Determining Differences in Expert Judgment: Implications for Knowledge Acquisition and Validation*

In knowledge acquisition, it is often desirable to aggregate the judgments of multiple experts into a single system. In some cases this takes the form of averaging the judgments of those experts. In these situations it is desirable to determine if the experts have different views of the world before their individual judgments are aggregated. In validation, multiple experts often are employed to compare the performance of expert systems and other human actors. Often those judgments are then averaged to establish performance quality of the expert system. An important part of the comparison process should be determining if the experts have a similar view of the world. If the experts do not have similar views, their evaluations of performance may differ, resulting in a meaningless average performance measure. Alternatively, if all the validating experts do have similar views of the world then the validation process may result in paradigm myopia.     

VALIDATION OF EXPERT SYSTEMS- WITH APPLICATIONS TO AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING EXPERT SYSTEMS*

This paper proposes a set of definitions for the concepts “validation” and “assessment” applied to expert systems (ESs). It develops a framework for this validation and demonstrates the framework on existing accounting and auditing ESs to elicit some of the research issues involved in ES validation. Validation is critical to the design and implementation of decision-making ESs. In a setting where objectivity is sought and variance is avoided, validation ascertains what a system knows, knows incorrectly, or does not know. Validation ascertains the system's level of expertise and investigates the theoretical basis on which the system is based. It evaluates the reliability of decisions made by the system. The validation framework developed in this paper is research methods. It is designed to reflect the unique aspects of ESs (in contrast to other types of computer programs) and can be used by ES developers as a basis from which to perform validation and by researchers as a framework to elicit research issues in validation.     

A Comparative Outcome Study of Behavioral Marital Therapy and Communication Therapy*

Distressed couples were assigned to Behavioral Marital Therapy, Communication Therapy, or a Wait-List. Treated couples demonstrated more change than controls in marital problems and general communication patterns, but not in feelings toward spouse or communication during conflict resolution discussions. Wives in treatment reported more positive change in personal, nonmarital problems than control wives. There were no overall differences between treatment groups; treated couples reported increases in marital satisfaction and communication from pretreatment to the 4-month follow-up. There was an interaction between age and response to treatment: young couples changed more in Behavioral Marital Therapy, while older couples responded better to Communication Therapy. Results are discussed in terms of the need for developing client-tailored treatment programs.     

Modelling domestic work time

What variables should be used as regressors in models of the length of time which people spend doing unpaid domestic work? To most economists, the answer would be straightforward: use the variables which are implied by a theoretical model of household time allocation (e.g. Becker's). This paper shows that this strategy has not been followed, explores why this is so, and makes some recommendations about variable specification and the treatment of paid market work time in particular. The arguments are illustrated using regressions based on UK time budget data for the mid-1980s.     

Physical and psychological partner aggression across a decade: a growth curve analysis

The course of physical and psychological partner aggression was investigated over a decade in 203 wives from Suffolk County, New York. Wives reported on their own and on their partners' aggression at one month before marriage and 6, 18, 30, and 120 months after marriage. This follow-up is the longest period over which partner aggression has been examined. Prevalence rates of wife's report of wife- and husband-perpetrated physical aggression were 48% and 35% at premarriage, and 13% and 10% ten years later. Using HLM, husband- and wife-perpetrated physical aggression were found to decrease on average approximately one act of aggression per month, regardless of severity and even when controlling for changes in marital satisfaction. There was no significant pattern of change in psychological aggression. These findings are consistent with cross-sectional analyses, and suggest that physical partner aggression decreases in community samples of couples.     

ASSERTION AND FAMILY VIOLENCE: CORRELATES OF SPOUSE ABUSE

Abusive couples, discordant couples, and satisfactorily married couples were compared on self-report measures of general assertion, spouse-specific assertion, spouse-specific aggression, and spousal physical aggression in their families of origin. Men and women in abusive relationships as well as those in discordant, but non-abusive, relationships have lower levels of spouse-specific assertion than satisfactorily married couples. However, men and women in abusive relationships did not differ from discordant, non-abusive men and women, on these measures. In brief, low levels of spouse-specific assertion are characteristic of discordant couples whether they are abusive or not. However, as in our past research, spousal violence in the family of origin was a critical distinguishing factor of physically abusive men versus discordant, but non-abusive, men. Also, as in ourpast research, violence in the family of origin was not a critical distinguishing characteristic of women in abusive relationships.