A question of credibility - Effects of source cues and recommendations on information selection on news sites and blogs

Communications

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 435-456

  Winter, Stephan ^a   Krämer, Nicole C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Online news sites; Selective exposure; Source credibility; Web 2.0

Indexed keywords

EID: 84924360421     PISSN: 03412059     EISSN: 16134087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/commun-2014-0020     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bless, H., Wänke, M., Bohner, G., Fellhauer, R. F., & Schwarz, N. 1994. Need for Cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude bei Denkaufgaben [Need for cognition: A scale for the assessment of involvement and enjoyment of cognitive tasks]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 25, 147-154.
2. Bromme, R., Kienhues, D., & Porsch, T. 2010. Who knows what and who can we believe? Epistemological beliefs are beliefs about knowledge (mostly) attained from others. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 163-193). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. 1982. The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131.
4. Chaiken, S. 1987. The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. Zanna, J. Olson & C. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. 2006. The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345-354.
6. Donsbach, W. 1991. Exposure to political content in newspapers: The impact of cognitive dissonance on readers' selectivity. European Journal of Communication, 6(2), 155-186.
7. Eveland, W. P., Jr. & Dunwoody, S. 2002. An investigation of elaboration and selective scanning as mediators of learning from the web versus print. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 34-53.
8. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. 2003. The perceived credibility of personal web page information as influenced by the sex of the source. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 683-702.
9. Gierl, H., Stich, A., & Strohmayr, M. 1997. Einfluss der Glaubwürdigkeit einer Informationsquelle auf die Glaubwürdigkeit der Information [The influence of source credibility on information credibility]. Marketing Zeitschrift für Forschung und Praxis, 19, 27-31.
10. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. 1953. Communications and persuasion: Psychological studies in opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11. Judd, C. M., Kenny, D. A., & McClelland, G. H. 2001. Estimating and testing mediation and moderation in within-participant designs. Psychological Methods, 6, 115-134.
12. Kang, H., Bae, K., Zhang, S., & Sundar, S. S. 2011. Source cues in online news: Is the proximate source more powerful than distal sources? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(4), 719-736.
13. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Hastall, M. R. 2006. Social comparisons with news personae: Selective exposure to news portrayals of same-sex and same-age characters. Communication Research, 33(4), 262-284.
14. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. 2009. Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36(3), 426-448.
15. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Sharma, N., Hansen, D. L., & Alter, S. 2005. Impact of popularity indications on readers' selective exposure to online news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(3), 296-313.
16. Lee, E.-J., & Jang, Y. J. 2010. What do others' reactions to news on internet portal sites tell us? Effects of presentation format and readers' need for cognition on reality perception. Communication Research, 37(6), 825-846.
17. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & McCann, R. 2003. Credibility in the 21st century: Integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment. In P. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 27 (pp. 293-335). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A., & Medders, R. 2010. Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413-439.
19. Pirolli, P., & Card, S. K. 1999. Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4), 643-675.
20. Pornpitakpan, C. 2004. The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades' evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-281.
21. Sundar, S. S. 2008. The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 72-100). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
22. Sundar, S. S., Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Hastall, M. 2007. News cues: Do indicators of newsworthiness by newsbots affect our perception of news stories? A cross-cultural study in Germany, the Netherlands, and the U. S. Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology, 58(3), 366-378.
23. Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. 2001. Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication, 51(1), 52-72.
24. Tseng, S., & Fogg, B. J. 1999. Credibility and computing technology. Communications of the ACM, 42(5), 39-44.
25. Wathen, C. N., & Burkell, J. 2002. Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 134-144.
26. Westerwick, A., Kleinman, S. B., & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. 2013. Turn a blind eye if you care: Impacts of attitude consistency, importance, and credibility on seeking of political information and implications for attitudes. Journal of Communication, 63(3), 432-453.
27. Willemsen, L. M., Neijens, P. C., & Bronner, F. 2012. The ironic effect of source identification on the perceived credibility of online product reviewers. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(1), 16-31.
28. Winter, S., & Krämer, N. C. 2012. Selecting science information in web 2.0: How source cues, message sidedness, and need for cognition influence users' exposure to blog posts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(1), 80-96.
29. nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 802-807). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.