Incredible: Is (almost) all web content trustworthy? Analysis of psychological factors related to website credibility evaluation

WWW 2014 Companion - Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 1117-1122

  Rafalak, Maria ^a   Abramczuk, Katarzyna ^b   Wierzbicki, Adam ^a  

^a POLISH JAPANESE INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

Author keywords

Bias; Credibility; Online behavior; Risk taking; Trust

Indexed keywords

INTERNET; RISK MANAGEMENT; WEBSITES; WORLD WIDE WEB;

BIAS; CREDIBILITY; ONLINE BEHAVIOR; RISK TAKING; TRUST;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84991000980     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2567948.2578997     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Flanagin A.J., Metzger M., 2000. Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 3, 515-540.
2. Sparks J.R., Rapp D. N., 2011. Readers' Reliance on Source Credibility in the Service of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37, 1, 230-247.
3. Lussen T., 2013. Trust in Online information. Doctoral Thesis. Universiteit Twente.
4. Metzger M.J., 2007. Making Sense of Credibility on the Web: Models for Evaluating Online Information and Recommendations for Future Research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 13, 2078-2091.
5. Jensen M.J., Lowry P.B., Jenkins J., 2011.Effects of Automated and Participative Decision Support in Computer- Aided Credibility Assessment. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28, 1, 201-234.
6. Bond, C.F., and DePaulo, B.M., 2008. Individual differences in judging deception: Accuracy and bias. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 4, 477-492.
7. Burgoon, J.K., Blair, J.P., Strom, R.E., 2008. Cognitive biases and nonverbal cue availability in detecting deception. Human Communication Research, 34, 4, 572-599.
8. DePaulo, B., and Kashy, D., 1998. Everyday lies in close and casual relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1, 63-79.
9. Ekman, P. Telling Lies. New York: Norton, 1985.
10. Kostakos V., 2009. Is the crowd's wisdom biased? A quantitative assessment of three online communities. Computational Science and Engineering, 4.
11. Weijia D., Jin G., Lee J., Luca M., 2012. Optimal Aggregation of Consumer Ratings: An Application to Yelp.com., Harvard Business School Working Paper, 13, 42.
12. Salganik M., J., Dodds, P.S., Watts, D.J., 2006. Experimental Study of Inequality and Unpredictability in an Artificial Cultural Market. Science, 311, 5762, 854-856.
13. Kakol M, Jankowski-Lorek M., Abramczuk K.Catasta M., Wierzbicki A., 2013. On the Subjectivity and Bias of Web Content Credibility Evaluations, WWW2013 Research Papers, 1131-1136.
14. Rotter, J. B, . 1967. A New Scale For the Measurement of Interpersonal Trust, Journal of Personality, 35, 651-665.
15. Pruitt, D. G., Kimmel, M. J., 1977. Twenty Years of Experimental Gaming. Critique, Synthesis and Suggestions For the Future, Annual Review of Psychology, 28, 363-392.
16. Gupta, A., Kumaraguru, P. 2012. Credibility ranking of tweets during high impact events. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Privacy and Security in Online Social Media.
17. Castillo, C., Mendoza, M., Poblete, B., 2011. Information Credibility on Twitter. Proceedings of WWW 2011.
18. Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D.J., Graepel, T, 2013. Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).