Who's the Best? A Relativistic View of Expertise
Article first published online: 6 MAR 2014
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Volume 28, Issue 4, pages 447–457, July/August 2014
How to Cite
2014), Who's the Best? A Relativistic View of Expertise, Appl. Cognit. Psychol., 28: 447–457. DOI: 10.1002/acp.3015, and (
- Issue published online: 21 JUL 2014
- Article first published online: 6 MAR 2014
- Manuscript Accepted: 5 FEB 2014
- Manuscript Revised: 9 JAN 2014
- Manuscript Received: 23 JUL 2013
The dictionary and the expert performance approach view an expert as one who, after sufficient training and experience in a domain, can perform the requisite tasks above a threshold level. In contrast, we argue for a performance-based approach that implies expertise is a continuum; the experts are the best performers. Most tasks in which expertise can be demonstrated have an underlying core of judgment, including domains in which the tasks call for judgment to be overlain with performance, prediction, or instruction. To evaluate judgment, we employ the metaphor of the judge as a measuring instrument. Like an instrument, expert judgment according to the performance-based approach has three key properties: discrimination, consistency, and validity. Validity requires ground truth and is usually difficult to establish; but the other two properties are readily observable, and they are combined in the Cochran–Weiss–Shanteau index. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.