Crawford Upa09 Consumer Health Information Seeking

1,220 views

Published on

Talk presented at the 2009 Usability Professionals Association Conference. For a copy of the slides, please email kath@usability.org

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,220
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
33
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Crawford Upa09 Consumer Health Information Seeking

  1. 1. Talk What
Triggers
Trust? How
Health
Consumer
Behavior
is
Evolving
with
the
Web Arabella
Crawford

 Kath
Straub,
PhD Usability
Professionals’
Associa9on


2009
InternaEonal
Conference
  2. 2. Then
  3. 3. Website credibility circa 2000 Credibility
Killers Quick
response
to
ques9ons Slow
download Physical
address Has
ads
 Contact
informa9on Typos Recently
updated Broken
links Professionally
designed . Arrangement
makes
sense . . Hard
to
navigate . Has
popup
ads .
 No
updates Has
ads
that
match
the
topic . Requires
you
to
register Hard
to
tell
ads
from
content Credibility
Enhancers Fogg,
et.
al.,
2000
  4. 4. Website credibility circa 2000 Credibility
Killers Technology Focus Credibility
Enhancers
  5. 5. Early evolution of information consumers Quick
response
to
ques9ons Design
look Physical
address Informa9on
structure Contact
informa9on . Recently
updated . Professionally
designed Usefullness
of
informa9on Arrangement
makes
sense . . Func9onality . Customer
Service .
 Iden9ty
of
sponsor Has
ads
that
match
the
topic . Requires
you
to
register Readability Afillia9ons 2002 2004 Fogg,
et.
al.,
2003 Credibility
Enhancers
  6. 6. Early evolution of information consumers Quick
response
to
ques9ons Design
look Physical
address Informa9on
structure Contact
informa9on . Recently
updated . Usability Focus Professionally
designed Arrangement
makes
sense Usefullness
of
informa9on . . Func9onality . Customer
Service .
 Iden9ty
of
sponsor Has
ads
that
match
the
topic . Requires
you
to
register Readability Afillia9ons 2002 2004 Credibility
Enhancers
  7. 7. Consumers use different cues than professionals (2003) Name/Affilia9on Design
look Informa9on
source Informa9on
focus Business
mo9ve Informa9on
design Informa9on
focus Adver9sing Adver9sing 3 Company
mo9ve Design
look 1 Reputa9on/Affilia9on Informa9on
bias Informa9on
bias Informa9on
design Informa9on
accuracy Wri9ng
tone Wri9ng
tone Informa9on
Accuracy 2 Informa9on
source Health
 Professionals Non‐professionals Fogg,
et.
al.,
2003 Credibility
Enhancers
  8. 8. Then Now (ish)
  9. 9. People look to the web for health information (2008) Jones,
et.
al.,
2008
  10. 10. How does then compare to late 2007? • Online
survey
 • QuesEons
built
from
on
Sillence
(2004) • 518
parEcipants Crawford, et. al., 2008a
  11. 11. Why do they go online? of note... Websites
contain
more
informa9on
than
doctors
can
know,
or
 paEents
can
reasonably
expect
them
to
know. They
use
the
web
both
before
and
aWer
going
to
the
doctor
  12. 12. How they they get there? of note... •
70%
of
health
info
seekers
start
at
a
known
site,
not
 search

  13. 13. When you type sites in, its easy to mix up the URL ... Cancer Consumers’
Error
Rates:
PredicEng
URLs .gov .org .com Crawford, et. al., 2008b
  14. 14. What inspires trust? •of note... • Health
informaEon
consumers
start
by
confirming
that
the
 site
says
something
that
they
already
know. • Trust
is
indexed
against
Reputa9on,
content
characteris9cs,
 and
content
quality. •
Consumers
cross
check
facts
  15. 15. Why do consumers do? of note... • Health
informaEon
seekers
read
content
most.
 • Content
from
other
users
is
more
engaging
than
interacEons
 like
symptom
checkers.
  16. 16. Why go back? of note... InformaEon
seekers
go
back
because
content
was
useful
and
 other
sources
confirmed
it
was
validity.
  17. 17. Takeaways Trust
markers • Health
informaEon
consumer
today
use
the
trust/credibility
markers
 that
health
experts
used
in
2002. • SItes
are
more
credible
if
the
first
confirm
something
that
the
 informaEon
seeker
already
knows. • Content
quality
and
characterisEcs
are
increasingly
important
for
inEal
 trust
and
driving
repeat
visits. Self‐reported
behaviors • Health
informaEon
consumers
are
looking
for
convenient,
 comprehensive
that
can
be
perused
privately.
 • They
read
more
than
they
interact.

  18. 18. Takeaways Trust
markers • Health
informaEon
consumer
today
use
the
trust/credibility
markers
 that
health
experts
used
in
2002. • SItes
are
more
credible
if
the
first
confirm
something
that
the
 informaEon
seeker
already
knows. • Content
quality
and
characterisEcs
are
increasingly
important
for
inEal
 Content trust
and
driving
repeat
visits. Self‐reported
behaviors • Health
informaEon
consumers
are
looking
for
convenient,
 comprehensive
that
can
be
perused
privately.
 • They
read
more
than
they
interact.
 Credibility
&
Trust
  19. 19. Credibility & trust for consumer health seekers 2000 Technology 2002 Usability 2008 Content Social networking & technology-driven collaboration Content level usability Computer-mediated empathy
  20. 20. Ideal physician behaviors Confident, Positive Empathetic Attentive (Humane) Comprehensive Plain English (Forthright) Collaborative (Respectful) Conscientious (Thorough) Bendapudi,, et al, 2006
  21. 21. Credibility & trust for consumer health seekers 2000 Technology 2002 Usability Questions? 2008 Content Social networking & technology-driven collaboration Content level usability Computer-mediated empathy
  22. 22. References Bendapudi, N, Berry, L., Frey, K., Parish, J., Rayburn, W. (2006) Patients' Perspectives on Ideal Physician Behaviors. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 81(3):338-344. Crawford,
Broch,
J.,
and
Straub,
K.
(2008b)
What’s
In
a
Name?;
Best
PracEces
for
SelecEng
Usable
URLs.
Proceedings of  UPA08,

2008.
BalEmore,
Maryland. Crawford,
A.,
&
Straub,
K.
(2008q)
Convenience,
Content
and
Credibility:
What
consumers
are
looking
for
on
health
 informaEon
sites.
Proceedings of UPA08,  2008.
BalEmore,
Maryland. Fogg,
B.J.,
Soohoo,
C.,
Danielson,
D.R.,
Marable,
L.,
Stanford,
J.,
&
Tauber,
E.R.
(2003).
How
do
users
evaluate
the
 credibility
of
Web
sites?
A
study
with
over
2,500
parEcipants.
Proceedings of DUX2003, Designing for User Experiences  Conference. Jones,
S.
and
Fox,
S.
(2008)
GeneraCons
on‐line
2009.
PEW
Internet
and
America
Life
Report.
Downloaded
from
hYp:// www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/GeneraCons‐Online‐in‐2009.aspx Fogg,
B.J.,
Swani,
P.,
Treinen,
M.,
Marshall,
J.,
Osipovich,
A.,
Varma,
C.,
Laraki,
O.,
Fang,
N.,
Paul,
J.,
Rangnekar,
A.,
&
 Shon,
J.
(2000).
Elements
that
affect
Web
credibility:
Early
results
from
a
self‐report
study.
Proceedings of CHI'00,  Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in CompuDng Systems,
287‐288. Sillence,
E.,
Briggs
P.,
Fishwick
L,
Harris,
P.,
Trust
and
Mistrust
of
Online
Health
Sites.
Proceedings of CHI 2004,
April
24– 29,
2004,
Vienna,
Austria.
 Rains,
S.,
&
Karmikel,
C.
D.,
(2009)
Health
informaEon‐seeking
and
percepEons
of
website
credibility:
Examining.
 Computers in Human Behavior
25
(2009)
544–553
  23. 23. For information & reprints, etc. Arabella Crawford Consumer Researcher arabella@usability.org Kath Straub Principal kath@usability.org www.usability.org

×