Hansson Isabelle, Buratti Sandra, Allwood Carl Martin
Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg Sweden.
Front Psychol. 2017 Mar 17;8:377. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00377. eCollection 2017.
Assessments of the extent of knowledge in a domain can be important since non-identified lack of knowledge may lead to decisions that do not consider the effect of relevant factors. Two studies examined experts' and novices' perception of their own ignorance and knowledge within their own and other disciplines and their assessments of their discipline's, and other disciplines' knowledge of all there is to know in each discipline. In total 380 experts and 401 students from the disciplines of history, medicine, physics, and psychology participated. The results for ignorance and knowledge assessments of one's own knowledge were similar. Novices reported more ignorance and less knowledge in their own discipline than experts, but no differences were found in the assessments of how much is known in each discipline. General belief in certainty of knowledge was associated with the knowledge assessments and level of expertise. Finally, disciplinary differences were found both for the knowledge assessments and for belief in certainty of knowledge. Historians and physicists assessed that less was known in their own discipline out of all there is to know (approximately 40%), compared to the medics (about 50%). Historians believed least in certainty of knowledge and physicists most. Our results have practical implications for higher educational teaching and interdisciplinary collaboration.
评估一个领域内的知识广度可能很重要,因为未被认识到的知识欠缺可能导致做出未考虑相关因素影响的决策。两项研究考察了专家和新手对自身及其他学科领域内自身无知和知识的认知,以及他们对自己学科和其他学科所有应知知识的评估。共有来自历史、医学、物理和心理学学科的380名专家和401名学生参与。对自身知识的无知和知识评估结果相似。新手报告称,与专家相比,他们在自己学科中所知的无知更多、知识更少,但在对各学科已知知识量的评估中未发现差异。对知识确定性的普遍信念与知识评估和专业水平相关。最后,在知识评估和对知识确定性的信念方面都发现了学科差异。与医学专家(约50%)相比,历史学家和物理学家认为在所有应知知识中,他们自己学科中已知的知识较少(约40%)。历史学家对知识确定性的信念最低,物理学家最高。我们的研究结果对高等教育教学和跨学科合作具有实际意义。