Excluding the figures and references, the length of this interesting paper is about three pages. The ample set of  references  covers decision tables and trees from the perspectives of management science, cognitive psychology, human-computer interaction, and information systems.

The authors provide an experimental study to compare the effectiveness of decision tables to that of decision trees in interpreting and validating conditional logic statements. An investment game is used to measure the differences and motivate the subjects in the experiment. The authors test four propositions:

• There is no significant difference between the effectiveness of the table and the tree in the interpretation of conditional logic.

• • Cognitive style significantly influences the effectiveness of the decision aid in the interpretation of conditional logic.

  • Sensing personalities perform better than the intuitive personalities in interpreting conditional logic.

• The academic ability of the subject significantly influences the effectiveness of the decision aid in the interpretation of conditional logic.

• The academic background of the subject has no significant effect on the effectiveness of the decision aid in the interpretation of conditional logic.

The experimental results failed to support the first proposition. Propositions 2A, 2B, 3, and 4 were confirmed. The findings indicate that the decision tree representation is easier to understand than the decision table and that cognitive style, academic ability, and academic background play a role in an individual’s ability to interpret conditional logic. In addition, sensing personalities turned out to be more effective than intuitive personalities, supporting proposition 2B.