Human judgement is widely used in workplace-based assessment despite criticism that it does not meet standards of objectivity. There is an ongoing push within the literature to better embrace subjective human judgement in assessment not as a 'problem' to be corrected psychometrically but as legitimate perceptions of performance. Taking a step back and changing perspectives to focus on the fundamental underlying value of fairness in assessment may help re-set the traditional objective approach and provide a more relevant way to determine the appropriateness of subjective human judgements. Changing focus to look at what is 'fair' human judgement in assessment, rather than what is 'objective' human judgement in assessment allows for the embracing of many different perspectives, and the legitimising of human judgement in assessment. However, this requires addressing the question: what makes human judgements fair in health professions assessment? This is not a straightforward question with a single unambiguously 'correct' answer. In this hermeneutic literature review we aimed to produce a scholarly knowledge synthesis and understanding of the factors, definitions and key questions associated with fairness in human judgement in assessment and a resulting conceptual framework, with a view to informing ongoing further research. The complex construct of fair human judgement could be conceptualised through values (credibility, fitness for purpose, transparency and defensibility) which are upheld at an individual level by characteristics of fair human judgement (narrative, boundaries, expertise, agility and evidence) and at a systems level by procedures (procedural fairness, documentation, multiple opportunities, multiple assessors, validity evidence) which help translate fairness in human judgement from concepts into practical components.

中文翻译：

---

评估中人类判断的公平性：解释学文献综述和概念框架

尽管有人批评其不符合客观标准，但人为判断仍广泛用于基于工作场所的评估。文献中不断推动在评估中更好地接受主观的人类判断，而不是将其视为需要通过心理测量来纠正的“问题”，而是将其视为对绩效的合理认知。退后一步并改变观点以关注评估公平的基本价值可能有助于重新设置传统的客观方法，并提供一种更相关的方法来确定主观人类判断的适当性。改变关注点，看看什么是评估中“公平”的人类判断，而不是评估中的“客观”人类判断，允许包含许多不同的观点，以及评估中人为判断的合法化。然而，这需要解决一个问题：在卫生专业评估中，什么使人类判断公平？这不是一个简单的问题，只有一个明确的“正确”答案。在这篇解释学文献综述中，我们旨在对与人类评估公平性相关的因素、定义和关键问题以及由此产生的概念框架进行学术知识综合和理解，以期为正在进行的进一步研究提供信息。公平人类判断的复杂结构可以通过价值观（可信度、适用性、透明度和防御性）概念化，这些价值观在个人层面被公平人类判断的特征（叙述、界限、专业知识、