LP4/ Examples

Here are examples of trustworthy websites.

presumed site
This is the website of Médecins du Monde, international NPO for medical issues, and an example of presumed credibility. The ‘org’ sign shows that this organization is fair, right. Thus, this website is credible.

reputed site
This website is one example of reputed credibility. It was awarded as the best designed website in 2013, and the title secures the reliability of this website.

surface site
This is an example of surface credibility; the design is well organised and looks professional, thus this website is worth while to trust.

earned site
Final example slide is for earned credibility. I have used the website ‘Amazon’ before, and there was no trouble such as delivery or money transferring. This is why I keep purchase goods on this website. Moreover, even though those who have not used this website, they can rely on other’s experiences. This shows the earned credibility of the website.



LP4/ Q3 – Discussion

People’s perception of web credibility has changed over time. According to Fogg’s data (2003, p. 154), there are two potential features which reduce credibility of websites: Self- appeal and automatic features.

Firstly, users might find websites in which companies appeal their own accomplishments less credible. In the findings of Fogg’s studies, people appreciate less site that ‘…displays an award it has won’ or ‘the site lists author’s credentials for each article’ (the score of credibility dropped down more than 0.5 points in both websites). This is possibly because these days false awards or identification are easy to manufacture, and they do not secure any credibility.

Secondly, web users will find a site less credible when they sense automatic features operating on a website. This can be seen from the score of ‘the site [that] provides a quick response to your customer service questions’ falling down from 2.0 to 1.8. In addition, the score of ‘the site sends emails confirming the transactions you make’ also dropped off for 0.6 points. On the contrary, more users appreciate websites which are updated frequently, or sites that show photographs of the organization’s members. This shows that people does not trust automatic functions of websites but tend to prefer the sense of the actual existence of humans behind website.

In conclusion, there are two features which can reduce credibility of website: self- appealing and automatic features. Web designers have to pay attention to these factors to ensure they are viewed as credible.

Fogg, B. J. (2003). Credibility and the World Wide Web. In Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

LP4/ Q2 – Discussion

In the leaning portfolio, Wikipedia is not permitted as resource. This is because, Wikipedia is not credible source for academic essays.

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia which everyone can use or edit. A merit of this system is that users can get information even from minor fields, because as long as there is one person who has knowledge about the field, he can write articles. In other words, Wikipedia is an aggregation of all knowledge. However, the disadvantage of this system is that not all information is accurate, because writers do not have to be in charge of the articles. This leads to a lack of credible sources, experts – all factors needed for trustworthiness and expertise as pointed out by Fogg(2003). This means that not all information on Wikipedia is credible. In fact, Chesney (2006) claims that about ‘13 percent of the articles contain mistakes’.

When it comes to academic writing, students are required to discuss their opinions reference to trustworthy sources. Thus, Wikipedia is not a suitable source for academic writing. Ghajar says that even Jimmy Wales, the Wikipedia founder says ‘I don’t think people should cite it, … People shouldn’t be citing encyclopedias in the first place. Wikipedia and other encyclopedias should…give good, solid background information to inform your studies for a deeper level”. Therefore, Wikipedia is not accepted as a credible resource for academic assignments.

Chesney, T. (2006, November 6). An empirical examination of Wikipedia’s credibility [Blog Post]. Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/1413/1331

Ghajar, L., A. Wikipedia: Credible Research Source or Not? Retrieved from http://teachinghistory.org/digital-classroom/ask-a-digital-historian/23863

LP4/ Q1- Discussion

Today we can access the internet and work online easily thanks to developments in technology. Our lives are made more convenient by the internet. However, not all of the information found online is trustworthy. Some information is inaccurate or even deliberately misleading. For example, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission showed the number of reported online shopping scams increased 65% in 2012 (2013). Therefore, it is very important to evaluate the credibility of information found on the internet.

According to Fogg (2003), credibility is composed of two factors: trustworthiness and expertise. Trustworthiness captures the perceived morality of the source, accomplished by the perception that a source is fair or perceived similarities. Expertise is the perceived knowledge, skill, and experience of the source, and this is achieved by profession, appearance cues, and documentation of accomplishments.

This discussion is also important for students. In academic writing, all students are required to think critically and support their opinions with credible sources. Thus, it is vital for students to select only credible information. Walsh (2013) also explains the importance of evaluating credibility by saying ‘I can recall many instances where students would stress out about how to cite an online source;… but, the more important issue was to determine whether the source was worth citing in the first place’. Thus, evaluation of websites is essential for students and their academic work.

Fogg, B. J. (2003). Credibility and the World Wide Web. In 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. In Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do (pp. 147‐181). Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

Online shopping scams: Don’t let them wreck your Christmas (n.d). Retrieved from http://learn.nab.com.au/online-shopping-scams-dont-let-them-wreck-your-christmas/

Walsh, K. (2012). The Importance of Source Evaluation and Content Credibility Skills for Today’s Students. Retrieved from http://www.emergingedtech.com/2012/05/the-importance-of-source-evaluation-and-content-credibility-skills-for-todays-students/