HackerPapers

arXiv:0801.3114cs.HC

Thinking is Bad: Implications of Human Error Research for Spreadsheet Research and Practice

Raymond R. Panko

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

In the spreadsheet error community, both academics and practitioners generally have ignored the rich findings produced by a century of human error research. These findings can suggest ways to reduce errors; we can then test these suggestions empirically. In addition, research on human error seems to suggest that several common prescriptions and expectations for reducing errors are likely to be incorrect. Among the key conclusions from human error research are that thinking is bad, that spreadsheets are not the cause of spreadsheet errors, and that reducing errors is extremely difficult.

arXiv comments
12 pages including references
Journal reference
Proc. European Spreadsheet Risks Int. Grp. (EuSpRIG) 2007 69-80 ISBN 978-905617-58-6
DOI
Subjects
cs.HCHuman-Computer Interaction

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 1 HN submission from May 2024 to May 2024. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.