Building Decision Support Systems for Acceptance

  • Ralph RiedelEmail author
  • Jan Fransoo
  • Vincent Wiers
  • Katrin Fischer
  • Julien Cegarra
  • David Jentsch


Production planning and control fulfill a crucial role in enterprises. Planning and scheduling activities are very complex, and take place within the enterprise and across the entire supply chain in order to achieve high quality products at lower cost, lower inventory and higher levels of customer service. Since the information that has to be processed in planning and scheduling functions is very complex information technology is used extensively to support these functions. In the field of manufacturing planning and control Decision Support Systems (DSS) are used. Those are also known as Advanced Planning Systems (APS).


Decision Support System Behavioral Intention Technology Acceptance Model User Involvement User Participation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alter, S. (2004). A work system view of DSS in its fourth decade. Decision Support Systems, 28, 319–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amoako-Gyampah, K., & Salam, A. F. (2004). An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment. Information & Management, 41, 731–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andriole, S. J. (1989). Handbook of decision support systems. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: TAB Professional and Reference Books.Google Scholar
  4. Anthony, R. N. (1965). Planning and control systems: A framework for analysis. Boston: Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration.Google Scholar
  5. Baecker, R. M., Grudin, J., Buxton, W. A. S., & Greenberg, S. (Eds.). (1995). Readings in human–computer interaction. Toward the Year 2000. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  6. Banati, H., Bedi, P., & Grover, P. S. (2006). Evaluating web usability from the user’s perspective. Journal of Computer Science, 2(4), 314–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (1994). Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Quarterly, 18(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baroudi, J. J., Olson, M. H., & Ives, B. (1986). An empirical study of the impact of user involvement on system usage and information satisfaction. Communications of the ACM, 29(3), 232–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bartoelke, K., Eschweiler, W., Flechsenberger, D., & Tannenbaum, A. S. (1982). Workers’ participation and the distribution of control as perceived by members of ten german companies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(3), 380–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennet, J. L. (Ed.). (1983). Building decision support systems. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  11. Beyer, H. R., & Holtzblatt, K. (1995). Apprenticing with the customer. Communications of the ACM, 38(5), 45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Beyon, M., Rasmequan, S., & Russ, S. (2002). A new paradigm for computer-based decision support. Decision Support Systems, 33, 127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blili, S., Raymond, L., & Rivard, S. (1998). Impact of task uncertainty, end-user involvement, and competence on the success of end-user computing. Information & Management, 33, 137–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bliss, J. P. (1997). Alarm reaction patterns by pilots as a function of reaction modality. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 7(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bliss, J. P., & Dunn, M. C. (2000). Behavioral implications of alarm mistrust as a function of task workload. Ergonomics, 43, 1283–1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bowers, C. A., Jentsch, F., Salas, E., & Braun, C. C. (1998). Studying communication patterns among aircrews: Implications for team training needs assessment. Human Factors, 40, 672–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bowers, C. A., Oser, R. L., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1996). Team performance in automated systems. In R. Parasuraman & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 243–263). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar
  18. Breznitz, S. (1984). Cry wolf: The psychology of false alarms. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  19. Carlson, C., & Turban, E. (2002). DSS: directions for the next decade. Decision Support Systems, 33, 105–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cegarra, J., & Hoc, J.-M. (2008). The role of algorithm and result comprehensibility of automated scheduling on complacency. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 18(6), 603–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chau, P. Y. K. (1996). An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(2), 185–204.Google Scholar
  22. Chau, P. Y. K. (2001). Influence of computer attitude and self-efficacy on IT usage behaviour. Journal of End User Computing, 13(1), 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheskin Research (2000). Trust in the wired Americas.
  24. Cheskin Research and Studio Archetype (1999). eCommerce trust study.
  25. Cohen, M. S., Parasuraman, R., & Freeman, J. (1999). Trust in decision aids: A model and its training implications (Tech. Report USAATCOM TR 97-D-4). Arlington, VA: Cognitive Technologies.Google Scholar
  26. Cooper, A., Reimann, R. M., & Cronin, D. (2007). About Face 3: The essentials of interaction design. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Courtney, J. F. (2001). Decision making and knowledge management in inquiring organizations: toward a new decision-making paradigm for DSS. Decision Support Systems, 31, 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perception and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results, PhD Thesis, Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  30. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.Google Scholar
  31. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology. A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Davis, F. D., & Kottemann, J. E. (1994). User perceptions of decision support effectiveness: Two production planning experiments. Decision Sciences, 25(1), 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Davis, F., & Kottemann, J. (1995). Determinants of decision rule use in a production planning task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Davis, F. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2004). Toward preprototype user acceptance testing of new information systems: implications for software project management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51(1), 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. de Vries, P., Midden, C., & Bouwhuis, D. (2003). The effects of errors on system trust, self-confidence, and the allocation of control in route planning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 719–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. De Kok, A. G., & Fransoo, J. C. (2003). Planning supply chain operations: Definition and comparison of planning concepts. In S. C. Graves & A.G. de Kok (Eds.), Supply Chain Management: Design, Coordination and Operation (pp. 597–675), (Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, vol. 11), Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  37. Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dillon, A. (2000). Group dynamics meet cognition: combining socio-technical concepts and usability engineering in the design of information systems,
  39. Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Information & Management, 36, 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Doll, W. C., Hendrickson, A., & Deng, X. (1998). Using Davis’s perceived usefulness and ease-of-use instruments for decision making: A confirmatory and multigroup invariance analysis. Decision Sciences, 29(4), 839–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Doll, W. J., & Torkzadeh, G. (1991). A congruence construct of user involvement. Decision Sciences, 22(2), 443–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Druzdzel, M. J., & Flynn, R. R. (1999). Decision support systems. In A. Kent (Ed.), Encyclopedia of library and information science. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  43. Dzindolet, M. T., Peterson, S. A., Pomranky, R. A., Pierce, L. G., & Beck, H. P. (2003). The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 58, 697–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Dzindolet, M. T., Pierce, L. G., Beck, H. P., & Dawe, L. A. (2002). The perceived utility of human and automated aids in a visual detection task. Human Factors, 44, 79–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Egger, F., & de Groot, B. (2000). Developing a model of trust for electronic commerce. An application to a permissive marketing web site. In Proceedings of the 9th International World-Wide Web Conference. Foretec Seminars.Google Scholar
  46. Elbeltagi, I., McBride, N., & Hardaker, G. (2005). Evaluating the factors affecting DSS usage by senior managers in local authority in Egypt. Journal of Global Information Management, 13(2), 42–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Faranda, W. T. (2001). A scale to measure the cognitive control form of perceived control: Construction and preliminary assessment. Psychology & Marketing, 18(12), 1259–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Franz, C. R., & Robey, D. (1986). Organizational Context, User Involvement, and the Usefulness of Information Systems. Decision Sciences, 17(3), 329–356.Google Scholar
  49. Fogg, B. J., Marshall, J. Laraki, O., Osipovich, A., Varma, C., Fang, N., et al. (2001). What Makes Web sites Credible? A Report on a Large Quantitative Study, Seattle, WA: SIGCHI.Google Scholar
  50. Fogg, B. J., & Tseng, H. (1999). The elements of computer credibility. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: The CHI is the Limit (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, May 15–20, 1999). CHI '99 (pp. 80–87). New York, NY: ACMGoogle Scholar
  51. Foster, S. T., & Franz, C. R. (1999). User involvement during information systems development: A comparison of analyst and user perceptions of system acceptance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 16(3–4), 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Friedman, B., Kahn, P., & Howe, D. C. (2000). Trust online. Communications of the ACM Press, 43(12), 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gatignon, H., & Robertson, T. S. (1991). Innovative decision processes. In T. S. Robertson & H. H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Handbook of consumer behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  54. Gefen, D., & Keil, M. (1998). The impact of developer responsiveness on perceptions of usefulness and ease of use: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 29(2), 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Gerrity, T. P., Jr. (1971). Design of man–machine decision systems: An application to portfolio management. Sloan Management Review, 12(2), 59–75.Google Scholar
  56. Gorry, G. A., & Morton, M. S. (1971). A framework for management information systems. Sloan Management Review, 13(1), 55–70.Google Scholar
  57. Greenbaum, J., & Kyng, M. (Eds.). (1991). Design at work: Cooperative design of computer systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  58. Guimaraes, T., Igbaria, M., & Lu, M.-T. (1992). The determinants of DSS success: An integrated model. Decision Sciences, 23(2), 409–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Halprin, S., Johnson, E., & Thornburry, J. (1973). Cognitive reliability in manned systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 22, 165–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hanowski, R. J., Kantowitz, S. C., & Kantowitz, B. H. (1994). Driver acceptance of unreliable route guidance information. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 381 h Annual Meeting (pp. 1062–1066.Google Scholar
  61. Hardgrave, B. C., & Johnson, R. A. (2003). Toward an information systems development acceptance model: the case of object-oriented systems development. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(3), 322–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science, 40(4), 440–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Hawk, S. R., & Dos Santos, B. L. (1991). Successful system development: The effect of situational factors on alternate user roles. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 38(4), 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ho, G., Kiff, L. M., Plocher, T., & Haigh, K. Z. (2005). A model of trust and reliance of automation technology for older users. AAAI Fall Symposium on Caring Machines, November 2005, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  65. Hoc, J.-M. (2001). Towards a cognitive approach to human-machine cooperation in dynamic situations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 509–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Hodgson, L., & Aiken, P., (1998). Organizational change enabled by the mandated implementation of new information systems technology: A modified technology acceptance model. Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGCPR conference on Computer personnel research. Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  67. Hogue, J. T., & Watson, H. J. (1983). Management’s Role in the Approval and Administration of Decision Support Systems. MIS Quaterly, 7(2), 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Honaker, L. M., Hector, V. S., & Harrell, T. H. (1986). Perceived validity of computer versus clinician-generated MMPI reports. Computers in Human Behavior, 2, 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Hubona, G. S., & Kennick, E. (1996). The Influence of External Variables on Information Technology Usage Behavior. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences Google Scholar
  70. Hunton, J. E., & Beeler, J. D. (1997). Effects of user participation in systems development: A longitudinal field experiment. MIS Quarterly, 21(4), 359–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Hwang, M. I., & Thorn, R. G. (1999). The effect of user engagement on system success: A meta-analytical integration of research findings. Information & Management, 35, 229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Igbaria, M., & Guimaraes, T. (1994). Empirically testing the outcomes of user involvement in DSS development. Omega, 22(2), 157–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Igbaria, M., & Iivari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. International Journal of Management Science, 23(6), 587–605.Google Scholar
  74. Igbaria, M., & Tan, M. (1997). The consequences of information technology acceptance on subsequent individual performance. Information & Management, 32, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984). User involvement and MIS success: A review of research. Management Science, 30(5), 586–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Jacko, J. A., & Sears, A. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook for human computer interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  77. Jackson, C. M., Chow, S., & Leitch, R. A. (1997). Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use an information system. Decision Sciences, 28(2), 357–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Johnson, J. D., Sanchez, J., Fisk, A. D., & Rogers, W. A. (2004). Type of automation failure: The effects on trust and reliance in automation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Google Scholar
  79. Kantowitz, B. H., Hanowski, R. J., & Kantowitz, S. C. (1997). Driver acceptance of unreliable traffic information in familiar and unfamiliar settings. Human Factors, 39(2), 164–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Kappelman, L. A. (1995). Measuring user involvement: A diffusion of innovation perspective. ACM SIGMIS Database, 26(2–3), 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (1999). The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Information & Management, 35, 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Karwowski, W. (Ed.). (2006). International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors. Boca Roton, FL: CRC.Google Scholar
  83. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  84. Keen, P., & Morton, M. S. (1978). Decision support systems: An organizational perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  85. Kensing, F. (2003). Methods and practices in participatory design. Copenhagen, Denmark: ITU.Google Scholar
  86. Kerr, R. M. (1992). Expert systems in production scheduling: Lessons from a failed implementation. Journal of Systems Software, 19, 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Kidwell, B., & Jewell, R. D. (2003). An examination of perceived behavioral control: Internal and external influences on intention. Psychology & Marketing, 20(7), 625–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Kim, C., Suh, K., & Lee, J. (1998). Utilization and user satisfaction in end-user computing: A task contingent model. Information Resources Management Journal, 11(4), 11–24.Google Scholar
  89. Kleingeld, A., van Tuijl, H., & Algera, J. A. (2004). Participation in the design of performance management systems: a quasi-experimental field study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(7), 831–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Kleintop, W. A., Blau, G., & Currall, S. C. (1994). Practice makes use: using information technologies before implementation and the effect on acceptance by end users. Proceedings of the 1994 Computer Personnel Research Conference on Reinventing IS: Managing Information Technology in Changing Organizations. ACM: New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  91. Klopping, I. M., & McKinney, E. (2004). Extending the technology acceptance model and the task-technology fit model to consumer E-COMMERCE. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 22(1), 35–48.Google Scholar
  92. LaForge, R. L., & Craighead, C. W. (2000). Computer-Based Scheduling in Manufacturing Firms: Some Indicators of Successful Practice. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 41(1), 29–34.Google Scholar
  93. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328.Google Scholar
  94. Landy, F. J., & Conte, J. M. (2007). Work in the 21st century: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  95. Lawrence, M., Goodwin, P., & Fildes, R. (2002). Influence of user participation on DSS use and decision accuracy. Omega, 30, 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Lee, J. (1991). The dynamics of trust in a supervisory control simulation. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 3Sh Annual Meeting (pp. 1228–1232).Google Scholar
  97. Lee, J., & Moray, N. (1992). Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1243–1270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Lee, J. D., & Moray, N. (1994). Trust, self-confidence, and operators' adaptation to automation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40(1), 153–184.Google Scholar
  99. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50–80.Google Scholar
  100. Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40, 191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Lerch, F. J., & Prietula, M. J. (1989). How do we trust machine advice? Designing and using human-computer interfaces and knowledge based systems. Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference on Human Computer Interaction (pp. 411–419). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  102. Lewandowsky, S., Mundy, M., & Tan, G. P. A. (2000). The dynamics of trust: Comparing humans to automation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 6(2), 104–123.Google Scholar
  103. Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 114–139). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Lin, W. T., & Shao, B. B. M. (2000). The relationship between user participation and system success: A simultaneous contingency approach. Information & Management, 37(6), 283–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Liu, Y., Fuld, R., & Wickens, C. D. (1993). Monitoring behavior in manual and automated scheduling systems. International Journal of Man-machine Studies, 39(6), 1015–1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power: Two works by Niklas Luhmann. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  107. Ma, Q., & Liu, L. (2004). The technology acceptance model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 16(1), 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Madhavan, P., & Wiegmann, D. A. (2004). A new look at the dynamics of human-automation trust: is trust in humans comparable to trust in machines? Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Google Scholar
  109. Mathieson, K., Peacock, E., & Chin, W. W. (2001). Extending the technology acceptance model: The influence of perceived user resources. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 32(3), 86–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.Google Scholar
  111. McHaney, R., & Cronan, T. P. (2001). A comparison of surrogate success measures in on-going representational decision support systems: An extension to simulation technology. Journal of End User Computing, 13(2), 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. McKay, K. N., & Black, G. W. (2007). The evolution of a production planning system: A 10-year case study. Computers in Industry, 58, 756–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. McKay, K. N., & Buzacott, J. A. (2000). The application of computerized production control systems in job shop environments. Computers in Industry, 42, 79–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. McKeen, J. D., Guimaraes, T., & Wetherbe, J. C. (1994). The relationship between user participation and user satisfaction: An Investigation of four contingency factors. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 427–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. McNurlin, B. C., & Sprague, R. H., Jr. (2002). Information systems management in practice (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.Google Scholar
  116. Metzger, U., & Parasuraman, R. (2001). The role of the air traffic controller in future air traffic management: An empirical study of active control versus passive monitoring. Human Factors, 43, 519–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Miller, C. A., Funk, H. B., Goldman, R. P., Meisner, J., & Wu, P. (2005). Implications of adaptive vs. adaptable UIs on decision making: Why “automated adaptiveness” is not always the right answer. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Augmented Cognition. Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  118. Miller, C. A., & Larson, R. (1992). An explanatory and “argumentative” interface for a model-based diagnostic system. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (pp. 43–52).Google Scholar
  119. Mitroff, I. I., & Linstone, H. A. (1993). The unbonded mind breaking the chains of traditional business thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  120. Morris, S. A., & Marshall, T. E. (2004). Perceived control in information systems. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 16(2), 38–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Muir, B. M. (1987). Trust between humans and machines. International Journal of Man–Machine Studies, 27, 327–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Muir, B. M. (1988). Trust between humans and machines, and the design of decision aids. In E. Hollnagel, G. Mancini, & D. D. Woods (Eds.), Cognitive engineering in complex dynamic worlds (pp. 71–84). London: Academic.Google Scholar
  123. Muir, B. M. (1989). Operators’ trust in and use of automatic controllers in a supervisory process control task. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  124. Muir, B. M. (1994). Trust in Automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics, 37(11), 1905–1922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Muir, B. M., & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in automation: 2. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 39, 429–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Muller, M. J. (2007). Participatory design: The third space in HCI. In J. Jacko & A. Sears (Eds.), Handbook of HCI. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  127. Musselmann, K., & Uzgoy, R. (2001). Advanced planning and scheduling for manufacturing. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of industrial engineering (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  128. Nass, C., Fogg, B. J., & Moon, Y. (1996a). Can computers be teammates? International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 45, 669–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and Mindlessness: Social Responses to Computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81–103.Google Scholar
  130. Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., Reeves, B., & Dryer, D. C. (1995). Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 223–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Nass, C., Reeves, B., & Leshner, G. (1996b). Technology and roles: A tale of two TVs. Journal of Communication, 46(2), 121–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Ndubisi, N. O., Gupta, O. K., & Ndubisi, G. C. (2005). The Moguls’ model of computing: Integrating the moderating impact of users’ persona into the technology acceptance model. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 8(1), 27–47.Google Scholar
  133. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering, Academic Press, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  134. Palanisamy, R. (2001). User involvement and flexibility in strategic MIS planning: A path analytic study. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 2(4), 15–32.Google Scholar
  135. Pancer, S. M., George, M., & Gebotys, R. J. (1992). Understanding and predicting attitudes toward computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 8(2–3), 211–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Parasuraman, R. M., Molloy, R., & Singh, I. L. (1993). Performance consequences of automation induced ‘complacency’. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Pearson, J. M., & Shim, J. P. (1995). An empirical investigation into DSS structures and environments. Decision Support Systems, 13, 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Ramesh, R., & Sekar, G. C. (1988). An Integrated Framework for Decision Support in Corporate Planning. Decision Support Systems, 4, 365–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Rawstorne, P., Jayasuriya, R., & Caputi, P. (2000). Issues in predicting and explaining usage behaviors with the technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behavior when usage is mandatory. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 35–44). Atlanta, GA: Association for Information SystemsGoogle Scholar
  141. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation. How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  142. REFA. (1984). Methodenlehre des Arbeitsstudiums -Teil 1 – Grundlagen. München: Carl Hanser Verlag.Google Scholar
  143. Rempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(1), 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Rhodes, J. S. (1998). How to gain the trust of your users.
  145. Riley, V. (1994a). A theory of operator reliance on automation. In M. Mouloua & R. Parasuraman (Eds.), Human performance in automated systems: Recent research and trends (pp. 8–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  146. Riley, V. (1994b). Human use of automation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  147. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35, 651–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Rotter, J. B. (1980). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American Psychologist, 35(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Saade, R., & Bahli, B. (2005). The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 42, 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Saffer, D. (2006). Designing for interaction. New Riders.Google Scholar
  152. Sage, A. P. (2001). Decision support systems. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of industrial engineering (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  153. Sanchez, J., Fisk, A. D., & Rogers W. A. (2004). Age-related and reliability related effects on trust of a decision support aid. Presented at the 2004 Human Performance, Situation Awareness and Automation Technology Conference. Daytona Beach, FL.Google Scholar
  154. Saxena, K. B. C. (1991). Decision support engineering: A DSS development methodology. Kowloon, Hong Kong: Department of Computing, Hong Kong Polytechnic Hung Hom.Google Scholar
  155. Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  156. Self, C. S. (1996). Credibility. In M. Salwen & D. Stacks (Eds.), An integrated approach to communication theory and research. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  157. Sharp, H., Rogers, Y., & Preece, J. (Eds.). (2002). Interaction design – beyond human–computer interaction. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  158. Shim, J. P., Warkentin, M., Courtney, J. F., Power, D. J., Sharda, R., & Carlsson, C. (2002). Past, present, and future of decision support technology. Decision Support Systems, 33, 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Simon, H. A. (1960). The new science of management decision. New York: Harper Brothers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Sprague, R. H., Jr., & Carlson, E. D. (1982). Building effective decision support systems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  161. Stadler, H., & Kilger, C. (2000). Supply chain management and advanced planning – concepts, models, software and case studies. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  162. Straub, D., Keil, M., & Brenner, W. (1997). Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A three country study. Information & Management, 33, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Strohm, O. (1996). Produktionsplanung und –steuerung im Industrieunternehmen aus arbeitspsychologischer Sicht Arbeits- versus technikorientierte Gestaltungskonzepte, vdf Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH ZürichGoogle Scholar
  164. Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. (2000). Source orientation in human-computer interaction. Communication Research, 27(6), 683–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Szajna, B. (1994). Software evaluation and choice: Predictive validation of the technology acceptance instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(3), 319–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1), 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Tait, P., & Vessey, I. (1988). The effect of user involvement on system success: A contingency approach. MIS Quarterly, 12(1), 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 561–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Tsubone, H., Matsuura, H., & Kimura, K. (1995). Decision support system for production planning – concept and prototype. Decision Support Systems, 13, 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Turban, E. (1995). Decision support and expert systems: management support systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  171. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Venkatesh, V., Speier, C., & Morris, M. G. (2002). User acceptance enablers in individual decision making about technology: Toward an integrated model. Decision Sciences, 33(2), 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Waern, Y., & Ramberg, R. (1996). People’s perception of human and computer advice. Computers in Human Behavior, 12(l), 17–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Wiegmann, D., Rich, A., & Zhang, H. (2001). Automated diagnostic aids: the effects of aid reliability on users’ trust and reliance. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2(4), 352–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Xie, H. (2003). Supporting ease-of-use and user control: desired features and structure of Web-based online IR systems. Information Processing and Management, 39, 899–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Xu, X., Wickens, C. D., & Rantanen, E. (2004). Imperfect conflict alerting systems for the cockpit display of traffic information (Technical Report AHFD-04-8/NASA-04-02). Savoy, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Institute of Aviation, Aviation Human Factors Division.Google Scholar
  179. Yin, R.W. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  180. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and Thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. Zoryk-Schalla, A. J., Fransoo, J. C., & de Kok, T.G. (2004). Modeling the planning process in Advanced Planning Systems. Information and Management, 42, 75–87.Google Scholar
  182. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of smart machines: The future of work technology and power. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ralph Riedel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jan Fransoo
    • 2
  • Vincent Wiers
    • 2
  • Katrin Fischer
    • 3
  • Julien Cegarra
    • 4
  • David Jentsch
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Factory Planning and Factory ManagementChemnitz University of TechnologyChemnitzGermany
  2. 2.School of Industrial EngineeringEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.School of Applied PsychologyUniversity of Applied Sciences Northwestern SwitzerlandOltenSwitzerland
  4. 4.Université de ToulouseToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations