Ethical Decision Making: A Comparison of Computer- Supported and Face-to-face Group

This study compares computer-supported groups, i.e., groups using group support systems (GSS), and face-to-face groups using ethical decision-making tasks. A laboratory experiment was conducted using five-person groups of information systems professionals. Face-to-face (FTF) and GSS groups were compared in terms of their decision outcomes and group members' reactions. The results revealed that computer-supported and face-to-face groups showed no significant difference in terms of the decision outcomes of choice shift and decision polarity. However, FTF groups reached their decisions more quickly and they were more successful in attaining group consensus than GSS groups. Subjects evaluated face-to-face communication more favorably than GSS interaction on most post-group measures related to perceived group processes and satisfaction. Despite these outcomes, some possibilities for using GSS technology in an ethical decision making context are examined.     

Using and Influence Level of Information to Explain the Non-consensus Process Loss

Much of the Group Support System (GSS) literature comparing GSS groups with manual groups has produced contrarian results. One of the more confusing is that GSS groups have a higher level of non-consensus than manual groups. Lack of consensus in GSS groups is considered to be a negative aspect of GSS. This paper argues that low levels of consensus are not necessarily harmful and should be expected given the assumptions about GSSs. This study uses an alternate measure to compare face-to-face groups with GSS groups; an influence level of information. Experimental results using an influence level of information show no difference between face-to-face group members and GSS group members. We discuss these implications, as well as additional directions for further consensus research.     

Coordination Structures and System Restrictiveness in Distributed Group Support Systems

Most GSS research has studied the impact of restricting group interaction to GSS-prescribed coordination structures with face-to-face groups, while Distributed GSS (DGSS) has been largely ignored. Due to the nature of mediated communication in asynchronous interaction, it is relatively difficult to coordinate distributed groups, and a special coordination structure must be arranged to overcome these difficulties. This study examines the effect of system restrictiveness of coordination structures in an asynchronous environment. A 2 × 2 factorial experiment was designed with two independent variables – sequential vs. parallel coordination mode, and with vs. without a leader – to construct coordination structures with varying degrees of restrictiveness. The study finds that less restrictive coordination structures are more appropriate to support asynchronously interacting distributed groups. Objective decision quality is equal for both parallel and sequential coordination mode, but is significantly better with a group leader. Groups with parallel coordination mode have a stronger belief that the decisions they made are of higher quality than those of groups with sequential coordination mode. In groups with a leader, communication effectiveness is better. Satisfaction with a decision process is higher in parallel coordination groups and in groups with a leader. There is also a significant interaction effect. Satisfaction with the decision process is higher in sequential coordination groups with a leader than sequential coordination groups without a leader.     

Effects of Experience-based Work Patterns in a GSS Environment

Existing group support system (GSS) research has focused on the impacts of GSSs on conventional group-work patterns. Few studies have examined the effects of different group-work patterns in a GSS environment. Specifically, we are interested in group-work patterns that vary in terms of group members' experience or ability levels. In this paper, we report on an exploratory experiment designed to compare the effects of three distinct experience-based work patterns on group decision quality, efficiency, and participant satisfaction in the case of GSS usage. There is the conventional work pattern in which persons of differing experience levels work simultaneously in a meeting. An alternative pattern consists of experienced participants working on a problem first and then passing their results on to less experienced participants. Yet another pattern reverses this sequence. Our results show that while groups in the conventional work pattern are more efficient in considering alternative solutions, groups organized in the other two experience-based work patterns can produce higher quality solutions. We observed no significant differences in participant satisfaction among the three group-work patterns. These findings suggest that a GSS can be as effective (or even more effective) with alternative group-work patterns as it is with the conventional pattern.     

A conceptual framework of anonymity in Group Support Systems

As the development and use of automated systems for collaborative work grows, the need for a better understanding of these systems becomes more important. Our focus is on one type of system, a Group Support System (GSS) and, in particular, on one important aspect of a GSS—anonymity. A conceptual framework for the study of anonymity in a GSS is presented, which describes the general classes of variables and their relationships. These variables include the factors that influence anonymity in a GSS, types of anonymity, and the effects of anonymity on a message sender, receiver, group process, and outcome. Each of these variables is discussed with working propositions presented for important group process and outcome measures. The objectives of this article are to highlight the importance and complexity of anonymity, to act as a guide for empirical investigations of anonymity, and to influence future GSS development and use.     

Decision Neuroscience

This article presents an introduction to and analysis of an emerging area of research, namely decision neuroscience, whose goal is to integrate research in neuroscience and behavioral decision making. The article includes an exposition of (1) how the exponential accumulation of knowledge in neuroscience can potentially enrich research on decision making, (2) the range of techniques in neuroscience that can be used to shed light on various decision making phenomena, (3) examples of potential research in this emerging area, and (4) some of the challenges readers need to be cognizant of while venturing into this new area of research. The genesis of this workshop session and article was a meeting that Dipankar Chakravarti, Antoine Bechara, and Baba Shiv had one balmy Iowa City summer afternoon in 2003. We coined the term Decision Neuroscience to describe the emerging stream of research outlined in this article.     

Household preference revisions and decision making: The role of disconfirmation

In this paper, we examine the role of disconfirmation as an important determinant of household preference revisions and decision making. Although prior research has examined decision influence and information exchange in household decision making, the impact of disconfirmation on individual family member preferences and the joint household preference has not been explicitly studied. Analogous to the main types of social influence found within groups, we identify two types of disconfirmation that impact individual preferences arising from family interaction or discussion. These two types of disconfirmation are informational disconfirmation, related to new product information revealed in family discussion being different than one's prior beliefs, and preference disconfirmation, where a family member has incorrect expectations of the preferences of other influential household members. An empirical study involving a household vacation decision demonstrates significant disconfirmation effects in explaining individuals' post-discussion preferences, as well as the joint household preference and decision. Based on the empirical results, we discuss various implications and suggest future research to study the specific consequences of disconfirmation in household decisions.     

Analysis of multiple criteria decision support systems for cooperative groups

This article reviews research on multiple criteria decision support systems for cooperative groups. The systems included in this survey integrate concepts from group decision theory, multiple criteria decision methodology, and decision support system technology. Three dimensions are considered in the analysis of existing research: the multiple criteria decision technique used to generate decision alternatives or to choose from a given set; the method used to facilitate individual compromise and group consensus; and the application category, if any.     

Information Collection Strategic Design in Experts-assisted Decision Making Paradigm

In an experts-assisted decision making paradigm, the information collection design becomes a strategic variable under a weak assumption that the final decision is dependent on the design used to collect information as well. As a result, the same information of the experts and the decision maker about the problem can potentially produce different final decisions for different information collection designs. The implication is that a decision maker can strategically select a design which serves his/her objective. This paper uses a Bayesian estimation methodology for combining experts' information with the decision maker's prior. An information collection process is designed by setting constraints on this model. Several designs are developed here using such controlled factors as a one-stage versus a two-stage decision process, experts' rank ordering, and group versus individual lobbying/consultation. An example is provided to illustrate the applicability of the concept. It is shown that the information produced in the process of producing a decision can also give insights into the impacts of the decision maker and the experts on the decision.     

Group Development (I): A Review and Synthesis of Development Models

This is the first of two parts that examine the issue of group development and its impact on the study design of group support systems (GSS). We review the various models of group development, analyze the sources of differences among these models, and synthesize common themes across various models. The paper concludes with a meta-framework for understanding group development; this framework highlights the two areas of focus that have dominated group development research in the past: group processes and outcomes. The second paper will build on the ideas developed here and discuss the implications of group development for GSS research.Previous research on group behavior suggests that groups change over time; patterns of change, referred to as group development models, have been an important area of study for the past four decades. For the first three of these decades, unitary models of group development were very popular; that is, the notion that all groups go through a certain series of predefined stages. In the last decade, however, researchers have cast doubt on such unitary models of group development. Nonsequential models that recognize the uniqueness of each group (and consequently reject the idea of a single, predetermined series of stages) have become increasingly popular. This paper examines the implications of these issues for researchers and managers of groups. It also attempts to serve as the foundation for the propositions developed in the next paper, in which the relevance of group development for GSS research and practice are discussed.     

非期望效用理论研究述评

期望效用理论（EUT）出现后,成为主流经济学和管理学中研究不确定性环境下决策活动的理论基础。但近50年特别是最近20多年来,随着行为科学的发展以及实验经济学的崛起且逐步融入主流,与EUT相抵触的经验证据大量涌现,因此其作为不确定性决策活动的理论根基正在被广泛质疑,各学科寻找EUT替代者的努力催生了多种不同的非期望效用理论。本文在对经典期望效用理论批判的基础上,对国外正处于进展中的非期望效用理论文献进行全面回顾和简单评价,以期为国内从事这一领域理论和应用研究的学者提供一些线索和思路。     

Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART

Many complex decisions are made in a group environment, where the decision is made jointly by a committee or group structure. The individual group members are often not equally qualified to contribute equitably to the decision process, or may have different saliences (desires) to influence the decision. A quantitative knowledge of the players' decisional power is useful for better understanding of the group decision process, and could even be used in weighted voting within the group structure. We adapt the REMBRANDT suite of decision models (multiplicative AHP and SMART) to measure decisional power in groups, and we generalise this to cater for the case where power itself is deemed to be multidimensional in nature, and the case of uncertain subjective judgements of power amongst group members.     

Differences between workstations and keypad group support systems: Implications for keypad GSS facilitators

Organizations are successfully using group support systems (GSS) to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction in organizational meetings. Meeting success relies on making an appropriate match between group, taks, and technology. This responsibility often falls to the meeting facilitator. This article draws upon GSS and facilitation literature to develop a framework for the discussion of effective facilitation in workstation and keypad meeting environments. The article identifies differences between the systems and how they impact upon the behavior of the meeting facilitators and their choice of technology. Compensatory actions are proposed for keypad facilitators to address the lack of key workstation features. Keypad strengths are also identified to show the opportunities available to facilitators to maximize the benefits of using these GSS. Further, it is proposed that different types of GSS are not mutually exclusive and should be seen as complementary components of a suite of GSS tools designed to support organizational goals.     

Decision Strategy and Structure in Households: A “Groups” Perspective

From a practical perspective, (arguably) most consumer decisions are not made in isolation of the households in which consumers are inserted, yet we commonly treat them econometrically as if they were. The purpose of this workshop was to take some initial steps in defining needed research in household decision making that structurally accounts for goal sharing, utility interdependence, taste heterogeneity, choice set formation, power structures, group size and composition, and so forth. We also considered conditions under which aggregation of tastes, utility and choices might occur and make sense from both behavioral and modeling perspectives.     

Applying Multiattribute-Based Group Decision Making Techniques in Complex Equipment Selection Tasks

A practicing industrial engineer, even an experienced decision maker, needs help in the sense that there is a necessity to use more logical or analytical decision support tools, especially when dealing with control and instrumentation projects which are often worth millions of dollars. In this article we propose an algorithm which can support the process of group decision making relating to industrial automation, especially involving the selection of control and instrumentation equipment. The aim of this article is to look only at the algorithm's application and how it is applied. To this end, two test cases are used as examples: (1) selecting a local area network for installation in an academic environment; and (2) selecting an integrated control system for a real-world pulp and paper mill. Obtained results show that the algorithm leads to a satisfactory solution. A software form of the algorithm is being programmed for use as a decision support tool.     

Dynamic Influences on Individual Choice Behavior

Research examining the process of individual decision making over time isbriefly reviewed. We focus on two major areas of work in choice dynamics:research that has examined how current choices are influenced by the historyof previous choices, and newer work examining how choices may be made toexploit expectations about options available in the future. A central themeof the survey is that if a general understanding of choice dynamics is toemerge, it will come through the development of boundedly-rational models ofdynamic problem solving that lie on the interface between economics andpsychology.