消除偏差的培训减少了国家风险分析师的确认偏差
Bas Heerma van Voss1, Haewon Yoon2, Irene Scopelliti3
1Department of Economic Policy & Research, Dutch Central Bank, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Department of Public Administration, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. b.s.heerma.van.voss@dnb.nl.
Scientific reports
|November 25, 2025
概括
国家风险分析师显示的确认偏差比学生少. 一次简短的退化培训改善了两组人的判断力,表明成本效益的干预措施可以提高专家预测.
科学领域:
- 认知心理学 认知心理学
- 风险分析 风险分析
- 决策科学科学 决策科学
背景情况:
- 国家风险预测对于对抗流行病和气候变化等全球威胁的资源配置至关重要.
- 人类在预测中的判断容易产生认知偏见,影响准确性.
- 确认偏见和偏见盲点是影响专家判断的关键认知偏见.
研究的目的:
- 为了比较国家风险分析师和士生之间的确认偏差和偏差盲点易感性.
- 为了评估一次性失智训练干预对两组认知偏差的有效性.
- 研究专业知识和经验在减轻风险预测中的认知偏见方面的作用.
主要方法:
- 一项实验与来自欧洲国家的国家风险分析师和匹配的士学生样本进行.
- 参与者对确认偏见和偏见盲点的敏感性被评估为与风险相关和无关的判断.
- 在两个参与者群体中评估了单次脱节训练会的影响.
主要成果:
- 与学生相比,国家风险分析师在风险相关和无关判断方面显示的确认偏差明显较小.
- 单次调试训练干预有效地减少了分析师和学生组的确认偏差.
- 专业知识和经验似乎比以前理解的更广泛地减少了认知偏见.
结论:
- 具有成本效益的退化干预措施可以在国家风险预测中提高专家判断力.
- 经验和专业知识在减少认知偏见方面发挥着重要作用.
- 有针对性的培训可以提高国家风险评估的可靠性.
相关概念视频
Confirmation Biases
7.6K
The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
7.6K
Halo Effect
376
The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...
376
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
1.2K
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
1.2K
Hindsight Biases
4.2K
Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now?
4.2K
Bias
7.2K
Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
7.2K
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
343
Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
343


