The guidance to authors additionally identifies other practices and approaches relevant in applying expert judgement and developing assessment findings . First, authors are encouraged to carefully consider appropriate generalisation within assessment findings, emphasising insights that are integrative, nuanced and rigorous . Second, authors are instructed to attend to potential biases, including in group dynamics, such as tendencies towards overconfidence and anchoring or Type I  error aversion . Third, particular attention is drawn to the importance of evaluating and communicating ranges of potential outcomes to inform decision making and risk management . In some cases, deep uncertainties related to parameters or processes that are unknown or disagreed upon strongly benefit from dedicated methods of assessment and decision support . Fourth, the guidance explores the different ways that framings of conclusions can shape their interpretation by readers. Finally, the guidance underscores the importance of reflecting upon all sources of uncertainty, which can include deep, difficult-to-quantify and easy-to-underestimate uncertainties arising from incomplete understanding of relevant processes or competing conceptualisations across the literature . A detailed review of literature assessing IPCC uncertainty characterisation methods is provided in WGI 1.2.3.1.
IPCC
Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
IPCC Report