In a similar spirit, Adler (2006) suggests that such cases are best explained in terms of the subject’s diminished confidence as to p, where the latter does not imply a lack of belief. Meanwhile, Nagel (2008) notes that, when a person has much riding on some matter, we normally expect them to engage in more (/more diligent) evidence-seeking behavior before arriving at confident belief. For this reason, we naturally attribute to the subject in the high standards case either a lack of solid belief or compromised accuracy, either of which can lead to a judgment that the subject does not know. Further, even in cases where the subject does not share the evaluator’s concerns about certain possibilities of error, epistemic egocentrism — our natural tendency to overestimate the extent to which others share our beliefs and attitudes — can lead the evaluator to project those concerns onto the subject. If the subject is not then engaging in the expected extra evidence-seeking behavior, she will once again be judged hasty, and as not knowing (Nagel 2010a,b).