JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Credibility Assessment of Online Information in Context
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Credibility Assessment of Online Information in Context
Rieh, Soo Young;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine to what extent the context in which people interact with online information affects people's credibility perceptions. In this study, credibility assessment is defined as perceptions of credibility relying on individuals' expertise and knowledge. Context has been characterized with respect to three aspects: Context as user goals and intentions, context as topicality of information, and context as information activities. The data were collected from two empirical studies. Study 1 was a diary study in which 333 residents in Michigan, U.S.A. submitted 2,471 diary entries to report their trust perceptions associated with ten different user goals and nine different intentions. Study 2 was a lab-based study in which 64 subjects participated in performing four search tasks in two different information activity conditions - information search or content creation. There are three major findings of this study: (1) Score-based trust perceptions provided limited views of people's credibility perceptions because respondents tended to score trust ratings consistently high across various user goals and intentions; (2) The topicality of information mattered more when study subjects assessed the credibility of user generated content (UGC) than with traditional media content (TMC); (3) Subjects of this study exerted more effort into making credibility judgments when they engaged in searching activities than in content creation. These findings indicate that credibility assessment can or should be seen as a process-oriented notion incorporating various information use contexts beyond simple rating-based evaluation. The theoretical contributions for information scientists and practical implications for web designers are also discussed.
 Keywords
Credibility assessment;Credibility assessment effort;User-generated content;Information search;Content creation;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
Arazy, O., & Kopak, R. (2011). On the measurability of information quality. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 89-99. crossref(new window)

2.
Borlund, P. (2000). Experimental components for the evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems. Journal of Documentation, 56, 71-90. crossref(new window)

3.
Courtright, C. (2007). Context in information behavior research. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, 273-306. crossref(new window)

4.
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2010). Kids and credibility: An empirical examination of youth, digital media use, and information credibility. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

5.
Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and do. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

6.
Hilligoss, B., & Rieh, S. Y. (2008). Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: Construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Information Processing & Management, 44(4), 1467-1484. crossref(new window)

7.
Hovland, C. I, Janis, I. L, & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion; Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University press.

8.
Johnson T. J. & Kaye, B. K. (2000). Using is believing: The influence of reliance on the credibility of online political information among politically interested internet users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 865-879. crossref(new window)

9.
Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (1998). Cruising is believing?: Comparing Internet and traditional sources on media credibility measures. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(2), 325-340. crossref(new window)

10.
Lim, S. (2013). College students' credibility judgments and heuristics concerning Wikipedia. Information Processing & Management, 49, 405-419. crossref(new window)

11.
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413-439. crossref(new window)

12.
Rieh, S. Y. (2010). Credibility and cognitive authority of information. In M. Bates & M. N. Maack (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences (3rd ed., pp. 1337-1344). New York: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

13.
Rieh, S. Y. & Danielson, D. R. (2007). Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, 307-364. crossref(new window)

14.
Rieh, S. Y., Jeon, G. Y-J, Yang, J., & Lampe, C. (2014). Audience-aware credibility: From understanding audience to establishing credible blogs. Proceedings of the Eight International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM 2014), 436-445.

15.
Rieh, S. Y., Kim, Y. M., Yang, J. Y., & St. Jean, B. (2010). A diary study of credibility assessment in everyday life information activities on the Web: Preliminary findings. Proceedings of the 73rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47.

16.
Rieh, S. Y. (2002). Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 145-161. crossref(new window)

17.
Saracevic, T. (2010). The notion of context in "Information Interaction in Context." Proceedings of the Information Interaction in Context (IIiX 2010).

18.
St. Jean, B, Rieh, S. Y., Yang, J. Y., & Kim, Y. M. (2011). How content contributors assess and establish credibility on the Web. Proc. of the 74rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48.

19.
Sundin, O., & Francke, H. (2009). In search of credibility: Pupils' information practices in learning environments. Information Research, 14(4), paper 418.

20.
Wang, P., & Soergel, D. (1998). A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I. Document selection. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(2), 115-133. crossref(new window)

21.
Xie, I. (2008). Interactive information retrieval in digital environments. Hershey, PA: GI Global.

22.
Xu, Q. (2013). Social recommendation, source credibility, and recency: Effects of news cues in a social bookmarking website. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(4), 757-775. crossref(new window)