Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,069

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Perceptions of Internet Information Credibility

Flanagin, Andrew J., Metzger, Miriam J.·2000·Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
DOI 10.1177/107769900007700304
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

People increasingly rely on Internet and web-based information despite evidence that it is potentially inaccurate and biased. Therefore, this study sought to assess people's perceptions of the credibility of various categories of Internet information compared to similar information provided by other media. The 1,041 respondents also were asked about whether they verified Internet information. Overall, respondents reported they considered Internet information to be as credible as that obtained from television, radio, and magazines, but not as credible as newspaper information. Credibility among the types of information sought, such as news and entertainment, varied across media channels. Respondents said they rarely verified web-based information, although this too varied by the type of information sought. Levels of experience and how respondents perceived the credibility of information were related to whether they verified information. This study explores the social relevance of the findings and discusses them in terms of theoretical knowledge of advanced communication technologies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/107769900007700304

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J.
Venue
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2000-09
Volume
77
Issue
3
Pages
515-540
ISSN
  • 1077-6990 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-430X
DOI
10.1177/107769900007700304
OpenAlex
W2137194788
Cited by
1,069
References
0
FWCI
39.14
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

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.