Conditions for intuitive expertise: a failure to disagree.

By Daniel Kahneman, Gary Klein. American Psychologist, 2009

2,181 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Family Practice, General Decision Sciences

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f1a5fb0c4b9703b3213bc3bd2dfe1f79ee35d511

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Family Practice

In General Decision Sciences

Citations in the corpus

The Cognitive Underpinnings of Bias in Forensic Mental Health Evaluations (2014, background): “There are two traditions of research with regard to human cognitive capacities (Kahneman & Klein, 2009).”
Situation Awareness-Based Agent Transparency (2014, neutral): “…is difficult, and there is strong evidence that humans use a variety of heuristics and rules of thumb to rapidly assess probabilities in real world situations that may lead to satisfactory solutions or in other cases to erroneous conclusions (Kahneman and Klein, 2009; Wickens and Hollands, 2000).”
Understanding intuition: The case for two forms of intuition (2012, background): “We also argue that intuition worthy of trust (cf. Hogarth, 2001; Kahneman and Klein, 2009; Salas et al., 2010) appears to be experienced by experts and thus we limit our research to expert intuition.”
Assessing the Risk and Needs of Supervised Sexual Offenders (2015, background): “According to Kahneman and Klein (2009), mechanical risk tools outperform professional judgment when (a) the number of relevant variables is large, (b) the effect of any particular variable is small, and (c) we do not receive rapid feedback concerning the accuracy of our decisions.”
The complexity of developmental predictions from dual process models (2011, background): “Also, many rules, stimulus discriminations, and decision-making principles that have been practiced to automaticity (e.g., Kahneman & Klein, 2009; Shiffrin & Schneider, 1977) are processed in a Type 1 manner.”
Nudging and Boosting: Steering or Empowering Good Decisions (2017, background): “(Klein, 2008, p. 457) This research program has been committed to revealing the mechanisms behind the often impressive performance of experts, without denying that failures may occur (see also the joint article by Kahneman & Klein, 2009).”
Development and Validation of a New Measure of Intuition: The Types of Intuition Scale (2014, background): “Recent work has begun to identify variables that affect the validity of intuition, including task complexity and expertise (e.g., Hogarth, 2001; Kahneman & Klein, 2009; Pretz, 2008).”
Intuition: A Challenge for Psychological Research on Decision Making (2010, background): “…2002; Glöckner & Witteman, 2010b; Hogarth, 2001; Klein, 1998; Myers, 2002; Plessner, Betsch, & Betsch, 2008; SadlerSmith, 2008) and articles (Hodgkinson, Langan-Fox, & Sadler-Smith, 2008; Kahneman & Klein, 2009) that would provide more than enough material for advanced graduate-level courses.”
Making sense of recommendations (2019, background): “Moreover, humans regularly get clear, immediate feedback on what people find funny, which makes it easier to develop expertise [11].”
Legitimacy‐as‐Feeling: How Affect Leads to Vertical Legitimacy Spillovers in Transnational Governance (2014, positive): “In these situations, experts may draw intuitively on their experiences to assess and complete complex tasks (Kahneman, 2011, p. 234-244; Kahneman and Klein, 2009).”
Defining features versus incidental correlates of Type 1 and Type 2 processing (2012, background): “Also, many rules, stimulus discriminations, and decision-making principles that have been practiced to automaticity (e.g., Kahneman and Klein 2009; Shiffrin and Schneider 1977) are processed in a Type 1 manner.”
Intuition in Management Research: A Historical Review (2012, positive): “In essence it corresponds to what Kahneman and Klein (2009) and Salas, Rosen, and DiazGranados (2010) referred to as 'intuitive expertise'.”