On the Competence and Incompetence of Experts

  • Peter Ayton


The widespread and unexceptional use of the term “expert” suggests that there is general public acceptance of the validity of the concept of an expert. For example, in news reports of particular “specialist” areas such as foreign politics, economics, and transport disasters, it is quite routine for particular individuals, presented as experts, to be explicitly consulted, and asked for their analyses, judgments, and opinions, which are quoted and duly accorded some weight and prominence.


Child Sexual Abuse Expert Judgment Selection Task Positive Test Result Hindsight Bias 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, U., & Wright, W. F. (1989). Expertise and the explanation effect. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 250–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arkes, H. R., Saville, P. D., Wortmann, R. L., & Harkness, A. R. (1981). Hindsight bias among physicians weighing the likelihood of diagnosis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 252–254.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beach, L. R., Barnes, V., & Christensen-Szalanski, J. J. J. (1987). Assessing human judgment: Has it been done, can it be done, should it be done? In Wright, G. & Ayton, P. (Eds.), Judgmental forecasting. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Berkeley, D., & Humphreys, P. (1982). Structuring decision problems and the “bias heuristic.” Ada Psychologica, 50, 201–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berry, D. C., & Broadbent, D. E. (1984). On the relationship between task performance and associated verbalisable knowledge. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 209–231.Google Scholar
  6. Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.Google Scholar
  7. Chi, M., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. Steinberg, (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Christensen-Szalanski, J. J. J., Beck, D. E., Christensen-Szalanski, C. M., & Koepsell, T. D. (1983). Effects of expertise and experience on risk judgments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 278–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Christensen-Szalanski, J. J. J., & Bushyhead, J. B. (1981). Physicians use of probabilistic information in a real clinical setting. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 7, 928–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, L. J. (1981). Can human irrationality be experimentally demonstrated? The Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 4, 317–370.Google Scholar
  11. Cooke, D. (1990). Being an “expert” in court. The Psychologist, 3, 1990, 216–221.Google Scholar
  12. Dawes, R. M. (1983). Is irrationality systematic? The Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 3, 491–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DeGowin, E. L., & DeGowin, R. L. (1969). Bedside diagnostic examination. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. de Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  15. de Groot, A. D. (1966). Perception and memory versus thought: Some old ideas and new findings. In Kleinmuntz, B. (Ed.). Problem solving. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Ebbesen, E. B., & Konecni, V. J. (1980). On the external validity of decision-making research: What do we know about decisions in the real world? In Wallsten, T. S. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in choice and decision behavior. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Eddy, D. M. (1982). Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Eddy, D. M., & Clanton, C. H. (1982). The art of clinical diagnosis: Solving the clinicopathological exercise. The New England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1263–1268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1984). Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 451–468.Google Scholar
  20. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1989a). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Brighton: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1989b). Some causes of bias in expert opinion. The Psychologist, 2, 112–113.Google Scholar
  22. Evans, J. St. B. T., & Pollard, P. (1981). On defining rationality unreasonably. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 335–336.Google Scholar
  23. Fischhoff, B. (1975). Hindsight ≠ foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 288–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gilovich, T., Vallone, R., & Tversky, A. (1985). The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Golding, E. (1981). The effect of past experience on problem solving. Paper presented to the British Psychological Society at Surrey University.Google Scholar
  26. Griggs, R. A., Cox, J. R. (1982). The elusive thematic-materials effect in Wason’s selection task. British Journal of Psychology, 73, 407–420.Google Scholar
  27. Griggs, R. A., & Ransdell, S. E. (1986). Scientists and the selection task. Social Studies of Science, 16, 319–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. The Guardian (1990). QC condemns deliberate silence. June 16th, p. 3.Google Scholar
  29. Haward, L. R. C. (1981). Forensic psychology. London: Batsford Academic and Educational Limited.Google Scholar
  30. Hunter, I. M. L. (1977). Mental calculation. In Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Wason, P. C. (Eds.), Thinking: Readings in cognitive science. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. The Independent (1990a). Maguire inquiry puts convictions to a severe test. May 29th, p. 5.Google Scholar
  32. The Independent (1990b). No record made of bomb case test. May 30th, p. 3.Google Scholar
  33. The Independent (1990c). DPP criticised by Maguire lawyers. June 16th, p. 3.Google Scholar
  34. The Independent (1990d). Scientists recalled to the Maguire inquiry. June 5th, p. 3.Google Scholar
  35. Jackson, S. L., & Griggs, R. A. (1990). The elusive pragmatic reasoning schemas effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 42A, 353–373.Google Scholar
  36. Jacob, V. S., Gaulteney, L. D., & Salvendy, G. (1986). Strategies and biases in human decision making and their implications for expert systems. Behaviour and Information Technology, 5, 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johnson, D. (1980). Doctor talk. In Michaels, L., & Ricks, C. (Eds.), The state of the language. University of California Press.Google Scholar
  38. Johnson-Laird, P. N., Legrenzi, P., & Legrenzi, M. S. (1972). Reasoning and a sense of reality. British Journal of Psychology, 63, 395–400.Google Scholar
  39. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Katz, J. (1984). Why doctors don’t disclose uncertainty. Hastings Centre Report, 14, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Keren, G. B. (1987). Facing uncertainty in the game of bridge: A calibration study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kirwan, J. R., Chaput de Saintonge, D. M., Joyce, C. R. B., & Currey, H. L. F. (1983). Clinical judgment in rheumatoid arthritis: II. Judging “current disease activity” in clinical practise. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 42, 648–651.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D., & Simon, H. (1980a). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335–1342.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D., & Simon, H. (1980b). Models of competence in solving physics problems. Cognitive Science, 4, 317–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Macdonald, R. R., & Gilhooly, K. J. (1990). More about Linda or conjunctions in context. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2, 57–70.Google Scholar
  47. Mayseless, O., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1987). What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 162–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Murphy, A. H., & Winkler, R. L. (1984). Probability forecasting in meteorology. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 489–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Murphy, G. L., & Wright, J. C. (1984). Changes in conceptual structure with expertise: Differences between real-world experts and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 10, 144–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Neale, M. A., & Northcraft, G. B. (1986). Experts, amateurs and refrigerators: Comparing expert and amateur negotiators in a novel task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  52. Nisbett, R. E., Krantz, D. H., Jepson, C., & Kunda, Z. (1983). The use of statistical heuristics in everyday inductive reasoning. Psychological Review, 90, 339–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1987). Experts, amateurs and real estate: An anchoring and adjust perspective on property pricing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 84–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Phillips, L. D. (1987). On the adequacy of judgmental probability forecasts. In Wright, G., & Ayton, P. (Eds.), Judgmental forecasting. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  55. Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., Strack, F., & Steinmetz, J. (1977). Social explanation and social expectation: Effects of real and hypothetical explanations on subjective likelihood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 817–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Seines, F., & Troye, S. V. (1989). Buying expertise, information search and problem solving. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10, 411–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simon, D., & Simon, H. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R. Siegler (Ed.), Children’s thinking: What develops? Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  58. Slovic, P. (1972). Psychological study of human judgment: implications for investment decision making. Journal of Finance, 27, 779–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Slovic, P., Fleissner, D., & Bauman, W. S. (1972). Analysing the use of information in investment decision making: A methodological proposal. Journal of Business, 45, 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sweller, J., Mawer, R. F., & Ward, M. R. (1983). Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 639–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Vaux, J. (1990). Replicating the expert. New Scientist, March 3rd, 55–58.Google Scholar
  63. Wagenaar, W. A. (1988). Identifying Ivan: A case study in legal psychology. New York: Harvester.Google Scholar
  64. Wagenaar, W. A., & Keren, G. B. (1986). Does the expert know? The reliability of predictions and confidence ratings of experts. In Hollnagel, E., Mancini, G., & Woods, D. D., Intelligent decision support in process environments. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  65. Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In Foss, B. M. (Ed.), New horizons in psychology. Harmonds-worth, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
  66. Whorf, B. L. (1940). Science and linguistics. Technology Review, 42, 227–231, 247–248.Google Scholar
  67. Winkler, R. L., & Murphy, A. H. (1973). Experiments in the laboratory and the real world. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 252–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wright, W. F., & Anderson, U. (1989). Effects of situation familiarity and financial incentives on use of the anchoring and adjustment heuristic for probability assessment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Ayton
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCity of London PolytechnicLondonEngland

Personalised recommendations