IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v145y2003i3p693-712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An investigation of changes in attitude over time of GDSS groups under unanimity and majority decision rules

Author

Listed:
  • Marsden, James R.
  • Mathiyalakan, Sathasivam

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Marsden, James R. & Mathiyalakan, Sathasivam, 2003. "An investigation of changes in attitude over time of GDSS groups under unanimity and majority decision rules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 693-712, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:145:y:2003:i:3:p:693-712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(02)00224-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parks, Craig D. & Cowlin, Rebecca, 1995. "Group Discussion as Affected by Number of Alternatives and by a Time Limit," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 267-275, June.
    2. William J. Doll & Gholamreza Torkzadeh, 1989. "A Discrepancy Model of End-User Computing Involvement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(10), pages 1151-1171, October.
    3. Ashton, Rh & Kramer, Ss, 1980. "Students As Surrogates In Behavioral Accounting Research - Some Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15.
    4. Smith, Vernon L, 1976. "Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 274-279, May.
    5. Kiesler, Sara & Sproull, Lee, 1992. "Group decision making and communication technology," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 96-123, June.
    6. V. Sambamurthy & Marshall Scott Poole, 1992. "The Effects of Variations in Capabilities of GDSS Designs on Management of Cognitive Conflict in Groups," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 224-251, September.
    7. Smith, Vernon L, 1982. "Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 923-955, December.
    8. Kieran Mathieson, 1991. "Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 173-191, September.
    9. Robert Anson & Robert Bostrom & Bayard Wynne, 1995. "An Experiment Assessing Group Support System and Facilitator Effects on Meeting Outcomes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 189-208, February.
    10. Arunachalam, Vairam & Dilla, William N., 1995. "Judgment Accuracy and Outcomes in Negotiation: A Causal Modeling Analysis of Decision-Aiding Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 289-304, March.
    11. Gerke, Wolfgang & Arneth, Stefan & Syha, Christine, 2000. "The impact of the order book privilege on traders' behavior and the market process: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 167-189, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic characterization of different majority concepts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(1), pages 160-173, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karola Bastini & Rainer Kasperzak, 2013. "Erkenntnisfortschritt in der Rechnungslegung durch experimentelle Forschung? — Diskussion methodischer Grundsatzfragen anhand der Entscheidungsnützlichkeit des Performance Reporting," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 65(7), pages 622-660, December.
    2. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Incentives," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2018-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    3. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    4. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Smyth, Andrew, 2018. "Testing the boundaries of the double auction: The effects of complete information and market power," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 372-396.
    5. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    6. Veszteg, Róbert F. & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2018. "Monetary payoffs and utility in laboratory experiments," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 108-121.
    7. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    8. Gruner, Sven & Lehberger, Mira & Hirschauer, Norbert & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2022. "How (un)informative are experiments with students for other social groups? A study of agricultural students and farmers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(03), January.
    9. Steven Gjerstad, 2013. "Price dynamics in an exchange economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(2), pages 461-500, March.
    10. Deck, Cary A. & Thomas, Charles J., 2020. "Using experiments to compare the predictive power of models of multilateral negotiations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Jan A. Kempkes & Francesco Suprano & Andreas Wömpener, 2024. "How management support systems affect job performance: a systematic literature review and research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 2013-2086, December.
    12. Andrea Morone & Francesco Nemore & Simone Nuzzo, 2018. "Experimental evidence on tax salience and tax incidence," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(4), pages 582-612, August.
    13. Flåm, S.D. & Godal, O., 2008. "Market clearing and price formation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 956-977, March.
    14. Fehr, Ernst & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Riedl, Arno, 1998. "Gift exchange and reciprocity in competitive experimental markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-34, January.
    15. Andreas Ortmann, 2009. ""The Way in which an Experiment is Conducted is Unbelievably Important": On the Experimentation Practices of Economists and Psychologists," CESifo Working Paper Series 2887, CESifo.
    16. Hellerstein, Daniel & Higgins, Nathaniel & Roberts, Michael, 2015. "Options for Improving Conservation Programs: Insights From Auction Theory and Economic Experiments," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, issue 01, pages 1-1, February.
    17. Dorian Jullien & Nicolas Vallois, 2014. "A probabilistic ghost in the experimental machine," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 232-250, September.
    18. Jan Hanousek & Evžen Kočenda, 2011. "Learning by investing," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 19(1), pages 125-149, January.
    19. Rydval, Ondrej & Ortmann, Andreas, 2004. "How financial incentives and cognitive abilities affect task performance in laboratory settings: an illustration," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 315-320, December.
    20. Navarro, Noemí & Veszteg, Róbert F., 2020. "On the empirical validity of axioms in unstructured bargaining," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-145.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:145:y:2003:i:3:p:693-712. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.