Anecdotal Evidence

[bennyboy]

Anecdotes become more trustworthy the more mundane the claim.  I read the meter on the scope and it read 8 units is trustworthy.  I was visited by the ghost of Abraham Lincoln is not.  It has to do with intervals of confidence.  The chance that the report of the meter reading being false based on random variation is negligible.  The chance of the ghost sighting being wrong by random variation is significant.  Not to mention the factors which can conspire to render a witnesses statement worthless.  There is less incentive to fabricate things with a mundane observation.

Interesting..... when I am inclined to fabricate something, I tend to keep it simple and easily believable (as well as low on details).   Not to invite questions, or encourage people to check out my story.  

And I have mistaken meter readings; far more often, then mistaking a visiting of a ghost of Lincoln... your mileage apparently varies.

My view is that mundane anecdotes are more likely reliable for a different reason.  If I'm trying to convince you that the Okanagan region in British Columbia has really nice peaches, I'll probably just state so.  If you don't believe me, then I'll shrug and change the subject.

So I'd recommend this as a second measure of validity-- the more the person tries to convince you that their anecdote is real, the less likely it is to be true, since the person obviously has a personal motivation for getting you to believe.