Archiveros

Studies on decision-making input often examme the nature and impact of vanous characteristics of the information set (such as type of information or method of presentation) on decision-making (Libby and Lewis, 1 977). The primary concern with input is the source and form of information to be supplied to decision-makers. Information can be sourced externally and/or internally (self) and applied to the decision-making process4• The nature of the task and the environment in which the decision-making takes place determine the extent to which external and/or internally sourced information is used (Vessey 1 99 1 ; Roberts, 2002). Further, the decision-makers' own personal characteristics also determine the extent to which these inputs are used (Sabherwal and Grover, 1 989; Bamber, 1 993;

Brown and Eining, 1 996). .\

3 Information acquisition refers to decision-makers' acquisition of information. Information evaluation refers to whether decision-makers evaluate information. Information weighting refers to whether decision-makers provide weighting to the information. Information judging refers to decision-makers judgment or decision made.

4 In the context of this study, external information means information that evolves around the decision-makers whereas self information means existing information within the decision-makers obtained from prior

2.3. 1 External Information

A commonly held objective of accounting is to supply information that is useful to decision-makers (Ahadiat, 1993). Improving the information set or increasing decision­ makers' abilities to use that information could enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of decision outcomes (Libby and Lewis, 1977; 1 981). Much research has examined the effect of external information on decision-making (for example; Chandra, 1974; Benjamin and Stanga, 1977; Firth, 1978; McNally et aI., 1 982; Rahrnan, 1999; Yatim and Omar, 2001 ; and Sabeni et al., 2002). Most of the findings support the idea that the quantity and quality of the information being inputted are factors that influence decision-making (Cloyd, 1995; Roberts, 2002). Although decision-makers have little control over the content of the information they are provided with, they do have control over the selection and integration of that information (Roberts, 2002). However, and arguably, increasing the quantity of information would increase the demands of selecting and integrating relevant information and decrease decision-making performance (Hwang and Lin, 1999).

The way in which information is presented has also been found to influence decision­ making performance (DeSanctis and Jarvenpaa, 1989; Davis et al., 1989; Iselin, 1989; Hard and Vanecek, 1991; Stone and Schkade, 1991; Ramarapu et al., 1997; Frownfelter-Lohrke, 1998; Dull et aI., 2003). Some presentation formats allow decision-making performance to improve when compared to other formats (for example; tabular versus graphical). However, the existing literature largely derives from an information systems perspective. Although some literature does include studies from an accounting perspective, these studies were conducted in a traditional reporting environment and have not considered the impact of a more recent form of reporting in a digital environment. Additionally, the literature has mainly examined the success of presentation formats in terms of their effectiveness on decision-makers' performance. However, the success of presentation formats also depends on other input factors, such as the decision-maker's perceptions (Davis, 1989).

2.3.2 Self Information

Unlike external information, decision-makers have considerable control over their predetermined views and the organisation of their perceptions. Decision-makers generally choose information based on their perceptions of the importance of the information item (Sabeni et al., 2002). They also generally choose a course of action based on their perceptions of the impact of selecting the action (Beach and Mitchell, 1 978; Abelson and Levi, 1 985; Davis, 1 989; Adams et al.,. 1 992), and these perceptions are constructed from the decision-makers' prior experiences and gained knowledge. When the knowledge of an object is limited or different between decision-makers, their perceptions of the object may cloud any recognition of the object's potential benefits. Decision-makers' perceptions also determine whether one strategy or technology will be adopted, although the strategy or technology may provide a different outcome than that of their perceived expectations (Kleinmuntz and Schkade, 1 993). When there is a mismatch between perception and actual outcome, performance improvement may not be achieved. Thus, the importance of perception in decision-making is evident.

Decision-makers may often rely on perceptions in decision-making despite the availability of external information. Overconfidence, the state of mood, inadequate knowledge, as well as time pressure may cause decision-makers to forego an additional search of related knowledge (Payne, 1 976; Russo and Dosher, 1 983; Payne et aI., 1 988) and rely solely on existing knowledge which may be inaccurate. Because of the general overconfidence of decision-makers in their often inaccurate or out-of-date perceptions (Ebbeson and Konechi, 1 980), perception becomes a primary input factor to decision-making. When perceptions are an input factor to decision-making, bias in these perceptions can affect the decision­ making process and the output in less effective ways.

Inaccuracies or biases in perceptions may exist for several reasons. Poor knowledge could introduce and intensify inaccuracy and bias in perceptions (Ebbeson and Konechi, 1 980).

Another potential source of bias is the use of affective responses to data. Affective responses refer to a person's affective reactions or "moods" created by a set of data, rather

than pre-existing states of mind that are brought to the decision domain (Kida and Smith, 1995). Brainerd and Reyna (1993) argue that decision-makers have the natural cognitive habit of using affective responses because of its ease of processing. This is because decision-makers are cognitive misers (Simon, 1956) tending to find alternatives that would reduce their cognitive effort (Hull and and Kleinmuntz, 1994). Hence, decision-makers' perceptions tend to be derived by relying on summary evaluations.