Author
Listed:
- J. O. Okoli
- J. Watt
- G. Weller
Abstract
The current paper builds on the naturalistic decision-making paradigm to advance the meaning and application of expert intuition in real-life settings. While conventional models of expert intuition often link intuitive competence to pattern recognition skills, the current paper advances prior knowledge by demonstrating that intuitive expertise is inextricably linked to actors’ ability to discriminate between subtle informational cues through the process of information filtering. Drawing on data from a phenomenological study involving thirty (30) fireground commanders (UK = 15, Nigeria = 15), the study utilised the critical decision method (CDM) to explore the cognitive strategies utilised by these expert fire-fighters. The method entailed that each expert participant shared a retrospective non-routine fire incident that particularly challenged their expertise, allowing the resulting qualitative data to be coded and analysed using a combination of emergent themes analysis (ETA) and interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). Specifically, the paper develops and discusses: (i) a theoretical model of intuition that emerged directly from the expert incident accounts (ii) an inventory of forty-two critical cues that aided expert decision-making on the fireground, alongside a cue classification framework. Competence on the fireground was found to be a function of experts’ cue discriminatory and information filtering abilities that subsequently allowed information from multiple sources to be processed and utilised efficiently. Although the firefighting domain formed the central focus of this study, findings are deemed generalisable across other high-risk organisations.
Suggested Citation
J. O. Okoli & J. Watt & G. Weller, 2022.
"A naturalistic decision-making approach to managing non-routine fire incidents: evidence from expert firefighters,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 198-217, February.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:25:y:2022:i:2:p:198-217
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2021.1936609
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:25:y:2022:i:2:p:198-217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.