Three Criteria for Consensus Conferences

Stegenga, Jacob

doi:10.1007/s10699-014-9374-y

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The work has been presented to NASA, cited by the US Geological Survey, is one of four works cited in support of positive expected institutional effects of UCLA's (2014) diversity requirement, and has recently been appealed to in support of promoting diversity in the armed forces in a brief submitted to the Supreme Court (Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 579 U.S. ___ [2016]; Thompson 2014). A number of philosophers have also taken the result to apply to the value of epistemic diversity in scientific communities (e.g., Martini 2014;Stegenga 2016;Bright 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity, Ability, and Expertise in Epistemic Communities

Grim¹,

Singer²,

Bramson³

et al. 2019

Philos. of Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Hong and Page ‘diversity trumps ability’ result has been used to argue for the more general claim that a diverse set of agents is epistemically superior to a comparable group of experts. Here we extend Hong and Page’s model to landscapes of different degrees of randomness and demonstrate the sensitivity of the ‘diversity trumps ability’ result. This analysis offers a more nuanced picture of how diversity, ability, and expertise may relate. Although models of this sort can indeed be suggestive for diversity policies, we advise against interpreting such results overly broadly.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity, Ability, and Expertise in Epistemic Communities

Grim¹,

Singer²,

Bramson³

et al. 2019

Philos. of Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By contrast, Stegenga (2016) argues that a purely cognitive epistemic evaluation of a consensus is possible. Stegenga identifies three conditions the procedures leading to a knowledge-based consensus should satisfy: (1) Inclusivity: the consensus-forming processes should include all available evidence; (2): Constraint: these processes should constrain intersubjective assessments of the hypothesis of interest; (3) Evidential Complexity: these processes should assess evidence on multiple relevant evidential criteria.…”

Section: When Is Consensus Knowledge-based or Epistemically Justified?mentioning

confidence: 98%

The Social Epistemology of Consensus and Dissent

Miller¹

2019

The Routledge Handbook of Social Epistemology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews current debates in social epistemology about the relations between knowledge and consensus. These relations are philosophically interesting on their own, but also have practical consequences, as consensus takes an increasingly significant role in informing public decision making. The paper addresses the following questions. When is a consensus attributable to an epistemic community? Under what conditions may we legitimately infer that a consensual view is knowledge-based or otherwise epistemically justified? Should consensus be the aim of scientific inquiry, and if so, what kind of consensus? How should dissent be handled? It is argued that a legitimate inference that a theory is correct from the fact that there is a scientific consensus on it requires taking into consideration both cognitive properties of the theory as well as social properties of the consensus. The last section of the paper reviews computational models of consensus formation.

show abstract

“…Controlled feedback gives participants the ability to reflect on the responses and allows participants to provide further understanding of the problems or issues which need to be addressed [ 16 ]. Online Delphi studies can also allow multiple participants to engage with the process at a time and place which is convenient for them, as participants are able to respond within a specified time period rather than attend a scheduled meeting, which may be required for other consensus building techniques such as nominal group technique [ 19 ] or a consensus conference [ 20 ]. Therefore, the present study uses a Delphi study design to inform the development of a training program to help visual impairment service professionals in the UK to promote PA to people with visual impairment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delphi Study: Designing Training to Enable Visual Impairment Services to Promote Physical Activity

Lindsay

Smıth

Allen

2023

Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests adults with visual impairment would increase their physical activity (PA) if they were advised to by a professional working in visual impairment services. However, there are no training programs which are targeted at enabling these professionals to promote PA. Therefore, this study aims to inform a UK-based training program which facilitates PA promotion within visual impairment services. A modified Delphi technique was used, consisting of a focus group and two rounds of surveys. The panel included 17 experts in round one, and 12 experts in round two. Consensus was defined as equal to or greater than 70% agreement. The panel agreed training should: educate professionals on PA benefits, injury prevention, and wellbeing, address myths associated with PA, address health and safety concerns, help professionals to find local PA opportunities, and include a networking session for professionals in visual impairment services and local PA providers. The panel agreed training should also target PA providers and volunteers for visual impairment services, and that training should be delivered online and in-person. In conclusion, training should provide professionals with the capability to promote PA and to establish stakeholder partnerships. The present findings can inform future research which tests the panel’s recommendations.

show abstract

Three Criteria for Consensus Conferences

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

Diversity, Ability, and Expertise in Epistemic Communities

Diversity, Ability, and Expertise in Epistemic Communities

The Social Epistemology of Consensus and Dissent

Delphi Study: Designing Training to Enable Visual Impairment Services to Promote Physical Activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About