Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Happy to Continue: Satisfaction, Commitment, and Persistence to Use Technology-Supported Collaborative Work Practices

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study focused on the persistent use of technology-supported collaborative work practices. Using the lenses of the technology transition model and yield shift theory of satisfaction, we examined the effects of satisfaction with process, satisfaction with outcomes, and commitment to outcomes on persistent use of a collaborative work practice. We designed and facilitated technology-supported collaborative work practice sessions with three organizations for 152 respondents. Using structural equation modeling, we found satisfaction with outcomes was an important predictor of whether individuals committed to outcomes of technology-supported collaborative sessions. Moreover, when commitment was strong, individuals tended to persist in using the collaboration technology and work practices in the future. These results can assist designers and facilitators of meetings and collaborative work practices to focus on communicating the importance of the outcomes of meetings and how these outcomes can benefit individuals and their organizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrahamsson P, Iivari N (2002) Commitment in software process improvement - in search of the process. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 7–10 2002. pp 3239–3248. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2002.994403

  • Agres A, de Vreede GJ, Briggs R (2005) A tale of two cities: Case studies of group support systems transition. Group Decis Negot 14(4):267–284. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-005-0315-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen D, Nora A (1995) An empirical examination of the construct validity of goal commitment in the persistence process. Res High Educt 36(5):509–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen NJ, Meyer JP (1990) The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. J Occup Psychol 63(1):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bajwa DS, Lewis LF, Pervan G, Lai VS (2005) The adoption and use of collaboration information technologies: International comparisons. JInfTechnol 20(2):130–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Benkhoff B (1997) Disentangling organizational commitment: The dangers of the ocq for research and policy. Personnel Rev 26(1–2):114–131. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/00483489710157823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacherjee A (2001) Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model. MIS Q 25(3):351–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bittner EAC, Leimeister JM (2014) Creating shared understanding in heterogeneous work groups: Why IT matters and how to achieve it. JManagement InformSystems 31(1):111–144. doi:https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222310106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boughzala I (2016) Social media and value creation: Exploring the perception of generation y toward corporate social networking applications use. J Organizational End User Comput 28(2):107–123. doi:https://doi.org/10.4018/JOEUC.2016040107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boughzala I, Briggs RO (2012) A value frequency model of knowledge sharing: An exploratory study on knowledge sharability in cross-organizational collaboration. Electron Markets 22(1):9–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs RO, Adkins M, Mittleman D, Kruse J, Miller S, Nunamaker JF Jr (1998) A technology transition model derived from field investigation of GSS use aboard the USS coronado. JManagement InformSystems 15(3):151–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ, Nunamaker JF Jr (2003a) Collaboration engineering with thinklets to pursue sustained success with group support systems. JManagement InformSystems 19(4):31–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ, Reinig BA (2003b) A theory and measurement of meeting satisfaction. In: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 8 pages

  • Briggs RO, Kolfschoten G, de Vreede GJ, Albrecht C, Dean DR (2009) Lukosch S A seven-layer model of collaboration: Separation of concerns for designers of collaboration systems. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Information Systems, Phoenix, AZ, pp 1–14

  • Briggs RO, Reinig BA, de Vreede GJ (2006) Meeting satisfaction for technology-supported groups. Small Group Research 37(6):585–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs RO, Reinig BA, de Vreede GJ (2008) The yield shift theory of satisfaction and its application to the IS/IT domain. J Association Inform Syst 9(5):267–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs RO, Reinig BA, de Vreede GJ (2012) The yield shift theory of satisfaction and its application to the IS/IT domain. In: Dwivedi YK (ed) Information systems theory: Explaining and predicting our digital society, vol 2. Springer, New York, NY, pp 185–217. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9707-4_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks NG, Korzaan ML, Brooks S (2020) Normative commitment in an information systems project environment. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

  • Brown SP, Peterson RA (1993) Antecedents and consequences of salesperson job satisfaction: Meta-analysis and assessment of causal effects. J Mark Res 30(1):63–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carillo K, Scornavacca E, Za S (2017) The role of media dependency in predicting continuance intention to use ubiquitous media systems. Inf Manag 54(3):317–335. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng X, Fu S, de Vreede T, de Vreede GJ, Seeber I, Maier R, Weber B (2020) Idea convergence quality in open innovation crowdsourcing: A cognitive load perspective. JManagement InformSystems 37(2):349–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin WW, Lee (2000) MK A proposed model and measurement instrument for the formation of IS satisfaction: The case of end-user computing satisfaction. In: Proceedings of the twenty first international conference on Information systems, Association for Information Systems, pp 553–563

  • Clawson VK, Bostrom RP (1996) Driven facilitation training for computer-supported environments. Group Decis Negot 5(1):7–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connolly T, Jessup LM, Valacich JS (1990) Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Manage Sci 36(6):689–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cress DM, McPherson JM, Rotolo T (1997) Competition and commitment in voluntary memberships: The paradox of persistence and participation. Sociol Perspect 40(1):61–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davison RM, Briggs RO (2000) GSS for presentation support. Commun ACM 43(9):92–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vreede GJ (2014) Achieving repeatable team performance through collaboration engineering: Experiences in two case studies. Manage Inform Syst Q Exec 13(2):115–129

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vreede GJ, Briggs RO (2019) A program of collaboration engineering research and practice: Contributions, insights, and future directions. JManagement InformSystems 36(1):74–119

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vreede T, de Vreede GJ, Ashley G, Reiter-Palmon R (2012) Exploring the effects of personality on collaboration technology transition. In: 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS), pp 869–878

  • de Vreede T, Reiter-Palmon R, de Vreede GJ The effect of shared mental models on consensus. In: 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Jan 7–10 2013. pp 263–272. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2013.517

  • DeLone WH, McLean ER (2003) The delone and mclean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. JManagement InformSystems 19(4):9–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis A, Haley B (1996) Vandenberg R A meta-analysis of effectiveness, efficiency, and participant satisfaction in group support systems research. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Information Systems, Atlanta, GA, pp 278–289

  • Dennis AR (1996) Information exchange and use in group decision making: You can lead a group to information, but you can’t make it think. MIS Q 20(4):433–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deokar AV, Meservy TO, Helquist J, Kruse J Understanding collaboration success in context of cognitive and social presence. In: 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2010. IEEE, pp 1–10

  • Dickson GW, Lee-Partridge JE, Limayem M, Desanctis GL (1996) Facilitating computer-supported meetings: A cumulative analysis in a multiple-criteria task environment. Group Decis Negot 5(1):51–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duivenvoorde GPJ, Briggs RO, Kolfschoten GL, de Vreede (2009) 2009 GJ Towards an instrument to measure successfulness of collaborative effort from a participant perspective. In: System Sciences, 2009 HICSS ‘09 42nd Hawaii International Conference on, 5–8 Jan. pp 1–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2009.469

  • Dwivedi YK et al (2015) Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and future directions. Inf Syst Front 17(1):143–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer FR, Schurr PH, Oh S (1987) Developing buyer-seller relationships. JMarket 51(2):11–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang Y, Neufeld DJ Should I stay or should I go? Worker commitment to virtual organizations. In: Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Jan 4–7 2006. 10 pages. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.434

  • Fjermestad J, Hiltz SR (1998) An assessment of group support systems experimental research: Methodology and results. JManagement InformSystems 15(3):7–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallupe RB, Cooper WH, Grisé M-L, Bastianutti LM (1994) Blocking electronic brainstorms. J Appl Psychol 79(1):77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallupe RB, Dennis AR, Cooper WH, Valacich JS, Bastianutti LM, Nunamaker JJF (1992) Electronic brainstorming and group size. Acad Manage J 35(2):350–369. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/256377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskin J (2016) Estimating myindirect effects estimand. Gaskination’s Statistics. https://statwiki.gaskination.com/index.php?title=Plugins

  • Gefen D, Rigdon E, Straub D (2011) An update and extension to sem guidelines for administrative and social science research. Editorial comment. MIS Q 35(2):1–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/23044042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George JF, Dennis AR, Nunamaker J Jr (1992) An experimental investigation of facilitation in an ems decision room. Group Decis Negot 1(1):57–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue DL, Thompson RL (1995) Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Q 19(2):213–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruen TW, Summers JO, Acito F (2000) Relationship marketing activities, commitment, and membership behaviors in professional associations. JMarket 64(3):34–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2013) Multivariate data analysis, vol 7. Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ

  • Hastie S, Wojewoda S (2015) Standish group 2015 chaos report - Q&A with Jennifer Lynch

  • Lt Hu, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct equation modeling: multidisciplinary J 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johlke MC, Duhan DF, Howell RD, Wilkes RW (2000) An integrated model of sales managers’ communication practices. J Acad Mark Sci 28(2):263–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL (2013) Identifying, prioritizing, and using multiple objectives. EURO J Decis Processes 1(1):45–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch C (2004a) When bad things happen to good projects. CIO- Framingham MA 18:50–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch C (2004b) Nike rebounds: how (and why) Nike recovered from its supply chain disaster. CIO-Framingham MA 17:56–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolfschoten GL, Kosterbok J, Hoekstra A (2015) A transferable thinklet based process design for integrity risk assessment in government organizations. Group Decis Negot 24(4):595–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolfschoten GL, de Vreede GJ, Pietron LR (2011) A training approach for the transition of repeatable collaboration processes to practitioners. Group Decis Negot 20(3):347–371. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-010-9208-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koslowsky M (1990) Staff/line distinctions in job and organizational commitment. J Occup Psychol 63(2):167–173. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00518.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le B, Agnew CR (2003) Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta–analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships 10(1):37–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lei PW, Wu Q (2007) Introduction to structural equation modeling: Issues and practical considerations. Educational Measurement: issues and practice 26(3):33–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis LF, Bajwa D, Pervan G (2004) An empirical assessment of the assimilation patterns and the benefits of collaborative information technologies. J Comput Inform Syst 44(4):16–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao C, Palvia P, Chen J-L (2009) Information technology adoption behavior life cycle: Toward a technology continuance theory (tct). Int J Inf Manag 29(4):309–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim ETK, Yu-Ting Caisy H Understanding the relationship between justice and team goal commitment in virtual project teams: An empirical investigation. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Jan 7–10 2008. 10 pages. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2008.480

  • Lucas HC Jr (1981) An experimental investigation of the use of computer-based graphics in decision making. Manage Sci 27(7):757–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra NK (2008) Marketing research: An applied orientation, 5/e. Pearson Education, India

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra Y, Galleta DF Role of commitment and motivation in knowledge management systems implementation: Theory, conceptualization, and measurement of antecedents of success. In: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Jan 6–9 2003. 10 pages. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174264

  • Meyer JP, Allen NJ (1987) A longitudinal analysis of the early development and consequences of organizational commitment. Can J Behav Sci 19(2):199–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowday RT, Steers RM, Porter LW (1979) The measurement of organizational commitment. J Vocat Behav 14(2):224–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munkvold BE (2002) Implementing collaboration technologies in industry: Case examples and lessons learned. Springer Science & Business Media

  • Nelson RR (2007) IT project management: Infamous failures, classic mistakes, and best practices. MIS Q Exec 6(2):67–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Park KJ, Berente N Institutionalization, embedded rationality, and the escalation of commitment to IT projects. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Jan 4–7 2012. pp 4924–4933. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.329

  • Petter S, DeLone W, McLean ER (2013) Information systems success: The quest for the independent variables. JManagement InformSystems 29(4):7–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter LW, Steers RM, Mowday RT, Boulian PV (1974) Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. J Appl Psychol 59(5):603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powers RF, Dickson GW (1973) Misproject management: Myths, opinions, and reality. CalifManageRev 15(3):147–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinig BA (2003) Toward an understanding of satisfaction with the process and outcomes of teamwork. JManagement InformSystems 19(4):65–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinig BA, Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ A cross-cultural investigation of the goal-attainment-likelihood construct and its effect on satisfaction with technology-supported collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Jan 7–10 2008. 8 pages. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2008.14

  • Reinig BA, Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ (2009) Satisfaction as a function of perceived change in likelihood of goal attainment: A cross-cultural study. Int J e-Collaboration 5(2):61–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinig BA, Briggs RO, Shepherd MM, Yen J, Nunamaker JF Jr (1995) Affective reward and the adoption of group support systems: Productivity is not always enough. JManagement InformSystems 12(3):171–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinig BA, de Vreede GJ, Briggs RO (2017) An investigation of the yield shift theory of satisfaction using field data from the united states and the netherlands. Group Decis Negot 26(5):973–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of innovations, 4th edn. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rusbult CE (1980) Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. J Exp Soc Psychol 16(2):172–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rusbult CE, Olsen N, Davis JL, Hannon PA (2001) Commitment and relationship maintenance mechanisms. Close romantic relationships: Maintenance and enhancement. Psychology Press, pp 95–122

  • Savage MW, Strom RE, Ebesu Hubbard AS, Aune KS (2019) Commitment in college student persistence. J Coll Student Retention: Res Theory Pract 21(2):242–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seeber I et al (2020) Machines as teammates: A research agenda on ai in team collaboration. Inf Manag 57(2):103174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seeber I, de Vreede GJ, Maier R, Weber B (2017) Beyond brainstorming: Exploring convergence in teams. JManagement InformSystems 34(4):939–969. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2017.1393303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiau W-L, Chau PY (2016) Understanding behavioral intention to use a cloud computing classroom: A multiple model comparison approach. Inf Manag 53(3):355–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simha A, Cullen JB (2012) Ethical climates and their effects on organizational outcomes: Implications from the past and prophecies for the future. Acad Manage Perspect 26(4):20–34. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2011.0156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Son M, Han K (2011) Beyond the technology adoption: Technology readiness effects on post-adoption behavior. J Bus Res 64(11):1178–1182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinhauser L, Read A, de Vreede (2008) GJ Studying the adoption of collaborative work practices using the value frequency model. In: MWAIS 2008 Proceedings,

  • Strom RE, Savage MW (2014) Assessing the relationships between perceived support from close others, goal commitment, and persistence decisions at the college level. J Coll Student Dev 55(6):531–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweis RJ (2010) The relationship between information technology adoption and job satisfaction in contracting companies in jordan. J Inform Technol Constr 15(1):44–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Torkzadeh G, Lee J (2003) Measures of perceived end-user computing skills. Inf Manag 40(7):607–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torkzadeh G, Doll WJ (1999) The development of a tool for measuring the perceived impact of information technology. Omega 27(3):327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valacich JS, Dennis AR, Connolly T (1994) Idea generation in computer-based groups: A new ending to an old story. Organizational Behav Hum Decis Processes 57(3):448–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Brown SA, Maruping LM, Bala H (2008) Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: The competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Q 32(3):483–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Chan FK, Hu PJH, Brown SA (2011) Extending the two-stage information systems continuance model: Incorporating utaut predictors and the role of context. Inform Syst J 21(6):527–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo VCS, Goh SK, Rezaei S (2017) Consumer experiences, attitude and behavioral intention toward online food delivery (ofd) services. J Retailing Consumer Serv 35:150–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business, University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO, USA

    David Kocsis

  2. University of South Florida, Muma College of Business, Tampa, FL, USA

    Triparna de Vreede

  3. Information Systems Department, College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

    Abdulrahman Alothaim

Authors
  1. David Kocsis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Triparna de Vreede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Abdulrahman Alothaim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Kocsis.

Ethics declarations

Declarations

None of the Springer declarations are applicable to this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Participants answered the following questions at the conclusion of the collaborative work practice sessions. All questions used a 7-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

Goal Attainment—adapted from Briggs et al. (2003)

I got (less/more) from the workshop than I had anticipated.

I benefited (less/more) from this workshop than I expected.

The workshop did (less/more) good for me than I thought it would.

I gained (less/more) from the workshop than I believed I would.

Satisfaction with Process—adapted from Briggs et al. (2006)

I feel satisfied with the way in which today’s workshop was conducted.

I feel good about today’s workshop process.

I liked the way the workshop progressed today.

I feel satisfied with the procedures used in today’s workshop.

I feel satisfied about the way we carried out the activities in today’s workshop.

Satisfaction with Outcomes—adapted from Briggs et al. (2006)

I liked the outcome of today’s workshop.

I feel satisfied with the things we achieved in today’s workshop.

When the workshop was over, I felt satisfied with the results.

Our accomplishments today give me a feeling of satisfaction.

I am happy with the results of today’s workshop.

Commitment - adapted from Mowday et al. (1979)

I am proud to tell others we were involved in recommending these ideas.

I am willing to put in a great deal of effort to see the successful implementation of our ideas.

I am willing to talk about our recommendations with my colleagues and tell them that developing these ideas is good for the organization.

I really care about seeing that the right ideas are selected.

I feel there is not much to be gained by sticking with our recommendations regarding the ideas. (Reverse coded)

Perceived Magnitude of Net Value—adapted from Briggs et al. (2003)

Overall, I will be better off using today’s collaborative writing process.

On the whole, the collaborative writing process will be valuable to me.

I will gain by starting to use the collaborative writing process.

In the end, I will benefit from the collaborative writing process.

Persistence—adapted from Briggs et al. (2003)

I will use the collaborative writing process again in the near future.

I plan to keep using the collaborative writing process for a long time.

The collaborative writing process will be my first choice for collaborative writing.

I do not foresee abandoning the collaborative writing process in the near future.

Demographics.

How many years of full-time work experience do you have?

How old are you?

Sex.

In how many workshops have you used tools and methods similar to the ones we used today?

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kocsis, D., de Vreede, T. & Alothaim, A. Happy to Continue: Satisfaction, Commitment, and Persistence to Use Technology-Supported Collaborative Work Practices. Group Decis Negot 31, 1235–1262 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-022-09795-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-022-09795-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation