Weighting and aggregating expert ecological judgments
Weighting and aggregating expert ecological judgments
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/eap.2075
复制
发表时间：
2020-06-01
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Burgman, Mark A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hemming, Victoria;Hanea, Anca M.;Burgman, Mark A.
专家判断的性能加权聚合，使用校准问题，一直主张改善生态问题的汇总定量判断。然而，在生态学文献中很少有关于性能加权的应用、优点或挑战的讨论或实际建议。在本文中，我们（1）说明了如何与四步问题格式的IDEA协议可以扩展到包括性能加权聚合的经典模型，（2）探讨这种扩展提高了汇集的判断范围内的性能指标的程度。我们的案例研究表明，性能权重可以改善从具有四步问题格式的IDEA协议中得出的判断。然而，没有先验的改进保证。我们的结论是，该方法的优点在于证明了最终的判断集合提供了不确定性的最佳表示（即，验证），无论是通过相等加权还是性能加权的聚合。业绩加权所需的时间和努力是否合理是决策者的问题。我们的案例研究概述了性能加权聚合的原理、挑战和优势。这将有助于就业绩加权的部署作出知情决定，并避免其应用中的常见陷阱。
Performance weighted aggregation of expert judgments, using calibration questions, has been advocated to improve pooled quantitative judgments for ecological questions. However, there is little discussion or practical advice in the ecological literature regarding the application, advantages or challenges of performance weighting. In this paper we (1) illustrate how the IDEA protocol with four-step question format can be extended to include performance weighted aggregation from the Classical Model, and (2) explore the extent to which this extension improves pooled judgments for a range of performance measures. Our case study demonstrates that performance weights can improve judgments derived from the IDEA protocol with four-step question format. However, there is no a-priori guarantee of improvement. We conclude that the merits of the method lie in demonstrating that the final aggregation of judgments provides the best representation of uncertainty (i.e., validation), whether that be via equally weighted or performance weighted aggregation. Whether the time and effort entailed in performance weights can be justified is a matter for decision-makers. Our case study outlines the rationale, challenges, and benefits of performance weighted aggregations. It will help to inform decisions about the deployment of performance weighting and avoid common pitfalls in its application.