Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering (산업경영시스템학회지)

Society of Korea Industrial and System Engineering (한국산업경영시스템학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Impact of Quality Factors on Platform-based Decisions

플랫폼 기반 의사결정 품질 요인의 영향력 연구

  • Sung Bok Yoon (Graduate School of Technology Management, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Ho Jun Song (College of Industrial Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Wan Seon Shin (Department of Systems Management Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University)
  • 윤성복 (성균관대학교 기술경영전문대학원) ;
  • 송호준 (성균관대학교 산업공학과) ;
  • 신완선 (성균관대학교 시스템경영공학과)
  • Received : 2023.05.14
  • Accepted : 2023.07.17
  • Published : 2023.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

As platforms become primary decision making tools, platforms for decision have been introduced to improve quality of decision results. Because, decision platforms applied augmented decision-making process which uses experiences and feedback of users. This process creates a variety of alternatives tailored for users' abilities and characteristics. However, platform users choose alternatives before considering significant quality factors based on securing decision quality. In real world, platform managers use an algorithm that distorts appropriate alternatives for their commercial benefits. For improving quality of decision-making, preceding researches approach trying to increase rational decision -making ability based on experiences and feedback. In order to overcome bounded rationality, users interact with the machine to approach the optional situation. Differentiated from previous studies, our study focused more on characteristics of users while they use decision platforms. This study investigated the impact of quality factors on decision-making using platforms, the dimensions of systematic factors and user characteristics. Systematic factors such as platform reliability, data quality, and user characteristics such as user abilities and biases were selected, and measuring variables which trust, satisfaction, and loyalty of decision platforms were selected. Based on these quality factors, a structural equation research model was created. A survey was conducted with 391 participants using a 7-point Likert scale. The hypothesis that quality factors affect trust was proved to be valid through path analysis of the structural equation model. The key findings indicate that platform reliability, data quality, user abilities, and biases affect the trust, satisfaction and loyalty. Among the quality factors, group bias of users affects significantly trust of decision platforms. We suggest that quality factors of decision platform consist of experience-based and feedback-based decision-making with the platform's network effect. Through this study, the theories of decision-making are empirically tested and the academic scope of platform-based decision-making has been further developed.

Keywords

References

  1. Alwan, A.A., Ciupala, M.A., Brimicombe, A.J., Ghorashi, S.A., Baravalle, A., and Falcarin, P., Data quality challenges in large-scale cyber-physical systems: A systematic review, Information Systems, 2022, Vol. 105, 101951.
  2. Antoniadi, A.M., Du, Y., Guendouz, Y., Wei, L., Mazo, C., Becker, B.A., and Mooney, C., Current challenges and future opportunities for XAI in machine learning-based clinical decision support systems: A systematic review, Applied Sciences, 2021, Vol. 11, No. 11, p. 5088.
  3. Araujo, T., Helberger, N., Kruikemeier, S., and De Vreese, C. H., In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence, AI & Society, 2020, Vol. 35, pp. 611-623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w
  4. Arnold, V., Collier, P.A., Leech, S.A., and Sutton, S.G., The effect of experience and complexity on order and recency bias in decision making by professional accountants, Accounting & Finance, 2000, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 109-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-629X.00039
  5. Baron, J. and Hershey, J.C., Outcome bias in decision evaluation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, Vol. 54, No. 4, p. 569.
  6. Bearden, W.O. and Etzel, M.J., Reference group influence on product and brand purchase decisions, Journal of Consumer Research, 1982, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 183-194. https://doi.org/10.1086/208911
  7. Burton, J.W., Stein, M.K., and Jensen, T.B., A systematic review of algorithm aversion in augmented decision making, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2020, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 220-239. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2155
  8. Cai, L. and Zhu, Y., The challenges of data quality and data quality assessment in the big data era, Data Science Journal, 2015, Vol. 14.
  9. Castillo-Soto, A. and Baker, G., A new approach to records management with the Information Workplace Platform, Records Management Journal, 2011, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 205-213. https://doi.org/10.1108/09565691111186876
  10. Davis, F.D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly, 1989, pp. 319-340.
  11. Demetis, D. and Lee, A.S., When humans using the IT artifact becomes IT using the human artifact, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2018, Vol. 19, No. 10, p. 5.
  12. Dery, K., Sebastian, I.M., and van der Meulen, N., The digital workplace is key to digital innovation, MIS Quarterly Executive, 2017, Vol. 16, No. 2.
  13. Dietvorst, B.J., Simmons, J.P., and Massey, C., Overcoming algorithm aversion: People will use imperfect algorithms if they can modify them, Management Science, 2018, Vol. 64, No. 3, pp. 1155-1170. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2643
  14. Dittes, S., Richter, S., Richter, A., and Smolnik, S., Towards the workplace of the future: How organizations can facilitate digital work, Business Horizons, 2019, Vol. 62, No. 5, pp. 649-661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.05.004
  15. Eslami, M., Vaccaro, K., Karahalios, K., and Hamilton, K., "Be careful; things can be worse than they appear": Understanding Biased Algorithms and Users' Behavior around Them in Rating Platforms, Proceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media, 2017.
  16. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  17. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., and Straub, D.W., Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model, MIS Quarterly, 2003, pp. 51-90.
  18. Gregory, R.W., Henfridsson, O., Kaganer, E., and Kyriakou, H., The role of artificial intelligence and data network effects for creating user value, Academy of Management Review, 2021, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 534-551. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0178
  19. Gupta, S., Modgil, S., Bhattacharyya, S., and Bose, I., Artificial intelligence for decision Support systems in the field of operations research: review and future scope of research, Annals of Operations Research, 2022, pp. 1-60.
  20. Harvey, N., Harries, C., and Fischer, I., Using advice and assessing its quality, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2000, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 252-273. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2874
  21. Joreskog, K.G., A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system, ETS Research Bulletin Series, 1970, Vol. 2, pp. 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1970.tb00783.x
  22. Keding, C. and Meissner, P., Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making Processes: How the use of AI-based advisory systems shapes choice behavior in R&D investment decisions, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2021, Vol. 171, p. 120970.
  23. Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L., and Rao, H.R., A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents, Decision Support Systems, 2008, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 544-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001
  24. Kim, J., Platform quality factors influencing content providers' loyalty, Journal of Retailing And Consumer Services, 2021, Vol. 60.
  25. Klein, G.A., A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making, Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods, 1993, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 138-147.
  26. Kline, R.B., Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, Guilford Publications, 2015, pp. 46-62.
  27. Knijnenburg, B.P., Willemsen, M.C., Gantner, Z., Soncu, H., and Newell, C., Explaining the user experience of recommender systems, User Modeling and Adapted Interaction, 2012, Vol. 22, No. 4-5, pp. 441-504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-011-9118-4
  28. Lochner, M. and Smilek, D., The uncertain advisor: Trust, accuracy, and self-correction in an automated decision support system, Cognitive Processing, 2023, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 95-106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-022-01113-1
  29. Marth, S., Barbara H., and Elfriede, P., Sharing on Platforms: Reducing Perceived Risk for Peer-to-Peer Platform Consumers through Trust-Building and Regulation, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2022, doi: 10.1002/cb.2075.
  30. Mas-Machuca, Marta, Frederic M., and Carmen, J., The Unexplored Potential of Trust to Boost Customer Loyalty for Transport Platforms. Research in Transportation Business and Management, 2021, Vol. 41, doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100618.
  31. McNamara, G.M., Haleblian, J., and Dykes, B.J., The performance implications of participating in an acquisition wave: Early mover advantages, bandwagon effects, and the moderating influence of industry characteristics and acquirer tactics, Academy of Management Journal, 2008, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 113-130. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.30755057
  32. Nasseef, O.A., Baabdullah, A.M., Alalwan, A.A., Lal, B., and Dwivedi, Y.K., Artificial intelligence-based public healthcare systems: G2G knowledge-based exchange to enhance the decision-making process, Government Information Quarterly, 2022, Vol. 39, No. 4, p. 101618.
  33. Omarli, S., Which factors have an impact on managerial decision-making process? An Integrated framework, Essays in Economics and Business Studies, 2017, pp. 83-93.
  34. Parker, G.G. and Van Alstyne, M.W., Two-sided network effects: A theory of information Product design, Management Science, 2005, Vol. 51, No. 10, pp. 1494-1504. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0400
  35. Pitoura, E., Tsaparas, P., Flouris, G., Fundulaki, I., Papadakos, P., Abiteboul, S., and Weikum, G., On Measuring Bias in Online Information, ACM SIGMOD Record, 2018, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 16-21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3186549.3186553
  36. Shibl, R., Lawley, M., and Debuse, J., Factors influencing decision support system acceptance, Decision Support Systems, 2013, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 953-961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.09.018
  37. Shin, W.S., Lee, Y., and Dahlgaard, J.J., A pattern-based decision framework in the era of Industry 4.0, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 2019, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 158-181.
  38. Spetzler, C., Winter, H., and Meyer, J., Decision quality: Value creation from better business decisions, John Wiley & Sons, 2016, pp. 21-30, pp. 157-187.
  39. Spiteri, J.M. and Dion, P.A., Customer value, overall satisfaction, end-user loyalty, and market performance in detail intensive industries, Industrial Marketing Management, 2004, Vol. 33, No. 8, pp. 675-687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.03.005
  40. Sussman, S.W. and Siegal, W.S., Informational influence in organizations: An integrated Approach to knowledge adoption, Information Systems Research, 2003, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 47-65. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.1.47.14767
  41. Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A., and Bala, H., Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems, MIS quartely, 2013, pp. 21-54.
  42. Wang, M.M. and Wang, J.J., Understanding solvers' continuance intention in crowdsourcing contest platform: An extension of expectation-confirmation model, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 2019, Vol. 14, No. 3, p. 17.
  43. Warhurst, C., Mathieu, C., and Wright, S., Workplace innovation and the quality of working life in an age of Uberisation, Workplace Innovation, 2017, pp. 245-259
  44. West, S.G., Finch, J.F., and Curran, P.J., Structural equation models with non-normal variables: Problems and remedies, 1995.