Ranking Risks

Dr. Fischhoff considers the role of government in helping citizens manage risks. He then offers a general procedure for risk ranking and concludes by discussing what can be done with a list of risks

Acceptable Risk: A Conceptual Proposal

Challenging the de minimis risk concept, Dr. Fischhoff argues that risks ought not to be considered apart from a particular technology\u27s benefits. He argues, too, that the acceptability of particular kinds of risks should not be determined without considering the views of all persons who may be exposed. Finally, building upon the reasonable person construct, he suggests ways those goals might be achieved

When Are Preferences Consistent? The Effects of Task Familiarity and Contextual Cues on Revealed and Stated Preferences

Traditionally, economists make a sharp distinction between stated and revealed preferences, viewing the latter as more fully meeting the assumptions of economic analysis. Here, we consider one form of empirical evidence regarding this belief: the consistency of choices in stated and revealed preference tasks. We show that both kinds of task can produce consistent choices, suggesting that both can measure underlying preferences, if necessary conditions are met. We propose that a necessary condition is that task be either familiar to those facing it or offer contextual cues that substitute for familiarity, such as prices in competitive markets or recommendations from trusted, knowledgeable sources. We show that how well decision makers achieve such understanding is often confounded with the method that researchers use. Considering task familiarity not only clarifies some of the conflicting evidence regarding revealed and stated preference methods, but raises potentially productive questions regarding the roles of social institutions in shaping preferences.Consistency, contingent valuation, framing, public goods, revealed preferences, stated preferences, validity

Counting casualties: A framework for respectful, useful records

Counting casualties in conflict zones faces both practical and ethical concerns. Drawing on procedures from risk analysis, we propose a general approach. It represents each death by standard features, having either essential value, for capturing the social and cultural meaning of individual casualties, or instrumental value, for relating patterns of casualties to possible causes and effects. We illustrate the approach with the choices involved in attempts to record casualties in Iraq and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and with natural disasters, as exemplified by Hurricane Katrina. We advocate institutionalizing the approach, so that recording casualties increases understanding, rather than suspicio

Prejudices about Bias

38 pagesMuch recent research in the area of judgment and decision making has been dominated by documentation of ways in which people's intuitive thought processes can lead them astray. Like other psychological results that have cast doubt on people's abilities, these accounts have generated considerable controversy. From the set of criticisms that have been raised, a set of generic criticisms that could be raised is developed here. These include aspersions of methodological malpractice, advancement of alternative standards of optimality, and development of error theories showing the insensitivity of events to these kinds of problems. Considering these critici.sms in general form offers some perspectives on the continuing debate, some guidance on how to improve its productivity, and some hypotheses for analyzing analogous controversies elsewhere in psychology

Mutually Assured Support: A security doctrine for terrorist nuclear weapons threats (Special Issue: Terrorism Briefing for the New President)

If the United States were subject to a terrorist nuclear attack, its president would face overwhelming political pressure to respond decisively. A well-prepared response could help both to prevent additional attacks and to bring the perpetrators to justice. An instinctive response could be cataclysmically ineffective, inflicting enormous collateral damage without achieving either deterrence or justice. An international security doctrine of Mutually Assured Support can make the response to such attacks more effective as well as less likely—by requiring preparations that reduce the threat. The doctrine requires all subscribing nations to mobilize fully in support of the attacked nation, in return for a promise of nonretaliation. It provides a vehicle for domestic and international leadership, allowing the president to engage the American people, from a position of strength, around an issue that has had little public discussion. The authors describe its rationale, implications, and implementation

Correction To: Better Beware: Comparing Metacognition for Phishing and Legitimate Emails (Metacognition and Learning, (2019), 14, 3, (343-362), 10.1007/S11409-019-09197-5)

The article Better beware: comparing metacognition for phishing and legitimate emails , written by Casey Inez Canfield, Baruch Fischhoff and Alex Davis, was originally published electronically on the publisher\u27s internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on 20 July 2019 without open access

Better Beware: Comparing Metacognition for Phishing and Legitimate Emails

Every electronic message poses some threat of being a phishing attack. If recipients underestimate that threat, they expose themselves, and those connected to them, to identity theft, ransom, malware, or worse. If recipients overestimate that threat, then they incur needless costs, perhaps reducing their willingness and ability to respond over time. In two experiments, we examined the appropriateness of individuals\u27 confidence in their judgments of whether email messages were legitimate or phishing, using calibration and resolution as metacognition metrics. Both experiments found that participants had reasonable calibration but poor resolution, reflecting a weak correlation between their confidence and knowledge. These patterns differed for legitimate and phishing emails, with participants being better calibrated for legitimate emails, except when expressing complete confidence in their judgments, but consistently overconfident for phishing emails. The second experiment compared performance on the laboratory task with individuals\u27 actual vulnerability, and found that participants with better resolution were less likely to have malicious files on their home computers. That comparison raised general questions about the design of anti-phishing training and of providing feedback essential to self-regulated learning