 Kneer (2017) also found solid evidence that  (JNA)  is a better predictor of assertability judgments than  (KNA),  TNA, and  (BNA).  In a first experiment, he tested Gettiered assertions and unlucky assertions, measuring assertability with different prompts: he asked whether the protagonist “should say p”, whether she “is permitted to say p”, and if saying p is “appropriate”. In both the Gettiered condition and the unlucky condition, the overwhelming majority of participants considered p assertable, but not known. Kneer concludes that “knowledge quite clearly doesn’t constitute the norm of assertion”. The other experiments were therefore designed to verify whether  (JNA) makes  more reliable predictions. Experiments 2 and 3 found robust evidence that  (JNA) is  a better predictor of assertability judgments than  (KNA),  both in Gettier assertions and unlucky assertions, even when different factors (like the response options or the kind of epistemic support) are manipulated. Experiment 4 shows that  (JNA) is  a better predictor of assertability judgments than  (BNA):  people judge that “having a hunch” that p is true is not good enough ground to assert p. Like Reuter and Brössel, Kneer concludes that  (JNA),  rather than  (KNA),  is better supported by the empirical evidence. In a subsequent study, Kneer (2021) found that these results are stable across different cultures.