Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Abstract/Artist Statement
Children and adults alike often interpret confident individuals as more credible sources when learning new information. However, confidence is not always interpreted as a sign of credibility. For example, children of about 5 years of age prefer a hesitant-accurate individual over a confident-inaccurate one (Brosseau-Liard, Cassels, & Birch, 2014). Previous research has shown that confident individuals are generally perceived as credible when the issue at hand is factual in nature. For example, one may trust a confident individual over a hesitant individual when they are providing differing information about salmon spawning patterns. However, it is an open question whether the preference for confidence generalizes to non-factual claims, such as moral decisions. That is, one may be skeptical of a confident individual when they make claims about who is most deserving of societal aid, as their confidence may reflect a cursory level of thoughtfulness. To address this gap in the literature, this study examined children’s credibility judgments of informants who differed in their level of confidence in two domains of knowledge (factual and moral).
Method. Children 3-8 years (N=96 planned with 82 participants thus far) listened to both a confident and a hesitant speaker make claims about either factual information (e.g., the dragonfly has a fendle inside) or moral decisions (e.g., the otter should get the last piece of fish). Novel (that is, made up) facts with words from a published novel word bank were utilized so as to control for children’s prior knowledge. Each child listened to a total of eight claims (factual or moral): four with a confident speaker and four with a hesitant speaker (in alternating order). After each claim, children rated the speaker’s confidence, likeability, smartness, and agreement with the speaker on a 4-point scale (0=not at all, 3=a lot).
Results. Results. Importantly, children clearly discerned between the speakers’ level of confidence as shown by significantly higher confidence ratings for the confident versus hesitant speaker (p<.001). However, children’s preferences for the confident speaker differed by domain (ps<.02). Consistent with previous research, when learning factual information children showed a preference for the confident informant in terms of her likeability, smartness, and agreement. However, when deliberating about moral claims, children became skeptical of the confident informant.
Discussion. This research sheds light on the remarkable level of sophistication with which children are able to evaluate informants and the credibility of information they are providing. That is, children’s use of confidence as a credibility cue is conditional, depending upon the domain of knowledge. Specifically, as these findings demonstrate, children not only attend to the tones (confident or hesitant) of individuals but also simultaneously weigh the type of information (factual or moral). This remarkable capacity at such a young age allows children to discern who is a trustworthy source of information across contexts, which has important implications for children’s learning and the transmission of knowledge.
Mentor Name
Rachel Severson
Do children always trust confident individuals? Not when it comes to moral deliberations.
UC South Ballroom
Children and adults alike often interpret confident individuals as more credible sources when learning new information. However, confidence is not always interpreted as a sign of credibility. For example, children of about 5 years of age prefer a hesitant-accurate individual over a confident-inaccurate one (Brosseau-Liard, Cassels, & Birch, 2014). Previous research has shown that confident individuals are generally perceived as credible when the issue at hand is factual in nature. For example, one may trust a confident individual over a hesitant individual when they are providing differing information about salmon spawning patterns. However, it is an open question whether the preference for confidence generalizes to non-factual claims, such as moral decisions. That is, one may be skeptical of a confident individual when they make claims about who is most deserving of societal aid, as their confidence may reflect a cursory level of thoughtfulness. To address this gap in the literature, this study examined children’s credibility judgments of informants who differed in their level of confidence in two domains of knowledge (factual and moral).
Method. Children 3-8 years (N=96 planned with 82 participants thus far) listened to both a confident and a hesitant speaker make claims about either factual information (e.g., the dragonfly has a fendle inside) or moral decisions (e.g., the otter should get the last piece of fish). Novel (that is, made up) facts with words from a published novel word bank were utilized so as to control for children’s prior knowledge. Each child listened to a total of eight claims (factual or moral): four with a confident speaker and four with a hesitant speaker (in alternating order). After each claim, children rated the speaker’s confidence, likeability, smartness, and agreement with the speaker on a 4-point scale (0=not at all, 3=a lot).
Results. Results. Importantly, children clearly discerned between the speakers’ level of confidence as shown by significantly higher confidence ratings for the confident versus hesitant speaker (p<.001). However, children’s preferences for the confident speaker differed by domain (ps<.02). Consistent with previous research, when learning factual information children showed a preference for the confident informant in terms of her likeability, smartness, and agreement. However, when deliberating about moral claims, children became skeptical of the confident informant.
Discussion. This research sheds light on the remarkable level of sophistication with which children are able to evaluate informants and the credibility of information they are providing. That is, children’s use of confidence as a credibility cue is conditional, depending upon the domain of knowledge. Specifically, as these findings demonstrate, children not only attend to the tones (confident or hesitant) of individuals but also simultaneously weigh the type of information (factual or moral). This remarkable capacity at such a young age allows children to discern who is a trustworthy source of information across contexts, which has important implications for children’s learning and the transmission of knowledge.