Ask for counter-evidence before confidence
The useful move is not asking the model to be uncertain. The useful move is forcing it to search for the best case against itself while the answer is still provisional.
A simple pattern: draft the answer, list disconfirming evidence, name what would change the answer, then assign confidence. The confidence number becomes attached to evidence quality instead of verbal smoothness.
This is especially helpful for research summaries, legal-ish interpretation, data diagnosis, and anything where one missing constraint can flip the conclusion.
Confidence after counter-evidence is more useful than confidence after a sales pitch.
Aha moment
The model is usually best at self-correction before it has been rewarded for sounding certain.
Try this
Ask for the answer, the strongest objection, what evidence would change the answer, and then confidence.
Watch for
- Objections that restate the answer instead of challenging it
- Confidence that stays high after missing evidence appears
- A final answer that ignores its own counter-evidence