Expert Status and Performance

Mark A Burgman, Marissa McBride, Raquel Ashton, Andrew Speirs-Bridge, Louisa Flander, Bonnie Wintle, Fiona Fidler, Libby Rumpff and Charles Twardy

PLOS ONE, 2011, vol. 6, issue 7, 1-7

Abstract: 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.

Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (25)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0022998 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 22998&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0022998

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022998

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().