skip to main content
research-article

Information Quality Awareness and Information Quality Practice

Published:29 May 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Healthcare organizations increasingly rely on electronic information to optimize their operations. Information of high diversity from various sources accentuate the relevance and importance of information quality (IQ). The quality of information needs to be improved to support a more efficient and reliable utilization of healthcare information systems (IS). This can only be achieved through the implementation of initiatives followed by most users across an organization. The purpose of this study is to examine how awareness of IS users about IQ issues would affect their IQ behavior. Based on multiple theoretical frameworks, it is hypothesized that different aspects of user motivation mediate the relationship between the awareness on both beneficial and problematic situations and IQ practice inclination. In addition, social influence and facilitating condition moderate the relationship between IQ practice inclination and overt IQ practice. The theoretical and practical implications of findings are discussed, especially how to enhance IQ compliance in the healthcare settings.

References

  1. A. Garman and L. Scribner. 2011. Leading for quality in healthcare: Development and validation of a competency model. Journal of Healthcare Management/American College of Healthcare Executives 56, 6, 373.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. J. A. Freitas, T. Silva-Costa, B. Marques, and A. Costa-Pereira. 2010. Implications of data quality problems within hospital administrative databases. In Proceedings of the 12th Mediterranean Conference on Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing 2010, 823--826. Springer Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. V. Klassen, A. Borek, A. Parlikad, and R. Kern. 2012. Quantifying the business impact of information quality-a risk-based approach. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems 2012. Paper 239.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. R. Agarwal, G. G. Gao, C. DesRoches, and A. K. Jha. 2010. The digital transformation of healthcare: Current status and the road ahead. Information Systems Research 21, 4 (2010), 796--809. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. A. Linder, J. Ma, D. W. Bates, B. Middleton, and R. S. Stafford. 2007. Electronic health record use and the quality of ambulatory care in the United States. Archives of Internal Medicine 167, 13, 1400--1405.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. T. Botsis, G. Hartvigsen, F. Chen, and C. Weng. 2010. Secondary use of EHR: Data quality issues and informatics opportunities. AMIA Summits on Translational Science Proceedings, 2010, 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. J. L. McCormack and J. S. Ash. 2012. Clinician perspectives on the quality of patient data used for clinical decision support: A qualitative study. Amia. Annual Symposium Proceedings. 1302--1309.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. G. Mikkelsen and J. Aasly. 2005. Consequences of impaired data quality on information retrieval in electronic patient records. International Journal of Medical Informatics 74, 5, 387--394.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. P. S. Kattimani. 2010. Quality awareness of online information resources: A study. International Journal of Library and Information Science 1, 2, 031--034.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. G. Hinson. 2009. Information security awareness. Handbook of Research on Social and Organizational Liabilities in Information Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Y. W. Lee, L. L. Pipino, J. D. Funk, and R. Y. Wang. 2006. Journey to Data Quality. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. B. Chaudhry, J. Wang, M. Maglione, S. Wu, W. Mojica, E. Roth, and P. G. Shekelle. 2006. Systematic review: Impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of Internal Medicine 144, 10, 742--752.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. T. Herath and H. R. Rao. 2009. Protection motivation and deterrence: A framework for security policy compliance in organisations. European Journal of Information Systems 18, 2, 106--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. A. X. Garg, N. K. Adhikari, H. McDonald, M. P. Rosas-Arellano, P. J. Devereaux, J. Beyene, and R. B. Haynes. 2005. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: A systematic review. JAMA 293, 10, 1223--1238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. K. A. Kerr, T. Norris, and R. Stockdale. 2008. The strategic management of data quality in healthcare. Health Informatics Journal 14, 4, 259--266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. R. Y. Wang and D. M. Strong. 1996. Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems 12, 4 (1996), 5--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. D. M. Strong, Y. W. Lee, and R. Y. Wang. 1997. 10 potholes in the road to information quality. Computer 30, 8, 38--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. L. L. Pipino, Y. W. Lee, and R. Y. Wang. 2002. Data quality assessment. Communications of the ACM 45, 4, 211--218. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. S. E. Madnick, R. Y. Wang, Y. W. Lee, and H. Zhu. 2009. Overview and framework for data and information quality research. Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ) 1, 1, 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. B. K. Kahn, E. M. Pierce, and H. Melkas. 2004. IQ research directions. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Information Quality (ICIQ). 326--332.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. M. W. Bovee. 2004. Information quality: A conceptual framework and empirical validation. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. M. Ge, M. Helfert, and D. Jannach. 2011. Information quality assessment: Validating measurement dimensions and processes. Proceedings ECIS 2011. Paper 75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. T. C. Redman. 1998. The impact of poor data quality on the typical enterprise. Communications of the ACM 41, 2, 79--82. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. G. Shankaranarayanan and R. Blake. 2017. From content to context: The evolution and growth of data quality research. Journal of Data and Information Quality 8, 2 (2017), 9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Y. Wand and R. Y. Wang. 1996. Anchoring data quality dimensions in ontological foundations. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery 39, 11 (1996), 86--95. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. D. M. Strong, Y. W. Lee, and R. Y. Wang. 1997. Data quality in context. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery 40, 5, 103--110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. D. G. Arts, N. F. De Keizer, and G. J. Scheffer. 2002. Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: A literature review, case study, and generic framework. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 9, 6, 600--611.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. K. Kerr, T. Norris, and R. Stockdale. 2007. Data quality information and decision making: A healthcare case study. In Proceedings of the 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. Toowoomba. 5--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. M. R. Endsley. 2000. Theoretical underpinnings of situation awareness: A critical review. In Situation Awareness: Analysis and Measurement, M. R. Endsley and D. J. Garland (Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. J. M. Flach. 1995. Situation awareness: Proceed with caution. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37, 1, 149--157.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. R. Ryan. 2009. Self-determination theory and well-being. Social Psychology 84, 822--848.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. I. Ajzen. 1985. From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. Springer, Berlin, 11--39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. M. Deutsch and H. B. Gerard. 1955. A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51, 3, 629.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. R. L. Thompson, C. A. Higgins, and J. M. Howell. 1991. Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly 125--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. S. Taylor and P. A. Todd. 1995. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research 6, 2, 144--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. J. Andrade. 2005. Consciousness. In Cognitive Psychology, N. Braisby and A. Gellatly (Eds.). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 545--577.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. R. Schmidt. 1994. Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. In Consciousness and Second Language Learning: Conceptual, Methodological and Practical Issues in Language Learning and Teaching, J. H. Hulstijn and R. Schmidt (Eds.). Thematic Issue of AILA Review--Revue de l'AILA, 11, 11--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. M. T. Siponen. 2000. A conceptual foundation for organizational information security awareness. Information Management 8 Computer Security 8, 1, 31--41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. M. T. Siponen. 2001. Five dimensions of information security awareness. Computers and Society, June 2001, 24--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. S. M. Furnell, M. Gennatou, and P. S. Dowland. 2002. A prototype tool for information security awareness and training. Logistics Information Management 15(5/6), 352--357.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. T. Dinev and Q. Hu. 2007. The centrality of awareness in the formation of user behavioral intention toward protective information technologies. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8, 7 (2007), 386--408.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. B. Bulgurcu, H. Cavusoglu, and I. Benbasat. 2010. Information security policy compliance: An empirical study of rationality-based beliefs and information security awareness. MIS Quarterly 34, 3, 523--548. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Q. Hu and T. Dinev. 2005. Is spyware an internet nuisance or public menace? Communications of the ACM 48, 8, 61--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. E. L. Deci. 1971. Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 18, 1, 105--115.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. R. J. Vallerand and R. Bissonnette. 1992. Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. Journal of Personality 60, 3, 599--620.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan. 1987. The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53, 6, 1024.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. I. Ajzen. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 2, 179--211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. D. R. Compeau and C. A. Higgins. 1995. Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skills. Information Systems Research 6, 2, 118--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. T. R. Davis and F. Luthans. 1980. A social learning approach to organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review 5, 2, 281--290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55, 1, 68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. M. Gagne and E. L. Deci. 2005. Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior 26, 4, 331--362.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. A. L. McAlister, C. L. Perry, and G. S. Parcel. 2008. How individuals, environments, and health behaviors interact: Social cognitive theory. In Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice, K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, and K. Viswanath (Eds.). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 169--188.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. A. Bandura. 2001. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 52, 1, 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. R. L. Thompson, C. A. Higgins, and J. M. Howell. 1991. Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly 125--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. P. B. Lowry and J. Gaskin. 2014. Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 57, 2, 123--146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. W. W. Chin. 2010. How to write up and report PLS analyses. In Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications, V. V. Esposito (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, 655--690.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. J. F. Hair Jr, G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2013. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications, Incorporated.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, R. E. Anderson, and R. L. Tatham. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Pearson/Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. D. Straub, M. C. Boudreau, and D. Gefen. 2004. Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 13, 1, 63.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. J. F. Hair, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19, 2, 139--152.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. J. D'Arcy, A. Hovav, and D. Galletta. 2009. User awareness of security countermeasures and its impact on information systems misuse: A deterrence approach. Information Systems Research 20, 1, 79--98. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. P. Hartmann and V. Apaolaza-Ibanez. 2012. Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward green energy brands: The roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern. Journal of Business Research 65, 9, 1254--1263.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. T. L. Webb and P. Sheeran. 2006. Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin 132, 2, 249.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. J. A. Krosnick and R. E. Petty. 1995. Attitude strength: An overview. In Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, R. E. Petty and J. A. Krosnick (Eds.). Erlabaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. D. L. Goodhue and D. W. Straub. 1991. Security concerns of system users: A study of perceptions of the adequacy of security. Information 8 Management 20, 1, 13--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. E. C. Johnson. 2006. Security awareness: Switch to a better programme. Network Security 2006, 2, 15--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. S. Sadiq, N. Yeganeh, and M. Indulska. 2011. 20 years of data quality research: Themes, trends and synergies. In Proceedings of the 22nd Australasian Database Conference, Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Heng Tao Shen and Yanchun Zhang (Eds.). 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. N. Kock. 2015. Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration 11, 4, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Information Quality Awareness and Information Quality Practice

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image Journal of Data and Information Quality
          Journal of Data and Information Quality  Volume 10, Issue 1
          Challenge Paper and Research Papers
          March 2018
          74 pages
          ISSN:1936-1955
          EISSN:1936-1963
          DOI:10.1145/3229521
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2018 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 29 May 2018
          • Revised: 1 January 2018
          • Accepted: 1 January 2018
          • Received: 1 September 2017
          Published in jdiq Volume 10, Issue 1

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader