Final answer:
The strictness of criteria used in decision-making typically depends on whether the outcome is expected or unexpected, with unexpected results often warranting a more stringent assessment. Context matters, and this principle is applied in fields ranging from medical evaluations to employment considerations, where concrete evidence and logical reasoning are necessary to support conclusions.
Step-by-step explanation:
Criteria for Decision Making in Various Contexts
When determining whether the criteria for a certain decision, such as an approach or evaluation, will be as strict for an expected result as for an unexpected result, it is essential to consider the context. In most cases, unexpected results demand a more rigorous examination as they could imply a significant deviation from the norm, which might necessitate additional validation. For example, when determining whether a drug is suitable for human administration, the acceptable risk assessment will often be stricter for unexpected results because of the potential implications for patient health.
In the context of employment, similar principles apply. Employers collect information about a candidate's academic and work history to avoid hiring a poor-quality employee - a "lemon." They may rely on signals such as degrees from reputable schools, high grade point averages, or awards to screen for qualities like motivation and ability to work well with others. Still, the actual ability can only be confirmed through observation on the job. Hence, certain criteria are employed to reduce the risk of uncertainty.
Therefore, whether assessing a creative work, analyzing a potential job candidate, or determining the viability of a design or medical treatment, criteria do invariably shift in strictness based on the expectedness of the outcome and the consequences it entails. Providing objective evidence and sound logic in support of conclusions is a fundamental part of this process.