Section 2 - Credibility Flashcards
What is a claim?
Statements that people make that it’s possible to question or disagree with.
Give some examples of claims.
- Reasons
* Conclusions
What is plausibility?
The likelihood of a certain outcome.
What makes a future event or outcome plausible?
If it’s likely to happen.
Is a plausible claim necessarily correct?
No - just because it seems likely, doesn’t mean it has to be true.
What makes a claim plausible?
If it’s reasonable.
Assess the plausibility:
“Tomorrow the Queen will break the triple-jump world record.”
Not plausible, because it’s unlikely that this will happen.
Assess the plausibility:
“Raising the speed limit will cause more car accidents.”
Plausible, because it’s likely that this will happen.
Assess the plausibility:
“Cabbage is healthier than chocolate.”
Plausible, because the claim is reasonable.
Assess the plausibility:
“100% or people prefer cabbage to chocolate.”
Not plausible, because the claim is not reasonable.
What is credibility?
How much a claim can be believed.
When you are asked to assess credibility of a claim or document, what are you actually assessing?
- The credibility of the writer or organisation that published it
- But you must still refer to the source in your answer!
Can a claim that is plausible and credible still be false?
Yes
What things might you be asked to assess the credibility of?
- Individual
- Organisation
- Document
- Claim
What types of credibility question might you get asked?
- Assessing the credibility of one source
* Comparing the relative credibility of two sources
How can you work out how credible a source is?
Using credibility criteria.
How many credibility criteria are there?
7
What are the credibility criteria?
- Corroboration / Consistency
- Reputation
- Ability to see or perceive
- Vested interest
- Bias
- Experience / Expertise
- Neutrality
What acronym can be used to remember the credibility criteria?
CRAVEN
What does CRAVEN stand for?
- Corroboration / Consistency
- Reputation
- Ability to see or perceive
- Vested interest / Bias
- Experience / Expertise
- Neutrality
What is bias?
Being prejudiced to one side of an argument.
Is bias intentional?
No always - it can be subconscious.
How does bias affect people?
It may make them prejudiced for or against a certain point of view.
Why might people be biased?
Because of background or experiences.
Give some examples of things that can cause people to be biased.
- Religious beliefs
- Past experience
- Family/Friends
How does bias affect credibility and why?
It usually decreases credibility because the bias could give them a motive to exaggerate, distort or lie.
What is an easy way to spot bias?
- Lack of a balanced argument
* Selective fact use
What is vested interest?
When a person or organisation has something to gain (or can avoid something negative) by an argument going their way.
How does vested interest affect credibility?
- Might decrease credibility -> By giving the source a reason to exaggerate, distort or lie.
- Might increase credibility -> If someone has a vested interest in telling the truth.
When might vested interest increase credibility?
- When the source has a vested interest in telling the truth.
- This is common when the source’s career or business depends on their reputation for impartiality and fairness.
When answering a question about vested interest, what questions is it important to ask yourself to get a complete answer?
- What side of the argument is the source likely to support?
- What do they stand to gain?
- Does this vested interest make them more or less credible?
What is the difference between bias and vested interest?
- Bias is usually due to background or experienced, whereas vested interest usually refers to future gains or losses.
- Vested interest can LEAD to biased claims.
What is neutrality?
- The opposite of bias.
* When a source isn’t prejudiced for or against either side of an argument.
How does neutrality affect credibility and why?
- Always increases it.
* Because the source has no motive to exaggerate, distort or lie.
How can you identify a neutral source?
Neutral sources:
• Present a balanced account -> Don’t leave out information
OR
• Have no links to either side -> Have no vested interest
How can neutral sources be used in a biased way?
They can be manipulated or used selectively, to portray only one side of the argument.
What is expertise?
Specialist skills and training that give someone knowledge that most people don’t have.
What is experience?
Knowledge gained from having done or encounters something, over a log period of time.
What is the difference between expertise and experience?
- Expertise -> Specialist skills and training
* Experience -> Knowledge gained over time
How can you identify expertise or experience?
- Expertise -> Look for job titles and qualifications in someone’s description
- Experience -> Look for time indicators in someone’s description
Is this expertise or experience:
• Mr Clifford, the engineer who designed the turbines…
• Dr Frances, from the University of Melton Mowbray…
• Mrs Clare, who has lived in the shadow of a similar wind farm for five years…
• Sally Hornchurch, a stamp collector for the last 45 years…
- Expertise
- Expertise
- Experience
- Experience
How do expertise and experience affect credibility?
They increase it, as long as they are relevant.
When is expertise or experience not relevant and what is the effect of this?
- When the experience or expertise is in a different field to the argument
- This means that credibility is not increased
What is the name for someone with experience or expertise?
Expert
Are experts usually neutral? Why?
- Usually neutral -> Portray both sides of the argument + aren’t involved in the argument personally
- Sometimes not neutral -> If they have a vested interest
Why might expert claims not always be the most credible?
- Expert isn’t neutral
- Someone on the other side has greater expertise/experience
- Another source has more information (ability to perceive)
- Someone on the other side has more relevant expertise/experience
- Someone who seems like an expert might not be (e.g. a journalist)
What extra information might you want to ask for to check the credibility of an expert?
- If they’ve had relevant specialist training in their subject
- If they’ve been in trouble before for misrepresenting information
- Who they’re paid by or how their company is funded
What is reputation?
The opinion people have of you.
How does reputation affect credibility?
- Positive reputation -> Increases credibility
* Negative reputation -> Decreases credibility
What contributes to a person’s credibility?
Previous actions (e.g. whether they’ve been truthful in the past)
Can an individual have a reputation based off their group’s reputation?
- Yes - e.g. doctors are considered trustworthy, while people are more suspicious of politicians
- However, this is a generalisation and there may be exceptions
How are reputation and vested interest linked?
- Some people may have a vested interest in maintaining a positive reputation - e.g. a competition judge
- This increases credibility
Do you need to be an expert in order for a good reputation to increase your credibility? Give an example.
- No
- e.g. a vicar might oppose plans to knock down a leisure centre because he thinks it will increase youth crime and people are more likely to believe him due to his reputation
Give some reasons why you must be careful when using reputation to judge credibility.
- People can change over time
- Judging a group’s reputation, we’re making a generalisation and there may be exceptions
- Reputation isn’t always fair -> Could be based off a lie or second-hand evidence
- Reputation may be irrelevant
Give an example of when reputation may be irrelevant.
A salesman may have a reputation for exaggerating when selling cars, but this doesn’t necessarily affect his credibility as the witness of a murder.
What does “perceive” mean?
Experience with any of the senses, not just the eyes.
What is ability to see or perceive?
How well as witness can seen or sense a particular event.
How does good ability to perceive affect credibility?
Always increases.
What two main things affect a source’s ability to perceive?
- Seeing or perceiving an event clearly
* Having access to relevant information
Give an example of how access to information can affect a source’s ability to perceive.
A town councillor in charge of granting planning permission has access to more information about new building developments than a local resident. Their ability to see this information increases their credibility.
Give some factors that can reduce a person’s ability to see or perceive.
- Didn’t observe whole event
- Conditions reduced their ability to see event
- Distracted by something else
- Affected by drugs
- Under physical or emotional stress
- Medical condition or disability
- Forgotten details
- Didn’t understand what was happening
What are the two types of evidence?
- Primary
* Secondary
What is the difference between primary and secondary evidence?
- Primary -> First-hand evidence from a witness
* Secondary -> Second-hand evidence that has been passed down through sources and people
What is more credible, primary or secondary evidence and why?
Primary -> Secondary evidence may be changed as its retold by different people.
What is hearsay?
Another name for second-hand evidence that has been retold.
Give two examples of hearsay.
- Rumour
* Gossip
What is corroboration?
When two or more sources say the same thing (they agree).
How does corroboration affect credibility?
It increases it.
What type of corroboration question might you be given in the exam?
You might be given a claim and told to pick one it corroborates.
What is conflict?
- When evidence from two sources disagrees
* It is the opposite of corroboration
What is another name for conflicting sources?
Inconsistent sources
Can sources be conflicting and credible at the same time?
Yes, if they agree on most things except a few details, they are generally credible.
What is consistency?
When two accounts don’t contradict each other (but don’t necessarily say the same thing).
What makes two things corroborate or consistent?
Corroboration:
• Both sources must say the same thing
Consistency:
• Both sources must not contradict each other, but they don’t have to say the same thing
When is a source inconsistent?
When it contains two claims that contradict each other.
How does consistency affect credibility?
Increases it.
Make sure you know the difference between corroboration and consistency.
Pg 29 of revision guide.
Are these claims corroborated, conflicting or consistent:
• “Closing this road will cause long traffic jams.”
• “Traffic will get worse if this road is closed.”
Corroborated
Are these claims corroborated, conflicting or consistent:
• “Closing this road will cause long traffic jams.”
• “This town has a huge traffic problem.”
Consistent
What does the C in CRAVEN stand for?
Corroboration / Consistency
What does the R in CRAVEN stand for?
Reputation
What does the A in CRAVEN stand for?
Ability to see or perceive
What does the V in CRAVEN stand for?
Vested interest / Bias
What does the E in CRAVEN stand for?
Experience / Expertise
What does the N in CRAVEN stand for?
Neutrality
What is another word for reasonableness?
Plausibility
What must you do when asked to assess the plausibility of a single claim?
- Use information from the document to help but also include your OWN IDEAS.
- Include points why the claim is plausible.
- Include points why the claim is not plausible.
- Come to an overall conclusion.
Remember to practise assessing plausibility.
Pg 30 of revision guide -> Look at the yellow and purple box
What must you do when asked to compare the plausibility of a two claims?
- Use information from the document to help but also include your OWN IDEAS.
- Write about why the first claim is plausible and implausible
- Write about why the second claim is plausible and implausible
- Come to an overall conclusion -> Giving a reason why
When assessing the plausibility of a claim, what are the ideas you must think of yourself?
Sort of like reasons why the claim is plausible or not plausible.
Which credibility criteria increase credibility?
- Good reputation
- Good ability to see or perceive
- Neutrality
- Corroboration / Consistency
- Relevant experience / expertise
Which credibility criteria decrease credibility?
- Bad reputation
- Lack of ability to see or perceive
- Bias / Vested interest
- Inconsistency / Conflicting sources
- Lack of relevant experience / expertise
What is the effect of having several positive/negative credibility criteria for one source?
They combine to strengthen/weaken the overall credibility.
What must you do when asked to assess the relative credibility of the two sides in an argument?
- Assess the credibility of each person or organisation on each side -> Using credibility criteria -> Say what strengthens and weakens their credibility
- Decide which side is more credible overall
- Write a conclusion
Remember to revise assessing the credibility of two sides in an argument.
Pg 32 of revision guide
When asked for what extra information you need to judge the credibility of a source, what must you do?
- Look at the credibility criteria you have already applied
- Pick one
- Think of information that will reaffirm that conclusion
What extra information do you need to confirm this credibility assessment:
“The company says it has a good reputation for making safe toys.”
e.g. Information about their track record to know whether their toys are usually safe.
What extra information do you need to confirm this credibility assessment:
“The company has a vested interest in the toy staying on sale as they’d lose money if it was removed from shops.”
e.g. Whether the company would be ready to possibly compromise safety in order to make more sales.
What extra information do you need to confirm this credibility assessment:
“The company has expertise in toymaking - they’ve been doing it for s long time.”
e.g. How long they’ve been making toys.
