Expert judgements are essential when time and resources are stretched or we face novel dilemmas requiring fast solutions. Good advice can save lives and large sums of money. Typically, experts are defined by their qualifications, track record and experience [1], [2]. The social expectation hypothesis argues that more highly regarded and more experienced experts will give better advice. We asked experts to predict how they will perform, and how their peers will perform, on sets of questions. The results indicate that the way experts regard each other is consistent, but unfortunately, ranks are a poor guide to actual performance. Expert advice will be more accurate if technical decisions routinely use broadly-defined expert groups, structured question protocols and feedback.
Expert Status and Performance
M. Burgman,M. McBride,Raquel Ashton,Andrew Speirs-Bridge,L. Flander,B. Wintle,F. Fidler,L. Rumpff,Charles R. Twardy
Published 2011 in PLoS ONE
ABSTRACT
PUBLICATION RECORD
- Publication year
2011
- Venue
PLoS ONE
- Publication date
2011-07-29
- Fields of study
Medicine, Economics, Psychology
- Identifiers
- External record
- Source metadata
Semantic Scholar, PubMed
CITATION MAP
EXTRACTION MAP
CLAIMS
- No claims are published for this paper.
CONCEPTS
- No concepts are published for this paper.
REFERENCES
Showing 1-35 of 35 references · Page 1 of 1