Learning Portfolio 4, Item 1, Q1

B. J. Fogg, in his chapter ‘Credibility and the World Wide Web’, discusses the perceptions of credibility in online resources as a blend of trustworthiness and expertise, and how the two either go hand in hand or don’t work together at all.

In a study conducted by Stanford Web Credibility Studies of over 6000 people, findings concluded that credibility suffers in four specific ways.

The first way is a blurred line between ads and page content. The second being links from one credible page to a page that lacks credibility. Third, advertisements and pop-up windows. The final way is a mismatch between domain name and company name.

Julia Schwarz and Meredith Ringel Morris state that almost everyone is at fault for accessing and trusting non-credible websites, ranging from school-age children to educated adults (2011).

Online reading has impacted credibility in a sense that it has changed the definition of literacy to include online skills, such as measuring credibility (Leu & Zawilinski, 2007).

Credibility can be linked to two aspects, trustworthiness and expertise. To a student, these are two very important factors, and can be the difference between marks. When making an argument, it is important that the information is backed up and supported by research, otherwise the argument is nullified by the fact that there is no evidence. The source of this information must be reputable, through knowledge and experience in the field.

Reference List
Fogg, B. J., (2003). Credibility and the World Wide Web. Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We
          Think and Do (pp. 122-125). Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Fogg, B. J., (2003). Credibility and the World Wide Web. Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We
          Think and Do (pp. 147-181). Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Schwarz, J., Morris, M. R., (2011). Augmenting web pages and search results to support credibility assessment. Retrieved
Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., (2007). The new literacies of online reading comprehension. New England Reading Association
          Journal, 43(1), 1-7


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s