Next Article in Journal
The Role of Phoneme Discrimination in the Variability of Speech and Language Outcomes Among Children with Hearing Loss
Previous Article in Journal
Swiping Disrupts Switching: Preliminary Evidence for Reduced Cue-Based Preparation Following Short-Form Video Exposure
Previous Article in Special Issue
Jurymen Seldom Rule Against a Person That They Like: The Relationship Between Emotions Towards a Defendant, the Understanding of Case Facts, and Juror Judgments in Civil Trials
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

You Understand, So I Understand: How a “Community of Knowledge” Shapes Trust and Credibility in Expert Testimony Evidence

School of Psychology, The University of Southern Mississippi, College Drive #5025, Hattiesburg, MS 39406, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Behav. Sci. 2025, 15(8), 1071; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081071
Submission received: 29 May 2025 / Revised: 17 July 2025 / Accepted: 5 August 2025 / Published: 6 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Social Cognitive Processes in Legal Decision Making)

Abstract

Sloman and Rabb found support for the existence of the community of knowledge (CK) effect, which occurs when individuals are more likely to report understanding and being able to explain even fake scientific information when told that an expert understands the information. To date, no studies have been conducted that attempted to replicate original findings, let alone test the presence of the CK effect in realistic, legal scenarios. Therefore, Study One replicated original CK effect studies in a jury-eligible M-Turk sample (N = 291) using both Sloman and Rabb’s experimental stimuli as well as new stimuli. Study Two then tested the presence of the CK effect using scientific testimony in a mock court hearing from a forensic evaluator (N = 396). Not only did the CK effect improve laypeople’s perceptions of the scientific information in court, but it also improved their perceptions of the expert witness’s credibility, increased the weight assigned to the scientific information, and increased the weight assigned to the expert testimony. This effect was mediated by participants’ perceived similarity to the expert, supporting the theory behind the CK effect. These studies have important implications for the use of scientific information in court, which are discussed.
Keywords: expert witness; forensic evaluation; witness credibility; community of knowledge effect; jury decision-making expert witness; forensic evaluation; witness credibility; community of knowledge effect; jury decision-making

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jones, A.C.T.; Haga, M. You Understand, So I Understand: How a “Community of Knowledge” Shapes Trust and Credibility in Expert Testimony Evidence. Behav. Sci. 2025, 15, 1071. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081071

AMA Style

Jones ACT, Haga M. You Understand, So I Understand: How a “Community of Knowledge” Shapes Trust and Credibility in Expert Testimony Evidence. Behavioral Sciences. 2025; 15(8):1071. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081071

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jones, Ashley C. T., and Morgan Haga. 2025. "You Understand, So I Understand: How a “Community of Knowledge” Shapes Trust and Credibility in Expert Testimony Evidence" Behavioral Sciences 15, no. 8: 1071. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081071

APA Style

Jones, A. C. T., & Haga, M. (2025). You Understand, So I Understand: How a “Community of Knowledge” Shapes Trust and Credibility in Expert Testimony Evidence. Behavioral Sciences, 15(8), 1071. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081071

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop