The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Credibility for the 21st Century: Integrating Perspectives on Source, Message, and Media Credibility in the Contemporary Media Environment
Abstract
Technological capabilities and features of the Internet and World Wide Web have prompted concerns about the verity of online information, the credibility of new media, and the new responsibilities placed on media consumers. Reflecting these concerns, scholars have shown a renewed interest in the credibility of sources, their messages, and the media that carry them. Nonetheless, researchers who are currently reengaging the issue of information credibility have yet to take full advantage of the rich heritage left by credibility research conducted over the last half century. The primary aim of this chapter is to show how past research can inform present attempts to understand credibility in the new media environment, focusing particularly on Web-based information. Toward that end, this chapter reviews, synthesizes, and integrates the substantial literature on source, message, and media credibility; addresses issues of credibility conceptualization, operationalization, and measurement; suggests strategies to empower online users and information providers; and culminates with strategies for credibility research and an agenda for the study of credibility in the contemporary media environment.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2 · Cited by 8,822
Ohanian, R. (1990) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.1990.10673191 · Cited by 4,043
The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness
Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/266350 · Cited by 3,543 · cited 1×
“Evaluations of credibility are higher when message discrepancy is low (Hovland & Weiss, 1951).”
BackgroundInformation Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation
Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.10.1.104 · Cited by 1,870
Mass Media Flow and Differential Growth in Knowledge
Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., & Olien, C. N. (1970) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/267786 · Cited by 1,537
Goldsmith, R. E., Lafferty, B. A., & Newell, S. J. (2000) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2000.10673616 · Cited by 1,301
What makes Web sites credible?: a report on a large quantitative study
Fogg, B. J., Marshall, J., Laraki, O., Osipovich, A., Varma, C., Fang, N., Paul, J., Rangnekar, A., Shon, J., Swani, P., et al. (2001) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/365024.365037 · Cited by 685 · cited 19×
“According to Fogg et al. (2001b), expertise may be communicated by listing authors’ credentials and including citations or references for information provided on Web sites.”
BackgroundInfluentialBegg, I. M., Anas, A., & Farinacci, S. (1992) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037//0096-3445.121.4.446 · Cited by 650
Source v. Content Effects on Judgments of News Believability
Austin, E. W., & Dong, Q. (1994) · Journalism Quarterly · doi:10.1177/107769909407100420 · Cited by 144
Cited by
Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media
Wang, Y., McKee, M., Torbica, A., & Stuckler, D. (2019) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112552 · Cited by 1,806
“The concept of credibility, as investigated extensively in communications research, encompasses message credibility, source credibility, and media credibility (Metzger et al., 2003) .”
Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics
Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2013) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.012 · Cited by 1,000
Self-citationQiu, L., & Benbasat, I. (2009) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222250405 · Cited by 737
Social Media as Information Source: Recency of Updates and Credibility of Information
Westerman, D., Spence, P. R., & Van Der Heide, B. (2014) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/jcc4.12041 · Cited by 708
Faculty of Economics and Management, U. P. M. K. L., Lim, X. J., Mohd Radzol, A. R. B., Faculty of Economics and Management, U. P. M. K. L., Cheah, J.-H. (., Azman Hashim International Business School, U. T. M. K. L., Wong, M. W., & Faculty of Health, A. A. D. (2017) · Asian Journal of Business Research · doi:10.14707/ajbr.170035 · Cited by 679
Metadata
- Authors
- Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & Mccann, R. M.
- Venue
- Annals of the International Communication Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 293-335
- ISSN
- 2380-8977 (ISSN-L)
- 2380-8985
- OpenAlex
- W2055952423
- Cited by
- 768
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 15.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Credibility for the 21st Century: Integrating Perspectives on Source, Message, and Media Credibility in the Contemporary Media Environment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/23808985.2003.11679029
- The paper
- Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & Mccann, R. M. (2003). Credibility for the 21st Century: Integrating Perspectives on Source, Message, and Media Credibility in the Contemporary Media Environment. Annals of the International Communication Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2003.11679029
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
