当专家预测失败时。

IF 16.7 1区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Trends in Cognitive Sciences Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-08 DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2023.10.005
Igor Grossmann, Michael E W Varnum, Cendri A Hutcherson, David R Mandel
{"title":"当专家预测失败时。","authors":"Igor Grossmann, Michael E W Varnum, Cendri A Hutcherson, David R Mandel","doi":"10.1016/j.tics.2023.10.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We examine the opportunities and challenges of expert judgment in the social sciences, scrutinizing the way social scientists make predictions. While social scientists show above-chance accuracy in predicting laboratory-based phenomena, they often struggle to predict real-world societal changes. We argue that most causal models used in social sciences are oversimplified, confuse levels of analysis to which a model applies, misalign the nature of the model with the nature of the phenomena, and fail to consider factors beyond the scientist's pet theory. Taking cues from physical sciences and meteorology, we advocate an approach that integrates broad foundational models with context-specific time series data. We call for a shift in the social sciences towards more precise, daring predictions and greater intellectual humility.</p>","PeriodicalId":49417,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Cognitive Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When expert predictions fail.\",\"authors\":\"Igor Grossmann, Michael E W Varnum, Cendri A Hutcherson, David R Mandel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tics.2023.10.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We examine the opportunities and challenges of expert judgment in the social sciences, scrutinizing the way social scientists make predictions. While social scientists show above-chance accuracy in predicting laboratory-based phenomena, they often struggle to predict real-world societal changes. We argue that most causal models used in social sciences are oversimplified, confuse levels of analysis to which a model applies, misalign the nature of the model with the nature of the phenomena, and fail to consider factors beyond the scientist's pet theory. Taking cues from physical sciences and meteorology, we advocate an approach that integrates broad foundational models with context-specific time series data. We call for a shift in the social sciences towards more precise, daring predictions and greater intellectual humility.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49417,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Cognitive Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Cognitive Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.10.005\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Cognitive Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.10.005","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们研究了社会科学中专家判断的机遇和挑战,仔细研究了社会科学家做出预测的方式。虽然社会科学家在预测基于实验室的现象时表现出了高于偶然的准确性,但他们往往难以预测现实世界的社会变化。我们认为,社会科学中使用的大多数因果模型都过于简单化,混淆了模型适用的分析水平,使模型的性质与现象的性质不一致,并且没有考虑科学家宠物理论之外的因素。从物理科学和气象学的角度出发,我们提倡一种将广泛的基础模型与特定上下文的时间序列数据相结合的方法。我们呼吁社会科学向更精确、更大胆的预测和更谦逊的智慧转变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When expert predictions fail.

We examine the opportunities and challenges of expert judgment in the social sciences, scrutinizing the way social scientists make predictions. While social scientists show above-chance accuracy in predicting laboratory-based phenomena, they often struggle to predict real-world societal changes. We argue that most causal models used in social sciences are oversimplified, confuse levels of analysis to which a model applies, misalign the nature of the model with the nature of the phenomena, and fail to consider factors beyond the scientist's pet theory. Taking cues from physical sciences and meteorology, we advocate an approach that integrates broad foundational models with context-specific time series data. We call for a shift in the social sciences towards more precise, daring predictions and greater intellectual humility.

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
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Trends in Cognitive Sciences 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
27.90
自引率
1.50%
发文量
156
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Essential reading for those working directly in the cognitive sciences or in related specialist areas, Trends in Cognitive Sciences provides an instant overview of current thinking for scientists, students and teachers who want to keep up with the latest developments in the cognitive sciences. The journal brings together research in psychology, artificial intelligence, linguistics, philosophy, computer science and neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences provides a platform for the interaction of these disciplines and the evolution of cognitive science as an independent field of study.
×
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