Search for: All records

The overall level of negative affect (NeA) has been linked to impaired health. However, whether the diurnal timing of NeA matters and whether the NeA-health relationship is mediated by sleep quality remain unclear.

Using a longitudinal dataset (2006, 2009 and 2014 waves) consisting of 1959 participants, we examined the within-person impact of both bedtime NeA and non-bedtime NeA measured by Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) on subjective health measured by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the mediating effect of sleep quality on the NeA-health relationships by fixed effect models.

Bedtime NeA predicted poorer health, while non-bedtime NeA was unrelated to health. The deleterious impact of bedtime NeA reduced and became non-significant after sleep quality was controlled for. Bedtime NeA also significantly predicted impaired sleep quality.

Bedtime NeA is a stronger predictor of poorer health than non-bedtime NeA, and the deleterious influence of bedtime NeA on health seems to operate through poor sleep quality. Therefore, interventions to reduce bedtime NeA could potentially improve subsequent sleep quality, thereby protecting people to some extent from impaired health status.

 

A key challenge facing the use of machine learning (ML) in organizational selection settings (e.g., the processing of loan or job applications) is the potential bias against (racial and gender) minorities. To address this challenge, a rich literature of Fairness-Aware ML (FAML) algorithms has emerged, attempting to ameliorate biases while maintaining the predictive accuracy of ML algorithms. Almost all existing FAML algorithms define their optimization goals according to a selection task, meaning that ML outputs are assumed to be the final selection outcome. In practice, though, ML outputs are rarely used as-is. In personnel selection, for example, ML often serves a support role to human resource managers, allowing them to more easily exclude unqualified applicants. This effectively assigns to ML a screening rather than a selection task. It might be tempting to treat selection and screening as two variations of the same task that differ only quantitatively on the admission rate. This paper, however, reveals a qualitative difference between the two in terms of fairness. Specifically, we demonstrate through conceptual development and mathematical analysis that miscategorizing a screening task as a selection one could not only degrade final selection quality but also result in fairness problems such as selection biases within the minority group. After validating our findings with experimental studies on simulated and real-world data, we discuss several business and policy implications, highlighting the need for firms and policymakers to properly categorize the task assigned to ML in assessing and correcting algorithmic biases.

 

Over the past two decades, behavioral research in privacy has made considerable progress transitioning from acontextual studies to using contextualization as a powerful sensitizing device for illuminating the boundary conditions of privacy theories. Significant challenges and opportunities wait, however, on elevating and converging individually contextualized studies to a context-contingent theory that explicates the mechanisms through which contexts influence consumers’ privacy concerns and their behavioral reactions. This paper identifies the important barriers occasioned by this lack of context theorizing on the generalizability of privacy research findings and argues for accelerating the transition from the contextualization of individual research studies to an integrative understanding of context effects on privacy concerns. It also takes a first step toward this goal by providing a conceptual framework and the associated methodological instantiation for assessing how context-oriented nuances influence privacy concerns. Empirical evidence demonstrates the value of the framework as a diagnostic device guiding the selection of contextual contingencies in future research, so as to advance the pace of convergence toward context-contingent theories in information privacy. This paper was accepted by Anindya Ghose, information systems. 

Research and practical development of data-anonymization techniques have proliferated in recent years. Yet, limited attention has been paid to examine the potentially disparate impact of privacy protection on underprivileged subpopulations. This study is one of the first attempts to examine the extent to which data anonymization could mask the gross statistical disparities between subpopulations in the data. We first describe two common mechanisms of data anonymization and two prevalent types of statistical evidence for disparity. Then, we develop conceptual foundation and mathematical formalism demonstrating that the two data-anonymization mechanisms have distinctive impacts on the identifiability of disparity, which also varies based on its statistical operationalization. After validating our findings with empirical evidence, we discuss the business and policy implications, highlighting the need for firms and policy makers to balance between the protection of privacy and the recognition/rectification of disparate impact. This paper was accepted by Chris Forman, information systems. 

Too much of a good thing can be harmful. Choice overload, a compelling paradox in consumer psychology, exemplifies this notion with the idea that offering more product options could impede rather than improve consumer satisfaction, even when consumers are free to ignore any available option. After attracting intense interest in the past decades from multiple disciplines, research on choice overload has produced voluminous yet paradoxical findings that are widely perceived as inconsistent even at the meta-analytic level. This paper launches an interdisciplinary inquiry to resolve the inconsistencies on both the conceptual and empirical fronts. Specifically, we identified a surprising butrobust pattern among the existing empirical evidence for the choiceoverload effect and demonstrated through mathematical analysis and extensive simulation studies that the pattern would only likely emerge from one specific type of latent mechanism underlying the moderated choiceoverload effect. The paper discusses the research and practical implications of our findings—namely, the broad promise of analytical meta-analysis (an emerging area for the use of data analytics) and machine learning to address the widely recognized inconsistencies in social and behavioral sciences, and the unique and salient role of the information systems community in developing this new era of meta-analysis.

 

Selecting the best items in a dataset is a common task in data exploration. However, the concept of “best” lies in the eyes of the beholder: different users may consider different attributes more important and, hence, arrive at different rankings. Nevertheless, one can remove “dominated” items and create a “representative” subset of the data, comprising the “best items” in it. A Pareto-optimal representative is guaranteed to contain the best item of each possible ranking, but it can be a large portion of data. A much smaller representative can be found if we relax the requirement of including the best item for each user and, instead, just limit the users’ “regret”. Existing work defines regret as the loss in score by limiting consideration to the representative instead of the full dataset, for any chosen ranking function. However, the score is often not a meaningful number, and users may not understand its absolute value. Sometimes small ranges in score can include large fractions of the dataset. In contrast, users do understand the notion of rank ordering. Therefore, we consider items’ positions in the ranked list in defining the regret and propose the rank-regret representative as the minimal subset of the data containing at least one of the top-k of any possible ranking function. This problem is polynomial time solvable in 2D space but is NP-hard on 3 or more dimensions. We design a suite of algorithms to fulfill different purposes, such as whether relaxation is permitted on k, the result size, or both, whether a distribution is known, whether theoretical guarantees or practical efficiency is important, etc. Experiments on real datasets demonstrate that we can efficiently find small subsets with small rank-regrets.