Adapting Scenario Planning to Create an Expectation for Surprises: Going Beyond Probability and Plausibility in Risk Assessment.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2025-09-18 DOI:10.1111/risa.70112
James Derbyshire, Mandeep Dhami, Ian Belton, Dilek Önkal, Terje Aven
{"title":"Adapting Scenario Planning to Create an Expectation for Surprises: Going Beyond Probability and Plausibility in Risk Assessment.","authors":"James Derbyshire, Mandeep Dhami, Ian Belton, Dilek Önkal, Terje Aven","doi":"10.1111/risa.70112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The need for risk assessments to take full account of uncertainty by going beyond probability and creating an expectation for surprises has recently been highlighted in this journal. This paper sets out an adaptation to the Intuitive Logics (IL) scenario-planning method that assists risk assessors to achieve this aim. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this adaptation through a controlled experiment. The controlled experiment took the form of a simulated IL scenario-planning exercise in which individuals assigned values representative of extreme outcomes to sets of simple and more complex clusters of driving forces under three experimental conditions representing alternative uncertainty expressions (\"probable,\" \"plausible,\" and \"surprising\"). The values assigned in the \"probable\" and \"plausible\" conditions were not significantly different from each other. However, the \"surprising\" condition resulted in the assignment of more extreme values than either of the other two conditions. The complexity of a set of clustered driving forces had no effect. A follow-up analysis showed that participants interpreted the words \"probable\" and \"plausible\" similarly. This is problematic for scenario methods like IL, which are claimed to stretch consideration of the future's potential extremity beyond what it would be using probability by instead employing plausibility. If participants interpret \"probable\" and \"plausible\" similarly, then using plausibility instead of probability will not stretch their thinking as desired. By adapting IL in the simple way this paper outlines, scenario planning can assist risk assessors to go beyond both probability and plausibility, thereby taking fuller account of uncertainty and improving anticipation of surprises.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70112","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The need for risk assessments to take full account of uncertainty by going beyond probability and creating an expectation for surprises has recently been highlighted in this journal. This paper sets out an adaptation to the Intuitive Logics (IL) scenario-planning method that assists risk assessors to achieve this aim. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this adaptation through a controlled experiment. The controlled experiment took the form of a simulated IL scenario-planning exercise in which individuals assigned values representative of extreme outcomes to sets of simple and more complex clusters of driving forces under three experimental conditions representing alternative uncertainty expressions ("probable," "plausible," and "surprising"). The values assigned in the "probable" and "plausible" conditions were not significantly different from each other. However, the "surprising" condition resulted in the assignment of more extreme values than either of the other two conditions. The complexity of a set of clustered driving forces had no effect. A follow-up analysis showed that participants interpreted the words "probable" and "plausible" similarly. This is problematic for scenario methods like IL, which are claimed to stretch consideration of the future's potential extremity beyond what it would be using probability by instead employing plausibility. If participants interpret "probable" and "plausible" similarly, then using plausibility instead of probability will not stretch their thinking as desired. By adapting IL in the simple way this paper outlines, scenario planning can assist risk assessors to go beyond both probability and plausibility, thereby taking fuller account of uncertainty and improving anticipation of surprises.

适应情景规划创造意外预期:在风险评估中超越概率和合理性。
该期刊最近强调了风险评估的必要性,即通过超越概率和创造意外预期来充分考虑不确定性。本文提出了一种对直觉逻辑(IL)场景规划方法的适应,以帮助风险评估者实现这一目标。我们通过一个对照实验证明了这种适应的有效性。对照实验采用模拟IL情景规划练习的形式,其中个人将代表极端结果的值分配给三种实验条件下的简单和更复杂的驱动力集群,这些条件代表了不同的不确定性表达式(“可能的”,“似是而非的”和“令人惊讶的”)。在“可能”和“可能”条件下分配的值彼此之间没有显着差异。然而,“令人惊讶”的条件导致分配的值比其他两个条件中的任何一个都更极端。一组聚集的驱动力的复杂性没有影响。后续分析表明,参与者对“可能”和“似是而非”这两个词的理解相似。对于像IL这样的情景方法来说,这是有问题的,这种方法声称通过使用可能性来扩展对未来潜在极端情况的考虑,而不是使用可能性。如果参与者对“可能”和“似是而非”的理解相似,那么用“似是而非”代替“概率”就不会像期望的那样扩展他们的思维。通过以本文概述的简单方式调整IL,情景规划可以帮助风险评估者超越概率和合理性,从而更充分地考虑不确定性并提高对意外事件的预期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信