Exploring the impact of modality on perceptions of credibility for online news stories

Journalism Studies

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 348-359

  Kiousis, Spiro ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Credibility; Interactivity; Modality; Participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 85016496092     PISSN: 1461670X     EISSN: 14699699     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14616700500533668     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Bagui, Sikha. 1998. “Reasons for Increased Learning Using Multimedia”. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7 (7):3–18.
2. Bellotti, Victoria, and Rogers, Yvonne, (1999) “From Web Press to Web Press:multimedia representations and multimedia publishing”, in:Steven, Pemberton (Ed.), CHI 97 Human Factors on Computing Systems, CHI 97 Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA, Addison-Wesley, 97, pp. 22–7.
3. Bengtsson, Bjorn, Burgoon, Judee K., Cederberg, Carl, Bonito, Joseph, and Lundeberg, Magnus, (1999) “The Impact of Anthropomorphic Interfaces on Influence, Understanding, and Credibility”, in:Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Mauri, HI.
4. Berlo, David K., Lemert, James B., and Mertz, Robert J., 1970. “Dimensions for Evaluating the Acceptability of Message Sources”. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33:563–76.
5. Bonito, Joseph A., Burgoon, Judee K., Ramirez, Artemio, and Dunbar, Norah E., 2000. “Participation and Decision Making:the role of interactivity in communication processes and outcomes”. Journal of Management and Information Systems, 16:33–56.
6. Bucy, Erik P., 2003. “Media Credibility Reconsidered:synergy effects between on-air and online news”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80 (2):247–64.
7. Bucy, Erik P., 2004. “The Interactivity Paradox:closer to the news but confused”. In Media Access:social and psychological dimensions of new technology use, Edited by:Bucy, E. P., and Newhagen, J. E., Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Clark, Herbert H., and Carlson, Thomas B., 1982. “Hearers and Speech Acts”. Language, 58:332–73.
9. Cohen, Jacob, and Cohen, Patricia. 1983. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn, Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
10. Defleur, Melvin L., Davenport, Lucinda, Cronin, Mary, and Defleur, Margaret. 1992. “Audience Recall of News Stories Presented by Newspaper, Computer, Television, and Radio”. Journalism Quarterly, 69 (4):1010–22.
11. Downes, Edward J., and Sally J. McMillan. 2000. “Defining Interactivity:a qualitative identification of key dimensions”. New Media and Society, 2 (2):157–79.
12. Dunbar, Norah E., Ramirez, Artemio, Jr and Burgoon, Judee K., 2003. “The Effects of Participation on the Ability to Judge Deceit”. Communication Reports, 16:23–33.
13. Eastin, Matthew S., (2001) “Credibility Assessments of Online Health Information:the effects of source expertise and knowledge of content”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 6 (4), http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue4/eastin.html, accessed 20 January 2006.
14. Edgar, Rebecca, (2002) “Perceptual Effects of Modality in On-line News”, Media Effects Research Laboratory, Penn State University, http://www.psu.edu/dept/medialab/.
15. Fogg, B. J., and Tseng, Hsiang, (1999) “The Elements of Computer Credibility”, in:CHI 99:human factors in computer system conference proceedings, New York:ACM SIGGHI, pp. 80–87.
16. Freeman, Krisandra S., and Spyridakis, Jan H., 2004. “An Examination of Factors That Affect the Credibility of Online Health Information”. Technical Communication, 51:239–63.
17. Gaziano, Cecilie, and McGrath, Kristin. 1986. “Measuring the Concept of Credibility”. Journalism Quarterly, 63:451–62.
18. Gunther, Albert C., 1988. “Attitude Extremity and Trust in Media”. Journalism Quarterly, 65:279–87.
19. Gunther, Albert C., 1992. “Biased Press or Biased Public? Attitudes toward media coverage of social groups”. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56:147–67.
20. Hutheesing, Nikhil, (1993) “Interactivity for the Passive”, Forbes, 6 December, pp. 244–46.
21. Ibelema, Mineabere, and Powell, Larry. 2001. “Cable Television News Viewed as Most Credible”. Newspaper Research Journal, 22 (1):41–51.
22. Johnson, Thomas J., and Kaye, Barbara K., 1998. “Cruising is Believing?:comparing the Internet and traditional sources on media credibility measures”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 75 (2):325–40.
23. Johnson, Thomas J., and Kaye, Barbara K., 2000. “Using is Believing:the influence of reliance on the credibility of online political information among politically interested internet users”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (4):865–79.
24. Johnson, Thomas J., and Kaye, Barbara K., 2002. “Webelievability:a path model examining how convenience and reliance predict online credibility”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79 (3):619–42.
25. Jones, Eric, and Kalyanaraman, Sriam, (2000) “Modality Effects on Memory for Multimedia Messages”, paper presented to the Sociology and Social Psychology Division at the 23rd General Assemble and Scientific Conference of the International Association for Media and Communication Research, Singapore.
26. Ketterer, Stan. 2001. “Links Engage Readers of Online Crime Stories”. Newspaper Research Journal, 22 (2):2–13.
27. Kiousis, Spiro. 2001. “Public Trust or Mistrust?:perceptions of media credibility in the information age”. Mass Communication and Society, 4 (4):381–403.
28. Kiousis, Spiro. 2002. “Interactivity:a concept explication”. New Media and Society, 4 (3):355–84.
29. Massey, Brian L., and Levy, Mark R., 1999. “Interactivity, Online Journalism, and English-language Web Newspapers in Asia”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 76 (1):138–51.
30. McCroskey, James C., Holdridge, William E., and Toomb, J. Kevin. 1974. “An Instrument for Measuring the Source Credibility of Basic Speech Communication Instructors”. Speech Teacher, 23 (1):26–33.
31. Metzger, Miriam, Flanagin, Andrew J., Eyal, Keren, Lemus, Daisy R., and McCann, Robert M., 2003. “Credibility for the 21st Century:integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment”. In Communication Yearbook 27, Edited by:Kalbfleisch, P., 293–335. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. Meyer, Philip. 1988. “Defining and Measuring Credibility of Newspapers:developing an index”. Journalism Quarterly, 65:567–72.
33. Nadarajan, Berlinda, and Penghwa, Ang, (1999) “Credibility and Journalism on the Internet:how online newspapers handle errors and corrections”, paper presented to the Communication Technology and Policy Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, New Orleans, LA.
34. Nunnally, Jum C., 1978. Psychometric Theory, 2nd edn, New York:McGraw Hill.
35. O'Keefe, Daniel J., 1990. Persuasion Theory and Research, Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
36. Poindexter, Paula M., and McCombs, Maxwell E., 2000. Research in Mass Communication:a practical guide, Boston:Bedford/St. Martin's.
37. Radio and Television News Directors Foundation (1998) “Silicon Summit:will technology affect the news”, http://www.ndu.edu/inss/books/Books%20-%201998/Information%20Age%20Anthology.
38. Rajani, Rakhi, and Rosenberg, Duska, (1999) “Usable? … Or not? … Factors affecting the usability of web sites”, CMC Magazine, http://www.december.com/cmc/mag/1999/jan/rakros.html, accessed 20 January 2006.
39. Schweiger, Wolfgang. 2000. “Media Credibility—experience or image? A survey on the credibility of the World Wide Web in Germany in comparison to other media”. European Journal of Communication, 15:37–59.
40. Shih, Yu-Fen, and Alessi, Stephen M., 1996. “Effects of Text Versus Voice on Learning in Multimedia Courseware”. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5 (2):203–18.
41. Singer, Jane, (1998) “Online Journalists:foundations for research in their changing roles”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 4 (1), http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue1/singer.html.
42. Singer, Jane. 2002. “Information Trumps Interaction in Local Papers’ Online Caucus Coverage”. Newspaper Research Journal, 23 (4):91–6.
43. Steuer, Jonathan S., 1992. “Defining Virtual Reality:dimensions determining telepresence”. Journal of Communication, 42 (4):73–93.
44. Stromer-Galley, Jennifer. 2004. “Interactivity-as-Product and Interactivity as Process”. The Information Society, 20:393–6.
45. Sundar, S. Shyam. 2000. “Multimedia Effects on Processing and Perception of Online News:a study of picture, audio, and video downloads”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (3):480–99.
46. Sundar, S. Shyam, and Nass, Clifford. 2001. “Conceptualizing Sources in Online News”. Journal of Communication, 51 (1):52–72.
47. Trench, Brian, and Quinn, Gary. 2003. “Online News and Changing Models of Journalism”. Irish Communications Review, 9:1–11.
48. Van Oostendorp, Jerre, and Van Nimwegen, Christof, (1998) “Locating Information in an Online Newspaper”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 4 (1), http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue1/oostendorp.html.
49. Williams, Fred, Rice, Ron E., and Rogers, Everett. 1988. Research Methods and the New Media, New York:The Free Press.
50. Wu, Guohua, (1999) “Perceived Interactivity and Attitude Toward Website”, paper presented to the 1999 Annual Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Albuquerque, NM.