Hal R Arkes | PubMed Health

PubMed2003

The nonuse of psychological research at two federal agencies.

In 1994 the Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued a report critical of some features of the proposal review processes at the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. I provide two examples of procedures the agencies could have adopted to address the GAO's criticisms. I also relate the history of the two agencies' reluctance to use the psychological research literature to guide them as their new review procedures were instituted. Finally, I enumerate possible reasons for the agencies' decision not to follow or even test suggestions based on the judgment and decision-making research literature.

Financing, Government↗

PubMed2002

Do juries meet our expectations?

Surveys of public opinion indicate that people have high expectations for juries. When it comes to serious crimes, most people want errors of convicting the innocent (false positives) or acquitting the guilty (false negatives) to fall well below 10%. Using expected utility theory, Bayes' Theorem, signal detection theory, and empirical evidence from detection studies of medical decision making, eyewitness testimony, and weather forecasting, we argue that the frequency of mistakes probably far exceeds these "tolerable" levels. We are not arguing against the use of juries. Rather, we point out that a closer look at jury decisions reveals a serious gap between what we expect from juries and what probably occurs. When deciding issues of guilt and/or punishing convicted criminals, we as a society should recognize and acknowledge the abundance of error.

Bayes Theorem↗