ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
The Message or the Messenger: The Impact of Explanation Satisfaction and Source Characteristics on Perceptions of Experts and Verdicts.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how expert characteristics shape verdicts is critical. This study identified message (e.g., explanation satisfaction) and source characteristics (e.g., education) that predict perceived expertise and verdicts. We hypothesized an expert with more (versus less) satisfying explanations, education, and hands-on contact with the evidence would be perceived as higher in expertise, and that female experts would be perceived as lower in expertise than male experts. Further, higher expertise would predict more verdicts in line with the expert's testimony. In three mock jury studies (N = 1853), we measured (Studies 1-3) and manipulated (Study 3) explanation satisfaction. We also manipulated source characteristics (i.e., education, Studies 1-3; evidence contact, Studies 1-2; expert gender, Studies 2-3). Mock jurors reported their verdicts and perceptions of the expert. Satisfaction with the expert's explanation was the only consistent predictor of perceived expertise, and in turn, verdicts. This effect operated independently from source characteristics; expert gender, education, and more hands-on contact with the evidence did not have consistent influence on satisfaction. We found evidence that expertise cues (education, Studies 1-3; evidence contact, Studies 1-2) impacted explanation satisfaction but did not consistently influence verdicts. Our findings suggest that explanation satisfaction-not source characteristics-reliably predicted expertise and verdicts. Thus, attorneys should ensure the experts they retain can effectively communicate to jurors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.