topic: [[Debriefing]] people: #people/maryfey created: 2023-06-13 *How to understand the mind of an expert, often used in debriefing positive outcomes.* This reminds me of [[ways of knowing]] It's kind of like [[Cognitive Entry Behaviors]] and [[cognitive reframing]] in a world where we are [[dealing with complexity]] what is cognitive task analysis? A three step process of: (1) knowledge elicitation (what do they know about the situation) (2) knowledge representation (how do they know it) and (3) data analysis and synthesis (how did judgment and action co-create the outcome) “The debriefer’s goal is to see the simulation through their eyes” (Fey and Johnson, 2023, p. 4) “The debriefer then connects their judgment to their actions by having learners reconstruct the decision making process” (Fey and Johnson, 2023, p. 4) This matters because we actually don't learn as much by just asking what someone knows, we need to know how they came about knowing it, and in the situation how did their judgment and action co-create the outcome? ##### What would the opposite argument be? [[Embodied Cognition]] is the idea that our bodies just know when we become experts, and could this be related to biases like motivated reasoning? How do we know that the experts can successfully be aware of the reasoning they used? What about the evidence around free will, and the several second gap between decision and awareness of that decision? Here I am avoiding the [[dual-subject fallacy]] tags: #note/thing | #on/thinking | #on/debriefing | #on/expertise ##### Sources: Fey, M., & Johnson, B. K. (2023). ‘They didn’t do anything wrong! What will I talk about?’ _International Journal of Healthcare Simulation_, gevl9221. [https://doi.org/10.54531/gevl9221](https://doi.org/10.54531/gevl9221)