Common errors in reasoning about the future: Three informal fallacies

Dorr, Adam

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.018

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, during the oil crisis energy scenario developers predominantly focused on exploring the implications of variations in fossil fuel prices, economic growth, and energy demand, while after nuclear power plant accidents they began exploring the potential implications of removing such power plants from the system (Trutnevyte et al, 2016). These prioritisations may be compounded further by individuals' (or indeed a community's) technological optimism (Dorr, 2017) as well as their models of how social and technological drivers of change interact.…”

Section: Assessing the Future In Complex Sociotechnical Systems: Parametric And Structural Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures

Kattirtzi

Winskel

2020

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent literature has highlighted the need to critically examine the assumptions and values that influence scenario analysis and expert advice on contested topics. To this end, this paper presents the results of a large scale two-round Policy Delphi expert survey on UK energy futures. The survey constitutes one of the most detailed and wide-ranging analyses of UKbased energy researchers and stakeholders (policy makers, businesses and civil society groups). Through a quantitative and qualitative analysis of expert views on two particularly challenging and contested topics (the future of heating provision in buildings and the future of personal transport), we develop an understanding of the extent of expert disagreement and the reasons behind it. For both heating and transport cases, disagreements and uncertainties emerged in terms of a number of specific parameters (particularly related to technical performance and the feasible pace of technology diffusion) and structural uncertainties (related to system boundaries, sociotechnical dynamics and the endogenous role of policy), and also epistemic and normative differences among participants. By setting out the diversity of expert views and reasoning on contested issues, Policy Delphi can help decision-makers personal transport. In discussing the results, we treat the quantitative and qualitative data differently: while we present the quantitative results in full (in Tables 2 and 3 below), we discuss the qualitative data thematically so as to represent the diversity of perspectives offered in open text responses (Small, 2011). Heating in Buildingsrounds. Most of those who did change shifted to the most popular proposition in Round 1 ('patchwork mix') without explaining why they did so. Two participants moved away from this proposition, either because they were persuaded that it would be too expensive, or because they now felt that more evidence is required. Reflecting the difference in values in Round 1 results (in terms of the desirable governance scale), one participant challenged others' assumptions that decisive action by national government was needed to solve the heat challenge, arguing instead that there needs to be a gradual process of demonstration and learning at different levels to steer the heat transition over the next 10-20 years.

show abstract

Section: Assessing the Future In Complex Sociotechnical Systems: Parametric And Structural Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures

Kattirtzi

Winskel

2020

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The context of Islam used make them think twice, namely thinking about the mathematics models and Islamic values contained in the question. In the end, the confusion covers the meaning and purpose HOTS mathematics problems that are basically used to improve students reasoning skills (Dorr, 2017).…”

Section: Student Challenges In Facing Hots Type Mathematics Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student Readiness and Challenge in Completing Higher Order Thinking Skill Test Type for Mathematics

Kusaeri

Hamdani

Suprananto

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mathematics teaching and learning should equip students with the ability to think critically and creatively and problem-solving skill to enable them to compete in the industrial revolution 4.0. This descriptive explorative study explores the readiness and challenges faced by Indonesian junior high school (SMP/MTs) student in solving HOTs type mathematics test using Islamic context. Data were collected from a test-based open-ended questionnaire distributed to 164 students in the 8th of five schools in Sidoarjo East Java comprising 2 junior madrasas (Islamic schools), 2 Islamic-based junior high schools and 1 public junior high school. Descriptive analysis using SPSS and categorization of responses (referring to response options in the questionnaire such as have ever-never, necessary-unnecessary, answered-not answered, etc) show that considering their experience, the students are “less ready” to face HOTs type mathematics test. However, students expect that they can be given more practices in doing HOTs type mathematics questions to help them get accustomed to this type of question. Being unaccustomed to non-routine and lengthy questions, lazy trait and being unfamiliar to Islamic terms used as the context of the question becomes the challenges for the students in facing HOTs type mathematics test.

show abstract

“…Just as the residents of Pompei assumed their fateful last day in AD 79 would be just like any other, oblivious to the explosive changes that were imminent, urban and regional planners tend to assume that the decades ahead will be little different than those gone by. Just as a better-informed theory of volcanology might have forewarned residents of the eruption of Mount Vesuvius, so do planning scholars and practitioners stand to benefit more from visions of possible, probable and desirable futures informed by futures studies than from simple linear projections based on past experience (Dorr, 2016).…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common errors in reasoning about the future: Three informal fallacies

Cited by 17 publications

References 21 publications

When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures

When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures

Student Readiness and Challenge in Completing Higher Order Thinking Skill Test Type for Mathematics

Technology blindness and temporal imprecision: rethinking the long term in an era of accelerating technological change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About