Week 7 Knowledge Check Overview
Uploaded by
JessicaWeek 7 Knowledge Check Overview
Uploaded by
JessicaCommon questions
Powered by AIBackground information might interfere with newly presented evidence by creating a bias towards information that aligns with pre-existing beliefs while dismissing or undervaluing contradictory evidence. This selective perception could prevent the fair evaluation of a claim's plausibility if it does not fit well into the existing web of beliefs .
A credible source is one that provides information consistent with other credible claims, aligns with one's own observations and background knowledge, and is free from suspected bias. In contrast, sources owned by interested parties or those that report inconsistently or with clear biases should be approached with skepticism .
Background information helps determine the credibility of a claim by providing a framework against which new claims are evaluated. It consists of the collection of general and specific beliefs about the world, acquired through education and experience, and allows us to assess how well a claim fits with what we already know, thus providing an assessment of its initial plausibility .
Bias affects the perception and credibility of information by skewing understanding based on personal experiences, allowing beliefs to color our perception of facts. This inappropriate personal motive can cast doubts on one's own observations or the firsthand observations reported by others, including claims of experts .
The statement "Cold weather alone does not make someone catch a cold" is considered to have some initial plausibility because it aligns with our observations and background information that viral infections cause colds rather than cold weather itself. However, the claim may conflict with the background knowledge where sometimes it seems weather impacts illness .
Personal observation contributes to the credibility of a claim by providing firsthand experience as evidence, which is usually considered solid grounds for accepting a claim. Despite potential biases, direct observation offers strong and immediate perception of a thing or event, enhancing the credibility of assertions made based on this ground .
It is prudent to reserve judgment about claims made by the news media, especially in controversial cases, because interested parties can influence and manipulate media content. Advertisers, owners, and managers may pressure reporters to report in a biased way, and personal biases of those in the news can lead to errors. Therefore, skepticism and critical evaluation are necessary when consuming such information .
The claim has some initial plausibility because it conforms to personal observations and background knowledge where vomiting is often associated with expelling harmful substances. However, it might conflict with other knowledge that vomiting can occur due to non-harmful stimuli such as motion sickness, demonstrating its limits in some contexts .
Initial plausibility can be assessed by evaluating how well a claim fits with existing background information. This signifies the degree to which a claim is believable based on prior knowledge and how well it integrates into our existing web of beliefs. It provides a preliminary judgment about the claim's acceptability before considering further evidence or arguments .
To evaluate the reliability of an expert's claim, one should consider the expert's level of knowledge in the subject, any potential biases, the consistency of the claim with other credible sources, and whether the claim conflicts with or is supported by one's own background knowledge and observations .