Calibration Trumps Confidence as a Basis for Witness Credibility

  title={Calibration Trumps Confidence as a Basis for Witness Credibility},
  author={Elizabeth R. Tenney and Robert J MacCoun and Barbara A. Spellman and Reid Hastie},
  journal={Psychological Science},
  pages={46 - 50}
Confident witnesses are deemed more credible than unconfident ones, and accurate witnesses are deemed more credible than inaccurate ones. But are those effects independent? Two experiments show that errors in testimony damage the overall credibility of witnesses who were confident about the erroneous testimony more than that of witnesses who were not confident about it. Furthermore, after making an error, less confident witnesses may appear more credible than more confident ones. Our… 

Figures from this paper

Witness Vetting: What Determines Detectives' Perceptions of Witness Credibility?

During the course of a criminal investigation witness vetting, a detective's process of determining the credibility and weight of witness information, can lead to errors in an investigation that can

Effects of a Proven Error on Evaluations of Witness Testimony

Investigation of the impact of a single demonstrated detail inaccuracy on judgments of the likely reliability of witness memory suggested that legal professionals should be cautious when highlighting an isolated testimonial error given the potential to suggest more widespread testimonial unreliability.

Title Cheap talk and credibility : The consequences of confidence and accuracy on advisor credibility and persuasiveness Permalink

Is it possible to increase one’s influence simply by behaving more confidently? Prior research presents two competing hypotheses: (1) the confidence heuristic holds that more confidence increases

The Epistemic Contract: Fostering an Appropriate Level of Public Trust in Experts.

  • R. MacCoun
  • Philosophy
    Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation
  • 2015
Research on expert calibration, on the effects of confidence and calibration on perceived credibility, and on the role that “naive realism” plays in biasing their assessments of experts who say what the authors want to hear are reviewed.

“I Had a Confidence Epiphany!”: Obstacles to Combating Post-Identification Confidence Inflation

Three experiments tested the effectiveness of introducing a confidence statement immediately following their selection to combat the effects of confidence inflation on mock-juror judgments and found use of post-identification confidence statements to decrease the impact ofconfidence inflation in the courtroom may be insufficient.

Juror Decision Making When a Witness Makes Multiple Identification Decisions1

Mock jurors (N = 224) read a trial summary varying the consistency of the eyewitness's initial lineup identification (ID) decision and confidence. In all conditions, a second positive lineup ID of

Secondary Confessions, Expert Testimony, and Unreliable Testimony

Two experiments examined two potential safeguards intended to protect accused persons against unreliable testimony from cooperating witnesses. Participants in both experiments read a trial transcript



Effects of Testimonial Inconsistencies and Eyewitness Confidence on Mock-Juror Judgments

It is suggested that witness confidence may be more likely to emerge as a dominant influence on juror judgments when the testimony is wide ranging rather than relatively brief and concerned only with a specific issue (e.g., identification confidence).

Witness confidence and witness accuracy: Assessing their forensic relation.

Jurors overbelieve eyewitnesses, have difficulty reliably differentiating accurate from inaccurate eyewitnesses, and are not adequately sensitive to aspects of witnessing and identification

The Role of Eyewitness Confidence in Juror Perceptions of Credibility1

A review of the theory and research concerning factors affecting persuasion suggested the hypothesis that eyewitness confidence is an important factor in jurors' perceptions of the witness'

Eyewitness accuracy and confidence

In deciding the trustworthiness of eyewitness testimony, the U.S. judiciary employs as one of five criteria the witness' level of confidence demonstrated at the confrontation. A very recent

Trivial persuasion in the courtroom: the power of (a few) minor details.

  • B. BellE. Loftus
  • Psychology, Law
    Journal of personality and social psychology
  • 1989
Investigated the influence of trivial testimonial detail on judgments of 424 undergraduates who served as mock jurors and found that when eyewitnesses provided more detail, they were generally judged to be more credible, to have a better memory for the culprit's face and for details, and to have paid more attention to the culprit.

The Impact of A Discredited Key Witness

An experiment was conducted in order to assess the impact of discredited testimony presented by a key witness in a court setting. One of two videotaped cases was presented to subjects who were asked

The Perceived Validity of Eyewitness Identification Testimony: A Test of the Five Biggers Criteria

It is postulated that certainty plays a qualitatively different role from the four other Biggers criteria in evaluations of eyewitness identification testimony, and hypothesized that participants would ignore reports on other criteria when certainty was high (the certainty-trumps hypothesis), but not when surety was low.

Effects of inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony on mock-juror decision-making

In attempting to impeach an eyewitness, attorneys often highlight inconsistencies in the eyewitness's recall. This study examined the differential impact of types of inconsistent testimony on

The Tractability of Eyewitness Confidence and Its Implications for Triers of Fact

A theft staged for 80 unsuspecting eyewitnesses was followed by a picture lineup that did or did not contain the thief. In an attempt to see if eyewitness confidence is tractable after the

Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases

The lay-person's knowledge of the factors that influence eyewitness memory was examined by evaluating the manner in which mock jurors integrated eyewitness evidence to draw inferences about defendant