Get access

Four case studies in using expert opinion to inform priors

Authors

  • Petra M. Kuhnert

    Corresponding author
    1. CSIRO Mathematics, Informatics and Statistics, Waite Campus, Private Bag 2, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia
    • CSIRO Mathematics, Informatics and Statistics, Waite Campus, Private Bag 2, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia.
    Search for more papers by this author

  • This article is published in Environmetrics as a special issue on Ecosystem Services, edited by M. Scott and R. Smith Affiliation(s).

Abstract

Priors gained from expert opinion can be the key to effective decision-making. Yet, there is continuing controversy with its use because of its subjective and potentially biased nature. I examine the use of expert opinion through four environmental case studies in which one or more experts participated in an elicitation exercise to provide inference on ecological problems. In each case study, I examine how expert opinion informed the model and the potential pitfalls that could result, especially in data-limited situations.

I discuss two opposing schools of thought: (1) experts provide a valuable source of information that can offer useful insights into a model and (2) expert priors are most times biased, leading to incorrect results and bad decisions. I show that expert opinion has a place in ecological analyses if carefully structured in a model. In situations in which data are limited or simply not available, steps can be taken to ensure its proper use and interpretation from models so decisions can be made urgently and updated when new data becomes available. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary