similarities between psychology and risk assessments
Dec 20th, 2017
The ability to distinguish between different terms is a prerequisite for the acquisition of accurate knowledge, including loss prevention knowledge. Without this capacity, confusion is virtually inevitable. More generally, several words and concepts in loss prevention underscore the necessity of acquiring a specialist vocabulary making fine differentiation among seemingly related but conceptually distinct concepts.
Physiognomy is a very disputed theory of the assessment of character or personality from a person’s outer appearance, especially the face.
As you probably noted the paragraph above is not our writing style. As a matter of fact we only have slightly adapted the conclusion of a paper of psychology.
Similarities between psychology and risk assessments
We have done it because we very well could have written it. Indeed our experience strike uncanny similarities while reviewing risk register (FMEA). When for example we review FMEAs, we see systematic confusion on causes and effects. Their authors sometimes identify consequences that are causes. Sometimes we see a number of irrelevant records as the failure criteria definition is missing. In another instance the boundary of the system was not defined, this lead to half of the consequences metric missing.
The similarities and common ideas between the psychology study referenced above and our our work are stunning. This is why we wrote a glossary, which we add in all our reports.
We will finish with a quote in the conclusion of the psychology paper: “Acquiring critical concepts is not essentially a matter of acquiring new terminology; rather, it is a matter of learning to make appropriate distinctions.”
Tagged with: FMEA, glossary, Psychology, risk assessments
Category: Risk analysis