David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Oxford University Press (1991)
This book is an extensive survey and critical examination of the literature on the use of expert opinion in scientific inquiry and policy making. The elicitation, representation, and use of expert opinion is increasingly important for two reasons: advancing technology leads to more and more complex decision problems, and technologists are turning in greater numbers to "expert systems" and other similar artifacts of artificial intelligence. Cooke here considers how expert opinion is being used today, how an expert's uncertainty is or should be represented, how people do or should reason with uncertainty, how the quality and usefulness of expert opinion can be assessed, and how the views of several experts might be combined. He argues for the importance of developing practical models with a transparent mathematic foundation for the use of expert opinion in science, and presents three tested models, termed "classical," "Bayesian," and "psychological scaling." Detailed case studies illustrate how they can be applied to a diversity of real problems in engineering and planning.
|Keywords||Science Philosophy Science Methodology Uncertainty (Information theory Probabilities Decision making|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$108.94 used (43% off) $134.33 new (30% off) $190.00 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||Q175.C699 1991|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Carlo Martini, Jan Sprenger & Mark Colyvan (2013). Resolving Disagreement Through Mutual Respect. Erkenntnis 78 (4):881-898.
Igor Douven (2005). Evidence, Explanation, and the Empirical Status of Scientific Realism. Erkenntnis 63 (2):253 - 291.
Carlo Martini (2014). Experts in Science: A View From the Trenches. Synthese 191 (1):3-15.
Katie Steele, Helen M. Regan, Mark Colyvan & Mark A. Burgman (2007). Right Decisions or Happy Decision-Makers? Social Epistemology 21 (4):349 – 368.
Marcel Boumans (2008). Battle in the Planning Office: Field Experts Versus Normative Statisticians. Social Epistemology 22 (4):389 – 404.
Similar books and articles
Giuseppe Fontana & Bill Gerrard (1999). Disequilibrium States and Adjustment Processes: Towards a Historical-Time Analysis of Behaviour Under Uncertainty. Philosophical Psychology 12 (3):311 – 324.
David Wallace (2006). Epistemology Quantized: Circumstances in Which We Should Come to Believe in the Everett Interpretation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (4):655-689.
René von Schomberg (ed.) (1993). Science, Politics, and Morality: Scientific Uncertainty and Decision Making. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Clare Chua Chow & Rakesh K. Sarin (2002). Known, Unknown, and Unknowable Uncertainties. Theory and Decision 52 (2):127-138.
Axel Gelfert (2011). Expertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry. Argumentation 25 (3):297-312.
Omar E. M. Khalil (1993). Artificial Decision-Making and Artificial Ethics: A Management Concern. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 12 (4):313 - 321.
Sven Ove Hansson (1996). Decision Making Under Great Uncertainty. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 26 (3):369-386.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1993). Book Review:Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science. Roger M. Cooke. [REVIEW] Ethics 103 (3):599-.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1988). Risk Assessment and Uncertainty. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:504 - 517.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads132 ( #27,433 of 1,792,039 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #102,466 of 1,792,039 )
How can I increase my downloads?