The benefits of knowing what you know (and what you don’t): How calibration affects credibility

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

“…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.…”

“…Confidence is compelling to observers because, in the absence of information to the contrary, observers assume it reflects superior ability (Tenney & Spellman, 2010;Tenney, Spellman, & MacCoun, 2008).…”

“…In these contexts, it is possible that overconfident individuals will be discovered as being overconfident. Accordingly, those individuals might be penalized for their perceived hubris (Paulhus, 1998;Tenney & Spellman, 2010;Tenney et al, 2008).…”

“…However, an important counterargument to this status enhancement account of overconfidence is that overconfidence might also pose substantial social risks for the individual. If groups were to discover that an individual's high level of confidence were unjustified, they might penalize that individual by relegating the person to the bottom of the status hierarchy (Tenney et al, 2008). If so, the costs of overconfidence might outweigh its benefits.…”

Calibrating Legal Judgments

“…Так, хотя в рамках судебного процесса свидетель, особенно во время перекрестного допроса, может выражать различную степень уверенности в фактах и наблюдениях, о которых он сообщает 9 , но редко можно услышать слова, показывающие что-либо, кро-ме полной уверенности в контексте судебного (а часто и административного) разбирательства. Судья Brandeis хорошо выразил этот феномен, когда писал, что обычно он испытывает меньшую степень уверенности (по его словам, 51 %), чем выражает в своем письменном за-ключении 10 .…”