Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research

By Miriam J. Metzger. 2007

1,167 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Communication, Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c0fe46262b865fc24d91d51cf028891e31dcd70d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Communication

In Information Systems

Citations in the corpus

Can Students Evaluate Online Sources? Learning From Assessments of Civic Online Reasoning (2018, background): “…use cues and heuristics to decide if a website is credible, including the authority of a search engine, site design and functionality, previous experience with or referral to a site, and perceived expertise (cf. Flanagin & Metzger, 2007; Fogg et al., 2003; Metzger et al., 2010; Sundar, 2008).”
Trust Online: Young Adults' Evaluation of Web Content (2010, methodology): “Commenting on this body of work, Metzger stated: “people know they ‘should’ critically analyze the information they obtain online, yet rarely have the time or energy to do it” (Metzger, 2007, p. 2078).”
The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index (2010, methodology): “…than by using the two other sources and also that there is only a limited overlap between the citations found through Google Scholar and those found using the Web of Science (Meho 2006; Meho and Yang 2007; Bar-Ilan 2008; Kousha and Thelwall 2008; Vaughan and Shaw 2008, and references therein).”
Disinformation on the Web: Impact, Characteristics, and Detection of Wikipedia Hoaxes (2016, background): “In particular, a number of papers [25, 34, 19] investigate which factors boost or hurt credibility, and by which strategies users can evaluate the credibility of online sources.”
Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action (2010, background): “Hyperlinking may make it even more difficult for users to follow and evaluate multiple sources (Harris, 2008; Metzger, 2007).”
In Search of Negativity Bias: An Empirical Study of Perceived Helpfulness of Online Reviews (2013, background): “Research into information presentation, for example, has long demonstrated that the delivery of information, such as clarity, and detail of writing, has a significant impact on the reader’s perception of its credibility (Fogg et al., 2003; Metzger, 2007).”
Psychological Approaches to Credibility Assessment Online (2015, background): “…decisions on factors like website design and navigability, while Internet users report verifying the information they found online for its credibility only " rarely " to " occasionally " and tend to verify using strategies that require the least time and effort (see Metzger, 2007, for a review).”
Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial (2008, background): “those downloaded from a subject based repository and future citations,”
Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media (2019, background): “This relates to credibility research, which suggests that perceived credibility and can heighten the persuasive impact, especially for internet users who are not motivated to process information (Metzger, 2007; Metzger et al., 2010).”
Explaining Credibility in News Articles using Cross-Referencing (2019, background): “The amount of information available from various heterogeneous news sources places at the center of attention the issue of credibility [12]: readers are now suspicious with regards to the quality, believability and trustworthiness of the information provided to them [4].”
Fake images: The effects of source, intermediary, and digital media literacy on contextual assessment of image credibility online (2018, background): “users rarely perform any evaluation behaviors (such as seeking out other sources to validate information, or checking out the author) to verify the credibility of online information (Metzger, 2007).”
Author Name Disambiguation in MEDLINE (2009, positive): “…et al. 2005]; and (e) methods that go beyond pairwise analysis of explicit information to analyze graphs and implicit information [Bhattacharya and Getoor 2006, 2007; Huang et al. 2006; Culotta and McCallum 2006; Kalashnikov and Mehrotra 2006; Culotta et al. 2007; Galvez and Moya-Aneg´ on 2007].”
Augmenting web pages and search results to support credibility assessment (2011, methodology): “Based on a synthesis of the research literature [11, 14, 18, 22, 24, 27, 28], we used the following definition to operationalize credibility for the purposes of assigning a score: A credible webpage is one whose information one can accept as the truth without needing to look elsewhere.”