Source author record

Tina Comes

Tina Comes appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

On the interplay of data and cognitive bias in crisis information management -- An exploratory study on epidemic response

Humanitarian crises, such as the 2014 West Africa Ebola epidemic, challenge information management and thereby threaten the digital resilience of the responding organizations. Crisis information management (CIM) is characterised by the urgency to respond despite the uncertainty of the situation. Coupled with high stakes, limited resources and a high cognitive load, crises are prone to induce biases in the data and the cognitive processes of analysts and decision-makers. When biases remain undetected and untreated in CIM, they may lead to decisions based on biased information, increasing the risk of an inefficient response. Literature suggests that crisis response needs to address the initial uncertainty and possible biases by adapting to new and better information as it becomes available. However, we know little about whether adaptive approaches mitigate the interplay of data and cognitive biases. We investigated this question in an exploratory, three-stage experiment on epidemic response. Our participants were experienced practitioners in the fields of crisis decision-making and information analysis. We found that analysts fail to successfully debias data, even when biases are detected, and that this failure can be attributed to undervaluing debiasing efforts in favor of rapid results. This failure leads to the development of biased information products that are conveyed to decision-makers, who consequently make decisions based on biased information. Confirmation bias reinforces the reliance on conclusions reached with biased data, leading to a vicious cycle, in which biased assumptions remain uncorrected. We suggest mindful debiasing as a possible counter-strategy against these bias effects in CIM.

preprint2022arXiv

Roadmap Towards Responsible AI in Crisis Resilience Management

Novel data sensing and AI technologies are finding practical use in the analysis of crisis resilience, revealing the need to consider how responsible artificial intelligence (AI) practices can mitigate harmful outcomes and protect vulnerable populations. In this paper, we present a responsible AI roadmap that is embedded in the Crisis Information Management Circle. This roadmap includes six propositions to highlight and address important challenges and considerations specifically related to responsible AI for crisis resilience management. We cover a wide spectrum of interwoven challenges and considerations pertaining to the responsible collection, analysis, sharing, and use of information such as equity, fairness, biases, explainability and transparency, accountability, privacy and security, inter-organizational coordination, and public engagement. Through examining issues around AI systems for crisis resilience management, we dissect the inherent complexities of information management and decision-making in crises and highlight the urgency of responsible AI research and practice. The ideas laid out in this paper are the first attempt in establishing a roadmap for researchers, practitioners, developers, emergency managers, humanitarian organizations, and public officials to address important considerations for responsible AI pertaining to crisis resilience management.