z-logo
Premium
Evidence of vulnerability to decision bias in expert field scientists
Author(s) -
Wilson Cristina G.,
Shipley Thomas F.,
Davatzes Alexandra K.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
applied cognitive psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.719
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1099-0720
pISSN - 0888-4080
DOI - 10.1002/acp.3677
Subject(s) - psychology , hindsight bias , confirmation bias , vulnerability (computing) , optimism , population , field (mathematics) , social psychology , response bias , computer science , medicine , computer security , environmental health , mathematics , pure mathematics
Summary Previous research demonstrates that domain experts, like ordinary participant populations, are vulnerable to decision bias. Here, we examine susceptibility to bias amongst expert field scientists. Field scientists operate in less predictable environments than other experts, and feedback on the consequences of their decisions is often unclear or delayed. Thus, field scientists are a population where the findings of scientific research may be particularly vulnerable to bias. In this study, susceptibility to optimism, hindsight, and framing bias was evaluated in a group of expert field geologists using descriptive decision scenarios. Experts showed susceptibility to all three biases, and susceptibility was not influenced by years of science practice. We found no evidence that participants' vulnerability to one bias was related to their vulnerability to another bias. Our findings are broadly consistent with previous research on expertise and decision bias, demonstrating that no expert, regardless their domain experience, is immune to bias.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here