警世故事的认知价值

W. Shields
{"title":"警世故事的认知价值","authors":"W. Shields","doi":"10.21061/jots.v32i2.a.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Twice in NASA history, the agency embarked on a slippery slope that resulted in catastrophe. Each decision, taken by itself, seemed correct, routine, and indeed, insignificant and unremarkable. Yet in retrospect, the cumulative effect was stunning. In both pre-accident periods, events unfolded over a long time and in small increments rather than in sudden and dramatic occurrences. NASA’s challenge is to design systems that maximize the clarity of signals, amplify weak signals so they can be tracked, and account for missing signals. For both accidents there were moments when management definitions of risk might have been reversed were it not for the many missing signals – an absence of trend analysis, imagery data not obtained, concerns not voiced, information overlooked or dropped from briefings. A safety team must have equal and independent representation so that managers are not again lulled into complacency by shifting definitions of risk . . . Because ill-structured problems are less visible and therefore invite the normalization of deviance, they may be the most risky of all. – Vol. I, Section 8.5, Report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (August 2003).","PeriodicalId":142452,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Technology Studies","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Epistemic Value of Cautionary Tales\",\"authors\":\"W. Shields\",\"doi\":\"10.21061/jots.v32i2.a.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Twice in NASA history, the agency embarked on a slippery slope that resulted in catastrophe. Each decision, taken by itself, seemed correct, routine, and indeed, insignificant and unremarkable. Yet in retrospect, the cumulative effect was stunning. In both pre-accident periods, events unfolded over a long time and in small increments rather than in sudden and dramatic occurrences. NASA’s challenge is to design systems that maximize the clarity of signals, amplify weak signals so they can be tracked, and account for missing signals. For both accidents there were moments when management definitions of risk might have been reversed were it not for the many missing signals – an absence of trend analysis, imagery data not obtained, concerns not voiced, information overlooked or dropped from briefings. A safety team must have equal and independent representation so that managers are not again lulled into complacency by shifting definitions of risk . . . Because ill-structured problems are less visible and therefore invite the normalization of deviance, they may be the most risky of all. – Vol. I, Section 8.5, Report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (August 2003).\",\"PeriodicalId\":142452,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Technology Studies\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Technology Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v32i2.a.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Technology Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v32i2.a.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在美国宇航局的历史上,该机构两次走上了导致灾难的滑坡。每一个决定,就其本身而言,似乎都是正确的、例行的,而且确实是微不足道的、无足轻重的。然而回想起来,累积效应是惊人的。在这两个事故发生前的时期,事件都是在很长一段时间内以较小的增量展开的,而不是突然和戏剧性的事件。NASA面临的挑战是设计出最大限度地提高信号清晰度的系统,放大弱信号以便跟踪,并解释丢失的信号。对于这两起事故,如果不是因为许多缺失的信号——缺乏趋势分析、没有获得图像数据、没有表达关切、信息被忽视或从简报中删除——在某些时刻,风险的管理定义可能会发生逆转。一个安全团队必须有平等和独立的代表,这样管理人员就不会再因为改变风险定义而沾沾自喜……由于结构不良的问题不太明显,因此会导致越轨行为的正常化,因此它们可能是所有问题中风险最大的。-第一卷,8.5节,哥伦比亚事故调查委员会报告(2003年8月)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Epistemic Value of Cautionary Tales
Twice in NASA history, the agency embarked on a slippery slope that resulted in catastrophe. Each decision, taken by itself, seemed correct, routine, and indeed, insignificant and unremarkable. Yet in retrospect, the cumulative effect was stunning. In both pre-accident periods, events unfolded over a long time and in small increments rather than in sudden and dramatic occurrences. NASA’s challenge is to design systems that maximize the clarity of signals, amplify weak signals so they can be tracked, and account for missing signals. For both accidents there were moments when management definitions of risk might have been reversed were it not for the many missing signals – an absence of trend analysis, imagery data not obtained, concerns not voiced, information overlooked or dropped from briefings. A safety team must have equal and independent representation so that managers are not again lulled into complacency by shifting definitions of risk . . . Because ill-structured problems are less visible and therefore invite the normalization of deviance, they may be the most risky of all. – Vol. I, Section 8.5, Report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (August 2003).
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