Expert Judgement In Risk And Decision Analysis

This book pulls together many perspectives on the theory, methods and practice of drawing judgments from panels of experts in assessing risks and making decisions in complex circumstances. The book is divided into four parts: Structured Expert Judgment (SEJ) current research fronts; the contributions of Roger Cooke and the Classical Model he developed; process, procedures and education; and applications. After an Introduction by the Editors, the first part presents chapters on expert elicitation of parameters of multinomial models; the advantages of using performance weighting by advancing the “random expert” hypothesis; expert elicitation for specific graphical models; modelling dependencies between experts’ assessments within a Bayesian framework; preventive maintenance optimization in a Bayesian framework; eliciting life time distributions to parametrize a Dirichlet process; and on an adversarial risk analysis approach for structured expert judgment studies. The second part includes Roger Cooke’s oration from 1995 on taking up his chair at Delft University of Technology; one of the editors reflections on the early decade of the Classical Model development and use; a current overview of the theory of the Classical Model, providing a deep and comprehensive perspective on its foundations and its application; and an interview with Roger Cooke. The third part starts with an interview with Professor Dame Anne Glover, who served as the Chief Scientific Advisor to the President of the European Commission. It then presents chapters on the characteristics of good elicitations by reviewing those advocated and applied; the design and development of a training course for SEJ; and on specific experiences with SEJ protocols with the intention of presenting the challenges and insights collected during these journeys. Finally, the fourth (and largest) part begins with some reflections from Willy Aspinall on his many experiences in applying the Classical Model in several application domains; it continues with related reflections on imperfect elicitations; and then it presents chapters with applications on medicines policy and management, supply chain cyber risk management, geo-political risks, terrorism and the risks facing businesses looking to internationalise.

Expert judgment is a major source of information that can provide vital input to project managers, who must ensure that projects are completed successfully, on time, and on budget. Too often, however, companies lack detailed processes for finding and consulting with experts—making it hard to match the required know-how with the project at hand. In Expert Judgment in Project Management: Narrowing the Theory-Practice Gap, Paul S. Szwed provides research that will help project managers become more adept at using expert judgment effectively.

Expert judgment is invaluable for assessing products, systems, and situations for which measurements or test results are sparse or nonexistent. Eliciting and Analyzing Expert Judgment: A Practical Guide takes the reader step by step through the techniques of eliciting and analyzing expert judgment, with special attention given to helping the reader develop elicitation methods and tools adaptable to a variety of unique situations and work areas. The analysis procedures presented in the book may require a basic understanding of statistics and probabilities, but the authors have provided detailed explanations of the techniques used and have taken special care to define all statistical jargon. Originally published in 1991, this book is designed so that those familiar with the use of expert judgment can quickly find the material appropriate for their advanced background.

Winner of the 2017 De Groot Prize awarded by the International Society for Bayesian Analysis (ISBA)A relatively new area of research, adversarial risk analysis (ARA) informs decision making when there are intelligent opponents and uncertain outcomes. Adversarial Risk Analysis develops methods for allocating defensive or offensive resources against

This book is about elicitation: the facilitation of the quantitative expression of subjective judgement about matters of fact, interacting with subject experts, or about matters of value, interacting with decision makers or stakeholders. It offers an integrated presentation of procedures and processes that allow analysts and experts to think clearly about numbers, particularly the inputs for decision support systems and models. This presentation encompasses research originating in the communities of structured probability elicitation/calibration and multi-criteria decision analysis, often unaware of each other’s developments. Chapters 2 through 9 focus on processes to elicit uncertainty from experts, including the Classical Method for aggregating judgements from multiple experts concerning probability distributions; the issue of validation in the Classical Method; the Sheffield elicitation framework; the IDEA protocol; approaches following the Bayesian perspective; the main elements of structured expert processes for dependence elicitation; and how mathematical methods can incorporate correlations between experts. Chapters 10 through 14 focus on processes to elicit preferences from stakeholders or decision makers, including two chapters on problems under uncertainty (utility functions), and three chapters that address elicitation of preferences independently of, or in absence of, any uncertainty elicitation (value functions and ELECTRE). Two chapters then focus on cross-cutting issues for elicitation of uncertainties and elicitation of preferences: biases and selection of experts. Finally, the last group of chapters illustrates how some of the presented approaches are applied in practice, including a food security case in the UK; expert elicitation in health care decision making; an expert judgement based method to elicit nuclear threat risks in US ports; risk assessment in a pulp and paper manufacturer in the Nordic countries; and elicitation of preferences for crop planning in a Greek region.

Decision Analysis for Management Judgment is unique in its breadth of coverage of decision analysis methods. It covers both the psychological problems that are associated with unaided managerial decision making and the decision analysis methods designed to overcome them. It is presented and explained in a clear, straightforward manner without using mathematical notation. This latest edition has been fully revised and updated and includes a number of changes to reflect the latest developments in the field.

This book is an extensive survey and critical examination of the literature on the use of expert opinion in scientific inquiry and policy making. The elicitation, representation, and use of expert opinion is increasingly important for two reasons: advancing technology leads to more and more complex decision problems, and technologists are turning in greater numbers to "expert systems" and other similar artifacts of artificial intelligence. Cooke here considers how expert opinion is being used today, how an expert's uncertainty is or should be represented, how people do or should reason with uncertainty, how the quality and usefulness of expert opinion can be assessed, and how the views of several experts might be combined. He argues for the importance of developing practical models with a transparent mathematic foundation for the use of expert opinion in science, and presents three tested models, termed "classical," "Bayesian," and "psychological scaling." Detailed case studies illustrate how they can be applied to a diversity of real problems in engineering and planning.

A graduate level textbook on probabilistic risk analysis, aimed at statisticians, operations researchers and engineers.

Since its original publication, Expert Political Judgment by New York Times bestselling author Philip Tetlock has established itself as a contemporary classic in the literature on evaluating expert opinion. Tetlock first discusses arguments about whether the world is too complex for people to find the tools to understand political phenomena, let alone predict the future. He evaluates predictions from experts in different fields, comparing them to predictions by well-informed laity or those based on simple extrapolation from current trends. He goes on to analyze which styles of thinking are more successful in forecasting. Classifying thinking styles using Isaiah Berlin's prototypes of the fox and the hedgehog, Tetlock contends that the fox--the thinker who knows many little things, draws from an eclectic array of traditions, and is better able to improvise in response to changing events--is more successful in predicting the future than the hedgehog, who knows one big thing, toils devotedly within one tradition, and imposes formulaic solutions on ill-defined problems. He notes a perversely inverse relationship between the best scientific indicators of good judgement and the qualities that the media most prizes in pundits--the single-minded determination required to prevail in ideological combat. Clearly written and impeccably researched, the book fills a huge void in the literature on evaluating expert opinion. It will appeal across many academic disciplines as well as to corporations seeking to develop standards for judging expert decision-making. Now with a new preface in which Tetlock discusses the latest research in the field, the book explores what constitutes good judgment in predicting future events and looks at why experts are often wrong in their forecasts.

An in-depth look at how to improve decisions on major projects at the concept stage, when there is scant information available. This book describes how to evaluate judgemental information. It looks at how scant information can actually be a strength, and can help establish a broad overall perspective.