Advertisement

Human-Centric Cognitive Decision Support System for Ill-Structured Problems

  • Tasneem MemonEmail author
  • Jie Lu
  • Farookh Khadeer Hussain
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 502)

Abstract

The solutions to ill-structured decision problems greatly rely upon the intuition and cognitive abilities of a decision maker because of the vague nature of such problems. To provide decision support for these problems, a decision support system (DSS) must be able to support a user’s cognitive abilities, as well as facilitate seamless communication of knowledge and cognition between itself and the user. This study develops a cognitive decision support system (CDSS) based on human-centric semantic de-biased associations (SDA) model to improve ill-structured decision support. The SDA model improves ill-structured decision support by refining a user’s cognition through reducing or eliminating bias and providing the user with validated domain knowledge. The use of semantics in the SDA model facilitates the natural representation of the user’s cognition, thus making the transfer of knowledge/cognition between the user and system a natural and effortless process. The potential of semantically defined cognition for effective ill-structured decision support is discussed from a human-centric perspective. The effectiveness of the approach is demonstrated with a case study in the domain of sales.

Keywords

Decision Maker Mental Model Decision Problem Decision Support System Natural Language Processing 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    AdventureWorks Database’ 2005, AdventureWorks Database, Microsoft (2011) http://msftdbprodsamples.codeplex.com/
  2. 2.
    Alter, S.L.: Decision Support Systems: Current Practice and Continuing Challange, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley, Mass (1980)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ariely, D.: Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions, 1st edn. HarperCollins, Canada (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arnott, D.: A Taxonomy of Decision Biases (Technical report. No. 2002/01) Decision support systems laboratory. Monash University, School lof Information Management and Systems, Melbourne (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barnes, J.H.: Cognitive biases and their impact on strategic planning. Strateg. Manage. J. 5(2), 129–137 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhandari, G., Hassanein, K., Deaves, R.: Debiasing investors with decision support systems: an experimental investigation. Decis. Support Syst. 46(1), 399–410 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chandrasekaran, B.: Designing decision support systems to help avoid biases and make robust decisions, with examples from army planning. Paper presented to the proceedings of army science conference 2008Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, J.Q., Lee, S.M.: An exploratory cognitive DSS for strategic decision making. Decis. Support Syst. 36(2), 147–160 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Craik, K.: The Nature of Explanation, 1st updated edition edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1943)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Croskerry, P.: Achieving quality in clinical decision making: cognitive strategies and detection of bias. Acad. Emer. Med. 9(11), 1184–1204 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Das, T.K., Teng, B.S.: Cognitive biases and strategic decision processes: an integrative perspective. J. Manage. Stud. 36(6), 757–778 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Feldman, S.: NLP meets the jabberwocky: natural language processing in information (1999) Retrieval, http://www.scism.lsbu.ac.uk/inmandw/ir/jaberwocky.htm
  13. 13.
    Ferguson, R.L., Jones, C.H.: A computer aided decision system. Manage. Sci. 15(10), 550–562 (1969)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fujita, H., Hakura, J., Kurematsu, M.: Virtual doctor system (VDS): medical decision reasoning based on physical and mental ontologies. Paper presented to the proceedings of the 23rd international conference on industrial engineering and other applications of applied intelligent systems—Volume Part III. Cordoba, Spain, 2010Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gorini, A., Pravettoni, G.: An overview on cognitive aspects implicated in medical decisions. European J. Intern. Med. 22(6), 547–553 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Greeno, J.G.: Natures of problem-solving abilities. In: Handbook of Learning and Cognitive Processes: V, pp. 239–270. Human information, Lawrence Erlbaum, Oxford (1978)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grief, I.: Computer-supported cooperative work: A book of readings, vol. 1, 1st edn. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Mateo (1988)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hicks, E.P., Kluemper, G.T.: Heuristic reasoning and cognitive biases. Am. J. Orthod. and Dentofac. Orthop. 139(3), 297–304 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hilbert, M.: Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: how noisy information processing can bias human decision making. Psychol. Bull. 138, 211–237 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hodgkinson, G.P., Bown, N.J., Maule, A.J., Glaister, K.W., Pearman, A.D.: Breaking the frame: an analysis of strategic cognition and decision making under uncertainty. Strateg. Manage. J. 20(10), 977–985 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Janser, M.J.: Army War College. Senior Service College Fellowship, P., Center for, S. and International, S: Cognitive biases in military decision making. Army War College, U.S. (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Johnson-Laird, P.: The history of mental models. In: Manktelow, K., Chung, M.C. (eds.) Psychology of Reasoning: Theoretical And Historical Perspectives, p. 382. Psychology Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson-Laird, P.N.: Mental models: Towards a Cognitive Science of language, inference, and Consciousness. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1983)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kahneman, D., Lovallo, D., Sibony, O.: The big idea: before you make that big decision. Harvard Bus. Rev. 89, 50–60 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cogn. Psychol. 3(3), 430–454 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Korte, R.F.: Biases in decision making and implications for human resource development. Adv. Develop. Hum. Resources 5(4), 440–457 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Krause, T.R., Hidley, J.H.: Protecting your decision making from cognitive bias. In: Taking the Lead in Patient Safety, pp. 149–176. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liddy, E.D.: Enhanced text retrieval using natural language processing. Bull. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 24(4), 14–16 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lucas, H.C.: Computer-Based Information Systems in Organization. Science Research Associates, Chicago (1973)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lucchiari, C., Pravettoni, G.: Cognitive balanced model: a conceptual scheme of diagnostic decision making. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 18(1), 82–88 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maqsood, T., Finegan, A.D., Walker, D.H.T.: Biases and heuristics in judgment and decision making: the dark side of tacit knowledge. Issues Inform. Sci. Inform. Technol. 1, 295–301 (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Memon, T., Lu, J., Hussain, F. K.: Semantic de-biased associations (SDA) model to improve ill-structured decision support. In: Huang, T., Zeng, Z., Li, C., Leung, C. (eds.), Neural Information Processing. Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 7664, Springer berlin heidelberg, 483–490 (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mintzberg, H.: The Nature of Managerial Work. Harper and Row, New York (1973)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nemati, H.R., Steiger, D.M., Iyer, L.S., Herschel, R.T.: Knowledge warehouse: an architectural integration of knowledge management, decision support, artificial intelligence and data warehousing. Decis. Support Syst. 33, 143–161 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Niu, L., Lu, J., Zhang, G.: Cognition-driven decision support for business intelligence, SpringerLink, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nonaka, I.: The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Bus. Rev. 69, 96–104 (1991)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pedrycz, W., Gomide, F.: Fuzzy Systems Engineering: Towards human-centric computing, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., United states (2007)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pervan, G., Arnott, D., Dodson, G.: Trends in the study of group support systems, In: Proceedings of Group Decision and Negotiation 2005. INFORMS/University of Vienna, Vienna, 2005Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Power, D.J.: A Brief History of Decision Support Systems. DSS, DSSResources.com, viewed Oct 2, 2009 http://dss.cba.uni.edu/dss/dsshistory.html (1999). Version 2.8, 31 May 2003
  40. 40.
    Power, D.J.: Decision support systems: A historical overview. In: Handbook on Decision Support Systems 1, vol. 1. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rentsch, J.R., Hall, R.J.: Members of great teams think alike: A model of team effectiveness and schema similarity among team members. In: Beyerlein, M.M., Johnson, D.A. (eds.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams: Theories of self-managing work teams, vol. 1, Elsevier Science/JAI Press, (1994)pp. 223–261.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rentsch, J.R., Klimoski, R.J.: Why do ‘great minds’ think alike?: antecedents of team member schema agreement. J. Organ. Beh. 22(2), 107–120 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schwenk, C.R.: The cognitive perspective on strategic decision making. J. Manage. Stud. 25(1), 41–55 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Scottmorton, M.S.: Management Decision Systems—Computer-Based Support for Decision Making—Morton, MSS. Sloan Manage. Rev. 12(3), 103–104 (1971)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Simon, H.A.: The structure of ill structured problems. Artif. Intell. 4(3–4), 181–201 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Simon, H.A.: Information-processing theory of human problem solving. In: Estes, W.K. (ed.) Handbook of Learning and cognitive Process, p. 318. Lawrence Erlbaum, HIllsdale (1978)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Simon, H.A., Newell, A.: Heuristic problem solving: the next advance in operations research. Oper. Res. 6(1), 1 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Swanson, E.B., Culnan, M.J.: Document-based systems for management planing and control: a classification, survey, and assessment. MIS Q. 2(4), 31–46 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157), 1124–1131 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481), 453–458 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ubel, P.A., Smith, D.M., Zikmund-Fisher, B.J., Derry, H.A., McClure, J., Stark, A., Wiese, C., Greene, S., Jankovic, A., Fagerlin, A.: Testing whether decision aids introduce cognitive biases: results of a randomized trial. Patient Educ. Couns. 80(2), 158–163 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Vosniadou, S.: Mental models in conceptual development. In: Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. (eds.) Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values. Springer, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yadav, S.B., Khazanchi, D.: Subjective understanding in strategic decision making: an information systems perspective. Decis. Support Syst. 8(1), 55–71 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tasneem Memon
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jie Lu
    • 1
  • Farookh Khadeer Hussain
    • 1
  1. 1.The Decision Systems and e-Service Intelligence (DeSI) Laboratory, The Centre for Quantum Computation and Intelligent Systems (QCIS), School of Software, Faculty of Engineering and Information TechnologyUniversity of TechnologySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations