工科学生风险评估与优先排序偏差研究的初步模型实验

Jeremy M. Gernand
{"title":"工科学生风险评估与优先排序偏差研究的初步模型实验","authors":"Jeremy M. Gernand","doi":"10.1115/IMECE2018-87888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Engineering decisions that have the greatest effect on worker and public safety occur early in the design process. During these decisions, engineers rely on their experience and intuition to estimate the severity and likelihood of undesired future events like failures, equipment damage, injuries, or environmental harm. These initial estimates can then form the basis of investment of limited project resources in mitigating those risks. Behavioral economics suggests that most people make significant and predictable errors when considering high consequence, low probability events. These biases have not previously been studied quantitatively in the context of engineering decisions, however. This paper describes preliminary results from a set of computerized experiments with engineering students estimating, prioritizing, and making design decisions related to risk. The undergraduate students included in this experiment were more likely to underestimate than overestimate the risk of failure. They were also more optimistic of the effects of efforts to mitigate risk than the evidence suggested. These results suggest that considerably more effort is needed to understand the characteristics and qualities of these biases in risk estimation, and understand what kinds of intervention might best ameliorate these biases and enable engineers to more effectively identify and manage the risks of technology.","PeriodicalId":201128,"journal":{"name":"Volume 13: Design, Reliability, Safety, and Risk","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Set of Preliminary Model Experiments for Studying Engineering Student Biases in the Assessment and Prioritization of Risks\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy M. Gernand\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/IMECE2018-87888\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Engineering decisions that have the greatest effect on worker and public safety occur early in the design process. During these decisions, engineers rely on their experience and intuition to estimate the severity and likelihood of undesired future events like failures, equipment damage, injuries, or environmental harm. These initial estimates can then form the basis of investment of limited project resources in mitigating those risks. Behavioral economics suggests that most people make significant and predictable errors when considering high consequence, low probability events. These biases have not previously been studied quantitatively in the context of engineering decisions, however. This paper describes preliminary results from a set of computerized experiments with engineering students estimating, prioritizing, and making design decisions related to risk. The undergraduate students included in this experiment were more likely to underestimate than overestimate the risk of failure. They were also more optimistic of the effects of efforts to mitigate risk than the evidence suggested. These results suggest that considerably more effort is needed to understand the characteristics and qualities of these biases in risk estimation, and understand what kinds of intervention might best ameliorate these biases and enable engineers to more effectively identify and manage the risks of technology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":201128,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Volume 13: Design, Reliability, Safety, and Risk\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 13: Design, Reliability, Safety, and Risk\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2018-87888\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 13: Design, Reliability, Safety, and Risk","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2018-87888","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对工人和公共安全影响最大的工程决策发生在设计过程的早期。在这些决策过程中,工程师依靠他们的经验和直觉来估计未来意外事件的严重性和可能性,如故障、设备损坏、伤害或环境危害。然后,这些初步估计可以作为有限项目资源投资的基础,以减轻这些风险。行为经济学表明,大多数人在考虑高后果、低概率事件时会犯重大的、可预见的错误。然而,这些偏差以前还没有在工程决策的背景下进行定量研究。本文描述了一组计算机化实验的初步结果,这些实验与工程专业的学生对风险进行估计、排序和做出设计决策有关。在这个实验中,本科生更有可能低估而不是高估失败的风险。他们对降低风险的努力所产生的效果也比证据显示的更为乐观。这些结果表明,需要相当多的努力来了解风险评估中这些偏差的特征和质量,并了解哪种干预可能最好地改善这些偏差,使工程师能够更有效地识别和管理技术风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Set of Preliminary Model Experiments for Studying Engineering Student Biases in the Assessment and Prioritization of Risks
Engineering decisions that have the greatest effect on worker and public safety occur early in the design process. During these decisions, engineers rely on their experience and intuition to estimate the severity and likelihood of undesired future events like failures, equipment damage, injuries, or environmental harm. These initial estimates can then form the basis of investment of limited project resources in mitigating those risks. Behavioral economics suggests that most people make significant and predictable errors when considering high consequence, low probability events. These biases have not previously been studied quantitatively in the context of engineering decisions, however. This paper describes preliminary results from a set of computerized experiments with engineering students estimating, prioritizing, and making design decisions related to risk. The undergraduate students included in this experiment were more likely to underestimate than overestimate the risk of failure. They were also more optimistic of the effects of efforts to mitigate risk than the evidence suggested. These results suggest that considerably more effort is needed to understand the characteristics and qualities of these biases in risk estimation, and understand what kinds of intervention might best ameliorate these biases and enable engineers to more effectively identify and manage the risks of technology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信