
Feedback in Dynamic Decision Environments: An Experimental Investigation,"
Management Science, 39:4, April 1993, pp. 411-428.
Sterman, John D., B & B Enterprises Management Flight Simulator , XXX
Todd, Peter and Izak Benbasat, "The Use of Information in Decision Making:
an Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Computer-Based Decision
Aids," MIS Quarterly, September, 1992, pp. 373-393.
Turner, Jon and Robert Kraut, eds., CSCW 92: Proceedings of the ACM
Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press, November,
1992, pp. 91-98.
Tyran, Craig K., Alan R. Dennis, Douglas R. Vogel, and J.F. Nunamaker, Jr.,
"The Application of Electronic Meeting Support Technology to Support
Strategic Management," MIS Quarterly, September 1992, pp. 313-334.
Wilson, Paul, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: An Introduction, Oxford:
Intellect, 1992.
****************************************************
Thomas Fiddaman, Ph.D.
Ventana Systems http://www.vensim.com
34025 Mann Road Tel (360) 793-0903
Sultan, WA 98294 Fax (360) 793-2911
http://home1.gte.net/tomfid/ tomfid@premier1.net
****************************************************