Stressed decision makers and use of decision aids: a literature review and conceptual model

Abstract

Purpose Decision making is inherently stressful since the decision maker must choose between potentially conflicting alternatives with unique hazards and uncertain outcomes. Whereas decision aids such as decision support systems (DSS) can be beneficial in stressful scenarios, decision makers sometimes misuse them during decision making, leading to suboptimal outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between stress, decision making and decision aid use. Design/methodology/approach The authors conduct an extensive multi-disciplinary review of decision making and DSS use through the lens of stress and examine how stress, as perceived by decision makers, impacts their use or misuse of DSS even when such aids can improve decision quality. Research questions examine underlying sources of stress in managerial decision making that influence decision quality, relationships between a decision maker’s perception of stress, DSS use/misuse, and decision quality, and implications for research and practice on DSS design and capabilities. Findings The study presents a conceptual model that provides an integrative behavioral view of the impact of a decision maker’s perceived stress on their use of a DSS and the quality of their decisions. The authors identify critical knowledge gaps and propose a research agenda to improve decision quality and use of DSS by considering a decision maker’s perceived stress. Originality/value This study provides a previously unexplored view of DSS use and misuse as shaped by the decision and job stress experienced by decision makers. Through the application of four theories, the review and its findings highlight key design principles that can mitigate the negative effects of stressors on DSS use.

Data literacy and the cognitive challenges of a data-rich business environment: an analysis of perceived data overload, technostress and their relationship to individual performance

“…Distress, on the other hand, is the stress associated with a threat or obstacle arising from a negative assessment of the demands of the environment that have the potential to prevent the achievement of positive goals and targets and bring harm or disability (Selye, 1976). In this sense, although the literature on TS has prioritized distress (Adya and Phillips-Wren, 2019), it is a two-tone phenomenon whose consequences can be harmful or beneficial (Tarafdar et al, 2019). Thus, Tarafdar et al (2019) highlight that, although some technological phenomena or characteristics of information technology can be perceived as harmful, individuals can also evaluate them as opportunities or possibilities for development, change, learning or reward concerning their skills, tasks or professional life.…”

“…That said, TS can manifest itself when endusers receive a large amount of data (Groes, 2017;Chen et al, 2019;Stich et al, 2019). This is because the individual's perception of overload when it is faced with high loads of data can be considered a decision stressor since it affects its physiological and psychological aspects (Adya and Phillips-Wren, 2019). This perception of overload can lead the individual to exhaustion, which may be related to technostress (Fu et al, 2020).…”

“…Under the state of stress, the individual's cognitive functioning is affected by the appearance of errors and biases that can impact his decision-making and behavior (Adya and Phillips-Wren, 2019). In this way, TS has become a contemporary challenge given its potential to affect the cognitive capacity of individuals who experience them and compromise possible advances in the use of Information Technology.…”

Evaluating the potential impact of online assessment on students' academic performance

“…In the extant literature, the Task-technology fit theory has been used to evaluate and study a wide range of information systems (Adya and Phillips-Wren, 2019). In addition, the theory has been combined with others such as Technology Acceptance Models (e.g., Larsen et al, 2009;Park et al, 2019) and Unified Theory of Technology Acceptance and Use (e.g., McGill & Klobas, 2009), as well as Social Capital Theory (e.g., Lu & Yang, 2014).…”

A personalized decision aid for prostate cancer shared decision making

“…While there are some DAs for prostate cancer patients, personalization is lacking, leaving patients unclear of how these treatments will specifically affect them. Misuse of DAs or those of poor quality can also contribute to negatively to patient decision making, increasing stress, or posing challenges for implementation [ 3 , 5 ]. DAs should be created according to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) criteria to ensure quality and optimal utilization [ 6 ].…”