Information quality dimensions for the social web

Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems, MEDES 2012

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 53-58

  Schaal, Markus ^a   Smyth, Barry ^a   Mueller, Roland M ^b   MacLean, Rutger ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b BERLIN SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND LAW   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Grounded theory; Information quality; Social web

Indexed keywords

DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM; GROUNDED THEORY; INFORMATION QUALITY; INFORMATION QUALITY DIMENSIONS; INFORMATION QUALITY FRAMEWORK; LITERATURE REVIEWS; SOCIAL WEBS; USER-GENERATED CONTENT;

DATA WAREHOUSES; ECOSYSTEMS; WORLD WIDE WEB;

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION);

EID: 84875981669     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2457276.2457287     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. J. E. Alexander and M. A. Tate. Web Wisdom; How to Evaluate and Create Information Quality on the Webb. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1999.
2. H. Chu and C. Xu.Web 2.0 and its dimensions in the scholarly world. SCIENTOMETRICS, 80(3):717-729, SEP 2009.
3. F. Davis, R. Bagozzi, and P. Warshaw. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14):1111-1132, 1992.
4. M. J. Eppler and D. Wittig. Conceptualizing Information Quality: A Review of Information Quality Frameworks from the Last Ten Years. In B. D. Klein and D. F. Rossin, editors, IQ, pages 83-96. MIT, 2000.
5. J. Gao, C. Zhang, K. Wang, and S. Ba. Understanding online purchase decision making: The effects of unconscious thought, information quality, and information quantity, 2012.
6. B. G. Glaser and A. L. Strauss. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Pub. Co., Chicago, 1967.
7. N. Hu, L. Liu, and J. Zhang. Do online reviews affect product sales? the role of reviewer characteristics and temporal effects. Information Technology and Management, 9:201-214, 2008. 10.1007/s10799-008-0041-2.
8. S. A. Knight and J. Burn. Developing a framework for assessing information quality on the World Wide Web. Informing Science, 8:159-172, 2005.
9. F. Naumann and C. Rolker. Assessment Methods for Information Quality Criteria. In Proc. IQ2000 MIT Conference on Information Quality, pages 148-162, 2000.
10. M. B. Parker, V. Moleshe, R. De la Harpe, and G. Wills. An evaluation of Information quality frameworks for the World Wide Web. In 8th Annual Conference on WWW Applications, Bloemfontein, Free State Province, South Africa, 2006.
11. R. Price, D. Neiger, and G. Shanks. Developing a Measurement Instrument for Subjective Aspects of Information Quality. Communications of the AIS, 22(3):49-74, January 2008.
12. R. Price and G. Shanks. A semiotic information quality framework: development and comparative analysis. Journal of Information Technology, 20(2):88-102, June 2005.
13. R. J. Price and G. G. Shanks. Empirical Refinement of a Semiotic Information Quality Framework. In HICSS. IEEE Computer Society, 2005.
14. L. Rao and K.-M. Osei-Bryson. Towards defining dimensions of knowledge systems quality. Expert Syst. Appl., 33(2):368-378, 2007.
15. B. Stvilia, L. Gasser, M. B. Twidale, and L. C. Smith. A framework for information quality assessment. JASIST, 58(12):1720-1733, 2007.
16. Y. Su and Z. Jin. Assuring information quality in knowledge intensive business services. In 2007 International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM 2007, 2007 International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM 2007, pages 3238-3241, Beijing, China, 2007.
17. H. van der Heijden. User Acceptance of Hedonic Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4):695-704, 2004.
18. R. Y. Wang and D. M. Strong. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J. Manage. Inf. Syst., 12(4):5-33, 1996.