Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Indicators of expert judgement and their significance: An empirical investigation in the area of cyber security
KTH, School of Electrical Engineering (EES), Industrial Information and Control Systems.
KTH, School of Electrical Engineering (EES), Industrial Information and Control Systems.
KTH, School of Electrical Engineering (EES), Industrial Information and Control Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3922-9606
KTH, School of Electrical Engineering (EES), Industrial Information and Control Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6590-6634
2014 (English)In: Expert systems (Print), ISSN 0266-4720, E-ISSN 1468-0394, Vol. 3, no 4, 299-318 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In situations when data collection through observations is difficult to perform, the use of expert judgement can be justified. A challenge with this approach is, however, to value the credibility of different experts. A natural and state-of-the art approach is to weight the experts' judgements according to their calibration, that is, on the basis of how well their estimates of a studied event agree with actual observations of that event. However, when data collection through observations is difficult to perform, it is often also difficult to estimate the calibration of experts. As a consequence, variables thought to indicate calibration are generally used as a substitute of it in practice. This study evaluates the value of three such indicative variables: consensus, experience and self-proclamation. The significances of these variables are analysed in four surveys covering different domains in cyber security, involving a total of 271 subjects. Results show that consensus is a reasonable indicator of calibration. The mean Pearson correlation between these two variables across the four studies was 0.407. No significant correlations were found between calibration and experience or calibration and self-proclamation. However, as a side result, it was discovered that a subject that perceives itself as more knowledgeable than others likely also is more experienced.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 3, no 4, 299-318 p.
Keyword [en]
Calibration, Cyber security, Decision support, Expert judgement
National Category
Computer Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-129256DOI: 10.1111/exsy.12039ISI: 000342812800001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84908021346OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-129256DiVA: diva2:651165
Note

QC 20141106

Available from: 2013-09-24 Created: 2013-09-24 Last updated: 2017-12-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Ekstedt, MathiasHoneth, Nicholas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Holm, HannesSommestad, TeodorEkstedt, MathiasHoneth, Nicholas
By organisation
Industrial Information and Control Systems
In the same journal
Expert systems (Print)
Computer Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 103 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf