1. Critical Thinking Credibility of Evidence 1
Criteria to use (Criterion singular)
Reputation-Does the source have a reputation for reliability, e.g. the difference between The Sun and the BBC
Ability to observe-Could the source see what it claims has happened
Vested Interest-Does the source have a reason to be biased e.g. someone accused of war crimes who denies any responsibility
Neutrality-Opposite of Vested Interest, does the source have a neutral outlook on the claim
Expertise/Training-Does the source have relevant training or expertise that would support their claim, e.g. a Doctor giving a medical opinion

2. Credibility of Sources
Do you believe the source?
Can you trust the claims being made?

3. RAVEN Evaluation Reputation Ability to See Vested Interest Expertise
Neutrality / Bias
RAVEN

4. Reputation What is the track record of the witness?
What is the status of the witness?

5. Reputation
TRACK RECORD - If a person has told lies in the past, then we will be less trusting of them in the future … …Remember the boy who cried wolf?
STATUS - If a person is in a position of authority, like a judge or a professor, then their status suggests that they can be trusted, as they need to be trustworthy to do that job.

6. Whose reputation would you trust?
Job
√ or X
Reasoning
Politician
Doctor
Used car
salesman
Teacher

7. Ability to See Were they there to witness what happened?
Did they have a clear view of what happened?

8. Ability to See
A person who can see an event happening is more reliable than someone who did not see the event.

9. Use of other senses? Sense How could this affect a witness’s evidence?
Sight
Hearing
Smell
Taste
Touch

10. Vested Interest
Does the witness have something to gain by telling the truth?
Does the witness have something to gain by telling lies?

11. Vested Interest
Vested Interest is when somebody might have something to gain by lying about something…
A plumber might look at a faulty washing machine and say there is more wrong with it than there really is…So that they can get more work and make more money!
I can fix it…… ….. but it will cost you!

12. Vested Interest
If somebody has a vested interest, then the credibility of their evidence is weakened, and therefore they are not as trustworthy.

13. Match the situation with the vested interest
I don’t want to have a criminal record, so I’ll say it wasn’t me
I’m refereeing an important rugby match
I’ve been offered £500 to make sure Saracens win the match
I’m being bullied at school
I’ve been accused of shoplifting
I daren’t tell anyone so I’m going to keep my mouth shut

14. Expertise Does the witness know what they are talking about?
Is their expertise relevant?

15. Expertise
This doesn’t mean that somebody has to be an expert to give evidence, but somebody who knows what they are talking about is more trustworthy than someone who doesn’t.
Expertise relates to whether an observer has the right background knowledge to give evidence on a subject.

16. Does the witness have expertise?
A traffic accident has occurred and the following witnesses come forward to give their account
Learner Driver
Primary School Child
Jenson Button
Traffic Policeman
Motor Mechanic

18. Neutrality / Bias Is the witness merely a neutral observer?
Or does the witness have reason to favour one particular side of a dispute?

19. Neutrality / Bias
A neutral witness is somebody that doesn’t take a side on the argument. If a person is neutral, they are not influenced either way.
The opposite of neutrality is Bias. If a person is biased, they have already made their mind up about a situation.

20. Bias In War Reporting We: Take out Suppress Eliminate Neutralise
Dig in
They:
Destroy
Kill
Cower in foxholes
Our boys are:
Professional
Cautious
Heroes
Loyal
Brave
Theirs are:
Brainwashed
Cowardly
Cornered
Blindly Obedient
Fanatical
We have:
Army, Navy, RAF
Reporting Guidelines
Press Briefings
They have:
A war machine
Censorship
Propaganda
Our leader is:
Resolute
Statesmanlike
Assured
Theirs is:
Defiant
An evil tyrant
A crackpot monster

22. Critical Thinking Credibility of Evidence 2
Criteria to use (Criterion singular)
Nature of the claim-Is the claim itself credible, or very unlikely, e.g. when someone claims to have witnessed a miracle
Credible reasons for the claim-Can the source support their claim with credible reasons, or is it not supported
Corroboration-Is there corroboration of the claim from independent sources, e.g. it is backed up elsewhere
You need to be able to use the Criteria in deciding which sources and authorities are credible/reliable and on what grounds

23. Using Credibility Criteria
When assessing the credibility of a source you should use
whatever criteria you think is relevant, and often will use at
least two.
EG – An Eye Witness Report Emphasis on the high credibility of direct observation
But also
Vested Interest – Did the eyewitness have anything to gain by including or excluding evidence
Bias – Did the eyewitness observe a friend and try to present them in the best light?
Expertise – Did the eyewitness have any relevant expertise which may increase the credibility of the evidence
Reputation – Has the eyewitness got a reputation for honesty or dishonesty
Corroboration – Is the evidence given by the eyewitness supported by other sources of evidence
Selectivity – Did the eyewitness see only part of the event?
Context – Did the context allow for a clear view of the event?
Here we can see combining different criteria improves our
assessment of credibility of evidence

24. Key Terms Argument – A reason or reasons that support a conclusion
Evidence – Information used to support an argument
Source – Where evidence comes from e.g. eye witness
Credibility – Believability, a cr4edable source is a believable source
Credibility Criteria – criteria used to assess the credibility of sources
and evidence
Neutrality – Impartial, not taking sides
Vested Interest – Having something to gain from a particular outcome
Bias – Favouring a particular view
Expertise – Specialist knowledge
Reputation – What is generally thought about a person’s character or
Standing
Observation – Direct observation of an event by an eyewitness
Eye witness account – A report by someone who has personally observed
an event
Corroboration – Confirming, giving support to, Corroborative evidence is
evidence that supports each other, point in the same direction.
Selectivity – The choice of evidence to support an argument
Context – The setting or situation in which evidence is produced
Truth – Something that is accurate or correct

25. Credibility of Evidence Can we apply the criteria?
Objectives
To apply the criteria to multiple evidence to assess its credibility
To make judgements on the evidence
To start to come to conclusions based on the evidence

26. Table for assessing Multiple Evidence
Evidence Letter
Criterion applied
Effect on credibility
Corroboration with….

28. Table for assessing Multiple Evidence
Two Dogs Fighting
Evidence Letter
Criterion applied
Effect on credibility
Corroboration with…. A B C D J