|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free Newsletters
Archive
My Subscriptions
News by Subject
News by Disease
News by Date
PLoS
Search News
Post Your News
JoVE
Job Seeker Login
Most Recent Jobs
Browse Biotech Jobs
Search Jobs
Post Resume
Career Fairs
Career Resources
For Employers
Regional News
US & Canada
Biotech Bay
Biotech Beach
Genetown
Pharm Country
BioCapital
BioMidwest
Bio NC
BioForest
Southern Pharm
BioCanada East
US Device
Europe
Asia
Market Summary
News
IPOs
Company Profiles
Companies
Events
Research Store
Biotech Events
Post an Event
Real Estate
Business Opportunities
|
|
|
|
PLoS By Category | Recent
PLoS Articles
|
|
Neuroscience - Science Policy
|
Expert Status and Performance
Published:
Friday, July 29, 2011
Author:
Mark A. Burgman et al.
by Mark A. Burgman, Marissa McBride, Raquel Ashton, Andrew Speirs-Bridge, Louisa Flander, Bonnie Wintle, Fiona Fidler, Libby Rumpff, Charles Twardy
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.
More...
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|