Individuals often rely on superficial cues like brand recognition, website design, and search engine rankings to determine the credibility of online information instead of verifying the source and content. Younger people and those with more internet experience tend to be less skeptical of information found online. There is a risk that unreliable health or political information spread widely online could negatively impact many individuals if they are not more discerning about source credibility. The document examines several studies that show people commonly use heuristics rather than in-depth source evaluation when assessing credibility, and that false information online could endanger those who uncritically accept it without verification.

1. 1
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
The Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
Elizabeth Beasley
National University

2. 2
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
Over time, the amount of people who have access to, and who use the internet, has
drastically increased. According to a survey done in March 2005, by the Pew Internet &
American Life Project, over the last decade there has been a jump of internet users from 16% to
76% of Americans. With most of the world’s information available online to anyone who wishes
to view it, there starts to develop a question of validity. With no gatekeeper available to make
sure information is credible before it is published, as is the case with newspaper and books, there
is no information accountability. This lack of information control can become a problem if the
consumers are unable or unwilling to check the credibility themselves. Especially since people
will, at times, act upon the information that they have gathered via internet sources. If the
information is incorrect, this can have a negative effect on the actions of the consumer. In the
present paper, the way individuals assess the credibility of internet sources, the differences
between internet using individuals, and what they then do with the information is investigated.
The result of this first study shows a majority of people begin an information search at a
search engine such as Google or Yahoo. Other times searches begin at specific sites depending
on the task. This indicates that brands are very important to individuals who are looking for
credible information. Frequently mentioned brands are “Google (85%), Yahoo! (51%), Spark
Notes (38%), MapQuest (36%), Wikipedia (19%), AOL (11%), and Facebook (6%)” (Hargittai,
2010). Brands are also given an extra layer of trust if they are sites made by a government or
educational institute. The implication being that .gov or .edu domains have been written by
professionals and not just anyone. Even sites sporting a .org domain were given more credibility
then the oh so common .com.
A second finding in the research is the use of social means to verify information. 60% of
the survey participants said that they would contact another person to find a question to an

3. 3
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
answer. “Broken down by method of contact, 52%of the sample suggests placing a phone call,
while 17% said they would send an email to the organization. An additional 10% mentioned they
would contact an institution for help” (Hargittai, 2010).
The second article of interest was written by Miriam j. Metzger, Andrew J. Flanagin, and
Ryan B. Medders of the Department of Communications, University of California Santa Barbara.
This article covers both social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation on the internet.
First the article covers the currently held views on information credibility. Research findings
show people use peripheral cues such as site presentation to determine if the website is credible.
“One could argue that people typically process web information in superficial ways, that using
peripheral cues is the rule of Web use, not the exception” (Metzger, 2010). People will take a
greater interest in confirming information if their motivation is high. Because information is so
easily available online, people’s motivation to check out the credibility is low.
The findings of this survey were very substantial. First was the social aspect of
information credibility. As was discovered in the previously discussed article, people often use
social means, such as reviews, blogs, comments, recommendations, etc. to determine if the
information found, or the website being used, is credible. Social recommendations, such as
testimonials, are deemed less credible because they have a potential to be biased. Participants
also brought up an interesting topic for future study. Many of them mentioned the importance of
finding like-minded individuals to help them in their search for credibility. Once they found the
information confirming the participants’ own beliefs, they would stop their search.
The second set of findings in this survey was the five different heuristics participants
employed while evaluating a site’s credibility. These five heuristics are reputation, endorsement,

4. 4
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
consistency, expectancy violation, and persuasive intent. The first of the heuristics used to
establish credibility is reputation. Meaning, how well known is a site, or the information
contained on the site. One participant was quoted “I think it depends on the credibility of the
company or the site itself. If it’s a government Web site or if it’s a big company like CNN,
they’ve already established their credibility and so their Web site, you’re gonna be more trusting
of it” (Metzger, 2010). Participants seem to believe because a name is well known; it makes
them a more reliable source of information. Second on the heuristic list is endorsement. This ties
back into the social confirmation aspect. “The endorsement heuristic suggests that people are
inclined perceive information and sources as credible if others do so also, without much scrutiny
of the site content or source itself” (Metzger, 2010). Third is consistency, which is where
participants will cross reference information with other sites, without checking the sources
credentials, though occasionally website information is cross verified with offline sources.
Fourth is the expectancy violation heuristic. Participants revealed that if a website didn’t meet
their expectations, visually or wording wise, they would judge it as not being a credible source.
This is a visual expectation for websites that has nothing to do with the creator or content
authors. If a website doesn’t look the way the participant expects, then it must not be a credible
site. Also if a website asked for more than a comfortable amount of personal information, survey
takers would judge it to be non-credible and leave the site. The last of the five heuristic for
credibility is persuasive intent. Unlike the other heuristics, this one deals with perceptions
surrounding online advertising in depth. Previous research mentioned in this article explains that
commercial information is usually viewed as less credible. People become less interested in a
website when presented with unexpected commercial content.

5. 5
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
The last article deals explicitly with internet research of a health nature, and covers an
even more important topic in relation to internet credibility. This being question of what people
do with the information after they receive it. “Eighty percent of American internet users, or some
113 million adults, have searched for information on at least one of seventeen health topics”
(Fox, 2006). According to a survey done in August 2006, in one day over 8 million adults had
searched for health related information. This is a very large number of users searching for a very
specific type of information, and of all the topics, health would be the one you would want to be
sure is credible. As found in the first article discussed, a majority of users began their health
search at a search engine. “66% of health seekers began their last online health inquiry at a
search engine; 27% began at a health related website” (Fox, 2006).
What is unique about Fox’s article is the breakdown of internet users by age and
education level. Fox’s findings showed that people who have a high school education level are
more likely to be satisfied with the information they find via a web source. In contrast people
with a college education level are more likely to be skeptical of the information they find online
and will more likely look to confirm the truth. There is also a variety in age groups with younger
people being more willing to accept online information, while the older generations would rather
confirm the information via a secondary source.
This article also reveals some startling facts about what people do with the information,
specifically health, they find online. “Forty-two percent of health seekers report that the health
information they found in their last search online had a minor impact on their own health care or
the way they care for someone else. Eleven percent of health seekers report a major impact.
Forty-two percent of health seekers report that the information they found in their last search had
no impact at all on their own care or how they help someone else.” (Fox, 2006). Of the

6. 6
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
participants who claimed the information they found had a high impact on their health care
routine, 58% said the information changed the way they treated their illness. The indication is,
even though information is readily available, not everyone is willing to make decisions based on
their personal findings. However a significant amount of people have begun to make internet
research-based decisions and this has a potential of growing in this information saturated age.
This can be dangerous if the health information they find is outdated or even completely made up
by civilian writers.
Can individuals be trusted to establish credibility on their own?
The problem of internet credibility is a very vast and growing problem. Due to a lack of
manpower and time to regulate internet content, people have to determine credibility themselves.
Most use peripheral cues or social means to verify the information they have found instead of
looking at the credentials of the writers and the organizations that are publishing the information.
Using information such as a domain name and the number of ads to decide if a website is
credible is not a way credibility should be established. Neither is relying on search engines to
sort out fact from fiction, although they do try the best they can.
What are the risks associatedwith self-credibility of the web?
What kind of impact will false information have on individuals in the future? Will made
up health care instructions cause a parent to over medicate a child? No one person knows the
exact extent all this wild information on the web will have on the lives of everyday Americans. If
people start relying almost solely on Web information, the possibility of dangerous information
trends may surface. New herbal treatments or diets, false political agendas, anything is possible
and can cause a wide spread negative impact on anyone who reads it.

7. 7
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
Method
Participants
The participants of this research were adult undergraduate students, attending National
University. All of whom worked either full time or part time jobs.
Materials
The materials used to conduct this research were a two paged, online survey. The survey
consisted of sixteen questions whose answers ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree
except for two short answer questions.
Design
The experiment used a within-group design. Each person was given access to the online survey.
The variables were the students age and years of internet experience. Thirteen questions asked
students to answer either strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, or strongly agree. Two
questions were short answer, and the remaining question was to rate internet competency
between low and high.
Procedure
Each participant was asked to anonymously fill out a sixteen question online survey on their
internet use. The survey answers were recorded electronically. After the surveys were completed
the answer data was compared to determine patterns of internet credibility.
Results

8. 8
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
The results of the combined sources showed that most people use means of establishing
credibility outside source verification. Participants used such verification methods such as brand
recognition, visual cues, and relying on search engines as gatekeepers. Results also showed that
internet usage is more proficient with people in a younger age category and that years of internet
experience did not improve credibility skills.
Discussion
It is quite apparent that while the internet has become a vital tool in most people’s lives,
everyday users still don’t have any idea how to check that the information they are viewing is in
any way truthful. As younger generations venture into a world of mass produced information,
they believe that they can trust anything they find without verifying the informations author,
content, relevance, or even the date the information was published. People are using methods,
such as judging a site by its design or by whether the information was produced or endorsed by a
familiar brand, to decide if what they are reading is real or not. This leads one to believe that
some internet reeducation is needed to protect people from potentially dangerous
misinformation.

9. 9
Individual Credibility Process of Internet Users
References
Fox, S. (2006). Online health search 2006. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet & American
Life Project.
Hargittai, E., Fullerton, L., Menchen-Trevino, E., & Thomas, K. (2010). Trust Online:
Young Adults’ Evaluation of Web Content. International Journal of Communication, 4, 468–
494.
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and Heuristic
Approaches To Credibility Evaluation Online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413-439.