Picture of UK Houses of Parliament

Leading national thinking on politics, government & public policy through Open Access research

Strathprints makes available scholarly Open Access content by researchers in the School of Government & Public Policy, based within the Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences.

Research here is 1st in Scotland for research intensity and spans a wide range of domains. The Department of Politics demonstrates expertise in understanding parties, elections and public opinion, with additional emphases on political economy, institutions and international relations. This international angle is reflected in the European Policies Research Centre (EPRC) which conducts comparative research on public policy. Meanwhile, the Centre for Energy Policy provides independent expertise on energy, working across multidisciplinary groups to shape policy for a low carbon economy.

Explore the Open Access research of the School of Government & Public Policy. Or explore all of Strathclyde's Open Access research...

Fault fictions : cognitive biases in the conceptualization of fault zones

Shipton, Z.K. and Roberts, J.J. and Comrie, E.L. and Kremer, Y. and Lunn, R.J. and Caine, J.S. (2019) Fault fictions : cognitive biases in the conceptualization of fault zones. Geological Society Special Publications. ISSN 0305-8719 (In Press)

[img] Text (Shipton-etal-GSSP-2019-cognitive-biases-in-the-conceptualization-of-fault-zones)
Shipton_etal_GSSP_2019_cognitive_biases_in_the_conceptualization_of_fault_zones.pdf
Accepted Author Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 31 January 2020.

Download (1MB) | Request a copy from the Strathclyde author

    Abstract

    Mental models (i.e. a human’s internal representation of the real world) have an important role in the way a human understands and reasons about uncertainties, explores potential options, and makes decisions. However, they are susceptible to biases. Issues associated with mental models have not yet received much attention in geosciences, yet systematic biases can affect the scientific process of any geological investigation; from the inception of how the problem is viewed, through selection of appropriate hypotheses and data collection/processing methods, to the conceptualisation and communication of results. This article draws 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 identify a number of 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, we argue that 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 geoscience discipline.