Paper detail

Modular interface for managing cognitive bias in experts

Expert knowledge is required to interpret data across a range of fields. Experts bridge gaps that often exists in our knowledge about relationships between data and the parameters of interest. This is especially true in geoscientific applications, where knowledge of the Earth is derived from interpretations of observable features and relies on predominantly unproven but widely accepted theories. Thus, experts facilitate solutions to otherwise unsolvable problems. However, experts are inherently subjective, and susceptible to cognitive biases and adverse external effects. This work examines this problem within geoscience. Three compelling examples are provided of the prevalence of cognitive biases from previous work. The problem is then formally defined, and a set of design principles which ensure that any solution is sufficiently flexible to be readily applied to the range of geoscientific problems. No solutions exist that reliably capture and reduce cognitive bias in experts. However, formal expert elicitation methods can be used to assess expert variation, and a variety of approaches exist that may help to illuminate uncertainties, avoid misunderstandings, and reduce herding behaviours or single-expert over-dominance. This work combines existing and future approaches to reduce expert suboptimality through a flexible modular design where each module provides a specific function. The design centres around action modules that force a stop-and-perform step into interpretation tasks. A starter-pack of modules is provided as an example of the conceptual design. This simple bias-reduction system may readily be applied in organisations and during everyday interpretations through to tasks for major commercial ventures.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.