Confidence or Competence? The Surprising Truth About Why We Trust Experts

When it comes to trusting experts, appearances matter more than we might like to admit. Stephen Martin and Joseph Marks highlight in 'Messengers' how perceived competence often hinges on visual cues and confidence, rather than actual expertise.

Experiments show that people are more likely to obey instructions from someone wearing a white lab coat, irrespective of the accuracy of those instructions. One chilling example involves a nurse administering ear drops into a patient’s rectum because the doctor’s prescription was ambiguous, but the nurse deferred unquestioningly due to the perceived authority of the white coat.

Confidence plays a crucial role here. Overconfident individuals are often perceived as more competent, even when they lack true knowledge. This confidence bias can lead to poor decision-making and misplaced trust. In group discussions, the first confident voice tends to set the tone, gaining disproportionate influence.

Interestingly, overt self-promotion can backfire, reducing likeability and trustworthiness. Instead, endorsements from third parties—delegated self-promotion—boost credibility more effectively. For example, a receptionist introducing a property agent by emphasizing their experience increases the agent’s perceived competence without seeming boastful.

Potential is another fascinating aspect. Recruiters often prefer candidates with high potential rather than proven experience, captivated by the promise of future success. This preference extends beyond hiring to social media and art appreciation, where 'potential' artists garner more interest than established ones.

By understanding the difference between confidence and competence, and the cues that influence our perceptions, we can become more discerning consumers of expertise, avoiding the pitfalls of blind trust and embracing a more critical, evidence-based approach.

References: Behavioural Public Policy Blog, Bookey.app, Admired Leadership 2 , 3 , 1