当前位置: X-MOL 学术Syst. Eng. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Does gist drive NASA experts’ design decisions?
Systems Engineering ( IF 1.6 ) Pub Date : 2020-06-04 , DOI: 10.1002/sys.21538
Deniz Marti 1 , David A. Broniatowski 1
Affiliation  

As engineers retire from practice, they must transfer their expertise to new recruits. Typically, this is accomplished using decision‐support systems that communicate precise probabilities. However, Fuzzy‐Trace Theory (FTT) predicts that the most experts prefer to rely on “gist” representations of risk over “verbatim” representations. We conducted a survey of 41 NASA employees (whose mathematical abilities are a prerequisite for their jobs) and 233 nonexperts. We tested whether experts designing space missions under the micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) impact – rely more on qualitative or quantitative risk representations. We tested three hypotheses: gist and verbatim representations of MMOD risk are distinct for both experts and nonexperts; gist representations are more predictive of decisions than are verbatim representations; and providing nonexperts with a bottom‐line meaning change their gists more than verbatim information does. Results support FTT's predictions: gist and verbatim representations were distinct, and gist representations were associated with decisions for both experts and nonexperts. We did not observe an association between quantitative risk estimates and decisions for either experts or nonexperts. We observed that exposing a nonexpert to an expert's gist modified that nonexpert's gist yet exposing quantitative risk information did not. Implications for expertise transfer are discussed.

中文翻译:

要点是否会推动NASA专家的设计决策?

工程师退休后,必须将其专业知识转移给新员工。通常,这是通过传达精确概率的决策支持系统来完成的。但是,模糊跟踪理论(FTT)预测,大多数专家宁愿依赖风险的“要点”表示,也不愿依赖“普通”表示。我们对41位NASA员工(其数学能力是其工作的前提)和233位非专家进行了调查。我们测试了在微流星体和轨道碎片(MMOD)影响下设计太空任务的专家是否更多地依赖于定性或定量风险表示。我们测试了三个假设:MMOD风险的要点和逐字表示对于专家和非专家而言都是不同的;要点表示比逐字表示更能预测决策;为非专家提供底线含义的改变要比逐字记录信息要大得多。结果支持FTT的预测:要点和逐字陈述是截然不同的,要点代表与专家和非专家的决策相关。我们没有观察到定量风险估计与专家或非专家决策之间的关联。我们观察到,将非专家的要点暴露在专家的要旨下会修改非专家的要点,但暴露定量风险信息却没有。讨论了对专业知识转移的影响。和要点代表与专家和非专家的决策相关。我们没有观察到定量风险估计与专家或非专家决策之间的关联。我们观察到,将非专家的要点暴露在专家的要旨下会修改非专家的要点,但暴露定量风险信息却没有。讨论了专业知识转移的含义。和要点代表与专家和非专家的决策相关。我们没有观察到定量风险估计与专家或非专家决策之间的关联。我们观察到,将非专家的要点暴露在专家的要旨下会修改非专家的要点,但暴露定量风险信息却没有。讨论了对专业知识转移的影响。
更新日期:2020-06-04
down
wechat
bug