Master of Public Policy
Master of Public Affairs
Master of Development Practice
Doctoral Program
Global and Executive Programs
Undergraduate Programs
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion
Student Groups
Alumni
Directories
Faculty
Publications
Working Papers
Centers
News Center
Policy Initiatives
For Students
For Employers
Career Events
Employment Statistics
Client-based Projects
About GSPP
Events
Make a Gift
Find a Program
Find a Faculty Member
Find a Center
Calibration Trumps Confidence as a Basis for Witness Credibility
Tenney, E. R., MacCoun, R. J., Spellman, B. A., & Hastie, R. (2007). Calibration trumps confidence as a basis for witness credibility. Psychological Science, 18, 46-50.
Abstract
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 interpretation of these results is that people make inferences about source calibration when evaluating testimony and other social communication.