Web Credibility Variables Public

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    1 Favorite

    Web Credibility Variables Public - Presentation Transcript

    1. What Variables Affect Web Credibility? A Report of Ongoing Research from Stanford’s Persuasive Technology Lab BJ Fogg (bjfogg@stanford.edu) First presented at CSLI’s Industrial Affiliate Conference Stanford University, November 11, 1999
    2. Overview
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    3. Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    4. Why does Web credibility matter?
      • Web sites with optimal levels of credibility
      Creators
      • What to believe
      • on the web
      • (aka “information quality”)
      Consumers
      • A key factor in
      • Web-based persuasion
      PT Lab Answer #1
    5. Why does Web credibility matter? Few have studied this (publicly) Web has least credible info of any medium Web has most credible info of any medium Web standards are taking shape now The Web is not going away any time soon Big money is at stake Web presence is vital for many companies Explosion of Web-based info & services Web users are vulnerable Answer #2
    6. What is “credibility”?
      • Believability
      • or
      • A perception based on two factors* . . .
      trustworthiness expertise honest truthful unbiased powerful intelligent knowledgeable experienced good *Some studies have shown three or more factors +
    7. Highly credible web sites have. . .
      • High levels of perceived trustworthiness and expertise
      perceived trustworthiness perceived expertise perceived credibility +
    8. One factor can damage credibility perceived lack of trustworthiness perceived expertise perceived lack of credibility + perceived trustworthiness perceived lack of expertise perceived lack of credibility +
    9. Some semantic issues
      • “Credibility” and “Trust”
        • Similar terms but not the same construct
      • Phrases that refer to credibility
        • “trust the information”
        • “accept the advice”
        • “believe the output”
    10. Expertise & Trustworthiness In these examples, what elements convey expertise? What elements convey trustworthiness?
    11. Expertise & Trustworthiness In these examples, what elements convey expertise? What elements convey trustworthiness?
    12. Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    13. Four Types of Credibility
      • 1. Presumed Credibility
      • 2. Reputed Credibility
      • 3. Surface Credibility
      • 4. Experienced Credibility
          • It’s helpful to distinguish different types of credibility.
          • But you won’t find these distinctions in the psychology literature.
    14. 1. Presumed Credibility
      • We believe because of general assumptions we hold.
    15. 1. Presumed Credibility
      • We believe because of general assumptions we hold.
      • Examples* . . .
      Increases credibility Decreases credibility Domain name has “.org” Lots of hits on web counter Info on the site is constantly updated Site has AOL domain name Very few hits on web counter Info on the site is rarely updated
        • *These are working hypotheses. To date, we’ve studied only some of these variables.
    16. 2. Reputed credibility
      • We believe because of a reference from a third party .
    17. 2. Reputed credibility
      • We believe because of a reference from a third party .
      • Examples* . . .
      Increases credibility Decreases credibility Your medical doctor referred you to this Web site. The site won an award. An authoritative Web site linked to this site. Your friend said the site was horrible. The newspaper said the site was down for three days. A political group you don’t like endorses the site.
        • *These are working hypotheses. To date, we’ve studied only some of these variables.
    18. 3. Surface credibility
      • We believe because of what we find on simple inspection .
    19. 3. Surface credibility
      • We believe because of what we find on simple inspection .
      • Examples* . . .
      Increases credibility Decreases credibility Site looks professional. Site is from an organization you recognize. You see that articles have citations. Site looks confusing. The organization has no presence outside the Web. The site uses many animated features.
        • *These are working hypotheses. To date, we’ve studied only some of these variables.
    20. 4. Experienced credibility
      • We believe because of past experience with site.
    21. 4. Experienced credibility
      • We believe because of past experience with site.
      • Examples* . . .
      Increases credibility Decreases credibility You get a quick response to a customer service question. You can navigate the site easily. You’ve found the content to be fair and balanced. The site has a broken link. The site takes a long time to download each page. You’ve seen factual errors on the site.
        • *These are working hypotheses. To date, we’ve studied only some of these variables.
    22. Why this framework is helpful
      • Provides a set of terms for discussion
      • Enhances both research & design
          • Asking better questions
          • Seeing more possibilities
      Presumed Credibility Reputed Credibility Surface Credibility Experienced Credibility Trustworthiness Expertise
    23. Why this framework is helpful
      • Provides a set of terms for discussion
      • Enhances both research & design
          • Asking better questions
          • Seeing more possibilities
      Presumed Credibility Reputed Credibility Surface Credibility Experienced Credibility Trustworthiness Expertise 
    24. Four Types of Credibility
      • Presumed
      • Reputed
      • Surface
      • Experienced
      Can you identify the different types of credibility in these examples?
    25. Four Types of Credibility
      • Presumed
      • Reputed
      • Surface
      • Experienced
      Can you identify the different types of credibility in these examples?
    26. Level 3 Web Site Variables
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    27. Level 3 Web Site Variables
      • How to contain the many elements of a Web site?
      • We’ve created some frameworks
              • I’ll talk about one.
              • See www.webcredibility.org for others.
    28. Framework for Web Site Elements
      • Web Site Provider
          • Person or organization that offers the site
              • e.g., IBM, Kodak, Amazon
      • Web Site Content
          • Information
          • Functionality
      • Web site Design
          • Aesthetic design
          • Information design
          • Technical design
    29. Web Credibility Grid Web Site Provider Web Site Content Web Site Design Presumed Credibility Reputed Credibility Surface Credibility Experienced Credibility
      • information
      • functionality
      • aesthetic
      • information
      • technical
    30. Web Credibility Grid Web Site Provider Web Site Content Web Site Design Presumed Credibility Reputed Credibility Surface Credibility Experienced Credibility The provider is a nonprofit organization. The site was created by an outside design firm. The site has ads from reputable companies. Users are familiar with the provider outside of the Web context. The provider is recognized as an expert by others. The site’s content has always been accurate and unbiased. The site is easy to navigate. The site appears to have lots of relevant information. The content has been approved by an outside agency. The site won an award for technical achievement. The site has a pleasing visual design. Users with questions receive quick and helpful answers. Examples of elements that increase credibility*
      • information
      • functionality
      • aesthetic
      • information
      • technical
        • *These are working hypotheses. To date, we’ve studied only some of these variables.
    31. Web Credibility Grid Web Site Provider Web Site Content Web Site Design Presumed Credibility Reputed Credibility Surface Credibility Experienced Credibility The site tries to recruit advertisers but has none so far. The site has no security protocols for transactions. The site shows only a few hits on their web counter. The site’s URL does not match the provider’s name. The provider was sued for patent infringement and lost. The site has typographical errors. The site has links to pages that no longer exist. The site seems to have more ads than information. The content got bad reviews from an outside agency. The site is reported to have copied the design of another site. The text font is either too large or small to read comfortably. The site doesn’t give contact information anywhere. Examples of elements that decrease credibility*
      • aesthetic
      • information
      • technical
      • information
      • functionality
        • *These are working hypotheses. To date, we’ve studied only some of these variables.
    32. Small Survey on Web Credibility
      • Pilot study on 45 variables
        • Questionnaire, n = 25, with Nina Kim
        • Purpose: To select variables for experiment
        • Sample question:
          • The Web site lists an author for each article.
              • -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3
              • much much
              • less more
              • credible credible
    33. Survey results were interesting * more credible less credible Was referred to you by a good friend Contains a link to a site you trust Contains an ad for IBM Contains many spelling and grammatical errors Was created with PageMill or FrontPage software Charges a monthly access fee Contains broken links Contains misleading ads Makes it difficult to distinguish ads from content Contains a typographical error Has “.com” in the domain Contains animation Has “.org” in the domain Lists an author for each article Lists a physical address for the page sponsor Is easy to navigate Provides quick response to a customer service question Presents information that may help its competitors Represents a company or organization you recognize *The sample size in this survey was too small to draw firm conclusions
    34. Lab Experiment on Web Credibility
      • Selected two Web credibility variables for Nina Kim’s thesis experiment
        • ads
        • typos
    35. Web credibility research Experimental Design
      • Controlled lab study
        • 2X2 mixed design, n = 38
        • Health information taken from Web
        • Independent variables
            • typos or no typos
            • ads or no ads
        • Dependent variables
            • questionnaire after viewing
    36. Web credibility research Sample Stimuli No typos Typos vs
    37. Web credibility research Sample Stimuli No Ad Ad vs
    38. Web credibility research Sample Stimuli Other sample pages
    39. Web credibility research What did the data show?
      • Typos decreased the credibility of page.
      • Ads increased the credibility of page.
      • Both effects are stronger for vital info than for less vital info.
    40. Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    41. Level 4: Variables Outside the Web
      • Individual variables
            • user differences (age, experience, personality, etc.)
      • Goal variables
          • For example,
            • information seeking on health
            • surveillance of current events
            • passing time, entertainment
      • Context variables
            • setting
            • time factors
            • technology factors
    42. Level 5 Three Moving Targets
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    43. Level 5: Three Moving Targets
      • Three things are changing . . .
          • 1. People
            • Web user base will become more diversified.
          • 2. Experience levels
            • Web users will become more savvy.
          • 3. Technology
            • Web technology and uses will change.
      • These moving targets mean . . .
          • Perceptions of Web credibility will shift over time.
          • We need an ongoing effort to understand Web credibility.
    44. Ongoing research efforts at PTL
      • Research on web credibility perceptions
          • www.webresearch.org
      • Web credibility experiments
          • Online and in the lab
      • Gathering other work on Web credibility
          • Pointers at www.webcredibility.org
    45. In Review
      • Level 1 A First Look at Credibility
              • definitions, basic issues
      • Level 2 Four Types of Credibility
              • different kinds of credibility
      • Level 3 Web Site Variables
              • web elements and a framework
      • Level 4 Variables Outside the Web
              • individuals, goals, and contexts
      • Level 5 Three Moving Targets
              • people, experience levels, and technology
      Plus two studies
    46. What Variables Affect Web Credibility? A Report of Ongoing Research from Stanford’s Persuasive Technology Lab BJ Fogg (bjfogg@stanford.edu) First presented at CSLI’s Industrial Affiliate Conference Stanford University, November 11, 1999
    SlideShare Zeitgeist 2009

    + winniejjwwinniejjw Nominate

    custom

    146 views, 1 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 146
      • 146 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 1
    • Downloads 4
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories