Expert status and performance

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. The social expectation hypothesis argues...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2011-07, Vol.6 (7), p.e22998-e22998
Main Authors: Burgman, Mark A, McBride, Marissa, Ashton, Raquel, Speirs-Bridge, Andrew, Flander, Louisa, Wintle, Bonnie, Fidler, Fiona, Rumpff, Libby, Twardy, Charles
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Appraisers
Biology
Estimates
Expert Testimony
Experts
Feedback
Humans
Hypotheses
Probability
Professional Competence
Qualifications
Risk assessment
Science
Science Policy
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Surveys and Questionnaires
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary: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. 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.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0022998