Suchergebnisse

English
This study explores the dimensions and attributes of credibility in knowledge transfer. It finds that there are four dimensions: 'scientific credibility', expertise, authority and stance. Credibility is characterised by several attributes: it is transferable; it is context-dependent; and it is subject to constant assessment. The notion of 'credibility work' describes the ways in which credibility in knowledge transfer is not an inherent or static characteristic of persons, but rather an achieved and actively constructed result of specific actions taken by knowledge producers and knowledge users in their social contexts. Many knowledge transfer practices can be framed as credibility work.

Do people believe a federal court when it rules against the government? And does such judicial credibility depend on the perceived political affiliation of the judge? This study presents a survey experiment addressing these questions, based on a set of recent cases in which both a judge appointed by President George W. Bush and a judge appointed by President Bill Clinton declared the same Trump Administration action to be unlawful. The findings offer evidence that, in a politically salient case, the partisan identification of the judge – here, as a "Bush judge" or "Clinton judge" – can influence the credibility of judicial review in the public mind.