This research investigated how the use of a spatial decision support system (SDSS)—a type of geographic information system (GIS)—influenced the accuracy and efficiency of different types of problem solvers (i.e., professionals versus students) completing problems of varied complexity. This research—the first to simultaneously study these variables—examined subjects who completed a problem involving spatially-referenced information The experiment was guided by a research model synthesized from various perspectives, including the theory of cognitive fit, prior research on map reading and interpretation, and research examining subject expertise and experience. The results are largely supportive of the research model and demonstrate that SDSS, an increasingly important class of management decision-making technology, increased the efficiency of users working on more complex problems. Professionals were found to be more accurate but less efficient than students: however, professionals who used the SDSS were no more accurate than professionals using paper maps. Need for cognition, a construct that focuses on an individual's willingness to engage in problem solving tasks, was found to be marginally related to accuracy. The implications of these findings for researchers and practitioners are presented and discussed.
Researchers have proposed that the contradictions observed between past group support system (GSS) laboratory and field research may be partially accounted for by the ad-hoc nature of the groups that are often used in the laboratory. To examine this, a laboratory experiment examining the influence of group history (i.e., established versus ad-hoc groups) and the level of computer support (i.e., communicating via a computer-mediated system versus face-to-face) was conducted. Dependent variables examined in the research include information-sharing performance, decision quality, and member perceptions. Subjects completed a hidden profile task--a task where some information is held by all group members prior to the meeting, while other information is held only by a subset of the group. As expected, established groups discussed less unique information than ad-hoc groups. In addition, information sharing was positively related to the quality of group decisions. Members of established groups were more satisfied than members of ad-hoc groups; members using the computer-mediated system were less satisfied than those communicating face-to-face. In addition, group cohesion was positively related to satisfaction and decision quality. The results are discussed in the context of prior theory and research. Opportunities for future research are also described.