Graphics and managerial decision making: research-based guidelines

ABSTRACT

Graphical charts are generally thought to be a superior reporting technique compared to more traditional tabular representations in organizational decision making. The experimental literature, however, demonstrates only partial support for this hypothesis. To identify the characteristics of the situations that have been shown to benefit from the use of graphics, existing studies are reviewed in terms of the type of task used, the format employed, and the user experience. The examination of the literature reveals a set of empirically based—though preliminary—guidelines as to when and how to use business graphics.

REFERENCES

• 1: Benbasat, I., and Dexter, A.S. An experimental evaluation of graphical and color-enhanced information presentation. Mgmt. Sci. 31, 11 (Nov. 1985), 1348-1364.
• 2: Benbasat, I., and Dexter, A.S. An investigation of the effectiveness of color and graphical information presentation under varying time constraints. MIS Qrtly 10, 1 (March 1986), 59-83.
• 3: Izak Benbasat , Albert S. Dexter , Peter Todd, An experimental program investigating color-enhanced and graphical information presentation: an integration of the findings, Communications of the ACM, v.29 n.11, p.1094-1105, Nov. 1986 [doi>10.1145/7538.7545]
• 4: Isak Benbasat , Albert S. Dexter , Peter Todd, The Influence of Color-Enhanced and Graphical Information Presentation in Decision Making, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, v.19 n.1, p.73, July 1987
• 5: Benbasat, I., and Schroeder, R.G. An experimental investigation of some MIS design variables. MIS Qrtly./, 1 (March 1977), 37-49.
• 6: Blake, G. Graphics shorthand as an aid to managers. Harvard Bus. Rev. 56, 2 (March-April 1978), 6-12.
• 7: Brown, M.D. Mainframe business graphics. Datamat. 30, 6 (May 1, 1984), 89-95.
• 8: Carter. L.F. An experiment of the design of tables and graphs used for presenting numerical data. J. of Applied Psyc. 31, 6 (1947), 640- 650.
• 9: Carter, L.F. "Relative effectiveness of presenting numerical data by the use of tables and graphs," U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Washington, D.C., 1948.
• 10: Chambers, J.M., Cleveland, W.S., Kleiner, B., and Turkey, P.A. Graphical Methods for Data Analysis. Wadsworth International Group, Belmont, Calif., 1983.
• 11: Cleveland, W.S., and McGill, R. Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. J. of the Am. Stat. Assoc. 79, 387 {Sept. 1984), 531-554.
• 12: Croxton, F.E. Further studies in the graphic use c)f circles and bars. J. of Am. Slat. Assoc. 22, 157 {March, 1927), 36-39.
• 13: Croxton, F.E., and Stein, H. Graphical comparison by bars, squares, circles, and cubes. J. of the Am. Slat. Assoc. 27, 177 (March, I932), 54-60.
• 14: Croxton, F.E., and Stryker, R.E. Bar charts versus circle diagrams. of the Am. Slat. Assoc. 22, 160 (Dec. 1927), 473-482.
• 15: Culbertson, H.M., and Powers, R.D. A study of graph comprehension difficulties. AV Comm. Review 7, 2 (Spring 1959), 97-100.
• 16: Donald Lamar Davis, An experimental investigation of the form of information presentation, psychological type of the user, and performance within the context of a management information system, 1981
• 17: Davis, D.L., and Elnicki, R.A. User cognitive types for decision support systems. OMEGA Int. J. Mgmt. Sci. 12, 6 (1984), 601-614.
• 18: DeSanctis, G. Computer graphics as decision aids: Direction for research. Dec. Sci. 15, 4 (Fall 1984), 463-487.
• 19: DeSanctis, G., and Dickson, G.W. Computer graphics as decision support tools for data interpretation and trend spotting. In Proceedings of the I Sth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Science, 1985, 557-562.
• 20: DeSanctis, G., and Jarvenpaa, S.L. An investigation of the 'tables versus graphs' controversy in a learning environment. Gallegos. L., Welke, R., and Wetherbe, J. (Eds.). In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Systems (Indianapolis, Ind., Dec. 16- 18, 1985), 134-144.
• 21: Gary W. Dickson , Gerardine DeSanctis , D. J. McBride, Understanding the effectiveness of computer graphics for decision support: a cumulative experimental approach, Communications of the ACM, v.29 n.1, p.40-47, Jan. 1986 [doi>10.1145/5465.5469]
• 22: Eells, W.C. The relative merits of circles and bars for representing component parts. J. of the Am. Star. Assoc. 21,154 (June 1926), 119- 132.
• 23: Einhorn, H.J., and Hogarth, R.H. Behavioral decision theory: Processes of judgment and choice. Ann. Rev. of Psyc. 32, 340 (1981), 53-88.
• 24: Feliciano, G.D., Powers, R.D., and Bryand, E.K. The presentation of statistical information. AV Comm. Review 11, 3 (May-June 1963), 32-39.
• 25: Firth, M. The impact of some MIS design variables on manager's evaluation of subordinates' performance. MIS Qrtly 4, 1 (March 1980), 45-53.
• 26: Friend, D. Can graphics raise executive productivity? Software News, Oct. 5, (1981), 20-24.
• 27: Gafner, M.K. Computer graphics: Looking sharp for the eighties. Adm. Mgmt. 42, 5 (May 1981), 29-56.
• 28: Garceau, L. "The Relationship of Cognitive Style and Usage Environment to Decision Making Performance, User Satisfaction and Information Preferences: A Contingency Model." Unpublished Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 1986.
• 29: Ghani, J.A. "The Effects on Information Representation and Modification on Decision Performance." Unpublished Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1981.
• 30: Ghani, J.A., and Lusk, E. Human information processing research: Its MlS-design consequences. Human Sys. Mgmt. 3, 1 (Spring 1982), 32-4O.
• 31: Graham, ).L. Illusory trends in the observations of bar graphs. J. of Exp. Psyc. 20, 6 (June 1937), 597-608.
• 32: Graphics hardware. Datamation 30, 3 (May 1984), 77.
• 33: Howell, W.C., and Burnett, S,A. Uncertainty measurement: A cognitive taxonomy. Org. Beh. and Human Perf. 22, 1 (Aug. 1978), 45-68.
• 34: Huber, G.P. Cognitive style as a basis for MIS and DSS designs: Much ado about nothing. Mgmt. Sci. 29, 5 (May 1983), 567-582.
• 35: Ives, B. Graphical user interfaces for business information systems. MIS Qrtly. Special Issue I982, (Dec. 1982), 211-224.
• 36: Jansen, R.L. Graphic indicators or operators. Harvard Bus. Rev. 58, 6 (Nov.-Dec. 1980), 164-170.
• 37: Jarvenpaa, S.L., and DeSanctis, G. An empirical investigation of the summarizing ability of graphics. Prec. of the Amer. Inst. for Decision Sci. I (Nov. 1985), 347-349.
• 38: Jarvenpaa, S.L., Dickson, G.W., and DeSanctis, G. Methodological issues in experimental IS research: Experiences and recommendations. MIS Qrtly. 9, 2 (June 1985), 141-156.
• 39: Johnson, J.R., Rice, R.R., and Roemmich, R.A. Pictures that lie: The abuse of graphs in annual reports. Mgmt. Acct. 62, 4 (Oct. 1980), 50-56.
• 40: Johnson, L.E., and Loucks, D.P. Interactive multiobjective planning using computer graphics. Comput. and Oper. Research 7, 1-2 (1980), 89-97.
• 41: John A Lehman , Doug Vogel , Gary Dickson, Business graphics trends, Datamation, v.30 n.19, p.119-122, Nov. 15, 1984
• 42: Lucas, H.C. An experimental investigation of the use of computerbased graphics in decision making. Mgmt. Sci. 27, 7 (July 1981). 757-768.
• 43: Lucas, H.C., and Nielsen, N.R. The impact of the mode of information presentation on learning and performance. Mgmt. Sci. 26, 10 (Oct. 1980), 982-993.
• 44: Lusk, E.J., and Kersnick, M. The effect of cognitive style and report format on task performance: The MIS design consequences. Mgmt. Sci. 22, 3 {Aug. 1979), 787-798.
• 45: James Martin, Design of Man-Computer Dialogues, Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 1990
• 46: Mason, R.O., and Mitroff, I.I. A program for research on management information systems. Mgmt. Sci. 19, 5 (Jan. 1973), 475-487.
• 47: Miller. I.M. Graphics in business descision making. Computer and Graphics 1, 4 (Aug. 1975), 293-296.
• 48: Allen Newell, Human Problem Solving, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1972
• 49: Paller, A. Outlook on computer graphics. Data Prec. Mgmt., Auerbach Publishers Inc., Pennsauken, New Jersey, (I983J, 1-10.
• 50: Paller, A., Szoka, K., and Nelson, N. Choosing the Right Chart. Integrated Software Systems Corporation, San Diego, Calif., 1981.
• 51: Powers, M., Lashley, C., Sanchez, P., and Shneiderman B. "An Experimental Comparison on Tabular and Graphic Data Presentation. Work. paper. University of Maryland, 1982.
• 52: Presnick, W.J. Helping managers see the trends. Adm. Mgmt. 41, 4 (Apr. 1980). 35-48.
• 53: Jan Stuart Prokop, An investigation of the effects of computer graphics on executive decision-making in an inventory control environment, 1969
• 54: Remus, W. An empirical investigation of the impact of graphical and tabular data presentations on decision making. Mgmt. Sci. 30, 5 (May 1984), 533-542.
• 55: Sage, A.P. Behavioral and organizational considerations in the design of information systems and processes for planning and decision support. IEEE Trans. on Sys., Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-11, 9 (Sept. 1981), 640-678.
• 56: Scannel, T. DP mapping remedies manager's tunnel vision. Computerworld 12, 33 (Aug. 1978}, 23.6.
• 57: Schmid, C.F., and Schmid. S.E. Handbook of Graphic Presentation. John Wiley, New York, 1979.
• 58: Schutz, H.G. An evaluation of formats for graphic trend displays. Human Factors 3, 2 (July 1961}, 99-107.
• 59: Schutz, H.G. An evaluation of methods for presentation of graphic multiple trends. Human Factors 3, 2 {July 1961), 108-119.
• 60: Scott Morton, M.S. Management Decision Systems: Computer Based Support for Decision Making. Dvision of Research, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1971.
• 61: Shostack, C., and Eddy, C. Management by computer graphics. Harvard Bus. Rev. 49, 6 (Nov.-Dec. 1971), 52-63.
• 62: Simon, H.A. Information processing models of cognition. Ann. Rev. of Psyc. 30 (1979), 363-396.
• 63: Strickland, R.G. A Study of the Possibilities of Graphs as a Means of Instruction in the First Four Grades of Elementary School. Columbia University, 1938. Vot. 30, 311.
• 64: Takeuchi, H., and Schmidt A.H. New promise of computer graphics. Hart;ard Bus. Rev. 58, 1 (Jam-Feb. 1980), 122-131.
• 65: Thiel, C.T. The big boom in computer graphics. Infosys. 29, 5 (1982), 48-56.
• 66: Tullis, T.S. An evaluation of alphanumeric, graphic, and color informat:ion display. Human Factors 23, 5 (Oct. 1981), 541-550.
• 67: Vernon, M.D. Learning from graphical material Brit. J. of Psyc. 36, Part 3 (May 1946}, 145-158.
• 68: Vernon, M.D. The use and value of graphical material in presenting quantitative data. Occup. Psyc. 26 (1952), 22-34.
• 69: Vicino, F.L., and Ringel, S. Decision-making with Updated Graphic vs. Alphanumeric Information. Wash., D.C.: Army Pers. Res. Office, Techn. Res. Note 178, Nov. 1966.
• 70: Vogel, D.R., Dickson, G.W., and Lehman, }.A. "Persuasion and the Role of Visual Presentation Support: The UM/3M Study." MISRC- WP-86-11, June 1986.
• 71: Wainer, H., and Reiser, M. Assessing the efficacy of visual displays. Proc. of the Am. Stat. Assoc., Soc. Star. Sect., 1, Part I (Aug. 1976), 89-92.
• 72: Washburne, J.N. An experimental study of various graphic, tabular and textural methods of presenting quantitative material. J. of Ed. Psyc. 18, 6 (Sept. 1927), 361-376.
• 73: Watson, C.J., and Driver, R.W. The influence of computer graphics on the recall of information. MIS Qrtly. 7, 1 (Mar. 1982), 45-53.
• 74: Wilcox, W. Numbers and the news: Graph, table or text? Journalism Qrtly. 41, I (Winter 1964), 38-44.
• 75: Welsch, R.E. Graphics for data analysis. Comp. and Graphics 2, 1 (1976), 31-37.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.3 COMPUTER GRAPHICS

Additional Classification:
  J. Computer Applications
  J.1 ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROCESSING
      Subjects: Business

  K. Computing Milieux
  K.4 COMPUTERS AND SOCIETY

General Terms:
Experimentation, Management