{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01805869074492099, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.823076923076923, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Decision models: some lessons from the field

Studies of decision-making in such environments as nuclear power plants, urban fire departments, command-and-control centers, and courtrooms are discussed. The studies provide a different perspective on decision strategies from laboratory studies that rely on naive subjects performing relatively context-free tasks under little time pressure and static task conditions. The field research paradigms generate a description of proficient decision making that emphasizes recognitional rather than analytical processes and challenges the decision tree representation of decision problems-that is, failure to use analytical methods is not a sign of incompetence since the recognitional strategies shown by decision makers seem reasonable and effective. Implications of these models for decision-support systems and for training are discussed. >