Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2208.05996

Modular interface for managing cognitive bias in experts

Abstract

Expert knowledge is required to interpret data across a range of fields. Experts bridge gaps that often exists in our knowledge about relationships between data and the parameters of interest. This is especially true in geoscientific applications, where knowledge of the Earth is derived from interpretations of observable features and relies on predominantly unproven but widely accepted theories. Thus, experts facilitate solutions to otherwise unsolvable problems. However, experts are inherently subjective, and susceptible to cognitive biases and adverse external effects. This work examines this problem within geoscience. Three compelling examples are provided of the prevalence of cognitive biases from previous work. The problem is then formally defined, and a set of design principles which ensure that any solution is sufficiently flexible to be readily applied to the range of geoscientific problems. No solutions exist that reliably capture and reduce cognitive bias in experts. However, formal expert elicitation methods can be used to assess expert variation, and a variety of approaches exist that may help to illuminate uncertainties, avoid misunderstandings, and reduce herding behaviours or single-expert over-dominance. This work combines existing and future approaches to reduce expert suboptimality through a flexible modular design where each module provides a specific function. The design centres around action modules that force a stop-and-perform step into interpretation tasks. A starter-pack of modules is provided as an example of the conceptual design. This simple bias-reduction system may readily be applied in organisations and during everyday interpretations through to tasks for major commercial ventures.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Melody G Whitehead, Andrew Curtis. 2022-08-08. Modular interface for managing cognitive bias in experts. https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.05996

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Learning Password Best Practices Through In-Task Instruction

Users often make security- and privacy-relevant decisions without a clear understanding of the rules that govern safe behavior. We introduce pedagogical friction, a design approach that inserts brief, instructional interactions at the moment of action. We evaluate this approach in the context of password creation, a familiar task with clear quality criteria. We conducted a randomized study with 128 participants across four interface conditions that varied the depth and interactivity of guidance. We assessed three outcomes: (1) rule compliance in a subsequent password task without guidance, (2) accuracy on survey questions tied to password rules, and (3) behavior-knowledge alignment, which captures whether participants who correctly followed a rule also recognized it on the survey. Across the guided conditions, participants corrected most rule violations in the follow-up task and showed high behavior-knowledge alignment. Survey results suggested clearer advantages for some rule types, especially symbol related questions. These results position pedagogical friction as a lightweight intervention for security- and privacy-critical interfaces.

cs.HC

Leveling the Playing Field: Temporal Video Segmentation for Individuals with ADHD in Computing Education

Individuals with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) often face significant barriers in computing education. In asynchronous learning environments, instructional videos can impose high extraneous cognitive load, often relying on assumptions about sustained attention and working memory that do not align with ADHD neurocognitive profiles. In this work, we evaluate a post-hoc video processing intervention that segments instructional content into single-instruction chunks followed by fixed-length pauses to reduce cognitive load. In a within-participants controlled study with 17 individuals with ADHD and 10 without, we find that the intervention has an equalizing effect. Although it improved performance for all participants, gains were larger for those with ADHD, reducing their errors and hesitations to levels comparable to those of participants without ADHD under the same intervention. These results align with the goals of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), by showing that cognitively-aligned, post-hoc instructional video modifications can reduce performance disparities across diverse neurocognitive profiles.

cs.HC

Human Driver Temperament and the Safety Impact of a C-V2X Denial-of-Service Flooding Attack in Mixed-Autonomy Traffic

Cooperative and connected automated vehicles (CAVs) rely on Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) messages to cross signalized intersections; a denial-of-service (DoS) flood that blocks SPaT forces CAVs into a fail-safe mode. Because human-driven vehicles share the intersection, the safety consequence depends not only on the attack and the CAV fail-safe policy, but on how the surrounding human drivers behave. We investigate this human-factors dimension with a coupled OMNeT++/INET (5G NR-V2X) and SUMO microsimulation of a signalized corridor, sweeping CAV market penetration (10-90%), four calibrated driver temperaments (cautious to aggressive) and two standards-based fail-safe policies, a minimal-risk maneuver (MRM) and an adaptive cruise control (ACC) keep-driving fallback, with each attack arm differenced against its policy-matched no-attack baseline. Temperament's effect on the attack is specific and modest rather than a blanket amplification. Aggressive surroundings worsen one metric, the hard-braking a keep-driving fail-safe forces on nearby drivers (p = 0.03), rising from near zero to +8 episodes/1000 veh-s. They appear to dampen rear-end conflicts, but only because the flood clears the queues aggressive drivers build, so the gain is in flow, not safety. On the attack's primary signatures, CAV red-light running and crossing conflicts, temperament has no detectable effect. It instead dominates baseline risk, producing a 13- to 18-fold cautious-to-aggressive gradient far larger than the attack itself, which acts through a channel already congested by CAV adoption. Human driver populations determine how dangerous the intersection is but do not systematically amplify this attack, so fail-safe design cannot assume a cautious test population bounds the risk.

cs.HC