Showing papers on "Credibility published in 1980"

Better Liked than Right Trustworthiness and Expertise as Factors in Credibility

Abstract: A persuasive message on the subject of international maritime boundaries was presented in pamphlet form to 1055 students in four countries. Trustworthiness and expertise of the source were manipulated in a 2 x 2 x 4factorial design of the after-only type to assess the relative impact of each component on the communicator's persuasiveness. Main effects were found for both country and trustworthiness. Overall, the expert and trustworthy source generated the most opinion change. However, the trustworthy communicator was more persuasive, whether expert or not.

Terminology for model credibility

Abstract: Members of the Western Simulation Council heard about Keeping the Lights on and the Elevators Running (The Simulation of Electric Power Systems) at a dinner meeting in Los Gatos on November 5, 1980. After dinner, Dr. William G. Tuel of the IBM Scientific Center in Palo Alto described the simulation of large electric power systems. Using slides and an analog model, he explained how transient simulators predict the ability of electric generators to remain

Establishing the credibility of simulations

Abstract: A procedure is proposed to promote the acceptance of a simulation model. The procedure actively involves potential users of the simulation. Several alterna tive approaches for the statistical analysis of the experimental results are suggested. Two contrasting experiences in applying the procedure to actual simulation projects are discussed.

Empirical Bayes credibility

Abstract: A credibility estimator is Bayes in the restricted class of linear estimators and may be viewed as a linear approximation to the (unrestricted) Bayes estimator. When the structural parameters occurring in a credibility formula are replaced by consistent estimators based on data from a collective of similar risks,we obtain an empirical credibility estimator, which is a credibility counterpart of empirical Bayes estimators. Empirical credibility estimators are proposed under various model assumptions, and sufficient conditions for asymptotic optimality are established.

Media Credibility: A Use-Gratifications Approach:

Abstract: This department is devoted to shorter reports on research in the communications field. Readers are invited to submit summaries of investigative studies interesting for content, method or implications for further research.

Formal and informal care: discontinuities in a continuum.

Abstract: Informal caregiving by family, friends, neighbors, and self-help groups is being given greater attention as human-service policy seeks to establish a continuum of care knitting together professional efforts and informal helping. However, there are many contradictions in assumptions and perspectives about who should handle problems and in what way. Alternative modes of interaction are outlined to indicate the variety of relationships that have developed in response to differences in assumptions about care. Collaboration between formal and informal helping efforts requires that the informal sector be able to influence professional and organizational expectations regarding responsibility, authority, and credibility.

Communication theory and the utilization of evaluation

Abstract: The evaluation reporting process can be viewed as analogous to a persuasive communication message. As such, it is possible to study the impact of different message contents and media on different audiences.

Relative Credibility Revisited: How 18 Unnamed Sources Are Rated.

Abstract: W Reporters often attribute information in their news stories to unnamed sources. Among reasons cited for the practice. reporters may wish: to prevent reprisals against the source, and in fact the source may demand anonymity;' to keep an unfamiliar name out of the story copy; or, as some have charged, to insert their own opinions.* In 1960, Adams measured the relative credibility of 20 unnamed news sources.' Respondents rated the 20 sources on seven-point scales, indicating the likelihood of their accepting or rejecting information attributed to these sources in a news story. The 20 sources were presented out of story context. The source attributions were of three types: nine referred to the institution of government, its personnel or documents (e.g., the U.S. government, official sources, official reports); five were nongovernmental referents (e.g.. experts, reports, political leaders); and four lacked any referent (e.g.. it was learned, trustworthy indications). Although subsequent research has suggested that credibility in the news media is a multi-dimensional construct.4 Adam's research on the credibility of a particular characteristic of a news story-the source to whom the story's information is

Credibility of Avalanche Warnings

Abstract: Avalanche warnings can provide a valuable public service. To be effective, the warning program must inspire public confidence. Experience gained from the Colorado Avalanche Warning Program is used to develop guidelines for establishing and maintaining credibility. The topics discussed arc the requirements for a good forecaster, the working relationship between forecaster and field observers, relations with the news media and the public, and forecast accuracy.

How Reporters Evaluate the Credibility of Their Sources.

Abstract: Reporters appear to fall into three types according to the way they evaluate their sources' credibility. And the major differences between the three types appear to lie in the weight they give intuition, or gut feeling, and to their ability to get corroboration of information supplied by their sources. The three types are: 1. Insists upon corroboration and specifically rejects intuition as a reason for believing or not believing a source; 2. Insists upon corroboration but is neutral on intuition; 3. Insists upon corroboration but rates intuition just as high as a part of the total process of deciding whether a source is believable. The study also yielded four dimensions on which reporters appear to base their evaluation of credibility as a part of the overall process: reliability, appearance, motivation and status-position. Of the four, it hardly is surprising that reporters appear likely to believe sources who have been reliable in the past and that they tend to consider motivation (Why is the source telling me this?) in trying to decide whom to believe. But it might be somewhat surprising that reporters appear to put more emphasis than might have been thought—or that some might have been willing to admit—upon appearance and status-position. This is not to say that appearance and/or status-position by themselves are used for believing or disbelieving a source. In fact, the data indicate such criteria are rejected by the reporters according to the three types. But some reporters do appear more willing than others to apply

Credibility and incredibility: the psychiatric examination of the complaining witness.

Abstract: Psychiatrists are called on to evaluate the credibility (and incredibility) of complaining witnesses in criminal proceedings despite a longstanding controversy about their ability to accurately make such determinations. The author discusses the history of such psychiatric activity from Freud through the Alger Hiss prejury trial, its current status in terms of benefits to the criminal justice system, the legal and social questions it raises (e.g., the competing issue of the complainant's right to privacy), andthe court's restrictions on the psychiatrists. He presents two illustrative case histories.

NPT safeguards: The limits of credibility

Abstract: (1980). NPT safeguards: The limits of credibility. Arms Control: Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 177-198.

An advocate role model for policy analysis

Abstract: The most common role descriptions for professional policy analysts may be described as “problem solving” models, these models assume that most policy issues are essentially technical problems which can be solved through professional expertise. This paper outlines an alternate advocacy analysis model which assumes that many policy problems are matters of competing self interests and that analysts will often be sought to provide the strongest possible case for a client's preference. It also reviews questions of feasibility, credibility, appropriate training, and ethics for an advocacy analysis profession.

Social science and social policy: roles of the applied researcher*

Abstract: Research on policy impact has increasingly focused on the practical application of social science research This paper outlines four roles—substantive expert, information processor, change agent, and scholar—which have helped to increase the potential usefulness of our research while maintaining linkages to the academic community This paper suggests the general nature of these roles and suggests specific implementation strategies, which need to be pursued as an early and continuing aspect of the research enterprise Balancing these multiple roles presents several analytical and ethical difficulties, but helps to establish credibility in both the scientific and policymaking communities

Individual Differences in the Credibility and Attitude Change Relationship

Abstract: Summary To isolate important receiver individual differences which could be incorporated into the relationship between credibility and attitude change, 223 male and female university students completed selected psychological examinations and were assigned into three groups. One group heard a message from a high credibility communicator; a second heard a message from a low credibility communicator; and another served as a control. Attitude change was measured with pre- and posttest questionnaires. Analysis indicated that change in individuals following a message attributed to a high credibility communicator was characterized by a combination of variables related to a subjectively yielding receiver orientation, and that change following a message attributed to a low credibility communicator was characterized by a more objective but alterable receiver orientation.

Preventive-maintenance techniques for staying union-free.

Abstract: Maintaining union-free status is a matter of maintaining credibility with your employees in five key areas: management development, employee training, promotion, compensation and benefits, and communications. The latter two concerns are particularly stressed by Dr. Rand in this low-cost, high-return strategy.

On duplicity in the modeling of public problems

Abstract: One of the problems is that operational modeling has been stunted in its growth so that its practitioners neither take pride in a professional affiliation nor have a body of standards to observe. The consequence is clear: the analyst’s wares are widely rejected, and the worth of the entire enterprise is questioned. Ida Hoos sounded the tocsin early,3 and others have provided technical expositions of the situation.4