The Importance of Selected Criteria for Assessing the Credibility of Information on the Internet from the Perspective of Users Searching Health and Disease Information Websites

IF 1.6 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Journal of Education Culture and Society Pub Date : 2022-09-27 DOI:10.15503/jecs2022.2.565.586
Jitka Rusová, Adéla Michková, Ondřej Pleskot, Ondřej Podeszwa, E. Hlavackova
{"title":"The Importance of Selected Criteria for Assessing the Credibility of Information on the Internet from the Perspective of Users Searching Health and Disease Information Websites","authors":"Jitka Rusová, Adéla Michková, Ondřej Pleskot, Ondřej Podeszwa, E. Hlavackova","doi":"10.15503/jecs2022.2.565.586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim. The aim of the survey was to find out how and why users of websites containing health information searched for information, how they feel about selected criteria for assessing the credibility of information, and what they are more likely to trust when they encounter a discrepancy between information from the website and from a doctor.\nMethods. An online survey of users of 4 health information websites, two of which are listed as trusted sites on MedLike. The respondents assessed 10 criteria for determining the trustworthiness of online information and websites by assigning a number of stars (5 stars = important).\nResults. The questionnaire was answered by 32,428 respondents (79.5% women, average age 47 years). The most frequently cited reasons for seeking information were their own health or illness (49%). Most respondents searched for information through an Internet search engine (66%). The importance of the criteria for selecting information did not differ significantly. The respondents gave the highest score (2.29) to the criterion of ease (I can easily find what I need). This was followed by consistency with information from the doctor (2.28).\nConclusion. The respondents searched for information in the way described in the literature as most common (using a search engine) and tended towards a heuristic evaluation of online information and its sources (ease of information retrieval) and also appreciated if the information found concurred with information from a healthcare professional.","PeriodicalId":30646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Education Culture and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Education Culture and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15503/jecs2022.2.565.586","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim. The aim of the survey was to find out how and why users of websites containing health information searched for information, how they feel about selected criteria for assessing the credibility of information, and what they are more likely to trust when they encounter a discrepancy between information from the website and from a doctor. Methods. An online survey of users of 4 health information websites, two of which are listed as trusted sites on MedLike. The respondents assessed 10 criteria for determining the trustworthiness of online information and websites by assigning a number of stars (5 stars = important). Results. The questionnaire was answered by 32,428 respondents (79.5% women, average age 47 years). The most frequently cited reasons for seeking information were their own health or illness (49%). Most respondents searched for information through an Internet search engine (66%). The importance of the criteria for selecting information did not differ significantly. The respondents gave the highest score (2.29) to the criterion of ease (I can easily find what I need). This was followed by consistency with information from the doctor (2.28). Conclusion. The respondents searched for information in the way described in the literature as most common (using a search engine) and tended towards a heuristic evaluation of online information and its sources (ease of information retrieval) and also appreciated if the information found concurred with information from a healthcare professional.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从用户搜索健康和疾病信息网站的角度,选择标准对评估互联网信息可信度的重要性
目标这项调查的目的是了解包含健康信息的网站的用户是如何以及为什么搜索信息的,他们对评估信息可信度的选定标准有何看法,以及当他们遇到来自网站和医生的信息之间的差异时,他们更可能信任什么。方法。一项针对4个健康信息网站用户的在线调查,其中两个网站被列为MedLike上的可信网站。受访者通过分配一些星星(5颗星=重要)来评估确定在线信息和网站可信度的10个标准。结果。32428名受访者(79.5%的女性,平均年龄47岁)回答了问卷。寻求信息最常被引用的原因是他们自己的健康或疾病(49%)。大多数受访者通过互联网搜索引擎搜索信息(66%)。选择信息的标准的重要性没有显著差异。受访者对轻松(我可以很容易地找到我需要的东西)的标准给出了最高的分数(2.29)。其次是与医生提供的信息的一致性(2.28)。结论。受访者以文献中描述的最常见的方式(使用搜索引擎)搜索信息,倾向于对在线信息及其来源进行启发式评估(信息检索的容易性),如果发现的信息与医疗保健专业人员。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Education Culture and Society
Journal of Education Culture and Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
27.30%
发文量
75
期刊最新文献
Narrating Chinese Teaching and Learning in Culturally Local Thai Schools The Influence of Ottoman Culture on the Way of life of Albanian Society Motivation and the Psycho-Emotional Reaction of Volunteers in War-Time The Dynamics of Motivation and Social Atmosphere of the Classroom in the Process of Pedagogical Intervention of Reading Comprehension Objective Feedback: The Views of Pedagogical Study Programme Students
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1