 So far we have focused on Rational Reflection and New Rational Reflection, which are motivated by the thought that in accommodating higher-order evidence, we should calibrate our first-order beliefs to our higher-order beliefs about rationality. Another way to approach the question begins with reliability. The thought here is that higher-order evidence affects our first-order beliefs because of its bearing on our reliability—that is, our propensity to get to the truth, under the relevant circumstances. Examples of this approach include Elga’s “Equal Weight View”, quoted above; Christensen (2007a)’s “Integration”; the “Calibration Rule”, discussed by White (2009); Weatherson’s (ms—see Other Internet Resources) “Judgments Screen Evidence” (which he argues against); “Guess Calibration”, discussed in Sliwa and Horowitz 2015; “Calibration”, discussed in Schoenfield 2015a; and the “Simple Thermometer Model” discussed in Christensen 2016a. As a representative example, here is White’s “Calibration Rule”, which he presents as a consequence of the Equal Weight View: