‘공신력을 고려한 동료 평가 사례’에 대한 국어교사들의 인식과 국어교육적 함의

최영인 한국화법학회 2017 화법연구 Vol.0 No.38

The concept that Aristote explained as ‘ethos’ has been named and known as ‘credibility’ in the modern persuasion theory, and modern Korean Language Education Curriculum deals with achievement standard related to ‘source credibility’ in the ‘Speech and Composition’, which is one of general elective subjects. The purpose of this study is to investigate how Korean language teachers evaluate on the ‘Peer assessment cases of high school students considering credibility’ and how they do achievement standard in the Korean Language Education Curriculum relating to credibility, and further to propose some issues to be solved for them to carry out credibility education more desirably in the Korean Language Education. The major data of the study are results of evaluation of oral speech and survey that Korean language teachers have performed. In order for the teachers to sufficiently understand the context of the ‘Peer assessment cases considering credibility’, the study had presented the copy of the corresponding talk and the result sheet of peer assessment by e-mail or in printing and asked them for performing the evaluation and participating in the survey on the ‘Peer assessment cases considering credibility’. Finally by analyzing responses of 23 Korean language teachers, the study is deriving issues on the credibility education. 아리스토텔레스가 ‘에토스’로 설명했던 개념은 현대의 설득 이론에서 ‘공신력(credibility)’으로 명명되어 다루어지고 있으며, 현재 국어과 교육과정 내에서는 일반 선택 교과 중 하나인 ‘화법과 작문’에서 ‘화자의 공신력(source credibility)’과 관련된 내용 성취기준이 다루어지고 있다. 본 연구에서는 국어교사들이 ‘공신력을 고려한 고등학생의 동료 평가 사례’에 대해 어떻게 평가하는지, 그리고 공신력과 관련된 국어과 교육과정 성취기준에 대해 어떻게 평가하는지를 확인하고, 국어교육 내에서 공신력 교육이 보다 바람직하게 이루어지도록 하기 위해 해결해야 할 문제를 제안하는 데 있다. 본 연구의 주요 자료는 국어교사들이 수행한 담화 평가 및 설문 조사 결과이다. ‘공신력을 고려한 동료 평가 사례’의 맥락을 교사들이 충분히 이해할 수 있도록 해당 말하기 전사본과 동료 평가 결과지를 이메일 혹은 출력본으로 제시하였고, ‘공신력을 고려한 동료 평가 사례’에 대한 평가 수행 및 설문 조사에 응하도록 요청하였다. 최종적으로 국어교사 23명의 응답을 분석하여 공신력 교육에 대한 쟁점을 도출하였다.

성폭력 피해 아동 진술신빙성 평가의 한계와 전망

조은경(Jo, Eun-kyung) 한국피해자학회 2010 被害者學硏究 Vol.18 No.2

This paper reviews the history of credibility assessment of child sexual violence victims and introduces the Statement Validity Assessment(SVA) as a widely used method of credibility assessment. This paper discusses the prospects and limitations of using SVA or other credibility assessment methods at the police or courts of Korea. SVA is the most widely used credibility assessment method. SVA was developed by psychologists in Germany in 1950s and is being used by expert witnesses in many countries. SVA procedure consists of three elements: (1) obtaining voluntary statements from an alleged child victim, (2) doing Criteria-Based Content Analysis(CBCA), and (3) analyzing validity factors that might have influenced the child's statements. CBCA is a content analysis scheme to tell the likelihood of child's statements coming from his or her own experience. Many empirical studies show that the average CBCA scores of children who actually witnessed an event are significantly higher than those of falsely reporting children. But using CBCA or SVA in court is still controversial. After many years of practice, the German Supreme Court in 1999 specified guidelines for SVA by experts. Credibility assessment is a professional area which requires in-depth knowledge of child development, eyewitness memory and investigative interviewing. Any attempts to produce credibility assessment experts by a short-term training without intensive supervision and ethics could be very risky and hinder the fact finding in the criminal justice system.

대학생의 인터넷 자료 읽기에서 신뢰성 평가 양상

백혜선(Hyesun Paik) 한국문화융합학회 2023 문화와 융합 Vol.45 No.12

This study aims to examine how college students evaluate the credibility Wiki sites. For this purpose, 286 college students were surveyed on credibility-releated questions for Wikipedia and NamuWiki. Results indicated that college students regarded Wikipedia as moderately credible, with an average of 3.25 for Wikipedia and 3.14 for NamuWiki. When we analyzed the difference in credibility evaluations between Wikipedia and NamuWiki, we found that Wikipedia was deemed more credible than NamuWiki for most questions, but NamuWiki was statistically significantly higher for “easy to understand”. When looking at the relationship between the credibility of wiki sites and college students' use of wiki sites, both source credibility and content credibility were significantly related. We found that college students perceived the credibility of wiki sites as “moderate” but used them for reasons of “newness” and “easy explanation”. It is necessary to develop evaluation indicators that take into account the characteristics of Internet sites and prepare educational measures on credibility evaluation in Internet reading. 이 연구는 대학생의 위키 사이트에 대한 신뢰성 평가 양상을 살펴보기 위한 목적으로 대학생 286명을대상으로 위키백과와 나무위키에 대한 신뢰성 평가를 실시하였다. 그 결과 대학생들은 위키백과는 평균3.25, 나무위키는 3.14로 보통 수준으로 신뢰성을 평가하고 있었다. 위키백과와 나무위키에 대한 신뢰성 평가의 차이를 분석한 결과 대부분의 문항에서 위키백과가 나무위키보다 신뢰성이 높다고 보고 있었으나 ‘이해하기 쉬운 설명’에서는 나무위키가 통계적으로 유의미하게 높게 나왔다. 위키 사이트에 대한 신뢰성 평가와 대학생의 위키 사이트 이용과의 관계를 보았을 때는 출처 신뢰성과 내용 신뢰성 모두 유의미한 상관을 보였다. 대학생들은 위키 사이트의 신뢰성에 대해 ‘보통’ 수준으로 인식하고 있으나‘최신성’과 ‘쉬운 설명’의 이유로 이용하고 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. 위키 사이트인 위키백과와 나무위키에 대한 신뢰성 평가 차이 등을 고려하여 인터넷 사이트의 특성을 고려한 평가 지표를 개발하고 이를 바탕으로 인터넷 읽기에서 신뢰성 평가에 대한 교육 방안을 마련하는 것이 필요하다.

군사위협의 신뢰성 평가 이론의 검토 -북한 위협 사례 분석을 중심으로-

전경주 한국정책개발학회 2020 정책개발연구 Vol.20 No.1

When assessing the credibility of a state’s military threat, there are two prominent theories: Past Actions theory and Current Calculus theory. The Past Actions theory posits that the credibility of a state’s current military threat rests on whether it kept or broke its declared commitments in the past. In contrast, according to the Current Calculus theory, past actions do not determine whether a state’s military threat is credible, but, rather, its power and interest to carry out the threat. This research revisits these two theories with the case of North Korea’s threat of all-out war in 2015 by looking at how the ROK government assessed the North’s threat credibility. The Current Calculus theory explains the examined case better than the Past Actions theory, but the case reveals those two theories’ disadvantages as well. This research concludes by suggesting additional points for the refinement of threat credibility theories and policy implications for the ROK government in assessing North Korea’s military threats. 군사적 위협의 신뢰성 평가와 관련하여 대표적인 두 가지 이론이 있다. 위협을 가하는 국가의 과거의 행적에 비추어 판단한다는 과거 행적 이론과, 해당 국가의 현재의 힘과 이해관계에 기반하여 판단한다는 현재 상황 이론이다. 본 논문은 두 이론들을 견주면서, 한국 정부가 북한 군사위협의 신뢰성을 어떻게 평가했는지를 설명하고자 한다. 본 논문은 2015년의 전면전 위협의 신뢰성을 평가할 때 2013년의 행적과 2015년 당시 상황 중 무엇이 한국 정부의 판단 근거였는지를 살펴봄으로써, 북한 사례에 있어서 현재 상황 이론이 더욱설득력을 가진다고 주장한다. 또한 북한 사례 분석을 통해 드러난 군사위협신뢰성 평가 이론들의 한계를 짚어보고, 동시에 도출할 수 있는 정책적 시사점을 제시한다.

Design Matters in Web Credibility Assessment: Interactive Design as a Social Validation Tool for Online Health Information Seekers

최원찬,김상연,Manman Luo 한국언론학회 2022 Asian Communication Research Vol.19 No.3

This study explored what makes users perceive a website as a credible source of health information and how web credibility assessment, in turn, influences their health information-seeking behaviors. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted with survey responses from college students (NN = 141) who assessed credibility markers of a website they normally visit to address health concerns. A 4-factor solution emerged as the best summary of the data: (a) content, (b) interaction design, (c) information design, and (d) source. Identified components were used in a linear model to explore the effects of different web credibility types on perceptual, attitudinal, and behavioral outcomes. Alongside content-related attributes (e.g., recency of the information), interaction design-related elements (e.g., ability to interact with other users) were significantly associated with most dependent variables examined in the study (e.g., trust in the information on the site, willingness to follow the advice, and willingness to recommend the site to others). Current results imply that users count on not only content-related cues or heuristics, but also interactive design features as helpful tools for mobilizing social resources (e.g., fellow users) to validate online health information. Theoretical and practical implications of the study findings and future research directions are discussed.

난민정의에 대한 한국 판례의 비판적 고찰

김종철(Jong Chul Kim) 서울국제법연구원 2014 서울국제법연구 Vol.21 No.2

난민협약상 난민정의 가운데 ‘well founded fear’를 해석할 때 난민신청자의 주관적인 요소를 배제하여 ‘합리적인 근거 있는 우려’라고 번역하는 것이 타당하며, 박해의 합리적인 가능성이 있음을 보여주는 것으로 박해를 받을 우려가 ‘합리적인 근거’가 있다는 것을 입증했다고 할 것이다. 이렇게 낮은 입증 정도를 인정하는 이유는 난민이 처한 특수한 상황 때문인데, 이러한 점은 입증의 방식에 관해서도 마찬가지이다. 난민사건의 경우 난민신청자의 진술이 신빙성이 있다면 다른 객관적인 증거가 없다고 하더라도 난민신청자의 진술로 난민주장을 입증할 수 있도록 해야 한다. 하지만 신빙성 판단은 함부로 이루어져서는 안 되며, 난민신청자의 진술 중에서 난민정의의 핵심적인 부분이 정합하는지 그리고 알려진 사실과 부합하는지 여부를 가지고 판단해야 하고, 난민신청자의 사회심리적인 취약성이 고려되어야 한다. 그러나 판례의 경우 이론적으로는 위의 내용을 인정하고 있지만, 구체적인 적용에 있어서는 입증정도나 신빙성 판단에 있어서 위 이론에 따른 적용을 하고 있지 않다. ‘Well founded fear’ in the article 1 A(2) of 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees should be translated “합리적인 근거 있는 우려” in Korean. In terms of standard of proof, when there is reasonable possibility of being persecuted, the fear of the persecution is well founded. One of the reasons this kind of standard of proof applies to refugee cases is for refugees to have difficulties in accessing objective evidences. In line with this, special way of proof in refugee cases has been acknowledged in that a refugee claim can be established by her the statements without objective evidence as long as her statements are credible. But assessment of the credibility should be conducted in a very cautious manner. The object of the assessment is not refugee herself but her statements, inter alia statements relating to refugee definition. The principle of ‘the benefit of the doubt’ is ensured and her phycho-social vulnerability is taken into account in the process of the assessment. But unfortunately most of Korean courts has failed in applying above mentioned distinct characteristics of standard of proof as well as way of proof including credibility assessment to individual refugee cases.

경관영향평가서의 실효성 평가 -경관영향평가서와 환경영향평가서의 내용분석을 중심으로-

이영경 한국조경학회 2000 韓國造景學會誌 Vol.27 No.5

Landscape impact assessment(LIA) is an aid to decision-making. For the decision maker, LIA provides a scientific examination of the predicted landscape implications of a proposed action and of the mitigation measures, before a decision is taken. Thus, the efficacy of LIA depends on the scientific credibility of the prediction and mitigation measures described in the landscape impact statement. The purpose of this paper was to examine the efficacy of LIA through the content analysis of prediction and mitigation measures in the selected 39 landscape impact statements and 34 environmental impact statements. The content of the selected statements was analyzed in terms of the quantification, precision, significance, and likelihood. The results showed that both prediction and mitigation measures were very low in the scientific credibility. Specifically, the prediction was ambiguously described without scientific probability, and the effect of mitigation measures was not specifically presented in the reports. Thus, landscape impact statement can not give credible information in the decision making process, which weakens the efficacy as an aid to decision-making. Based on the results, several suggestions were presented to enhance the efficacy of LIA.

The Opportunities and Barriers in Considering Cumulative Effects for Landscape Assessments

Jin-Oh Kim,Byoungwook Min 전북대학교 휴양및경관계획연구소 2018 휴양및경관연구 (J East Asian Landscape Studies) Vol.12 No.2

Cumulative effects are defined as the joint and aggregated effects of many factors and processes. Their consideration in landscape and environmental assessments are integral at both the project and strategic level, and they can help to bridge the different spatial and temporal scales. The primary challenge of conducting cumulative effect assessments (CEAs) is the difficulty in understanding the complicated nature of cumulative effects. We used three criteria for a systematic understanding of the barriers to addressing cumulative effects that are critical for improving knowledge systems for sustainable development and environmental assessment: salience, credibility, and legitimacy, and analyzed three cases through a variety of studies and resources: the Middle Humber in the U.K., the Transboundary Crown of the Continent in the U.S. and Canada, and the Great Sandhills in Canada, to understand how CEAs have been applied and obstructed in terms of the three criteria. In addition, a series of focus group interviews with experts and practitioners were performed to illuminate the critical barriers based on the criteria for addressing CEA in the context of South Korea. Based on the lessons, we suggest several key strategies such as securing a cooperative consulting process, and active and transparent partnerships; using a strategic environmental assessment as a framework; understanding and incorporating stakeholder knowledge; using advanced computer modeling and simulation techniques including effective visualization tools; and preparing a simple model design and understandable scientific information.

성범죄 피해 지적장애인의 진술에 대한 법원의 신빙성 판단 - 대법원 2017. 1. 25. 선고 2016도14989 판결 및 하급심 판결을 중심으로 -

김민희,이승진 대검찰청 2019 형사법의 신동향 Vol.0 No.63

Due to the nature of sex crimes that often lack physical evidence, victim's statements during the trial process are very imperative. However, the intellectually disabled have been questioned for their reliability in stating the damage they suffered due to their relatively low intellectual and verbal skills compared to those of the non-disabled. So, by what standards are we currently judging the credibility of the statements made by the intellectually disabled who suffered sexual crimes in the courts? In order to confirm the set of criteria for judgment, the content analysis was carried out on one recent ruling by the criminal trial that dealt with the reliability of statements made by the intellectually disabled victim of sexual crimes as a major issue No.2016Do14989. As a result, the criteria for determining the reliability of the intellectually disabled victim who suffered sexual crimes were basically to make the judgment based on the comprehensive consideration of the consistency and specificity, the possibility of false statements, and the various all matters. It also confirmed that further consideration is being made of the spontaneity of the statements, sources of memory, mental age, the elapsed time of the event, and suggestibility. Based on the above analysis, the authors proposed the need to prepare a detailed framework for determining the reliability of an intellectual disabled statement, the necessity of investigative interview training for a witness, the need to review the reliability of a defendant's statement, the dismantling of the frame of victimhood, and the separation of the judgment of the reliability of a child's statement and the judgment of an intellectual person's credibility. 물적 증거가 부재한 경우가 빈번한 성범죄의 특성상 재판과정에서 피해자의 진술은 매우 중요하다. 하지만 지적장애인의 경우 비장애인들에 비해 비교적 낮은 지적능력과 언어구사력으로 인해 자신이 입은 피해를 진술함에 있어 그 신빙성을 의심받는 경우가 많았다. 그렇다면 현재 법원에서 성범죄 피해를 당한 지적장애인들의 진술 신빙성을 어떠한 기준에 의하여 판단하고 있을까? 그 일련의 판단기준을 확인하기 위하여, 성범죄 피해를 당한 지적장애인의 진술 신빙성을 주요 쟁점으로 다룬 형사재판의 비교적 최근 판결인 대법원 2017. 1. 25. 선고 2016도14989 판결 및 하급심 판결에 대한 내용분석을 실시하였다. 그 결과 성범죄 피해를 당한 지적장애인의 신빙성 판단기준은 기본적으로 진술의 일관성과 구체성, 허위진술의 가능성, 그리고 제반사항 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하는 것이었다. 아울러 아동 진술의 신빙성 판단기준을 인용하여 진술의 자발성, 기억의 출처, 정신적 연령, 그리고 피암시성 등에 대한 검토가 추가적으로 이루어짐을 확인하였다. 이상의 분석을 토대로 향후 형사재판 중 지적장애인의 진술 신빙성을 판단하는 데 있어 그 기준의 세부적인 준거틀 마련 필요성, 증인신문 교육 필요성, 피고인 진술 신빙성 검토 필요성, 피해자다움 프레임의 해체, 그리고 아동 진술의 신빙성 판단 및 지적장애인 진술 신빙성 판단의 분리 등을 제언하였다.

Credibility는 감성의 영역인가?

김기은 한국감성과학회 2014 추계학술대회 Vol.2014 No.-