Cited by 1,477Memory Processes and InfluencesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsEpistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics

Reasons for confidence.

Koriat, Asher, Lichtenstein, Sarah, Fischhoff, Baruch·1980·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory

Abstract

People are often overconfident in evaluating the correctness of their knowl-edge. The present studies investigated the possibility that assessment of con-fidence is biased by attempts to justify one's chosen answer. These attempts include selectively focusing on evidence supporting the chosen answer and disregarding evidence contradicting it. Experiment 1 presented subjects with two-alternative questions and required them to list reasons for and against each of the alternatives prior to choosing an answer and assessing the prob-ability of its being correct. This procedure produced a marked improvement in the appropriateness of confidence judgments. Experiment 2 simplified the manipulation by asking subjects first to choose an answer and then to list (a) one reason supporting that choice, (b) one reason contradicting it, or (c) one reason supporting and one reason contradicting. Only the listing of contradicting reasons improved the appropriateness of confidence. Correla-tional analyses of the data of Experiment 1 strongly suggested that the con-fidence depends on the amount and strength of the evidence supporting the answer chosen. e remarkable characteristic of human>ry is its knowledge of its own content, nents of confidence in the correctness 'all and recognition performance are research was supported by the Advanced ch Projects Agency of the Department of e, and was monitored by Office of Naval

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.107

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When people try to reason through an issue, they often work hard to find evidence that confirms their initial perspective.

    “When people try to reason through an issue, they often work hard to find evidence that confirms their initial perspective 55-58 .”

    From Predictors and consequences of intellectual humility (2022) · cites this paper as [55]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B.
Affiliations
University of Haifa (IL)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
Published
1980-03
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
107-118
ISSN
0096-1515 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026136470
Cited by
1,477
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 57
FWCI
5.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Learning & Memory (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Keywords
overconfidence, confidence judgments, metacognition, self-knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review