Assessing the quality of expert judgment: Issues and analysis

摘要

Frequently the same biases have been manifest in experts as by students in the laboratory, but expertise studies are often no more ecologically valid than laboratory studies because the methods used in both are similar. Further, real-world tasks vary in their learnability, or the availability of outcome feedback necessary for a judge to improve performance with experience. We propose that good performance will be manifest when both ecological validity and learnability are high, but that performance will be poor when one of these is low. Finally, we suggest how researchers and practitioners might use these task-analytic constructs in order to identify true expertise for the formulation of decision support.