rated themselves highest, then friends, then generalised others
Milton - many pioneering discoveries made by indivs who were ignored by peers
Chi - proficiency scale - adapted from Hoffman
Novice - new members. minimal exposure
initiate - novice who's done initiation ceremony
apprentice - learning at introductory level
journeyman - can perform orders unsupervised
expert - brilliant journeyman, regarded by peers, accurate judgements
master - expert qualified to teach, of elite group of experts
Farrington-Darby + Wilson
review of expertise + its study
source of confusion + conflicting findings in literature on
expertise comes from variety of investigator's disciplines +
perspectives -> has impact on method choice
most recently, the attrition (falling short of
skills) of skilled performers in many industries
has motivated organisation to try understand
what distinguishes expert from rest
own work on railways - interested in understanding expertise for 4 major purposes:
1) To develop better human factors tools + solutions for future
2) Future of rail network control will increasingly depend on
appropriate + useful intelligent decision support systems
3) Need to understand how 'expert' signallers + controllers deal with
network at present - eg in abnormal circumstances
4) Loss of expertise + opportunities to develop expertise has meant Network Rail must
take v serious look at what experts of future should be + how to develop them
How many hours of practice to become expert?
Watson - founder of behaviourism
practicing more intensively than others
= probably most reasonable
explanation we have for success +
Simon + Chase
investigated chess mastery
no instant experts
estimate v roughly that a master has
spent 10k-50k hours practice
analysed music 1685-1900
identified top 500 pieces by 76 composers
in almost every case, greatest work not created until 10yrs experience composing
Ericsson et al
music academy, west berlin
10 students - best violinists.
10 students - good violinists.
10 students - future music
best 2 groups had deliberate practice
'deliberate practice' - activities specially designed to improve performance
level. not performances, competitions, paid services, not enjoyable...
as age increased + practice increased (diff between groups), performance level increased.
cited more than 4200 times, confirmation bias. See Bacon
10k rule popularised by Gladwell (author)
takes 10k hours to become an expert at anything. 'practice makes perfect'
X Epstein - practice is important but eg Jamaicans dominate
sprinting, Kenyans dominate long distance - it's in the genes
- Gladwell only applied rule to cognitively demanding activities
Bacon - the confirmation bias
when adopted an opinion, draws everything to
support it. although may be greater number of
instances proving wrong, neglects + rejects these.
we see patterns we want to see, even if not actually there
Problems with 10k rule
most often cited studies rely on
historical analysis + self report
number appeared plucked from thin air.
Ericsson maths doesn't make sense
Heavy criticism from researchers - 'blindness
to decades of psych theorising'
Hambrick - meta-analysis of effect of deliberate practice on
music + chess. in both, practice only made up ~30% of
variance in performance. leaves a lot unexplained
other factors? starting age, intelligence (working mem capacity), personality?
Are experts more persuasive than non-experts?
Many companies think so - used in media a lot
expert vs attractive vs powerful
when source attractive, ppts persuaded by identification. want to
establish/maintain satisfying relship to another person
when source expert, ppts persuaded by internalisation.
behaviour adopted tends to be integrated with indiv's
existing values. satisfaction due to content of new beh
Hovland + Weiss 1951
Few studies consider effectiveness of
persuasion in attitude of the audience to communicator
untrustworthy sources eg mass circulation magazine, controversh columnist, movie-gossip columnist
trustworthy sources eg journal of bio + medicine, national boards, good rep magazine
questionnaires 1-5 scale to evaluate ppt's attitudes of trustworthiness before study = not associated with experiment
2nd questionnaire on reactions to articles - gradually to opinion q's.
ppts discounted material from untrustworthy sources. in time, tended to disassociate
content + source = original scepticism faded + untrustworthy material accepted
changes in opinion sig related to trustworthiness of source
we are persuaded by 'credible sources' - knowledgable, trustworthy
X many ppts didn't complete study - not compulsory. only 61 students completed
supports sleeper effect - psych phenomenon related to persuasion.
when exposed normally to persuasive messages, attitudes supporting message increase
over time, decay -> attitudes gravitate back to previous opinion
contrast - low cred/distrust messages arouses suspicion + attitude
change to message. but when exposed to persuasive distrust
message, tend to be more persuaded over time = sleeper effect
political campaings - undecided voters see negative
advert by opposite party. question trustworthiness, not
persuaded initially. but even though low cred, more
likely to be persuaded late + vote against party in ad
message -> high motivation -> deep processing focused on message quality -> lasting change that resists fading + counterattacks
message -> low motivation -> superficial processing of surface features eg attractiveness -> temporary change susceptible to
= expertise can influence attitudes, but can it really influence perception + beh?
Crisci + Kassinove
does explicit label signalling expertise influence beh in real world?
96 mother-child pairings. parents thought psych giving evaluation. offered card to redeem parenting guide book.
when dressed as expert, 2/3rds took card, half redeemed. when non-expert, 3/8ths took card, 1/3rd redeemed
Petty, Cacioppo + Goldman
ppts heard argument for changes in uni policies. manipulated source. half heard report by high school class - low expertise.
half heard report by prof of ed - high expertise. actually, all heard same speaker. manipulated strength of argument.
same results as petty + cacioppo. favoured expert source + strong arguments.
X ofc, usually have pre-existing beliefs on topics. don't usually change beliefs just because expert suggested
not a yes/no answer. persuasiveness of expert depends on situational + indiv diff
Clark et al - if we anticipate argument will threaten beliefs, will process argument centrally rather than peripherally.
how do our starting beliefs influence how persuasive we find expert's argument? Asked ppts in favour of 'fast food tax'. told source was
leading scholar / high school junior. argument strength manipulated. expert sources considered to elicit more persuasive processing cause
expectations of info to be valid/accurate. attitude increased (+ persuaded) when source expertise high + message strong.
Expert. Counter-attitude - influenced by strength. Pro-attitude - not influenced by strength
Non-Expert. Counter-attitude - not influenced by strength. Pro-attitude - influenced by strength.
Perceive threat -> central processing -> influenced by argument strength
Don't perceive threat -> peripheral processing -> not influenced by argument strength
expectations can also work against experts - if we expect strong argument + they don't, we punish them
tendency for experts to be more persuasive than non-experts