B. J. Fogg
ABSTRACT
Given the importance of credibility in computing products, the research on computer credibility is relatively small. To enhance knowledge about computers and credibility, we define key terms relating to computer credibility, synthesize the literature in this domain, and propose three new conceptual frameworks for better understanding the elements of computer credibility. To promote further research, we then offer two perspectives on what computer users evaluate when assessing credibility. We conclude by presenting a set of credibility-related terms that can serve in future research and evaluation endeavors.
- 1.Andrews, L.W. & Gutkin, T.B. (1991). The Effects of Human Versus Computer Authorship on Consumers' Perceptions of Psychological Reports. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 31 I-317.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- 2.Bauhs, J.A. & Cooke, N.J. (1994). Is Kuowing More Really Better? Effects of System Development Information in Human-Expert System Interactions. CHI 94 Companion, p. 99-100. New York: AClVl. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 3.Buller, D.B. & Burgoon, J.K. (1996). Interpersonal Deception Theory. Communication Theory, 6(3) 203- 242.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 4.Byrne, D. (1971). The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
- 5.Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1387-1397.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 6.Cialdini, R.B. (1993). Influence: Science and Practice. (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
- 7.Fogg, B.j. (1997). Charismatic Computers: Creating more likable and persuasive interactive technologies by leveraging principles from social psychology. Doctoral thesis. Stanford University. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 8.Fogg, B.J. (1998). Persuasive Computers: Perspectives and research directions. Proceedings of the CHI98 Conference of the ACM/SIGCHI, 225-232. New York: ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 9.Gatignon, H., & Robertson, T.S. (1991). Innovative Decision Processes. T.S. Robertson & H.H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Handbook of Consumer Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hail.Google Scholar
- 10.Hanowski, R.J., Kantowitz, S.C., & Kantowitz, B.H. (1994). Driver Acceptance of Unreliable Route Guidance Information. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 38th Annual Meeting, p. 1062-1066.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 11.Harkins, S.G., & Petty, R.E. (1981). Effects of Source Magnification of Cognitive Effort on Attitudes: An information processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 401-413.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 12.Honaker, L.M., Hector, V.S., & Harrell, T.H. (1986). Perceived Validity of Computer Versus Clinician- Generated MMPI Reports. Computers in Human Behavior, 2, 77-83.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 13.Kantowitz, B.H., Hanowski, R.J., & Kantowitz, S.C. (1997). Driver Acceptance of Unreliable Traffic Information in Familiar and Unfamiliar Settings. Human Factors, 39(2) 164-176.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 14.Kerber, K.W. (1983). Attitudes Towards Specific Uses of the Computer: Quantitative, decision-making and record-keeping applications. Behavior and Information Technology, 2, 197-209. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 15.Kim, J. & Moon, J.Y. (1997). Designing Towards Emotional Usability in Customer Interfaces: Trustworthiness of cyber-banking system interfaces. Interacting with Computers, 10, 1-29.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 16.Larson, C. (1995). Persuasion: Reception and responsibility. (Tth ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
- 17.Lee, J. (1991). The Dynamics of Trust in a Supervisory Control Simulation. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35'h Annual Meeting, p. 1228-1232.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 18.Lee, J. & Moray, N. (1992). Trust, Control Strategies and Allocation of Function in Human-Machine Systems. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1243-1270.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 19.Lerch, F.J. & Prietula, M.J. (1989). How Do We Trust Machine Advice? Designing and using human-computer interfaces and knowledge based systems. Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference on Human Computer interaction, p. 411-419. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 20.Lester, J.C., Converse, S.A., Kahler, S.E., Barlow, S.T., Stone, B.A., & Bhogal, R.S. (1997). The Persona Effect: Affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. Proceedings ofCH197, p. 359-366. New York: ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 21.Mackie, D.M., Worth, L.T., & Asuncion, A.G. (1990). Processing of Persuasive In-group Messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 812-822.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 22.Matarazzo, J.D. (1986). Response to Fowler and Butcher on Matarazzo. American Psychologist, 41, 96.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 23.Miller, C.A. & Larson, R. (1992). An Explanatory and "Argumentative" Interface for a Model-Based Diagnostic System. Proceedings of the A CM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, 1992, 43- 52. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 24.Moon, Y. (1998). The Effects of Distance in Local Versus Remote Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings ofCH198, p. 103-108. New York: ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 25.Muir, B.M. (1988). Trust Between Humans and Machines, and the Design of Decision Aids. Cognitive Engineering in Complex Dynamic Worlds. p. 71-83.Google Scholar
- 26.Muir, B.M. (1994). Trust in Automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics, 37(11) 1905-1922.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 27.Muir, B.M. & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in Automation: Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 39(3) 429-460.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 28.Nass, C., Fogg, B.J., & Moon, Y. (1996). Can Computers Be Teammates? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 669-678. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 29.Nass, C., Reeves, B., & Leshner, G. (1996). Technology and Roles: A tale of two TVs. Journal of Communication, 46(2).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 30.Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B.J., Reeves, B. & Dryer, D.C. (1995). Can Computer Personalities Be Human Personalities? International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, 43, 223-239. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 31.Pancer, S.M., George, M., & Gebotys, R.J. (1992). Understanding and Predicting Attitudes Toward Computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 8, 211-222.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 32.Petty, R. and Cacioppo, J. (1981). Attitudes and Persuasion." Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: Brown.Google Scholar
- 33.Petty, R., Cacioppo, J., Goldman, R. (1981). Personal Involvement as a Determinant of Argument-Based Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5) 847-855.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 34.Quintanar, L., Crowell, C., Pryor, J. (1982). Human- Computer Interaction: A preliminary social psychological analysis. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 14(2) 210-2213,.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 35.Reeves, B. & Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 36.Rempel, J.K., Holmes, J.G, & Zanna, M.P. (1985). Trust in Close Relationships. journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49 (1) 95-112.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 37.Rotter, J.B. (1980). Interpersonal Trust, Trustworthiness, and Gullibility. American Psycliologist, 35 (1) 1-7.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 38.Self, C.S. (1996). Credibility. In M. Salwen & D. Stacks (Eds.), An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research. Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- 39.Sheridan, T.B., Vamos, T., and Aida S. (1983). Adapting Automation to Man, Culture ~md Society. Automatica, 19(6) 605-612.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 40.Stiff, J. (1994). Persuasive Communication. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- 41.Waem, Y. & Ramberg, R. (1996). People's Perception of Human and Computer Advice. Computers in Human Behavior, 12(1) 17-27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 42.Waem, Y., Hagglund, S. et al. (1992). Communication Knowledge for Knowledge Communication. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 37, 215- 239. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 43.Zajonc, R.B. (1980). Feeling and Thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151-175.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 44.Zimbardo, P. & Leippe, M. (1991). The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- The elements of computer credibility
Recommendations
What makes Web sites credible?: a report on a large quantitative study
CHI '01: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThe credibility of web sites is becoming an increasingly important area to understand. To expand knowledge in this domain, we conducted an online study that investigated how different elements of Web sites affect people's perception of credibility. Over ...
How do credibility and utility play in the user experience of health informatics services?
While the use of health informatics is increasing in health care, how it is improving health care and how users accept the services has been little studied, and due to increasing uncertainty, credibility has become a key determinant of health ...
How credible are online product reviews? The effects of self-generated and system-generated cues on source credibility evaluation
Online product reviews are important information sources in the consumer decision-making process. Despite the importance of online reviews in product evaluation, there is an emerging need to address the role of self-generated and system-generated ...
Comments