The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of the Critical Decision Method to Elicit Expert Knowledge: A Case Study in the Methodology of Cognitive Task Analysis
Abstract
The Critical Decision Method (CDM) is an approach to cognitive task analysis. The method involves multiple-pass event retrospection guided by probe questions. The CDM has been used in the elicitation of expert knowledge in diverse domains and for applications including system development and instructional design. The CDM research illustrates the sorts of knowledge representation products that can arise from cognitive task analysis (e.g., Situation Assessment Records, time lines, decision requirements). The research also shows how one can approach methodological issues surrounding cognitive task analysis, including questions about data quality and method reliability, efficiency, and utility. As cognitive task analysis is used more widely in the elicitation, preservation, and dissemination of expert knowledge and is used more widely as the basis for the design of complex cognitive systems, and as projects move into even more field applications and real-world settings, the issues we discuss become increasingly critical.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317
The critical incident technique.
Flanagan, J. C. (1954) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0061470 · Cited by 8,191
(2007) · Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.4135/9781412952651.n55 · Cited by 5,287
Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices*
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2 · Cited by 5,248
Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5657.001.0001 · Cited by 3,537
Klein, G. (2008) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872008x288385 · Cited by 2,231
(2014) · doi:10.4324/9781315799681 · Cited by 2,174
(1991) · Cited by 1,767
Decision making in action: Models and methods
Zakay, D. (1994) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/0001-6918(94)90039-6 · Cited by 1,552
Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions.
Wilson, T. D., & Schooler, J. W. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.181 · Cited by 1,417 · cited 1×
“…task used for the purpose of research on cognition can entail the distortion of ordinary, ongoing thought and that multiattribute evaluation in the manner of exhaustive decision analysis can change the ways people reason (compare, for instance, Fernberger, 1937, with Wilson & Schooler, 1991).”
Method
Cited by
Human Performance Consequences of Stages and Levels of Automation: An Integrated Meta-Analysis
Onnasch, L., Wickens, C. D., Li, H., & Manzey, D. (2014) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720813501549 · Cited by 524
Veale, M., Van Kleek, M., & Binns, R. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3174014 · Cited by 490
“With the inductive, data-driven turn, we may need to rediscover it as something which constrains and augments patterns learned from data, less around tough or rare cases [35] as much as around contentious, value-laden ones.”
BackgroundTheory Construction as Disciplined Reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s
Weick, K. E. (1999) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553254 · Cited by 356
Wickens, C. D. (2008) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872008x288420 · Cited by 334
Cognitive Load and Classroom Teaching: The Double-Edged Sword of Automaticity
FELDON, D. F. (2007) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520701416173 · Cited by 300
Metadata
- Authors
- Hoffman, R. R., Crandall, B., & Shadbolt, N.
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1998-06
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 254-276
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W2070841423
- Cited by
- 403
- References
- 67
- FWCI
- 15.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Use of the Critical Decision Method to Elicit Expert Knowledge: A Case Study in the Methodology of Cognitive Task Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1518/001872098779480442
- The paper
- Hoffman, R. R., Crandall, B., & Shadbolt, N. (1998). Use of the Critical Decision Method to Elicit Expert Knowledge: A Case Study in the Methodology of Cognitive Task Analysis. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872098779480442
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
