Perceptual Bias In The Columbia Disaster

Decision making biases played a devastating role in the Deepwater Disaster. The biases that were present are; representativeness heuristic, overconfidence bias, confirmation bias and escalation of commitment bias. Based on my findings, to some extent, each of the following biases contributed to the Deepwater Disaster.

These consequences can lead to monumental fiascoes. One such fiasco took place in the mining town of Pitcher, Oklahoma in 1950. A mining engineer warned the miners that their town could cave in at any moment from excessive excavating. He suggested immediate evacuation of the town. The leading citizens of the town held a meeting and mocked the engineers’ warning. A few days later, the disaster hit, taking the lives of those who refused to leave. They followed the poor decision made by the leading citizens of the town. All seven symptoms were present in the 1950 mining disaster. A second example of groupthink would be the events surrounding the space shuttle Challenger, the product of flawed decisions. The evidence was inadvisable to launch the space shuttle at the earliest opportunity. NASA’s perspective was that is was undesirable to delay the launch because of the impact it would have on political and public support for the program. Authorities dismissed potentially lethal hazards as only acceptable risks because of NASA’s engineer’s pressure to launch. The decision to launch the shuttle amounted to a much greater loss than the loss of political and public support. A third example of groupthink involves the group around Admiral HE Kimmel, which failed to prepare for the possibility of a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor despite repeated warnings. Informed by his intelligence chief that radio contact with Japanese aircraft carriers

In the late summer of 2005, a terrible tragedy occurred that changed the lives of many in the south-east region of the United States. A Category 3, named storm, named Hurricane Katrina, hit the Gulf Coast on the 29th of August and led to the death of 1,836 and millions of dollars’ worth of damage (Waple 2005). The majority of the damage occurred in New Orleans, Louisiana. Waple writes in her article that winds “gusted over 100 mph in New Orleans, just west of the eye” (Waple 2005). Not only was the majority of the damage due to the direct catastrophes of the storm but also city’s levees could no longer hold thus breaking and releasing great masses of water. Approximately, 80% of the city was submerged at sea level. Despite the vast amount

The audience’s probable attitude and personality with respect to the Board and its findings are all addressed in the document. The attitude that the audience has is one of grief and distrust in both NASA and the Government. This is made evident in the statement, “The loss of Columbia and her crew represents a turning point, calling for a renewed public policy debate and commitment regarding human space exploration.” By stating that there is a need for renewed public policy regarding NASA’s missions, it is clear that the public opinion about NASA has been tarnished by the accident. They also have the probable objections that the Board was biased and that they do not have any effective results that could help reduce the risk that another accident like this will ever occur. However, the likely attitude that the audiences will have toward the writer are that of hope for the future and America’s return to space. This is shown when the document states, “These recommendations reflect both the Boardʼs strong support for

It holds true that government organizations gradually decline; the enthusiasm is replaced with bureaucracy, employees are resistant to change and overall performance is decreased. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is no exception to this. NASA is an example of bureaucracy having a detrimental effect on an organization. The lines of communication became skewed and were often broken while the organization was locked in an internal battle over who exactly was in charge. While there were heads of each department and heads of each branch, critical information often slipped through the cracks. It was this breakdown in communication and the failure to address known issues that was the direct cause for both the Challenger and Columbia explosions. The explosions, though separated by seventeen years, were incredibly similar. Concerns had been brought to the table and similarly dismissed as “acceptable risk.” This acceptable risk proved fatal for the crews of both space shuttles. Bureaucracy and financial expediency led to reduced federal funding, general distrust from the public, and growing disinterest. The organization that sent men to the moon is vastly different than the organization in charge today. NASA’s beginnings were less clouded in red tape and bureaucratic policies. Ideas were

The fundamental attribution error intrigued me while reading the book because I came across the example about Hurricane Katrina. I lived through this experience so I felt it was only right that I talk about my take. The definition of the fundamental attribution error is assuming someone’s personality based on their actions, even when there are powerful outside forces that can be influencing them. Hurricane Katrina was a horrible natural disaster that no one could have predicted would happen but none the less it happened. I remember my family and I watching the news together and coming to the crippling conclusion that we had to leave everything we had behind. Of course, we were used to this because we lived in what they call “the soup bowl” and we were used to emergency evacuations for hurricanes. There was no

Although the extent in which color blind racism surrounded Hurricane Katrina was a contributor to the relief efforts that went about helping those in need because of the pure carnage with Katrina had caused the representation also backed this up with different terminology used to portray different races in ways which made Black Americans more subordinate, which shows how colour blind racism played a hegemony part in the politics of Hurricane Katrina. From evidence gathered it can be seen in a context where the government's involvement before and after hurricane Katrina which can show and demonstrate the hegemony of color blind racism and the different dynamics which have shown the use of color blind racism. Although this approach wasn't primarily

The tragedies caused from the failure of people to listen to others views can be represented in the natural disaster of Hurricane Katrina. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina had struck the Gulf Coast of the United States and directly hit the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia and Alabama. However, it mostly targeted the poverty stricken city of New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina was the costliest natural disaster and one of the five deadliest hurricanes in the United States. The death toll was almost 2,000 people. However, the immense death rate was caused from the failure of people to listen to authorities and evacuate. Many lower class citizens didn’t evacuate because they didn’t own cars, which in turn would cause an expensive evacuation

On February 1,2003, the Columbia was set to return to the Earth from its 16 day mission conducting medical experiments. The return was televised, but instead of our nation watching the 7 crew members safely land, the nation watched the shuttle explode, killing all 7 crew members. In a televised address from the White House, George W. Bush stated, “The cause in which they died will continue. Mankind was led into the darkness beyond our world by the inspiration of discovery and a longing to understand. Our journey into space will go on” (Gatehouse, “A Nation Mourns”). George W. Bush explains that even though the nation will mourn those 7 crewmen, the need for those medical experiments is still crucial. He believes that the curiosity of not knowing what is in space is more important than the safety of our people. An article in Maclean’s, written by Jonathon Gatehouse,

The two sources that i’m using for this report are CNN, Hurricane Katrina Time. The Disaster that i’m covering is Hurricane Katrina. This disaster took place on Monday of April 29th of 2005. Hitting all of louisiana and causing this country to fall in a big depression this hurricane had up to wind speeds of 127 mph (miles per hour) and also being in a category 3 storm. This left 10,000 people seeking for homes because Hurricane Katrina has destroyed them. After the hurricane had hit its damages was estimated up to 108 billion dollars just to repair everything.

The massive hurricane that decimated large areas of the southeastern coast originated as a small category 1 hurricane. The state and federal government received lots of criticism for their minimal preparation and their ineffectual evacuation procedures. The storm shed light on the role of the government in natural disasters and its need for serious evaluation.

In the United States, people who live in poverty are already one of the most vulnerable populations and it is this population that is heavily impacted by public policy relating to natural disasters. Often, public policies relating to disaster preparedness and recovery are not discussed until after a natural disaster takes place which is too late to do any good for the people affected and who are devastated almost beyond comprehension. The role of government in disaster preparedness and recovery became a “hot button” issue especially after Hurricane Katrina when the federal and local governments seemed to protect/help those who already had resources and not those with little to no resources. According to a Gallup Poll by Jones & Carroll (2005), forty-nine percent of respondents said that FEMA was most helpful to them while thirty-one percent of respondents said that nothing was helpful to them during recovery from Hurricane Katrina. This information indicates that there is a gap in services disaster relief policies and programs that needs to be filled.

Most of the social systems in our lives are seemingly independent to each other. However, many of them function similarly since their functioning commonly has strong relations to human behaviors and human mind. In other words, the existence of human beings contributes to the similarity of those social systems. Traffic and small groups are two good examples of this idea. In “Committees, Juries, and Teams: The Columbia Disaster and How Small Groups Can be Made to Work”, James Surowiecki acknowledges that sometimes collective knowledge can fail, and suggests that groups are correct only under specific circumstances. His goal is to understand how to foster those circumstances. In “Shut Up, I Can’t Hear You:

Natural disasters have never been an issue for me in the twenty years I have been living in Florida. There have always been the threats of dangerous hurricanes living near the coast, but I never took them seriously. I always thought " they're just little storms, what's the worst that could happen?". I was so naive to think that way.

While natural disasters such as floods, drought and hurricanes are commonly thought to occur due to environmental forces such as weather, climate and tectonic movements; a deeper investigation into the ‘disaster’ displays other contributing forces. Human factors have a large, if not equal, contribution to the occurrance and outcome of such disasters (Pelling, 2001). As Pelling (2001) argues, there is both a physical and human dimension to ‘natural disasters’. The extent to which the natural occurrence of a physical process, such as a flood or earthquake, impacts on society is constructed by that society, creating a ‘disaster’ as measured by a