Re: [SystemSafety] NYTimes: The Next Accident Awaits

From: Tom Ferrell < >
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 16:46:30 -0500

The biggest reason I would suggest for a relatively low amount of confirmation bias in the current aerospace designee-oriented system is that the system is structured in such a way that most compliance data is looked at by different DERs and government specialists who, in effect, look over each other's shoulders. At least one if not multiple parties in the review cycle are supposed to be free from project/program cost and schedule pressures. The goal is for as objective a review as possible with a whole lot of 'what-ifs' being asked along the way. The system breaks down when these types of constraints are allowed to intrude. This sometimes happens through political pressure brought to bear on what would otherwise be a pure regulatory function. All of that said, I see no distinction between this as a problem today and what might exists should assurance/safety cases become more of the norm. It also breaks down, IMHO, when the focus tends to checking the box regarding the form and format of data rather than the technical content, something we are seeing on an ever increasing basis.

-----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx [mailto:systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx Of Peter Bernard Ladkin
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 2:30 PM
To: Andrew Rae; systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] NYTimes: The Next Accident Awaits

On 2/3/14 5:31 PM, Andrew Rae wrote:
> .... Nancy has
> suggested that it leads the regulator into following the same mindset
> as the people who present the evidence, rather than performing an
adversarial role (confirmation bias).

Tell me, if confirmation bias is such a big problem, why civilian-aerospace DERs don't suffer from it in spades?

PBL Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Faculty of Technology, University of Bielefeld, 33594 Bielefeld, Germany
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319

The System Safety Mailing List

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Mon Feb 03 2014 - 22:46:45 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:06 CEST