Real-time feedback applications are reshaping employee performance feedback in operations management. Their design and implementation significantly influence employee engagement, which is a key factor in the success of technology-driven business innovations. This study investigates an implementation strategy to optimize feedback app use by employing digital nudges to encourage regular engagement. Drawing on social norms theory and cognitive load theory, we examine how message framing and users’ cognitive states affect the quantity and content features of feedback, including ratings, review length, surprise, and recognition. We conducted two randomized experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of digital nudges. Experiment 1, a field study with over 250 users of the DevelapMe app in a financial firm, tested how message framing and timing influenced cognitive load. Experiment 2, an online randomized controlled trial, explored underlying mechanisms and validated cognitive load measures. The results show that while social norms-based nudges increase feedback volume, they are associated with shorter reviews and reduced recognition and surprise. Employees experiencing lower cognitive load provided more feedback but tended to give lower ratings. Importantly, the interaction between social norms and low cognitive load resulted in higher ratings and more detailed reviews. This suggests that reducing cognitive load can enhance the positive effects of social norms on feedback quality. This study underscores the moderating role of cognitive load in the effectiveness of digital nudges and offers insights into feedback design that promotes both participation and quality. Theoretically, it contributes to research on digital feedback systems by integrating social norms and cognitive load theories to explain employee feedback behavior. Practically, it provides guidance for managers in designing real-time feedback tools that strategically use digital nudges while minimizing cognitive load, fostering a culture of continuous feedback, strengthening engagement, and improving performance management systems.
AdamsGSConverseBAHalesAH, et al. (2021) People systematically overlook subtractive changes. Nature592(7853): 258–261.
2.
AdriantoABen-NerAUrtasunA (2023) How things are made matters: The effects of technology on the organization of work. Academy of Management Proceedings1: 14745.
3.
AguinisHGottfredsonRKJooH (2012) Delivering effective performance feedback: The strengths-based approach. Business Horizons55(2): 105–111.
4.
AlashoorTKeilMSmithHJ, et al. (2023) Too tired and in too good of a mood to worry about privacy: Explaining the privacy paradox through the lens of effort level in information processing. Information Systems Research34(4): 1415–1436.
5.
AllcottH (2011) Social norms and energy conservation. Journal of Public Economics95(9-10): 1082–1095.
6.
AndersonE (2000) Beyond homo economicus: New developments in theories of social norms. Philosophy & Public Affairs29(2): 170–200.
7.
AwayshehABonetROrtegaJ (2023) Performance feedback and productivity: Evidence from a field experiment. Production and Operations Management32(1): 98–115.
8.
BalebakoRSchaubFAdjeridI, et al. (2015) The impact of timing on the salience of smartphone app privacy notices. Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM CCS Workshop on Security and Privacy in Smartphones and Mobile Devices: 63–74.
9.
BelhadiAManiVKambleSS, et al. (2024) Artificial intelligence-driven innovation for enhancing supply chain resilience and performance under the effect of supply chain dynamism: An empirical investigation. Annals of Operations Research222: 627–652.
10.
BellDCCoxML (2015) Social norms: Do we love norms too much?Journal of Family Theory & Review7(1): 28–46.
11.
BendolyE (2006) Incorporating behavioral theory in OM empirical models. Journal of Operations Management24(6): 735–736.
12.
BendolyE (2013) Real-time feedback and booking behavior in the hospitality industry: Moderating the balance between imperfect judgment and imperfect prescription. Journal of Operations Management31(1-2): 62–71.
13.
BendolyEDonohueKSchultzKL (2006) Behavior in operations management: Assessing recent findings and revisiting old assumptions. Journal of Operations Management24(6): 737–752.
14.
BiswasDAbellAChackoR (2024) Curvy digital marketing designs: Virtual elements with rounded shapes enhance online click-through rates. Journal of Consumer Research51(3): 552–570.
BriefAPMotowidloSJ (1986) Prosocial organizational behaviors. The Academy of Management Review11(4): 10.
17.
BrinkhoffAÖzerÖSargutG (2015) All you need is trust? An examination of inter-organizational supply chain projects. Production and Operations Management24(2): 181–200.
18.
BrutusS (2010) Words versus numbers: A theoretical exploration of giving and receiving narrative comments in performance appraisal. Human Resource Management Review20(2): 144–157.
19.
BursztynLEgorovGFiorinS (2020) From extreme to mainstream: The erosion of social norms. American Economic Review110(11): 3522–3548.
20.
BurtchGHongYBapnaR, et al. (2018) Stimulating online reviews by combining financial incentives and social norms. Management Science64(5): 2065–2082.
21.
CabralLLiL (2015) A dollar for your thoughts: Feedback-conditional rebates on eBay. Management Science61(9): 2052–2063.
CarrierJMonkTH (2000) Circadian rhythms of performance: New trends. Chronobiology International17(6): 719–732.
24.
ChandrasekaranALindermanKSchroederRG (2012) Antecedents to ambidexterity competency in high technology organizations. Journal of Operations Management30(1-2): 134–151.
25.
ChandrasekaranAMishraA (2012) Task design, team context, and psychological safety: An empirical analysis of R&D projects in high technology organizations. Production and Operations Management21(6): 977–996.
26.
ChenRSunHGuoZ, et al. (2025) He loves the one he has invested in: The effects of mating cues on men’s and women’s sunk cost bias. Journal of Consumer Research51(6): 1098–1119.
27.
ChernevABöckenholtUGoodmanJ (2015) Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology25(2): 333–358.
28.
ChoiHSOhWKwakC, et al. (2022) Effects of online crowds on self-disclosure behaviors in online reviews: A multidimensional examination. Journal of Management Information Systems39(1): 218–246.
29.
CialdiniRBGoldsteinNJ (2004) Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology55(1): 591–621.
30.
CialdiniRBTrostMR (1998) Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In: GilbertDTFiskeSTLindzeyG (eds) The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed. McGraw-Hill, 151–192.
31.
CiminiCLagorioACavalieriS, et al. (2022) Human-technology integration in smart manufacturing and logistics: Current trends and future research directions. Computers and Industrial Engineering169: 108261.
32.
CrosonRSchultzKSiemsenE, et al. (2013) Behavioral operations: The state of the field. Journal of Operations Management31(1-2): 1–5.
33.
DaiXLinYLiangJ, et al. (2024) Appearance for females, functionality for males? The false lay belief about gender difference in product preference. Journal of Consumer Research50(6): 1136–1156.
34.
DannalsJEMillerDT (2017) Social norm perception in groups with outliers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General146(9): 1342–1355.
35.
DeciELRyanRM (1985) Conceptualizations of intrinsic motivation and self-determination. In: Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Boston, MA: Springer US, 11–40.
36.
DeodharSJGuptaS (2023) The impact of social reputation features in innovation tournaments: Evidence from a natural experiment. Information Systems Research34(1): 178–193.
37.
DhanorkarSSiemsenE (2021) How nudges lead to improved energy efficiency in manufacturing: Evidence from archival data and a field study. Production and Operations Management30(10): 3735–3757.
38.
DiesteMOrzesGCulotG, et al. (2023) The “dark side” of industry 4.0: How can technology be made more sustainable?International Journal of Operations & Production Management44(5): 900–933.
39.
DinevTMcConnellARSmithHJ (2015) Research commentary—informing privacy research through information systems, psychology, and behavioral economics: Thinking outside the “APCO” box. Information Systems Research26(4): 639–655.
40.
DoHTShunkoMLucasMT, et al. (2018) Impact of behavioral factors on performance of multi-server queueing systems. Production and Operations Management27(8): 1553–1573.
41.
DollardJMillerNE (2013) Social Learning and Imitation. London: Routledge.
42.
EtzioniA (2000) Social norms: Internalization, persuasion, and history. Law and Society Review34(1): 157–178.
43.
EvansJSBTStanovichKE (2013) Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science8(3): 223–241.
44.
FransooJCWiersVC (2006) Action variety of planners: Cognitive load and requisite variety. Journal of Operations Management24(6): 813–821.
45.
GagnéMDeciEL (2005) Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior26(4): 331–362.
46.
GaoYLiMSunS (2023) Field experiments in operations management. Journal of Operations Management69(4): 676–701.
47.
GardnerJW (2020) Managing production yields and rework through feedback on speed, quality, and quantity. Production and Operations Management29(9): 2182–2209.
48.
GhoshA (2021) Performance management trends in 2021. Thrive Global.
49.
GilbertDTPelhamBWKrullDS (1988) On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology54(5): 733.
50.
GinoFPisanoGP (2008) Toward a theory of behavioral operations. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management10(4): 676–691.
51.
GoldsteinNJCialdiniRBGriskeviciusV (2008) A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research35(3): 472–482.
52.
HallRJ (1998) How to avoid unwanted email. Communications of the ACM41(3): 88–95.
53.
HartSG (2006) Nasa-Task load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting50(9): 904–908.
54.
HartmannJHuppertzJSchampC, et al. (2019) Comparing automated text classification methods. International Journal of Research in Marketing36(1): 20–38.
55.
HassanLHamariJ (2019) Gamification of e-participation: A literature review. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences: 3077–3086. DOI: 10.24251/HICSS.2019.372.
56.
HattieJTimperleyH (2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research77(1): 81–112.
57.
HayengaAOCorpusJH (2010) Profiles of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: A person-centered approach to motivation and achievement in middle school. Motivation and Emotion34(4): 371–383.
HenrichJMcElreathRBarrA, et al. (2006) Costly punishment across human societies. Science312(5781): 1767–1770.
60.
HuPJHHuHFFangX (2017) Examining the mediating roles of cognitive load and performance outcomes in user satisfaction with a website. MIS Quarterly41(3): 975–A11.
61.
HuangNBurtchGGuB, et al. (2019) Motivating user-generated content with performance feedback: Evidence from randomized field experiments. Management Science65(1): 327–345.
62.
HuangNZhangJBurtchG, et al. (2021) Combating procrastination on massive online open courses via optimal calls to action. Information Systems Research32(2): 301–317.
63.
JungMChoDShinE (2021) Repairing a cracked mirror: The heterogeneous effect of personalized digital nudges driven by misperception. Production and Operations Management30(8): 2586–2607.
64.
KahnemanD (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Macmillan.
65.
KatokELochC (2010) Call for papers for a special issue of production and operations management: Behavioral mechanism design for operations management. Production and Operations Management19(5): 629–629.
66.
KellermannK (1989) The negativity effect in interaction: It’s all in your point of view. Human Communication Research16(2): 147–183.
67.
Khern-am-nuaiWKannanKGhasemkhaniH (2018) Extrinsic versus intrinsic rewards for contributing reviews in an online platform. Information Systems Research29(4): 871–892.
68.
KilleyaLAJohnsonBT (1998) Experimental induction of biased systematic processing: The directed-thought technique. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin24(1): 17–33.
69.
KirschnerPA (2002) Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction12(1): 1–10.
70.
KnowlesESCondonCA (1999) Why people say “yes”: A dual-process theory of acquiescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology77(2): 379.
71.
KohLOrzesGJiaFJ (2019) The fourth industrial revolution (industry 4.0): Technologies disruption on operations and supply chain management. International Journal of Operations and Production Management39(6/7/8): 817–828.
72.
KumarSMookerjeeVShubhamA (2018) Research in operations management and information systems interface. Production and Operations Management27(11): 1893–1905.
73.
KumarSQiuL (2022) Social media analytics and practical applications: The change to the competition landscape. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
74.
LeeD (2008) Game theory and neural basis of social decision making. Nature Neuroscience11(4): 404–409.
75.
LeeSYQiuLWhinstonA (2018) Sentiment manipulation in online platforms: An analysis of movie tweets. Production and Operations Management27(3): 393–416.
76.
LegrosSCislaghiB (2020) Mapping the social-norms literature: An overview of reviews. Perspectives on Psychological Science15(1): 62–80.
77.
LiATLiuDXuSX, et al. (2024) Interleaved design for e-learning: Theory, design, and empirical findings. MIS Quarterly48(4): 1363–1394.
78.
LiZWangGWangH (2017) Peer effects in competitive environments: Field experiments on information provision and interventions. MIS Quarterly45(1): 163–191.
79.
LondonM (2003) Job feedback: Giving, seeking, and using feedback for performance improvement. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
80.
LuoXTongSFangZ, et al. (2019) Frontiers: Machines vs. Humans: The impact of artificial intelligence chatbot disclosure on customer purchases. Marketing Science38(6): 937–947.
81.
LuthansFStajkovicAD (2012) Provide recognition for performance improvement. Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior: Indispensable Knowledge for Evidence-Based Management, 239–253.
MelnykVHerpenEVFischerARH, et al. (2011) To think or not to think: The effect of cognitive deliberation on the influence of injunctive versus descriptive social norms. Psychology & Marketing28(7): 709–729.
84.
MithasSChenZLSaldanhaTJ, et al. (2022) How will artificial intelligence and industry 4.0 emerging technologies transform operations management?Production and Operations Management31(12): 4475–4487.
85.
MudambiSMSchuffD (2010) Research note: What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon. com. MIS Quarterly34(1): 185–200.
86.
NarayananAMoritzBB (2015) Decision making and cognition in multi-echelon supply chains: An experimental study. Production and Operations Management24(8): 1216–1234.
87.
NiranjanTTGhosalyaNKMenonRR, et al. (2023) Unpacking the cognitive processes of the boundedly rational newsvendor. Production and Operations Management32(10): 3138–3157.
Oliveira-DiasDMaqueira-MarínJMMoyano-FuentesJ (2022) The link between information and digital technologies of industry 4.0 and agile supply chain: Mapping current research and establishing new research avenues. Computers and Industrial Engineering167(1): 108000.
91.
O’RiordanSEmersonBFellerJ, et al. (2023) The road to open news: A theory of social signaling in an open news production community. Journal of Management Information Systems40(1): 130–162.
92.
OzuemWWillisMHowellK, et al. (2021) Determinants of online brand communities’ and millennials’ characteristics: A social influence perspective. Psychology & Marketing38(5): 794–818.
93.
PaasFGWC (1992) Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology84(4): 429–434.
94.
PerkinsJMWesleyHWCraigDW (2015) Misperception of peer weight norms and its association with overweight and underweight status among adolescents. Prevention Science16(1): 70–79.
95.
PetrykMRiveraMBhattacharyaS, et al. (2022) How network embeddedness affects real-time performance feedback: An empirical investigation. Information Systems Research33(4): 1467–1489.
96.
PettyREWegenerDT (1998) Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: Implications for scrutiny of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin24(3): 227–240.
97.
PuJChenYQiuL, et al. (2020) Does identity disclosure help or hurt user content generation? Social presence, inhibition, and displacement effects. Information Systems Research31(2): 297–322.
98.
PurohitAKHolzerA (2019) Functional digital nudges: Identifying optimal timing for effective behavior change. 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-6.
99.
QiaoDRuiH (2023) Text performance on the vine stage? The effect of incentive on product review text quality. Information Systems Research34(2): 676–697.
100.
QiuL (2026a) AI-Empowered corporate social media: Exploring internal and external strategy. London, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
101.
QiuL (2026b) When social technology meets artificial intelligence: Foundations, transformations, and a research agenda. Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, & Robotics in Business2(1): 24–35.
102.
QiuLKumarS (2017) Understanding voluntary knowledge provision and content contribution through a social-media-based prediction market: A field experiment. Information Systems Research28(3): 529–546.
103.
RietscheRShanGRiveraM, et al. (2025) Decoding digital feedback: Simulating the dynamics of channel capability, task complexity, and organizational performance. SSRN 3966150.
104.
RiveraMGuoXShanG, et al. (2025) Stimulating feedback contributions using digital nudges: A field experiment in a real-time mobile feedback platform. MIS Quarterly. forthcoming.
105.
RiveraMQiuLKumarS, et al. (2021) Are traditional performance reviews outdated? An empirical analysis on continuous, real-time feedback in the workplace. Information Systems Research32(2): 517–540.
ShanGBaumanKRiveraM, et al. (2023) Mobile or desktop? That is the question: An empirical study of the role of device type on real-time employee feedback quality. Americas Conference of Information Systems.
110.
ShanGQiuL (2025) Examining the impact of generative ai on users’ voluntary knowledge contribution: Evidence from a natural experiment on stack overflow. Information Systems Research. forthcoming.
111.
ShanGRiveraM (2022) Humanizing digital transformation across people and things: An empirical investigation of the impact of real-time feedback types on performance. International Conference on Information Systems.
112.
ShanGRiveraMKumarS, et al. (2026) The mind and the machine: How does generative AI usage affect the coding performance of developers?Journal of Management Information Systems. forthcoming.
113.
SharmaMKumarALuthraS, et al. (2022) The impact of environmental dynamism on low-carbon practices and digital supply chain networks to enhance sustainable performance: An empirical analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment31(4): 1776–1788.
114.
ShenHLiYGuanJ, et al. (2021) A planning approach to revenue management for non-guaranteed targeted display advertising. Production and Operations Management30(6): 1583–1602.
115.
ShuteVJ (2008) Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research78(1): 153–189.
SongHTuckerALMurrellKL, et al. (2018) Closing the productivity gap: Improving worker productivity through public relative performance feedback and validation of best practices. Management Science64(6): 2628–2649.
118.
SteelmanLALevyPESnellAF (2004) The feedback environment scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement64(1): 165–184.
119.
SusarlaAOhJ-HTanY (2012) Social networks and the diffusion of user-generated content: Evidence from YouTube. Information Systems Research23(1): 23–41.
120.
SwellerJ (2011) Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation55: 37–76.
121.
ThalerRHSunsteinCR (2021) Nudge: The Final Edition. New York: Penguin Books.
122.
ThibautJW (2017) The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: Routledge.
123.
ThürerMZhangHStevensonM, et al. (2020) Worker assignment in dual resource constrained assembly job shops with worker heterogeneity: An assessment by simulation. International Journal of Production Research58(20): 6336–6349.
124.
TianJShanGRiveraM, et al. (2024) An empirical study of the feedback source on real-time doctor feedback in a crisis. Americas Conference of Information Systems.
125.
Van der RijtJDijkstraPVan den BroekP (2012) The role of feedback in learning and performance in industrial environments. Journal of Workplace Learning24(2): 113–129.
126.
VyveyTCastellarENVan LooyJ (2018) Loaded with fun? The impact of enjoyment and cognitive load on brand retention in digital games. Journal of Interactive Advertising18(1): 72–82.
WaskoMMFarajS (2005) Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly29(1): 35–57.
129.
WechslerHNelsonTELeeJE, et al. (2003) Perception and reality: A national evaluation of social norms marketing interventions to reduce college students’ heavy alcohol use. Journal of Studies on Alcohol64(4): 484–494.
130.
WootenJOUlrichKT (2017) Idea generation and the role of feedback: Evidence from field experiments with innovation tournaments. Production and Operations Management26(1): 80–99.
131.
XuXWangQLiuY, et al. (2026) Social audience size as a reference point: Evidence from a field experiment. Management Science. forthcoming.
132.
YeHJChuaCEH (2025) Effect of ambidexterity on contestants’ creative performance in open innovation contests. Production and Operations Management34(7): 1901–1920.
133.
YinWHayJRothD (2019) Benchmarking zero-shot text classification: Datasets, evaluation and entailment approach. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1909.00161.
ZhangDShanGLeeM, et al. (2025) MT-GPD: A multimodal deep transfer learning model enhanced by auxiliary mechanisms for cross-domain online fake news detection. Production and Operations Management34(8): 2448–2470.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
