Understanding risk using:

Scientific validation

Abstract vector collection of line research and science icons. Elements for mobile and web applications.
RSI-U square-512w

RSI stands firm on the bedrock of scientific rigor, ensuring that our assessments possess the highest degree of precision and relevance. We aim to pinpoint threats and equally emphasize areas that hold promise for innovation. Institutions, therefore, benefit from an approach that not only prevents setbacks but actively highlights emerging areas of growth.

At RSI, scientific validation of risk and risk assessments, entails a rigorous process to ensure that the methods, models, and data used to calculate risks are both accurate and reliable. This is critical for lending credibility to an assessment and for making informed decisions based on the results.

The first step usually involves peer review using qualified RSI staff experts, RSI external associate experts, as well as independent experts in the relevant domain. Together, they scrutinize methodologies, assumptions, and calculations. Peer review ensures that the process adheres to established scientific principles and that any potential biases or errors are identified and addressed.

Next, the data sources and data quality are scrutinized. For the validation to be scientifically sound, the data must be reliable, accurate, and relevant to the risks being assessed. Data quality checks may include verifications for completeness, consistency, and timeliness. In cases where primary data is not available, the reliability of secondary or surrogate data needs to be evaluated carefully.

Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses are another critical component of RSI’s scientific validation process. Sensitivity analysis helps to identify how changes in different parameters or assumptions influence the calculated risks. Uncertainty analysis, often conducted via methods like Monte Carlo simulation, quantifies the uncertainty in the calculated outcomes due to inherent variabilities or lack of knowledge in the input parameters.

In some specialized areas, empirical validation is also conducted. For instance, in engineering or medical research, it is common to validate risk models against real-world observations or experiments. Such empirical validation provides a robust check on the reliability of the risk assessment model.

Statistical methods also play a significant role in scientific validation. These could range from goodness-of-fit tests to check if a particular distribution adequately describes the data, to hypothesis testing to ensure that the models are making valid inferences.

Lastly, the validation process should be iterative. As new data becomes available or as the organization undergoes changes that could affect risk, the validation process should be revisited. This ensures that the risk model remains accurate and relevant over time.

In summary, scientific validation of risk assessments is a multi-step process potentially involving peer review, data quality checks, sensitivity and uncertainty analyses, and possibly empirical validation. Statistical methods are often employed to rigorously test the model’s assumptions and results. Finally, RSI’s process is iterative, ensuring that it adapts to new information and remains a reliable tool for risk management.

Understanding, managing, and communicating risk