바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Confidence Indicators and Evaluation Factors of Credibility According to the Types of Online Information

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2010, v.27 no.1, pp.7-24
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2010.27.1.007

  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

This study tried to develop the confidence indicators and evaluation factors of credibility according to the types of online information by nationwide large scale online survey. The main results are summarized as follows: i) confidence indicators by types of online information: information on news sites(72.553), financial companies(68.894), government sites(67.938), cafe(66.464), portal sites(65.001), collective intelligence sites(63.489), nonprofit organization (63.392), company/corporation sites(59.789), blog(59.066), online community sites(55.609), e-commerce sites(55.118), mini-homepage(50.695). ii) ‘Widely known site’ or ‘famous site’ is the most important factor for all types of online information. User opinions like as posting or comment are major factors for sites of cafe, blog, mini-homepage, online community, collective intelligence etc. and ‘name recognition’ and ‘reputation’ are main factors for site of financial company, corporation, government, nonprofit organization.

keywords
신뢰지수, 평가요인, 웹 신뢰성, 신뢰성 평가, 온라인 정보 유형, confidence indicators, evaluation factors, web credibility, credibility evaluation, types of online information, confidence indicators, evaluation factors, web credibility, credibility evaluation, types of online information

Reference

1.

김영기. (2007). 웹 사이트의 신뢰성 평가에 영향을 미치는 요인과 각 요인의 중요도에 관한 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 41(4), 93-111.

2.

김영기. (2007). 이용자들의 웹 사이트 신뢰성 평가 방법에 관한 연구. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 38(3), 53-72.

3.

김영기. (2008). 지표 적합도 분석을 통한 웹 사이트 신뢰성 평가 지표 개발에 관한 연구. 정보관리학회지, 25(4), 185-204.

4.

김영기. (2008). AHP를 이용한 웹 사이트 신뢰성 평가 모델 개발. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 39(4), 51-69.

5.

Barker, Joe. (2009). Evaluating Web Pages: Techniques to Apply & Questions to Ask (-). UC Berkeley - Teaching Library Internet Workshops.

6.

Bell, Colleen. Critical Evaluation of Information Sources. http://libweb.uoregon.edu/guides/findarticles/credibility.html.

7.

Comsumer Reports WebWatch. (2008). Law and Disorder: Paid Listings Complicate Search for Quality Lawyers Online. .

8.

Comsumer Reports WebWatch. (2008). Consumer Reports WebWatch Guidelines for Hotel-Booking Sites. .

9.

Comsumer Reports WebWatch. (2008). Consumer Reports WebWatch Guidelines for Independent Airline Ticket-Booking Sites. .

10.

Comsumer Reports WebWatch. (2008). Consumer Reports WebWatch Guidelines for Search Engine and Navigation Sites. .

11.

Comsumer Reports WebWatch. (2008). Law and Disorder: Paid Listings Complicate Search for Quality Lawyers Online. .

12.

e-Library, Iowa State University. Evaluating Information on the Web. http://www.lib.iastate.edu/commons/resources/evaluation/.

13.

Fogg, B. J.. (1999). The Elements of Computer Credibility (80-87). Proceedings of ACM CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press.

14.

Fogg, B. J.. (2003). How do users evaluate the credibility of web sites?:A study with over 2500 participants, ACM.

15.

Gatignon, H.. (1991). Innovative Decision Processes. in: Handbook of Consumer Behavior:Prentice-Hall.

16.

Princeton Survey Research Associates. (2002). A Matter of Trust: What Users Want From Web Sites. Results of a National Survey of Internet Users for Consumer WebWatch. http://www.consumerwebwatch.org/news/report1.pdf.

17.

Standler, Ronald B.. Evaluating Credibility of Information on the Internet. http://www.rbs0.com/credible.pdf.

18.

Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab and Makovsky & Company. (2002). Stanford-Makovsky Web Credibility Study - Investigating what makes Web sites credible today. http://captology.stanford.edu/pdf/Stanford-MakovskyWebCredStudy2002-prelim.pdf.

19.

Stanford Web Credibility Research. Stanford Web Credibility Research. http://credibility.stanford.edu/.

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management