Evaluating the Credibility of Online Information: A Test of Source and Advertising Influence
Abstract
When the U.S. public logs on to find information, they choose from billions of Web pages produced by everyone from fringe activists to respected media outlets. Research experts advise Internet users to carefully examine a variety of cues when evaluating the credibility of online information. This study isolates 2 cues (source and advertising) that individuals might rely on when judging online information and examines whether they are used by Web audiences, at least in an experimental setting. In a 2 x??2 factorial design, participants were shown an online news story from either a high- (nytimes.com) or low- (a personal home page) credibility Web source surrounded by either high- or low-credibility advertising. It was hypothesized that, in the absence of a brand-name news source, participants would look to surrounding advertising as a secondary cue. Although source credibility was significantly tied to participants' ratings of the story, advertising credibility was not. Further, participants paid little attention to the ads, even though advertising covered one third of the Web page.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Credibility of information is an important factor to create polarization, especially in online media where information from several sources propagates controversial beliefs.
“Credibility of information is also an important factor to create polarization, especially in online media where usually there exists information from several sources (Greer, 2003) that propagate controversial beliefs.”
From Credibility of climate change denial in social media (2019) · cites this paper as Greer, 2003
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 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Believe it or not: Credibility of blogs in tourism
Mack, R. W., Blose, J. E., & Pan, B. (2008) · Journal of Vacation Marketing · doi:10.1177/1356766707087521 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
Personal profile information as cues of credibility in online travel reviews
Park, H., Xiang, Z., Josiam, B., & Kim, H. (2014) · Anatolia · doi:10.1080/13032917.2013.820203 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
How Can Psychological Science Help Counter the Spread of Fake News?
van der Linden, S., Roozenbeek, J., Maertens, R., Basol, M., Kácha, O., Rathje, S., & Traberg, C. S. (2021) · The Spanish Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1017/sjp.2021.23 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Credibility of climate change denial in social media
Samantray, A., & Pin, P. (2019) · Palgrave Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-019-0344-4 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Behre, B., & Cauberghe, V. (2025) · Cleaner and Responsible Consumption · doi:10.1016/j.clrc.2025.100287 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Greer, J. D.
- Corresponding author
- Greer, Jennifer D.
- Venue
- Mass Communication and Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-02
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-28
- ISSN
- 1520-5436 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7825
- OpenAlex
- W2010330073
- Cited by
- 197
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 7.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Mass Communication & Society (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Journalism and Media Studies
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
- Keywords
- online information credibility, source credibility, advertising credibility, credibility cues, online news, advertising attention, website evaluation
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