Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
Science. 2015 Oct 30;350(6260):aaa6516. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa6516.
Formal analyses can be valuable aids to decision-making if their limits are understood. Those limits arise from the two forms of subjectivity found in all analyses: ethical judgments, made when setting the terms of an analysis, and scientific judgments, made when conducting it. As formal analysis has assumed a larger role in policy decisions, awareness of those judgments has grown, as have methods for making them. The present review traces these developments, using examples that illustrate the issues that arise when designing, executing, and interpreting analyses. It concludes with lessons learned from the science and practice of analysis. One common thread in these lessons is the importance of collaborative processes, whereby analysts and decision-makers educate one another about their respective needs and capabilities.
如果能理解其局限性,正式分析可以成为决策的有益辅助。这些局限性源自所有分析中存在的两种主观性形式:在确定分析条件时做出的伦理判断,以及在进行分析时做出的科学判断。随着正式分析在政策决策中扮演着越来越重要的角色,人们对这些判断的认识也在不断提高,同时也出现了更多用于做出这些判断的方法。本综述通过举例说明了在设计、执行和解释分析时出现的问题,追溯了这些发展。最后,从分析的科学和实践中总结了经验教训。这些经验教训的一个共同点是合作过程的重要性,即分析人员和决策者相互教育对方各自的需求和能力。