信息爆炸和信息不确定语境下的可信度判据研究——以<bold>COVID-19</bold>疫情为例

doi:10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.07.004

情报学报

2021, Vol. 40

Issue (7): 714-724 DOI: 10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.07.004

情报分析方法与技术

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

信息爆炸和信息不确定语境下的可信度判据研究——以COVID-19疫情为例

谢娟, 李文文, 沈鸿权, 成颖

南京大学信息管理学院，南京 210023

Study on the Criteria of Information Credibility in the Context of Information Explosion and Uncertainty: The Case of COVID-19

Xie Juan, Li Wenwen, Shen Hongquan, Cheng Ying

School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (2)

全文: PDF (769 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要在突发事件中，信息数量的爆炸式增长伴随着不确定性的急剧上升，显著提升了公众对信息可信度判断的困难程度。本研究以COVID-19疫情为例，探讨了信息爆炸和信息不确定语境下用户信息可信度的判据。本研究采用扎根理论方法，通过访谈提纲设计和理论抽样，对21名研究对象进行了深度访谈；对原始语料初步整理后进行开放编码、主轴编码、选择编码以及理论饱和度检验；发掘出了包括权威性、可靠性、内部质量、传播特征和积极性5个主范畴，以及相应的12个范畴和35个初始概念等在内的信息可信度判据；对专业性等普适判据，以及积极性等新发现的判据进行了深入的剖析与探讨。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	谢娟
	李文文
	沈鸿权
	成颖

关键词 ：信息可信度, 判据, COVID-19, 信息爆炸, 信息不确定性

收稿日期: 2020-06-10

基金资助:国家社会科学基金项目“施引者引用意向与文献计量视角的学术论文被引影响因素研究”（17BTQ014）。

作者简介: 谢娟，女，1995年生，博士研究生，主要研究方向为信息行为；李文文，女，1986年生，博士研究生，主要研究方向为信息行为；沈鸿权，男，1997年生，硕士研究生，主要研究方向为信息检索；成颖，男，1971年生，博士，教授，博士生导师，主要研究方向为用户信息行为、信息检索，E-mail：chengy@nju.edu.c；

引用本文:

谢娟, 李文文, 沈鸿权, 成颖. 信息爆炸和信息不确定语境下的可信度判据研究——以COVID-19疫情为例[J]. 情报学报, 2021, 40(7): 714-724.
Xie Juan, Li Wenwen, Shen Hongquan, Cheng Ying. Study on the Criteria of Information Credibility in the Context of Information Explosion and Uncertainty: The Case of COVID-19. 情报学报, 2021, 40(7): 714-724.

链接本文:

http://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.07.004 或 http://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/Y2021/V40/I7/714

1 Cheung C M, Sia C L, Kuan K K, et al. Is this review believable? A study of factors affecting the credibility of online consumer reviews from an ELM perspective[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2012, 13(8): 618-635.
2 Flanagin A J, Metzger M J. Trusting expert-versus user-generated ratings online: The role of information volume, valence, and consumer characteristics[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2013, 29(4): 1626-1634.
3 Mackiewicz J, Yeats D, Thornton T. The impact of review environment on review credibility[J]. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 2016, 59(2): 71-88.
4 Cosenza T R, Solomon M R, Kwon W S. Credibility in the blogosphere: a study of measurement and influence of wine blogs as an information source[J]. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2015, 14(2):71-91.
5 Johnson T J, Kaye B K, Bichard S L, et al. Every blog has its day: politically-interested internet users' perceptions of blog credibility[J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2007, 13(1): 100-122.
6 Tan W K, Chang Y C. Improving users' credibility perception of travel expert blogs: useful lessons from television travel shows[J]. Information Research, 2013, 18(2): paper 579.
7 Golbeck J, Fleischmann K R. Trust in social Q&A: the impact of text and photo cues of expertise[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2010, 47(1): 1-10.
8 O’Grady L, Wathen C N, Charnaw-Burger J, et al. The use of tags and tag clouds to discern credible content in online health message forums[J]. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2012, 81(1): 36-44.
9 Bates B R, Romina S, Ahmed R, et al. The effect of source credibility on consumers' perceptions of the quality of health information on the internet[J]. Medical Informatics and the Internet in Medicine, 2006, 31(1): 45-52.
10 中华人民共和国突发事件应对法[EB/OL]. (2007-08-30) [2020-04-24]. http://www.gov.cn/ziliao/flfg/2007-08/30/content_732593.htm.
11 李纲, 陈璟浩. 突发公共事件网络舆情研究综述[J]. 图书情报知识, 2014(2): 111-119.
12 疫情报道“前中后期”有何不同? 这家央媒告诉你![EB/OL]. (2020-02-29) [2020-04-24]. https://www.163.com/dy/article/F6H5RQF K05148SKI.html.
13 新媒体疫情大数据: 两周20篇双10w+, 全民关注的线上战疫[EB/OL]. (2020-02-07) [2020-04-24]. https://www.chinaz.com/2020/0207/1108004.shtml.
14 吴艳. 社交媒体信息可信度研究[D]. 武汉: 武汉大学, 2015.
15 王倩. 学术虚拟社区中网络学术信息可信度影响因素分析[D]. 合肥: 安徽大学, 2017.
16 Metzger M J. Making sense of credibility on the Web: models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007, 58(13): 2078-2091.
17 Thomas M J, Wirtz B W, Weyerer J C. Determinants of online review credibility and its impact on consumers’ purchase intention[J]. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 2019, 20(1): 1-21.
18 Li R H, Suh A. Factors influencing information credibility on social media platforms: evidence from Facebook pages[J]. Procedia Computer Science, 2015, 72: 314-328.
19 Savolainen R. Judging the quality and credibility of information in Internet discussion forums[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 62(7): 1243-1256.
20 沈旺, 康霄普, 王佳馨, 等. 用户视角下社会化问答社区信息可信度评价研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2018, 62(17): 104-111.
21 Mansour A, Francke H. Credibility assessments of everyday life information on Facebook: a sociocultural investigation of a group of mothers[J]. Information Research, 2017, 22(2): paper 750.
22 Avery E J. The role of source and the factors audiences rely on in evaluating credibility of health information[J]. Public Relations Review, 2010, 36(1): 81-83.
23 Choi W. What makes online health information credible for older adults?: an exploratory study[C]// Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2013: 2671-2676.
24 Borah P, Xiao X Z. The importance of ‘likes’: the interplay of message framing, source, and social endorsement on credibility perceptions of health information on Facebook[J]. Journal of Health Communication, 2018, 23(4): 399-411.
25 Liao Q V, Fu W T. Age differences in credibility judgments of online health information[J]. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 2014, 21(1): Article No. 2.
26 薛可, 王丽丽, 余明阳. 自然灾难报道中传统媒体与社交媒体信任度对比研究[J]. 上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2014, 22(4): 88-95.
27 尤薇佳, 李红, 刘鲁. 突发事件Web信息传播渠道信任比较研究[J]. 管理科学学报, 2014, 17(2): 19-33.
28 King C L, Chow M Y K, Wiley K E, et al. Much ado about flu: a mixed methods study of parental perceptions, trust and information seeking in a pandemic[J]. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses, 2018, 12(4): 514-521.
29 Haynes K, Barclay J, Pidgeon N. The issue of trust and its influence on risk communication during a volcanic crisis[J]. Bulletin of Volcanology, 2008, 70(5): 605-621.
30 Pee L G, Lee J. Trust in user-generated information on social media during crises: an elaboration likelihood perspective[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, 2016, 26(1): 1-22.
31 薛传业, 夏志杰, 张志花, 等. 突发事件中社交媒体信息可信度研究[J]. 现代情报, 2015, 35(4): 12-16.
32 宋之杰, 刘绍山, 石蕊, 等. 基于眼动追踪技术的突发事件微博信息可信度影响因素研究[J]. 情报杂志, 2017, 36(1): 101-107.
33 李明, 李莹, 许应成. 突发事件环境下的虚拟问答社区知识可信度影响因素研究[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2019, 42(9): 128-132, 145.
34 Corbin J M, Strauss A. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory[M]. London: SAGE Publications, 2015.
35 靳代平, 王新新, 姚鹏. 品牌粉丝因何而狂热?——基于内部人视角的扎根研究[J]. 管理世界, 2016(9): 102-119.
36 胡蓉, 赵宇翔, 朱庆华. 移动互联环境下用户跨屏行为整合分析框架——基于扎根理论的探索[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2017, 43(6): 113-129.
37 莫衡, 等. 当代汉语词典[M]. 上海: 上海辞书出版社, 2001.
38 Choi W, Stvilia B. Web credibility assessment: conceptualization, operationalization, variability, and models[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015, 66(12): 2399-2414.
39 Jeon G Y J, Rieh S Y. Answers from the crowd: how credible are strangers in social Q&A?[C]// iConference 2014 Proceedings, 2014: 663-668.
40 Kang M. Measuring social media credibility: a study on a measure of blog credibility[EB/OL]. [2020-02-07]. https://instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/BlogCredibility_101210.pdf.
41 Jean B S, Rieh S Y, Yang J Y, et al. How content contributors assess and establish credibility on the web[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2011, 48(1): 1-11.
42 Kim S. Questioners' credibility judgments of answers in a social question and answer site[J]. Information Research, 2010, 15(2): paper 432.
43 朱侯, 蒋彩莹, 王可. 社会化媒体公众平台可信度体系构建[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2016, 39(11): 111-115.
44 李金城. 社交媒体信息可信度的评估策略与影响因素[J]. 情报杂志, 2017, 36(1): 181-186.
45 Metzger M J, Flanagin A J. Credibility and trust of information in online environments: the use of cognitive heuristics[J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2013, 59(1/2): 210-220.
46 邓爱民. 高可靠长寿命产品可靠性技术研究[D]. 长沙: 国防科学技术大学, 2006.
47 Kittur A, Suh B, Chi E H. Can you ever trust a wiki?: impacting perceived trustworthiness in wikipedia[C]// Proceedings of the ACM 2008 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. New York: ACM Press, 2008: 477-480.
48 Fogg B J, Marshall J, Laraki O, et al. What makes Web sites credible?: a report on a large quantitative study[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 2001: 61-68.
49 Kahn B K, Strong D M, Wang R Y. Information quality benchmarks: product and service performance[J]. Communications of the ACM, 2002, 45(4): 184-192.
50 Rieh S Y, Danielson D R. Credibility: a multidisciplinary framework[J]. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 2007, 41(1): 307-364.
51 Wathen C N, Burkell J. Believe it or not: factors influencing credibility on the Web[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, 53(2): 134-144.
52 Dou X, Walden J A, Lee S, et al. Does source matter? Examining source effects in online product reviews[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2012, 28(5): 1555-1563.
53 谢新洲, 周晓英, 李月琳, 等. 突发公共卫生事件中的科学应对与思考: 图情专家谈新冠疫情[J]. 信息资源管理学报, 2020, 10(2): 4-16.
54 沈正赋. 突发公共事件的危机管理、舆情应对和共情传播[J]. 社会科学文摘, 2020(3): 11-13.
55 王芳, 安璐, 黄如花, 等. 突发公共卫生事件中的科学应对与思考: 图情专家谈新冠疫情[J]. 图书情报知识, 2020(2): 4-14.
56 明安香. 重大危机事件传播的主要特征与应对研究[J]. 新闻爱好者, 2012(22): 1-5.