Psychological investigations of competence in decision making

摘要: Agreement among professionals is often considered as evidence that a decision is correct. The reasoning behind this principle is that it is unlikely that independent experts would all choose a wrong alternative. Concurring opinions in medicine, consensus on faculty committees, and unanimous appeals court decisions exemplify how the principle makes us confident. The expertise of someone who disagrees with the consensual answer is deemed questionable. We challenge this view, arguing that agreement with other experts is neither necessary nor sufficient for expertise.