The Validity of Engineering Judgment and Expert Opinion in Hazard and Risk Analysis: The Influence of Cognitive Biases

被引：16

作者：

Baybutt, Paul ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Primatech Inc, Columbus, OH 43235 USA

来源：

PROCESS SAFETY PROGRESS | 2018年 / 37卷 / 02期

关键词：

engineering judgment; expert opinion; hazard analysis; risk analysis; heuristic; cognitive bias; motivational bias; memory bias; social bias;

D O I：

10.1002/prs.11906

中图分类号：

TQ [化学工业];

学科分类号：

0817 ;

摘要：

Hazard and risk analysis depends heavily on human decision making in the form of engineering judgment and expert opinion. Human decision making may be flawed by the effects of heuristics and cognitive biases. The influence of these psychological factors may invalidate the results of hazard and risk analysis studies. They must be managed carefully to minimize their possible adverse impacts. This article provides a pragmatic view of cognitive biases and guidance on how to address them in hazard and risk analysis. (C) 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers

引用

页码：205 / 210

页数：6

共 17 条

[1]

American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 2000, GUID CHEM PROC QUANT

[2]

American Institute of Chemical Engineers ed, 2009, GUID DEV QUANT SAF R

[3]

[Anonymous], 2013, HDB LOSS PREVENTION

[4]

[Anonymous], 2001, LAYER PROT AN

[5]

Baybutt P., 2013, 9 GLOB C PROC SAF SA

[6]

Baybutt P., 2015, 11 GLOB C PROC SAF A

[7]

Baybutt P., 2017, HYDROCARB PROCESS, V96, P81

[8] Setting Multinational Risk Tolerance Criteria [J].

Baybutt, Paul .

PROCESS SAFETY PROGRESS, 2016, 35 (02) :153-158

[9] Cognitive biases in process hazard analysis [J].

Baybutt, Paul .

JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2016, 43 :372-377

[10] Design intent for hazard and operability studies [J].

Baybutt, Paul .

PROCESS SAFETY PROGRESS, 2016, 35 (01) :36-40

← 1 2 →