.png){kind=icon}
返回
Improving visual estimation through active feedback
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00254.x.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
In field surveys, ecological researchers and practitioners routinely make quantitative judgements that are known to vary in quality. Feedback about judgement accuracy is crucial for improving estimation performance yet is not usually afforded to fieldworkers. One reason it is rare lies in the difficulty of obtaining true values (e.g. percentage cover) to learn from. Often, the only information we can access is other people's estimates of the same thing. Group average estimates tend to be remarkably accurate. By extension, receiving feedback about group averages may improve the estimation performance of individuals, dispensing with the need for true values to learn from. In experiment 1, we tested whether feedback using group averages might improve estimates of species abundance as much as feedback using true values. However, not all feedback approaches are effective. In experiment 2, we compared two feedback formats for presenting information about group estimates of percentage cover. In both experiments, we used a novel 4-point interval estimation approach to quantify uncertainty that is known to reduce overconfidence but is yet to be applied in ecology. Results from experiment 1 show that feedback about group averages improved performance (calibration and accuracy) almost as much as feedback about the truth, despite the fact that group averages were generally not close to true values. In contrast, group averages in experiment 2 were remarkably close to true values, but the only participants who improved their estimates were those who evaluated their own performance during the feedback session, using active feedback with a calibration component. Feedback reminds surveyors not to give over-precise estimates and to appropriately reflect uncertainty. It improves calibration and accuracy of abundance estimates and could reasonably improve estimates of other quantities. Drawing on the wisdom of crowds, group averages could be used as a proxy for true values in feedback procedures. However, the format for delivering feedback matters. Actively engaging participants by having them evaluate their own estimation performance appears critical to improving their subsequent judgements, compared with passive feedback. We advocate the introduction of feedback into the training of ecologists.
Keyword:
calibration feedback
cover estimation
expert judgement
interval
overconfidence
species abundance
uncertainty
Wisdom of Crowds
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
6.2
论文数:
2.9K
被引数:
2.9W
机构
引用论文
Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds Suppress Acetylcholinesterase Activity via Transcriptional Downregulations In Vitro二恶英和二恶英样化合物通过体外转录下调抑制乙酰胆碱酯酶活性
PREAI
分享收藏
Ribosomal DNA phylogenies ofCyathus: Is the current infrageneric classification appropriate?.png)
Mycologia
MycologiaIF0
PREAI
分享收藏Protein cluster formation in aqueous solution in the presence of multivalent metal ions – a light scattering studySoft Matter
Soft MatterIF0
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容