Making sense of credibility in complex information environments: the role of message sidedness, information source, and thinking styles in credibility evaluation online
Open accessAbstract
An experiment using a representative sample of US. Internet users in the context of online encyclopedias is conducted to understand how the type of information source (expert-generated, user-generated, or hybrid [both expert- and user-generated]) and message sidedness (one- versus two-sided) affect perceived information credibility. Additionally, individual differences in cognitive styles, including need for cognition and flexible thinking, are hypothesized to moderate these relationships. Results showed that expert-generated messages are regarded as most credible, whereas two-sided messages were only perceived as more credible than one-sided messages when originating from a hybrid source. Moreover, the effect of message sidedness is stronger among people with higher flexible thinking, but not among those with high need for cognition. This study extends knowledge of source type to include the diversity of possibilities available online today, clarifies how message sidedness and type of information source affect the perceived credibility of online information, and offers new insight into how individual psychological differences affect the evaluation of online information credibility, including the identification of flexible thinking as an important variable in this domain. Results of this study help to clarify how people navigate the wide diversity of information options available today in efforts to locate credible information to guide their attitudes and behaviors.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
This reliance on cognitive shortcuts aligns closely with what Flanagin et al. (3) described as heuristic credibility assessment.
“This reliance on cognitive shortcuts aligns closely with what Flanagin et al. (3) described as heuristic credibility assessment: a mode of information appraisal characterized by rapid judgements based on perceived source reputation and surface-level cues, rather than systematic and structured verification.”
From Health misinformation, digital health literacy, and attitudes toward science among university students: an exploratory cross-sectional survey (2026) · cites this paper as [3]
Health misinformation has documented effects on preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic decision-making at both individual and population levels.
“Health misinformation, the circulation of false, inaccurate, or misleading health-related information regardless of intent, as emerged as a structural threat to global Public Health, with documented effects on preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic decision-making at both individual and population levels (3, 6).”
From Health misinformation, digital health literacy, and attitudes toward science among university students: an exploratory cross-sectional survey (2026) · cites this paper as [3]
The section on perceptions of credibility online discusses how people judge information, and the study’s experimental conditions include two health topics, but neither addresses effects of health misinformation on care decisions. Searches for preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic decision-making and for health-misinformation consequences found no supporting passage in our copy; page numbers were not provided. (LLM, conf=0.73)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,542 · see citing works
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532 · see citing works
Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-3352 · Cited by 36,644 · see citing works
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810 · see citing works
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650 · see citing works
Chaiken, S. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 · Cited by 5,516 · see citing works
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359 · see citing works
Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart
Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (1999) · Cited by 3,564 · see citing works
Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,368 · see citing works
Individual differences in need for cognitive closure.
Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1049 · Cited by 2,494 · see citing works
(2017) · doi:10.5040/9798400682018.ch-003 · Cited by 2,247 · see citing works
Lumsdaine, A. A. (1954) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/bf02713272 · Cited by 2,237 · see citing works
The limited capacity model of mediated message processing
Lang, A. (2000) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x · Cited by 2,153 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Limited Capacity Model of message processing (Lang, 2000) posits that because people do”
BackgroundPersuasion theory and research
O’Keefe, D. J. (1990) · Cited by 1,555 · see citing works
Baron, J. A. (2006) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009263672 · Cited by 1,434 · see citing works
Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x · Cited by 1,394 · see citing works
Self-citationMedia Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure
Stroud, N. J. (2008) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9 · Cited by 1,154 · see citing works
Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility
Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2007) · Cited by 1,036 · see citing works
Self-citationMetzger, M. J. (2007) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20672 · Cited by 871 · see citing works
Self-citationThe elements of computer credibility
Fogg, B. J., & Tseng, H. (1999) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/302979.303001 · Cited by 820 · see citing works
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2007) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444807075015 · Cited by 817 · see citing works
Self-citationMetzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & McCann, R. M. (2003) · Annals of the International Communication Association · doi:10.1080/23808985.2003.11679029 · Cited by 780 · see citing works
Self-citationReasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking.
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.342 · Cited by 735 · see citing works
How do patients evaluate and make use of online health information?
Sillence, E., Briggs, P., Harris, P. R., & Fishwick, L. (2007) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.01.012 · Cited by 676 · see citing works
Block, L., & Keller, P. A. (1995) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3152047 · Cited by 636 · see citing works
Hilligoss, B., & Rieh, S. Y. (2008) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2007.10.001 · Cited by 611 · see citing works
New models for mass communication research
Clarke, P. (1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 455 · see citing works
Kamins, M. A., Brand, M. J., Hoeke, S. A., & Moe, J. C. (1989) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.1989.10673146 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R. J. (1996) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.88.2.260 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Persuasion: Theory and Research
Metallinos, N. (1991) · doi:10.22230/cjc.1991v16n3a630 · Cited by 376 · see citing works
A one-item question with a Likert or Visual Analog Scale adequately measured current anxiety
Davey, H. M., Barratt, A. L., Butow, P. N., & Deeks, J. J. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.07.015 · Cited by 367 · see citing works
Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework
Rieh, S. Y., & Danielson, D. R. (2007) · Annual Review of Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/aris.2007.1440410114 · Cited by 336 · see citing works
Prominence-interpretation theory: explaining how people assess credibility online
Fogg, B. J. (2003) · CHI '03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '03 · doi:10.1145/765891.765951 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Designing Effective Health Communications: A Meta-Analysis
Keller, P. A., & Lehmann, D. R. (2008) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-88060-5_17 · Cited by 333 · see citing works
Two-sided advertising: A meta-analysis
Eisend, M. (2006) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.11.001 · Cited by 305 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Yet, such negative arousal can be mitigated by two-sided messages that might ‘ signi fi cantly enhance the perceived credibility of the source and reduce negative cognitive responses ’ (Eisend, 2006, p. 194).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialCredibility of Anonymous Online Product Reviews: A Language Expectancy Perspective
Jensen, M. L., Averbeck, J. M., Zhang, Z., & Wright, K. B. (2013) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222300109 · Cited by 289 · see citing works
Kokis, J. V., Macpherson, R., Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2002) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0022-0965(02)00121-2 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Metzger, M. J., Hartsell, E. H., & Flanagin, A. J. (2020) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650215613136 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
Self-citationFlanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.001 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Self-citationDevelopment and Validation of the Single Item Narcissism Scale (SINS)
Konrath, S., Meier, B. P., & Bushman, B. J. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103469 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Meta‐analysis comparing the persuasiveness of one‐sided and two‐sided messages
Allen, M. R. (1991) · Western Journal of Speech Communication · doi:10.1080/10570319109374395 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Selective exposure to information: the impact of information limits
Fischer, P., Jonas, E., Frey, D., & Schulz‐Hardt, S. (2005) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.264 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
Psychological Approaches to Credibility Assessment Online
Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2015) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118426456.ch20 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Self-citationSorrentino, R. M., Bobocel, D. R., Gitta, M. Z., Olson, J. M., & Hewitt, E. C. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.55.3.357 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking
Macpherson, R., & Stanovich, K. E. (2007) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.05.003 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
Westerwick, A., Johnson, B. K., & Knobloch‐Westerwick, S. (2017) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637751.2016.1272761 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
Factual accuracy and trust in information: The role of expertise
Lucassen, T., & Schraagen, J. M. (2011) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21545 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Pechmann, C. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224379202900405 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Winter, S., & Krämer, N. C. (2012) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01596.x · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Self-citationThe influence of structural and message features on Web site credibility
Hong, T. J. (2005) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20258 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Armstrong, J. S., & Rosenstone, S. J. (1988) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/0169-2070(88)90021-0 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Svedholm‐Häkkinen, A. M., & Lindeman, M. (2017) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2017.1378723 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Markov, A., Grossman, R., & Bulger, M. (2015) · Journal of Children and Media · doi:10.1080/17482798.2015.1056817 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Self-citationSchwind, C., & Buder, J. (2012) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.035 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Effects of specialization in computers, web sites, and web agents on e-commerce trust
Koh, Y. J., & Sundar, S. S. (2010) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.08.002 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
FROM ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA TO WIKIPEDIA
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2011) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2010.542823 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Self-citationPerceived credibility of Internet encyclopedias
Ida Kubiszewski, A., Noordewier, T. G., & Costanza, R. (2010) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.008 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Blikstad‐Balas, M. (2015) · Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00313831.2015.1066428 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Winter, S., Krämer, N. C., Rösner, L., & Neubaum, G. (2014) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x14555872 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Self-citationMayweg-Paus, E., & Jucks, R. (2017) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x17716102 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Testing three models for the sleeper effect
Allen, M. R., & Stiff, J. B. (1989) · Western Journal of Speech Communication · doi:10.1080/10570318909374318 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
The Influence of Ambivalence on Adolescents' Reactions to Anti-Drug Messages
Zhao, X., & Cappella, J. N. (2008) · Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1080/01463370802026885 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Inhibition Failure is Mediated by a Disposition Toward Flexible Thinking.
Swan, A. B., & Revlin, R. (2015) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 2 · see citing works
The Role of Credibility Assessment in Exposure to Political Information on the Internet
Medders, R., & Metzger, M. J. (2015) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Braatz, L. A. (2017). Consumer responses towards promotional posts: The effects of message sidedness and product depiction (Master's thesis). University of Twente, Twente, The Netherlands.
- Del Giudice, K. V. (2010). Trust on the web: The impact of social consensus on information credi- bility (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida. Retrieved from http://purl.fcla.edu/fcla/etd/CFE0003240
- In S. S. Sundar (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 445-466).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sarcone, A., Pileggi, C., Nobile, C., Simeone, S., & Mercuri, C. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1931903
- Authors
- Flanagin, A. J., Winter, S., & Metzger, M. J.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
- University of Koblenz and Landau (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Flanagin, Andrew J.
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-11-27
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1038-1056
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W2902695958
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 64
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 11.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- escholarship.org
- Locations
- Information Communication & Society (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Keywords
- information credibility, message sidedness, user-generated content, need for cognition, flexible thinking, cognitive style, online encyclopedias, credibility assessment, individual differences, online information seeking
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
