Poster Session #2
Presentation Type
Poster
Faculty Mentor’s Full Name
Rachel L. Severson
Faculty Mentor’s Department
Psychology
Abstract / Artist's Statement
Children often treat confident individuals as credible sources of information. Yet, confidence may differentially signify credibility depending upon the domain of knowledge. For example, when dealing with factual information, confident responses indicate greater credibility. However, when deliberating about moral issues, hesitancy may reflect a deeper level of thoughtfulness, and therefore credibility. This study investigated children’s credibility judgments of individuals who differed in the level of confidence (confident vs. hesitant) in two domains of knowledge (factual, moral).
In a between-subjects design, children 3-8 years (N=96 planned with 52 participants thus far) listened to a confident and hesitant model make either novel factual (e.g., which animal has an omentum inside?) or moral claims (e.g., which animal should get the last piece of fish?). Across eight trials (4 confident, 4 hesitant), children rated the models on a 4-point scale (0=not at all, 3=a lot) in terms of confidence level, likeability, smartness, and agreement with her answer.
Preliminary analyses using a 2 (confidence level) x 2 (domain) x 6 (age) ANOVA indicated significant main effects (ps
This research will advance knowledge in how (and when) children use cues about individuals’ credibility when determining who is a trustworthy source of new information. This research will also provide a more nuanced understanding of how children interpret levels of confidence across different domains of knowledge.
Category
Social Sciences
Sometimes Hesitancy is Key: Effects of Moral Deliberations on Children's Interpretation of Credibility Cues
UC South Ballroom
Children often treat confident individuals as credible sources of information. Yet, confidence may differentially signify credibility depending upon the domain of knowledge. For example, when dealing with factual information, confident responses indicate greater credibility. However, when deliberating about moral issues, hesitancy may reflect a deeper level of thoughtfulness, and therefore credibility. This study investigated children’s credibility judgments of individuals who differed in the level of confidence (confident vs. hesitant) in two domains of knowledge (factual, moral).
In a between-subjects design, children 3-8 years (N=96 planned with 52 participants thus far) listened to a confident and hesitant model make either novel factual (e.g., which animal has an omentum inside?) or moral claims (e.g., which animal should get the last piece of fish?). Across eight trials (4 confident, 4 hesitant), children rated the models on a 4-point scale (0=not at all, 3=a lot) in terms of confidence level, likeability, smartness, and agreement with her answer.
Preliminary analyses using a 2 (confidence level) x 2 (domain) x 6 (age) ANOVA indicated significant main effects (ps
This research will advance knowledge in how (and when) children use cues about individuals’ credibility when determining who is a trustworthy source of new information. This research will also provide a more nuanced understanding of how children interpret levels of confidence across different domains of knowledge.