o
!"
# $
!# %&
$
'
o()
*+)
,-"
# .
!# /.
,# 0$
'1!&23
#
o%
)
o4&
5
o617)8)
31#
o9$)9)
o':)/;<
$
!9)
identication of experts: =)$"
o>&)&
3#
o'$)
%$
$
!
oExpert authority 8
=

o/=2
=
o3)
#
o)7
o)<:
9)1
1)
&9)
1
9)
!?,
*+
!!
/)eld of
expertise
,
/)"
")(@
@
'4
"9)(
!"@$$(
,"9@
@
/49;'$$$)
*
$
&
%$)"
1. Do we care enough about the issue to try to evaluate those who claim to be experts about it?
2. Is the field one in which there even are experts?
3. Is the source an expert on the relevant issue?
4. Has the source been quoted accurately?
5. Is the issue one in which the experts are (mostly) in agreement?
6. Is the source’s claim one that is very unusual or surprising?
7. Is there any reason to think that the source might be biased or mistaken in this particular case?
Is the issue important to us?
What you don’t know can hurt you ex. Serious cancer treatment (multiple ways) good to have
more info
But more isn’t always better, trick is to know when u need info and when you don’t
There’s a cost of acquiring info so having too much is no good, wastes effort