Calibration Trumps Confidence as a Basis for Witness Credibility

Tenney, Elizabeth R.; MacCoun, Robert J.; Spellman, Barbara A.; Hastie, Reid

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01847.x

Cited by 152 publications

(177 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

161

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results contrast with those of Tenney and her colleagues (Tenney, MacCoun, Spellman, & Hastie, 2007;Tenney et al, 2008). They found that overconfident witnesses lost credibility when they claimed to be 100% confident about something that turned out to be incorrect.…”

Section: The Origins Of Overconfidencecontrasting

confidence: 56%

When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence

Kennedy

Anderson

Moore

2013

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

135

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Origins Of Overconfidencecontrasting

confidence: 56%

When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence

Kennedy

Anderson

Moore

2013

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

135

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To investigate the effects of scale-grain size on discrimination, we calculated "recognition ratings" (ranging from -100 [certain new] to 100 [certain old]; cf. Tenney, MacCoun, Spellman, & Hastie, 2007) by combining binary responses with retrospective confidence ratings, and then compared classification performance using these ratings with performance using ecphoric confidence and binary responses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using ecphoric confidence ratings to discriminate seen from unseen faces: The effects of retention interval and distinctiveness

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theories of confidence processing for recognition judgments suggest that confidence indexes the degree of match between a presented stimulus and an image in memory (ecphoric similarity). Recent research has demonstrated that having participants rate their confidence that a face had been previously seen provides an equivalent or a better index of the stimulus's status than does eliciting a simple binary response (Sauer, Brewer, & Weber, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 137: 528-547, 2008). Using a face recognition paradigm, we manipulated retention interval and stimulus distinctiveness to directly test the suggestion that confidence indexes ecphoric similarity and to probe the boundary conditions for using confidence ratings to discriminate seen from unseen faces. Consistent with the proposed ecphoric basis for confidence ratings, mean confidence was higher for previously seen than for unseen faces, and conditions conducive to the formation of strong memories improved confidence-based discrimination. In all conditions, after the application of a classification algorithm, confidence ratings provided a more sensitive index of face status (i.e., seen or unseen) than did binary responses.

show abstract

“…An eyewitness who claims to be absolutely certain, for example, is rated more credible than an eyewitness who does not (Tenney, MacCoun, Spellman, & Hastie, 2007), and prosecution eyewitnesses who elaborate their testimony with extra details are more credible, and get more guilty verdicts, than eyewitnesses who do not (Bell & Loftus, 1988. It is worrying that our subtle manipulation produces effects similar in magnitude to these relatively heavy-handed approaches.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Ordered questions bias eyewitnesses and jurors

Michael

Garry

2015

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eyewitnesses play an important role in the justice system. But suggestive questioning can distort eyewitness memory and confidence, and these distorted beliefs influence jurors (Loftus, Learning & Memory, 12, 361-366, 2005; Penrod & Culter, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1, 817-845, 1995). Recent research, however, hints that suggestion is not necessary: Simply changing the order of a set of trivia questions altered people's beliefs about their accuracy on those questions (Weinstein & Roediger, Memory & Cognition, 38, 366-376, 2010, Memory & Cognition, 40, 727-735, 2012. We wondered to what degree eyewitnesses' beliefs-and in turn the jurors who evaluate them-would be affected by this simple change to the order in which they answer questions. Across six experiments, we show that the order of questions matters. Eyewitnesses reported higher accuracy and were more confident about their memory when questions seemed initially easy, than when they seemed initially difficult. Moreover, jurors' beliefs about eyewitnesses closely matched those of the eyewitnesses themselves. These findings have implications for eyewitness metacognition and for eyewitness questioning procedures.

show abstract

Calibration Trumps Confidence as a Basis for Witness Credibility

Cited by 152 publications

References 19 publications

When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence

When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence

Using ecphoric confidence ratings to discriminate seen from unseen faces: The effects of retention interval and distinctiveness

Ordered questions bias eyewitnesses and jurors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About