Abstract
Cognitive conflicts arise because the members view the problem from different perspectives, even when they have similar interests in achieving the goal. Disagreement within a group may occur due to: (a) differing judgment policies amongst the members, (b) inconsistency by any member in using a policy, (c) group process losses that prevent group members from understanding each other better, and (d) limited human information processing capability incapacitating group members from processing all information effectively especially when these are conflicting in nature. A design of a level 2 GDSS to aid decision-making in cognitive conflict tasks is presented that combines cognitive feedback and multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) based multieriteria decision-making techniques with the communication structure and activitystructuring capabilities of a level I GDSS. Though cognitive feedback and MAU method have been separately used to help groups resolve cognitive conflicts, never have the two decision-aids been used together in computerized collaborative system before. The contributory effects of the components of the presented GDSS design were empirically tested in a laboratory setting. Thus, four treatments consisting of an unaided face-to-face meeting, level I GDSS supported meeting, cognitive feedback along with level I GDSS support, and the level 2 GDSS consisting of level I GDSS reinforced with cognitive feedback and MAU method were compared in a repeated measures experimental design. Results largely supported the proposed research hypotheses. Some specific findings include: (1) the Level 2 GDSS comprised of cognitive feedback capability and the MAU method reduced disagreement between group members and improved consistency of judgments better than the other meetings did; (2) the Level 1 GDSS augmented with cognitive feedback capability did not do a better job than the basic Level I GDSS in reducing disagreements or improving consistency of judgments; (3) there was no significant difference in the reduction of disagreement between the basic Level 1 GDSS and face-to-face meetings; and (4) while there was no difference in improvement of consistency of individual judgments between the face-to-face and basic Level I GDSS supported meetings, group judgments made in face-to-face meetings came out to be more consistent.
Bose, Utpal (1994). Effects of group decision support technology comprising cognitive feedback and multiattribute utility-based multicriteria decision-making method on cognitive conflict. Texas A&M University. Texas A&M University. Libraries. Available electronically from
https : / /hdl .handle .net /1969 .1 /DISSERTATIONS -1556366.