Fault Fictions: cognitive biases in the conceptualization of fault zones

Z. K. Shipton, J. J. Roberts, E. L. Comrie, Y. Kremer, R. J. Lunn, J. S. Caine

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Mental models are a human's internal representation of the real world and have an important role in the way we understand and reason about uncertainties, explore potential options, and make decisions. Mental models have not yet received much attention in geosciences, yet systematic biases can affect any geological investigation; from how the problem is conceived, through selection of appropriate hypotheses and data collection/processing methods, to the conceptualisation and communication of results. We draw on findings from cognitive science and system dynamics, with knowledge and experiences of field geology, to consider the limitations and biases presented by mental models in geoscience, and their effect on predictions of the physical properties of faults in particular. We highlight biases specific to geological investigations and propose strategies for debiasing. Doing so will enhance how multiple data sources can be brought together, and minimise controllable geological uncertainty to develop more robust geological models. Critically, there is a need for standardised procedures that guard against biases, permitting data from multiple studies to be combined and communication of assumptions to be made. While we use faults to illustrate potential biases in mental models and the implications of these biases, our findings can be applied across the geosciences.
LanguageEnglish
JournalGeological Society Special Publications
Early online date12 Sep 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 12 Sep 2019

Fingerprint

fault zone
communication
Communication
Geology
Dynamical systems
Physical properties
physical property
geology
Processing
prediction
Uncertainty

Keywords

  • mental models
  • systematic biases
  • geological investigation
  • debiasing

Cite this

@article{2c03bfd0ed5e4c47a90e680e97c154fc,
title = "Fault Fictions: cognitive biases in the conceptualization of fault zones",
abstract = "Mental models are a human's internal representation of the real world and have an important role in the way we understand and reason about uncertainties, explore potential options, and make decisions. Mental models have not yet received much attention in geosciences, yet systematic biases can affect any geological investigation; from how the problem is conceived, through selection of appropriate hypotheses and data collection/processing methods, to the conceptualisation and communication of results. We draw on findings from cognitive science and system dynamics, with knowledge and experiences of field geology, to consider the limitations and biases presented by mental models in geoscience, and their effect on predictions of the physical properties of faults in particular. We highlight biases specific to geological investigations and propose strategies for debiasing. Doing so will enhance how multiple data sources can be brought together, and minimise controllable geological uncertainty to develop more robust geological models. Critically, there is a need for standardised procedures that guard against biases, permitting data from multiple studies to be combined and communication of assumptions to be made. While we use faults to illustrate potential biases in mental models and the implications of these biases, our findings can be applied across the geosciences.",
keywords = "mental models, systematic biases, geological investigation, debiasing",
author = "Shipton, {Z. K.} and Roberts, {J. J.} and Comrie, {E. L.} and Y. Kremer and Lunn, {R. J.} and Caine, {J. S.}",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1144/SP496-2018-161",
language = "English",
journal = "Geological Society Special Publications",
issn = "0305-8719",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fault Fictions

T2 - Geological Society Special Publications

AU - Shipton, Z. K.

AU - Roberts, J. J.

AU - Comrie, E. L.

AU - Kremer, Y.

AU - Lunn, R. J.

AU - Caine, J. S.

PY - 2019/9/12

Y1 - 2019/9/12

N2 - Mental models are a human's internal representation of the real world and have an important role in the way we understand and reason about uncertainties, explore potential options, and make decisions. Mental models have not yet received much attention in geosciences, yet systematic biases can affect any geological investigation; from how the problem is conceived, through selection of appropriate hypotheses and data collection/processing methods, to the conceptualisation and communication of results. We draw on findings from cognitive science and system dynamics, with knowledge and experiences of field geology, to consider the limitations and biases presented by mental models in geoscience, and their effect on predictions of the physical properties of faults in particular. We highlight biases specific to geological investigations and propose strategies for debiasing. Doing so will enhance how multiple data sources can be brought together, and minimise controllable geological uncertainty to develop more robust geological models. Critically, there is a need for standardised procedures that guard against biases, permitting data from multiple studies to be combined and communication of assumptions to be made. While we use faults to illustrate potential biases in mental models and the implications of these biases, our findings can be applied across the geosciences.

AB - Mental models are a human's internal representation of the real world and have an important role in the way we understand and reason about uncertainties, explore potential options, and make decisions. Mental models have not yet received much attention in geosciences, yet systematic biases can affect any geological investigation; from how the problem is conceived, through selection of appropriate hypotheses and data collection/processing methods, to the conceptualisation and communication of results. We draw on findings from cognitive science and system dynamics, with knowledge and experiences of field geology, to consider the limitations and biases presented by mental models in geoscience, and their effect on predictions of the physical properties of faults in particular. We highlight biases specific to geological investigations and propose strategies for debiasing. Doing so will enhance how multiple data sources can be brought together, and minimise controllable geological uncertainty to develop more robust geological models. Critically, there is a need for standardised procedures that guard against biases, permitting data from multiple studies to be combined and communication of assumptions to be made. While we use faults to illustrate potential biases in mental models and the implications of these biases, our findings can be applied across the geosciences.

KW - mental models

KW - systematic biases

KW - geological investigation

KW - debiasing

U2 - 10.1144/SP496-2018-161

DO - 10.1144/SP496-2018-161

M3 - Article

JO - Geological Society Special Publications

JF - Geological Society Special Publications

SN - 0305-8719

ER -