Inducing sensitivity to deception in order to improve decision making performance: A field study

被引:56
作者
Biros, DP [1 ]
George, JF
Zmud, RW
机构
[1] USAF, Inst Technol, Dept Syst & Engn Management, Wright Patterson AFB, OH 45433 USA
[2] Florida State Univ, Coll Business, Dept Management Informat Syst, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA
[3] Univ Oklahoma, Div Management Informat Syst, Michael F Price Coll Business, Norman, OK 73019 USA
关键词
information quality; date security; data integrity; error detection; deception detection;
D O I
10.2307/4132323
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
When an organization's members depend on the data contained in computer-based systems, they become vulnerable to strategic information manipulation. That is, they become susceptible to situations where their decision-making behaviors can be influenced by others able to access and manipulate this data. This paper describes the results of a field experiment that examines the effects of alternative interventions aimed at inducing sensitivity to the possibility of manipulated date on professionals' task-related decision behaviors: deception detection, false alarms, and task accuracy. While traditional training had no effect on detection success or the issuance of false alarms, warnings about data quality resulted in better detection success. Warnings combined with just-in-time training resulted in better detection success but at the cost of an increased number of false alarms, Higher levels of detection success increased task accuracy and the time spent solving each problem. A higher number of false alarms was associated with lower levels of task accuracy.
引用
收藏
页码:119 / 144
页数:26
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   CRITICISMS OF VIGILANCE RESEARCH - A DISCUSSION [J].
ADAMS, JA .
HUMAN FACTORS, 1987, 29 (06) :737-740
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1988, NATURE EXPERTISE
[3]  
[Anonymous], ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC
[4]  
Bisantz A., 2000, EMPIRICAL INVESTIGAT
[5]   REPORT FORMAT AND TASK COMPLEXITY - INTERACTION IN RISK JUDGMENTS [J].
BLOCHER, E ;
MOFFIE, RP ;
ZMUD, RW .
ACCOUNTING ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIETY, 1986, 11 (06) :457-470
[6]   INTERPERSONAL DECEPTION .5. ACCURACY IN DECEPTION DETECTION [J].
BURGOON, JK ;
BULLER, DB ;
EBESU, AS ;
ROCKWELL, P .
COMMUNICATION MONOGRAPHS, 1994, 61 (04) :303-325
[7]  
Chin WW, 1998, QUANT METH SER, P295
[8]  
CHIN WW, 1998, PLSGRAPH VERSION 2 9
[9]  
DAVIES DR, 1981, PSYCHOL VIGILANCE
[10]  
DAVIES DR, 1969, HUMAN VIGILANCE PERF, P53