Suchergebnisse

Contents -- Introduction -- I: RIVALRY -- 1. Irreducible Uncertainty and the Need for Judgment -- Determinism in the Objective World -- Indeterminism in the Objective World -- Human Judgment and Uncertainty -- Different Consequences of Different Errors -- Duality of Error in Law and Medicine -- 2. Duality of Error and Policy Formation -- Misconceiving Probabilities and Its Consequences -- The Slow Formal Recognition of the Duality of Error -- Are Cycles of Differential Injustice to Individuals and Society Inevitable? -- 3. Coping with Uncertainty: The Rivalry Between Intuition and Analysis

This work focuses on how social policy grows out of the policymaker's judgment about what to do, what can be done, and what ought to be? Answers necessarily emerge from human judgment, and from human error and the unavoidable uncertainty in the world.

In this article we apply research in the field of judgment & decision making to the policy of preemption. We use Brunswik's lens model to frame the policy of preemption as the integration of multiple fallible indicators under conditions of uncertainty. We use the Taylor-Russell diagram to demonstrate how the policy of preemption increases judgment uncertainty & error. The continuation of a policy of preemption will inevitably lead to an increase in false positives (mistaken military engagements), an increase in tension & dispute among U.S. allies (& foes) over these engagements, & a growing world perception that the United States is an aggressor nation. Post-9/11 policymakers & the public are explicitly focused on reducing false negatives at the implicit cost of increasing false positives. Greater appreciation of the inverse relationship between false positives & false negatives is needed to understand the consequences of the policy of preemption. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

The central claim of social judgment theory is that differences in policy often originate in cognitive disagreements. This assumption suggests methods for their resolution. Discussion alone may be inadequate to solving such problems because human judgment relies strongly on covert processes which cannot be described explicitly by participants. 2 aids to communication are proposed: computer graphics representations of priority rankings, & input-output analysis. 9 staff members in an educational research center suffering policy disputes were interviewed on their priorities, resulting in their being grouped into 3 clusters. Both computer graphics & input-output analysis were employed to seek a compromise policy. The success of these efforts provides empirical support for social judgment theory. 6 Figures, 7 Tables. Modified HA.