Shifting students’ to experts’ complex systems knowledge

This paper includes three analyses concerning: expert support in the selection of impact variables for scientific models relevant to environmental planning, the quality of students’ individual estimates of corresponding impacts before and after a group discussion, and the accuracy of artificially‐aggregated judgments of independent groups. Participants were students of environmental sciences at ETH Zurich. The first analysis revealed that during participation in an environmental case study, students’ individual estimates of impacts of variables which have been suggested by experts increased, as compared to the estimates of impacts of additional variables, which have been selected by the students. The remaining analyses consider group discussions on the strength of particular environmental impacts. The quality of the estimates was analyzed referring to expert estimates of the impacts.

[1]  E. H. Witte,et al.  Understanding Group Behavior , 2018 .

[2]  R. Dawes,et al.  Linear models in decision making. , 1974 .

[3]  Harald A. Mieg,et al.  University‐based projects for local sustainable development , 2000 .

[4]  Paul E. Meehl,et al.  Clinical versus Statistical Prediction. , 1955 .

[5]  N. Kerr,et al.  The effects of jury size and polling method on the process and product of jury deliberation. , 1985, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  P. Meehl,et al.  Clinical versus Statistical Prediction. , 1955 .

[7]  J. Stroop.  Is the judgment of the group better than that of the average member of the group , 1932 .

[8]  Andreas Faludi,et al.  A decision-centred view of environmental planning , 1987 .

[9]  Johannes A. Zuber,et al.  Group decision, choice shift, and polarization in consulting, political, and local political scenarios: An experimental investigation and theoretical analysis , 1991 .

[10]  Robert C. Blattberg,et al.  Database Models And Managerial Intuition: 50% Model + 50% Manager , 1990 .

[11]  Helmut W. Crott.  Soziale Interaktion und Gruppenprozesse , 1979 .

[12]  J. Shanteau.  Competence in experts: The role of task characteristics , 1992 .

[13]  Harald A. Mieg,et al.  Prozeßanalyse von Gruppenentscheidungen zu Aspekten ökologischer Stadtplanung , 1999 .

[14]  D. Black.  The theory of committees and elections , 1959 .

[15]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition - a new foundation for design , 1987 .

[16]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  Environmental Problem-Solving Ability: Profiles in Application Documents of Research Assistants. , 1997 .

[17]  P. Burger.  Embedded Case Study Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Knowledge , 2001 .

[18]  F. Restle,et al.  The road to agreement: Subgroup pressures in small group consensus processes. , 1974 .

[19]  Spyros Makridakis,et al.  Forecasting and Planning: An Evaluation , 1981 .

[20]  G. Stasser,et al.  Expert role assignment and information sampling during collective recall and decision making. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Colin F. Camerer,et al.  General conditions for the success of bootstrapping models , 1981 .

[22]  C. BlattbergRobert,et al.  Database Models and Managerial Intuition , 1990 .

[23]  J. H. Davis,et al.  Some compelling intuitions about group consensus decisions, theoretical and empirical research, and interpersonal aggregation phenomena: Selected examples 1950-1990 , 1992 .

[24]  Norbert L. Kerr,et al.  Social transition schemes: Charting the group's road to agreement. , 1981 .

[25]  H. Crott,et al.  The Norm-Information-Distance Model: A Stochastic Approach to Preference Change in Group Interaction , 1994 .

[26]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[27]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition , 1986 .

[28]  Johannes A. Zuber,et al.  Social decision schemes and choice shift: An analysis of group decisions among bets , 1986 .

[29]  D. Black.  On the Rationale of Group Decision-making , 1948, Journal of Political Economy.

[30]  D. Hegedus,et al.  Task Effectiveness and Interaction Process of a Modified Nominal Group Technique in Solving an Evaluation Problem , 1986 .

[31]  J. H. Davis.  Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. , 1973 .

[32]  A. D. D. Groot.  Thought and Choice in Chess , 1978 .

[33]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[34]  Herman Kahn,et al.  The Year 2000 , 1988, AAOHN journal : official journal of the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses.

[35]  M. Chi,et al.  The Nature of Expertise , 1988 .

[36]  Norbert L. Kerr,et al.  Social transition schemes: Model, method, and applications , 1982 .

[37]  M. Deutsch,et al.  A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgement. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[38]  Harald A. Mieg,et al.  The Social Psychology of Expertise: Case Studies in Research, Professional Domains, and Expert Roles , 2001 .

[39]  Robert W. Holt,et al.  Changes in group members' decision preferences during discussion: An illustration with mock juries. , 1976 .

[40]  R. Hastie,et al.  Proper analysis of the accuracy of group judgments , 1997 .

[41]  J. Houghton,et al.  Climate change : the IPCC scientific assessment , 1990 .

[42]  Group Judgments in the Field of Lifted Weights. , 1924 .

[43]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  Mastering the complexity of environmental problem solving by case study approach , 1995 .