Tracing intuitive judgement of experts in fish stock assessment data

Esther Schuch*, Andries Richter

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


Scientific advice is increasingly used to inform policy. Often, experts are asked to give advice when stakes are high, time pressure is severe and uncertainty looms. In such environments, decisions may be guided by instincts and priors, rather than reason. Yet, the extent of these intuitive judgements is unknown. We use a database of fish stock assessments to detect and quantify the systematic tendency to put too much weight on previous information, known as anchoring, in scientific advice. By exploiting exogenous variation in procedures and possibilities to vary model assumptions, we find consistent evidence for intuitive judgement. We find that anchoring is strongest if model choices are flexible and the fish stock is in crisis, potentially increasing pressure and stakes. By providing advice that is biased towards previous results, the stock assessments may be more robust but may also give a false sense of security as more drastic changes may go undetected.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)758-767
JournalFish and Fisheries
Issue number3
Early online date26 Feb 2022
Publication statusPublished - May 2022


  • anchoring
  • behavioural bias
  • expert advice
  • panel data
  • policy advice


Dive into the research topics of 'Tracing intuitive judgement of experts in fish stock assessment data'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this