Credibility of Evidence Critical Thinking Unit 1 – Introduction to Critical Thinking Chapter 5 D Gray September 2009

Credibility of EvidenceCredibility of Evidence

Critical ThinkingCritical ThinkingUnit 1 – Introduction to Critical ThinkingUnit 1 – Introduction to Critical Thinking

Chapter 5Chapter 5D GrayD Gray

September 2009September 2009


Starter:Starter:

Write down at least five ways in which you would assess the credibility of Write down at least five ways in which you would assess the credibility of a piece of evidence, such as a newspaper article on corruption in a piece of evidence, such as a newspaper article on corruption in sport.sport.

Rank them from best to worst.Rank them from best to worst.

Justify why your top answer is the best way to assess credibilityJustify why your top answer is the best way to assess credibility

Justify why your bottom answer is the worst way to assess credibilityJustify why your bottom answer is the worst way to assess credibility

(5 mins)(5 mins)


Lesson Objectives:Lesson Objectives:

1)1) To know and understand the meaning of To know and understand the meaning of the nine credibility criteriathe nine credibility criteria

2)2) To be able to apply the credibility criteria to To be able to apply the credibility criteria to a piece of evidence.a piece of evidence.

3)3) To be able to assess the credibility of a To be able to assess the credibility of a piece of evidence.piece of evidence.

ArgumentsArguments

Critical thinking teaches the skills required to Critical thinking teaches the skills required to analyse and evaluate arguments.analyse and evaluate arguments.

An argument is a An argument is a reasonreason or reasons which or reasons which support a support a conclusionconclusion..

Evidence or examples are used to support Evidence or examples are used to support reasons and conclusions.reasons and conclusions.


Evidence and/or examples alone are not enough.Evidence and/or examples alone are not enough.

We need to judge the We need to judge the credibilitycredibility of the evidence. of the evidence.

CredibleCredible means means believablebelievable

Plausible means reasonablePlausible means reasonablePlausibility Plausibility is whether or not a claim or piece of evidence is reasonable.is whether or not a claim or piece of evidence is reasonable.

A A ClaimClaim is a statement or judgement that could be challenged. is a statement or judgement that could be challenged.

So, how do we measure credibility? So, how do we measure credibility?

Claims & PlausabilityClaims & Plausability

Read and make notes on page 65 then do Read and make notes on page 65 then do Activity 24 on Page 66Activity 24 on Page 66

Read and make notes on Pages 66 – 69 then Read and make notes on Pages 66 – 69 then do Activity 25 on Page 70do Activity 25 on Page 70

Simple Ways of Assessing the Simple Ways of Assessing the Credibility of EvidenceCredibility of Evidence

What is the What is the sourcesource of the evidence? of the evidence?

Where does it come from?Where does it come from?

Who does it come from?Who does it come from?

Is the source Is the source reputablereputable??

Witnesses and SourcesWitnesses and Sources

Source – A person, organisation or document Source – A person, organisation or document providing information or evidence.providing information or evidence.

Witness Statement – A report by someone who has Witness Statement – A report by someone who has actually seen (or heard) an event.actually seen (or heard) an event.

Criteria – Standards, measures or benchmarks, Criteria – Standards, measures or benchmarks, against which something can be measured.against which something can be measured.

The singular of criteria is criterionThe singular of criteria is criterion

Assessing the Credibility of EvidenceAssessing the Credibility of Evidence

There are certain criteria we use in Critical There are certain criteria we use in Critical Thinking to assess the credibility of Thinking to assess the credibility of evidence.evidence.

You must use these You must use these Credibility CriteriaCredibility Criteria and and the technical language associated with them the technical language associated with them in your exam.in your exam.

You must learn them and use them all!!You must learn them and use them all!!

Credibility CriteriaCredibility Criteria

Read and make notes on Page 71Read and make notes on Page 71 Now read the passage on Pages 72 & 73.Now read the passage on Pages 72 & 73.

In groups of 3 or 4 decide whether you In groups of 3 or 4 decide whether you would believe Andrew Atkins if he tried to would believe Andrew Atkins if he tried to sell you a quality car which will give you sell you a quality car which will give you years of trouble free motoring.years of trouble free motoring.

Write down why and prepare to present to Write down why and prepare to present to the class.the class.

Assessing Credibility of EvidenceAssessing Credibility of Evidence

In pairs write a brief definition, in your own words, of what is meant by each of the In pairs write a brief definition, in your own words, of what is meant by each of the nine credibility criteria.nine credibility criteria.

1)1) NeutralityNeutrality2)2) Vested InterestVested Interest3)3) BiasBias4)4) ExpertiseExpertise5)5) ReputationReputation6)6) Ability to PerceiveAbility to Perceive7)7) CorroborationCorroboration8)8) ContextContext9)9) Consistency and InconsistencyConsistency and Inconsistency

In addition to these also address Selectivity and RepresentativenessIn addition to these also address Selectivity and Representativeness

(5 mins)(5 mins)

Ability to PerceiveAbility to Perceive

Eyewitness evidence is generally better than Eyewitness evidence is generally better than hearsay.hearsay.

Descriptions of events change when they are Descriptions of events change when they are told.told.

Is the witness a reliable witness? Are they Is the witness a reliable witness? Are they blind? Deaf? Biased? Have a vested blind? Deaf? Biased? Have a vested interest?interest?

Ability to PerceiveAbility to Perceive

Read and make notes on Pages 74 & 75 Read and make notes on Pages 74 & 75 then complete Activity 26 on Page 75.then complete Activity 26 on Page 75.

Now do the ‘Take it further’ on Page 75Now do the ‘Take it further’ on Page 75


CorroborationCorroboration

Evidence which supports other evidence.Evidence which supports other evidence.

Corroboration Corroboration strengthensstrengthens the credibility of evidence. the credibility of evidence.

Is Fred guilty?Is Fred guilty?

Fred was caught on CCTV stealing the jumper.Fred was caught on CCTV stealing the jumper.He was wearing it when found by the police.He was wearing it when found by the police.The shop assistant saw him leaving the shop with it.The shop assistant saw him leaving the shop with it.His fingerprints where on the display where the jumper went missing.His fingerprints where on the display where the jumper went missing.He was overheard boasting that he had stolen it to his friend 10 mins before being He was overheard boasting that he had stolen it to his friend 10 mins before being

arrested.arrested.Fred has 134 convictions for shop lifting.Fred has 134 convictions for shop lifting.Fred’s flat was found to be full of stolen property.Fred’s flat was found to be full of stolen property.

CorroborationCorroboration

Page 76 Activity 27Page 76 Activity 27

Consistency and InconsistencyConsistency and Inconsistency

Inconsistency is where two claims oppose Inconsistency is where two claims oppose each other – they can not be true at the each other – they can not be true at the same time.same time.

Consistency strengthens an argument.Consistency strengthens an argument.

Consistency and InconsistencyConsistency and Inconsistency



BiasBias

Vested interests can lead to bias.Vested interests can lead to bias.Bias means favouring a particular view or having a Bias means favouring a particular view or having a

preference.preference.Bias can be very similar to loyalty.Bias can be very similar to loyalty.

A biased viewpoint A biased viewpoint can reducecan reduce the credibility of evidence. the credibility of evidence.

Example: Everton will win because they are the best team in Example: Everton will win because they are the best team in the land.the land.

BiasBias



NeutralityNeutrality

A neutral source is impartial – it does not take sides.A neutral source is impartial – it does not take sides.Neutral sources have no motive to lie or to distort evidence.Neutral sources have no motive to lie or to distort evidence.Neutral sources have no bias.Neutral sources have no bias.

If someone is neutral then it If someone is neutral then it strengthensstrengthens the credibility of the credibility of their evidence.their evidence.

Examples: ACAS, Rugby referees, Judges.Examples: ACAS, Rugby referees, Judges.

NeutralityNeutrality



Vested InterestVested Interest

Does the person have something to gain from their version of the Does the person have something to gain from their version of the argument?argument?

Have they lied?Have they lied?Have they presented all the facts?Have they presented all the facts?Have they been selective with their evidence?Have they been selective with their evidence?

If someone has a vested interest it If someone has a vested interest it cancan affect the credibility of their affect the credibility of their evidence.evidence.

Examples: Football managers, tobacco companies, Advertising Examples: Football managers, tobacco companies, Advertising companies.companies.

Vested InterestVested Interest



ExpertiseExpertise

Evidence which is given by an expert can be judged as being very Evidence which is given by an expert can be judged as being very credible.credible.

Be careful though that the ‘expert’ is a credible expert on what they are Be careful though that the ‘expert’ is a credible expert on what they are actually commenting on.actually commenting on.

Is their evidence relevant?Is their evidence relevant?Is it up to date?Is it up to date?Could they have made a mistake?Could they have made a mistake?Are they biased?Are they biased?Do they have a vested interest?Do they have a vested interest?

Expertise or Experience of SourceExpertise or Experience of Source

Activity 32 on Page 79Activity 32 on Page 79


ReputationReputation

CharacterCharacterProfessional standingProfessional standingAltruisticAltruisticAre they fair, decent, honest?Are they fair, decent, honest?Or are they motivated by self-interest, greed, desire, fame?Or are they motivated by self-interest, greed, desire, fame?

Examples:Examples: Broadsheets vs. tabloidsBroadsheets vs. tabloidsBBC news vs. Heat magazineBBC news vs. Heat magazine

ReputationReputation

Page 81 & 82 Activity 33Page 81 & 82 Activity 33


ContextContext

Factors which can affect credibility of evidenceFactors which can affect credibility of evidence

Was it night time? Foggy? Poorly lit?Was it night time? Foggy? Poorly lit?Is there an atmosphere of fear?Is there an atmosphere of fear?Is the evidence historical? Is it out of date?Is the evidence historical? Is it out of date?Does the evidence refer to the specifics of the Does the evidence refer to the specifics of the

argument?argument?


Selectivity and RepresentativenessSelectivity and Representativeness

Selecting and using evidence which only supports your Selecting and using evidence which only supports your conclusion.conclusion.

Is ‘evidence’ only taken from a selected sample of the Is ‘evidence’ only taken from a selected sample of the population?population?

Does the evidence represent the true views of the Does the evidence represent the true views of the population?population?

Being selective Being selective reduces reduces the credibility of evidencethe credibility of evidence

Exam style questionsExam style questions

Page 83 – 85 Activities 33, 34 & 35.Page 83 – 85 Activities 33, 34 & 35.

And finally …And finally …

Did we achieve the lesson objectives?Did we achieve the lesson objectives?

Do you understand what an argument is?Do you understand what an argument is?What is evidence?What is evidence?How do we assess evidence?How do we assess evidence?What are the nine credibility criteria?What are the nine credibility criteria?

(5 mins)(5 mins)

Homework: Learn the nine credibility criteria for a Homework: Learn the nine credibility criteria for a test tomorrow!test tomorrow!


Lesson Objectives review:Lesson Objectives review:

1)1) To understand how a basic argument is To understand how a basic argument is structured.structured.

2)2) To know and understand the meaning of the nine To know and understand the meaning of the nine credibility criteriacredibility criteria

3)3) To be able to apply the credibility criteria to a To be able to apply the credibility criteria to a piece of evidence.piece of evidence.

4)4) To be able to assess the credibility of a piece of To be able to assess the credibility of a piece of evidence.evidence.


Critical ThinkingCritical ThinkingUnit 1 – Introduction to Critical ThinkingUnit 1 – Introduction to Critical Thinking

Chapter 5Chapter 5D GrayD Gray

September 2009September 2009


It’s Just Not Cricket!It’s Just Not Cricket!

In groups of four, read the article on ‘It’s Just Not In groups of four, read the article on ‘It’s Just Not Cricket’.Cricket’.

Identify where the credibility criteria could be applied Identify where the credibility criteria could be applied to the article.to the article.

Extension: Assess whether or not Extension: Assess whether or not HairHair acted acted honourably.honourably.

(10 mins)(10 mins)

It’s Just Not Cricket!It’s Just Not Cricket!AnswersAnswers

Speed’s Speed’s reputationreputation is solid enough. As the Chief Executive of the ICC, he is solid enough. As the Chief Executive of the ICC, he certainly has high status; he is in an important position of trust. This lends certainly has high status; he is in an important position of trust. This lends credibility to his claim.credibility to his claim.

His His ability to seeability to see is more limited; it’s difficult for him to tell what was going on in is more limited; it’s difficult for him to tell what was going on in Hair’s head. Yes, he had access to the e-mail correspondence, but he admitted Hair’s head. Yes, he had access to the e-mail correspondence, but he admitted in the press conference that this could be read in either of two ways. Unless he in the press conference that this could be read in either of two ways. Unless he had private correspondence or conversations with Hair in addition to the had private correspondence or conversations with Hair in addition to the published e-mails, then his access to the evidence is the same as everyone published e-mails, then his access to the evidence is the same as everyone else’s, and so he is basing his interpretation of events on background else’s, and so he is basing his interpretation of events on background knowledge rather than clear first-hand evidence.knowledge rather than clear first-hand evidence.

Speed certainly suffers from a Speed certainly suffers from a vested interestvested interest. As someone with a great deal . As someone with a great deal invested in cricket, and whose responsibility it is to protect the sport. He has a invested in cricket, and whose responsibility it is to protect the sport. He has a lot to lose if the reputation of cricket is damaged. This certainly weakens his lot to lose if the reputation of cricket is damaged. This certainly weakens his sympathetic interpretation of Hair’s actions.sympathetic interpretation of Hair’s actions.

http://www.criticalthinking.org.uk/reputation.html

http://www.criticalthinking.org.uk/abilitytosee.html

http://www.criticalthinking.org.uk/vestedinterest.html

It’s Just Not Cricket!It’s Just Not Cricket!AnswersAnswers

Speed’s level of Speed’s level of expertiseexpertise is a little difficult to assess. In this context, expertise is a little difficult to assess. In this context, expertise would involve knowledge of Hair. Is Hair the type of person who would try to would involve knowledge of Hair. Is Hair the type of person who would try to make money out of a potential disaster? Without better knowledge of the make money out of a potential disaster? Without better knowledge of the relationship between the two, it’s impossible to tell whether Speed possesses relationship between the two, it’s impossible to tell whether Speed possesses this expertise.this expertise.

Finally, there is the issue of Finally, there is the issue of neutralityneutrality, which is again difficult to assess. If , which is again difficult to assess. If Speed and Hair have had a long and productive professional relationship, as Speed and Hair have had a long and productive professional relationship, as may well be the case, then Speed may well have a bias towards Hair, and so a may well be the case, then Speed may well have a bias towards Hair, and so a reason to defend him. If, on the other hand, they have no such rapport, or even reason to defend him. If, on the other hand, they have no such rapport, or even a disliking for each other, then things may be different.a disliking for each other, then things may be different.

To reach an overall judgment on the credibility of Speed’s claim his reputation To reach an overall judgment on the credibility of Speed’s claim his reputation and possible expertise must be weighed against his poor ability to see, vested and possible expertise must be weighed against his poor ability to see, vested interest, and possible bias.interest, and possible bias.

What is your judgment?What is your judgment?

http://www.criticalthinking.org.uk/expertise.html

http://www.criticalthinking.org.uk/neutrality.html

Documents

Credibility of Evidence Critical Thinking Unit 1 – Introduction to Critical Thinking Chapter 5 D Gray September 2009