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
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
收藏
页码:205 / 210
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
[11]   Numerical risk tolerance criteria in the United States: A critique of the risk criterion used for the New Jersey Toxic Catastrophe Prevention Act [J].
Baybutt, Paul .
JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2014, 32 :428-435
[12]   The role of people and human factors in performing process hazard analysis and layers of protection analysis [J].
Baybutt, Paul .
JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2013, 26 (06) :1352-1365
[13]   What risk reduction measures should be credited in process hazard analysis? [J].
Baybutt, Paul .
PROCESS SAFETY PROGRESS, 2012, 31 (04) :359-362
[14]  
Center for Chemical Process Safety, 2008, GUID HAZ EV PROC, V3rd
[15]  
Larrick R.P., 2007, BLACKWELL HDB JUDGME
[16]   Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis [J].
Montibeller, Gilberto ;
von Winterfeldt, Detlof .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2015, 35 (07) :1230-1251
[17]  
Popov G., 2016, Risk Assessment: A Practical Guide to Assessing Operational Risks