The effect of top-level domains and advertisements on health web-site credibility

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2004, Pages

  Walther, Joseph B ^a   Wang, Zuoming ^a   Loh, Tracy ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

Advertising; Credibility; Domains; Internet; Web sites

Indexed keywords

ADVERTIZING; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; HUMAN; INTERNET; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; SAFETY;

EID: 5444268601     PISSN: 14388871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6.3.e24     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Fox S, Rainie L. The online health care revolution: how the Web helps Americans take better care of themselves. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2000. Nov 26.
2. Winker MA, Flanagin A, Chi-Lum B, White J, Andrews K, Kennet RL, et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the Internet: principles governing AMA Web sites. American Medical Association 2003.
3. Craigie M, Loader B, Burrows R, Muncer S. Reliability of health information on the Internet: an examination of experts' ratings. J Med Internet Res 2002 Jan;4(1):e2.
4. Turow J, Coluccio K, Hersh A, Humphreys L, Jacobsohn L, Sawicki N, et al. Discussions of health websites in medical and popular media. Report to Consumer WebWatch 2003 May.
5. Peterson G, Aslani P, Williams KA. How do consumers search for and appraise information on medicines on the Internet? A qualitative study using focus groups. J Med Internet Res 2003 Dec 19; 5:e33.
6. Chaffee SH. Mass media and interpersonal channels: competitive, convergent, or complementary. In: Gumpert G, Cathcart R, editors. Inter/media: interpersonal communication in a media world. New York: Oxford University Press; 1982. p. 57-77.
7. Kiousis S. Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the information age. Mass Communication & Society 2001;4(4):381-403.
8. Slater MD, Rounder D. How message evaluation and source attributes may influence credibility assessment and belief change. Journalism Mass Comm 1996;73:974-91.
9. Smith RG. The message measurement inventory: a profile for communication analysis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1978.
10. Hovland CI, Janis IL, Kelley JJ. Communication and persuasion: psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1953.
11. Berlo DK, Lemert JB, Mertz RJ. Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opin Q 1969; 33:563-576.
12. McCroskey J. Scales for the measurement of ethos. Speech Monogr 1966;33:65-72.
13. McCroskey JC, Young JT. Ethos and credibility: the construct and its measurement after three decades. Cent States Speech J 1981;32:24-34.
14. Gass RH, Seiter JS. Persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon; 1999.
15. Jurma WE. Evaluations of credibility of the source of the message. Psychol Rep 1981;49:778.
16. Aune RK, Kikuchi T. Effects of language intensity similarity on perceptions of credibility, relational attributes, and persuasion. J Lang Soc Psychol 1993;12:224-237.
17. Keefe DJ. Persuasion: theory and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990.
18. Cronkhite G, Liska J. A critique of factor analytic approaches to the study of credibility. Commun Monogr 1976; 43:92-107.
19. Delia JG. A constructivist analysis of the concept of credibility. Q J Speech 1976;62:361-375.
20. Gunther A. Attitude extremity and trust in media. Journal Q 1988;65:279-287.
21. Stamme K, Dube R. The relationship of attitudinal components to trust in media. Communic Res 1994;21:105-123.
22. Keefe DJ. The dependency of interpersonal evaluations on contextrelevant beliefs about the other. Speech Monogr 1975;42:10-19.
23. Metzger MJ, Flanagin AJ, Eyal K, Lemus DR, McCann RM. Bringing the concept of credibility into the 21st century: integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment. In: Kalbfleisch P, editor. Communication yearbook 27. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003. p. 293-335.
24. Flanagin A, Metzger M. Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism Mass Comm 2000;77:515-540.
25. Gaziano C, McGrath K. Measuring the concept of credibility. Journal Q 1986;63:451-462.
26. Meyer P. Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: developing an index. Journal Q 1988;65:567-574.
27. Flanagin A, Metzger M. Internet use in the contemporary media environment. Hum Commun Res 2001; 27:153-181.
28. Sundar SS, Nass C. Conceptualizing sources in online news. J Commun 2001;51:52-72.
29. Eastin MS. Credibility assessments of online health information: the effects of source expertise and knowledge of content. J of Computer-Mediated Comm 2001 Jul;6(4).
30. Fogg BJ, Marshall J, Laraki O, Osipovich A, Varnma C, Fang N, et al. What makes web sites credible? A report on a large quantitative study. Proceedings of ACM CHI 2001 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; 2001 Mar 31-Apr 5; Seattle, WA.
31. Eysenbach G, Köhler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability tests, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 2002 Mar 09;324(7337):573-577.
32. Metzger MJ, Flanagin AJ, Zwarun L. College student Web use, perceptions of information credibility, and verification behavior. Comput Educ 2003;41:271-290.
33. Dutta-Bergman MJ. Health communication on the web: the roles of web use motivation and information completeness. Commun Monogr 2003;70:264-274.
34. Walther JB, Boyd S. Attraction to computer-mediated social support. In: Lin CA, Atkin D, editors. Communication technology and society: audience adoption and uses. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press; 2002. p. 153-188.
35. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: Berkowitz L, editor. Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 19. New York: Academic Press; 1986. p. 123-205.
36. Klingle RS, Burgoon HM, Afifi WA, Callister M. Rethinking how to measure organizational culture in the hospital setting: the hospital culture scale. Evid Based Ment Health 1995;18:166-186.
37. Gay G. , Stefanone M, Grace-Martin M, Hembrooke H. The effects of wireless computing in collaborative learning environments. Int J Hum Comput Interact 2001; 13:257-276.