The Effects of Ambiguity Tolerance and User Discretion on Spatial Task Performance and Display Choices

Recent improvements in information technologies have led to the creation and advancement of numerous interfaces or visual displays. However, not all innovations in visual representations optimize their users’ decisional performance. This research examines whether granting users discretion improves their decisional accuracy and expedites their decision making, as well as reduces their stress and mental workload. In addition, the current study utilizes an extensive, relatively stable construct in cognitive psychology – ambiguity tolerance – to represent individuals’ openness to complexities and investigates the impacts on those decisional outcomes. The mixed results yield implications for future studies.

[1]  Harvey S. Smallman,et al.  The Use of 2D and 3D Displays for Shape-Understanding versus Relative-Position Tasks , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[2]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[3]  C. D. Smock,et al.  The influence of psychological stress on the "intolerance of ambiguity". , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[4]  S. Budner.  Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. , 1962, Journal of personality.

[5]  Shuk Ying Ho,et al.  Human-computer interaction and management information systems: Foundations , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  Sébastien Grenier,et al.  Intolerance of Uncertainty and Intolerance of Ambiguity: Similarities and differences , 2005 .

[7]  M. Freeston,et al.  Generalized anxiety disorder: a preliminary test of a conceptual model. , 1998, Behaviour research and therapy.

[8]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Graphics and managerial decision making: research-based guidelines , 1988, CACM.

[9]  B. Marx.  The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , 1985 .

[10]  Effects of need for approval and intolerance of ambiguity upon stimulus preference. , 1968 .

[11]  Charles R. Schwenk.  EFFECTS OF INQUIRY METHODS AND AMBIGUITY TOLERANCE ON PREDICTION PERFORMANCE , 1982 .

[12]  Edward R. Tufte,et al.  The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , 1986 .

[13]  H. Lefcourt.  The function of the illusions of control and freedom. , 1973, The American psychologist.

[14]  Kurt T. Taube.  Critical Thinking Ability and Disposition as Factors of Performance on a Written Critical Thinking Test. , 1995 .

[15]  E. Frenkel-Brunswik,et al.  A Study of Prejudice in Children , 1948, Human relations; studies towards the integration of the social sciences.

[16]  R. Lazarus.  Psychological stress and the coping process , 1970 .

[17]  William S. Helton,et al.  Assessing Daily Stress with the Short Stress State Questionnaire (SSSQ): Relationships with Cognitive Slips-Failures , 2005 .

[18]  P. Fayers,et al.  The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , 1990 .

[19]  C. Melody Carswell,et al.  Geospatial Perspective-Taking: How Well Do Decision Makers Choose Their Views? , 2007 .

[20]  Robert Karasek,et al.  Job decision latitude and mental strain: Implications for job redesign , 1979 .

[21]  D. R. Shaffer,et al.  Interactive effects of ambiguity tolerance and task effort on dissonance reduction. , 1973, Journal of personality.

[22]  L. Murphy Smith,et al.  Applying software engineering principles to the user application interface , 1988 .

[23]  Philip M. J. Reckers,et al.  The Influence of Outcome Effects, Decision Aid Usage, and Intolerance of Ambiguity on Evaluations of Professional Audit Judgement , 1997 .

[24]  L. Bhushan,et al.  A situational test of intolerance of ambiguity , 1986 .

[25]  J. Averill.  Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. , 1973 .

[26]  Robert Ladouceur,et al.  Intolerance of Uncertainty and Problem Orientation in Worry , 1997, Cognitive Therapy and Research.

[27]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  Decisional guidance and end-user display choices , 1999 .

[28]  E. Frenkel-Brunswik,et al.  Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. , 1949, Psychological issues.

[29]  Harvey S. Smallman,et al.  Naive Realism: Misplaced Faith in Realistic Displays , 2005 .

[30]  Tracy Hall,et al.  De-motivators for software process improvement: an analysis of practitioners' views , 2003, J. Syst. Softw..

[31]  R. Payne,et al.  Test of the demands, supports-constraints framework in predicting psychological distress amongst Australian public sector employees , 2001 .