CONSULT THE EXPERTS?

The 'Dr. Fox Effect' is the name of a series of experiments
that have demonstrated that so-called 'experts' are often
little more correct than random guesses. It made no dif-
ference whether the expert was highly educated, had ac-
cess to hidden information, or had many years of experi-
ence. The only consistent predictor of accuracy was
fame, and it was an inverse relationship, i.e. famous pre-
dictors were less accurate than unknown ones.

'Dr. Fox' was a made-up name for an actor who presented
professionals with what was essentially a meaningless
lecture. After the lecture most of the audience declared
that they were impressed with the 'doctor', showing how
much expectation has to do with believeability.

Those experts that were the worst at predictions tended
to be strongly opinionated but highly outspoken. Those
who were more cautious and prone to self-doubt were far
more likely to get matters right.

Other experiments point in the same direction: Psych-
ologists diagnosing clients did no better than their sec-
retaries; maze rats consistently outperformed groups of
Yale undergraduates at understanding the ways of maze
optimality.

What do these insights mean to those who comprehend
this information? --Perhaps taking 'experts' opinions
with a large grain of salt. But if we can't rely on experts,
how will we know what is true? This is an attitude that
was formerly known as 'existential'; human beings are
suspended over a void of the unknown and uncertain.
That is our lot. What will our future be?

--Taken from an editorial by Nicholas Kristof, col-
umnist of the NY Times. 3-26-09