Perceived credibility of Internet encyclopedias

Kubiszewski, Ida; Noordewier, Thomas G.; Costanza, Robert

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.008

Cited by 48 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to these studies, those described elsewhere in this review (especially in the section on Scholarly Contribution) also discuss aspects of scholars using Wikipedia as a knowledge source (Davis et al 2010;Huss et al 2010;Bateman & Logan 2010;Bond 2011;Kubiszewski et al 2011). …”

Section: Source For Scholarly Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…She proposed techniques for presenting knowledge on the Internet that facilitate readers' rapid assessment of its credibility. Kubiszewski et al (2011) performe n expe men on "whe he certain webpage characteristics affect academics' and students' perception of the credibility of n o m on p esen e n n onl ne cle" (2011, p.659). They concluded h "comp e o Encyclopedia Britannica, article information appearing in both Encyclopedia of Earth and Wikipedia is pe ce ve s s gn c n ly less c e le" (2011, p.664).…”

Section: Reader Perceptions Of Credibmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wikipedia has become one of the ten most visited sites on the Web, and the world's leading source of Web reference information. Its rapid success has inspired hundreds of scholars from various disciplines to study its content, communication and community dynamics from various perspectives. This article presents a systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia. We describe our detailed, rigorous methodology for identifying over 450 scholarly studies of Wikipedia. We present the WikiLit website (http://wikilit.referata.com), where most of the papers reviewed here are described in detail. In the major section of this article, we then categorize and summarize the studies. An appendix features an extensive list of resources useful for Wikipedia researchers.

show abstract

Section: Source For Scholarly Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reader Perceptions Of Credibmentioning

confidence: 99%

The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wikipedia is apparently less credible than some other online reference resources (Kubiszewski et al 2011;Rector 2008) and seems to provide inaccurate, incomplete and poorly referenced information for some topics (Clauson et al 2008;Lavsa et al 2011). Its quality also seems to vary between language editions (see, for instance, Cabrera-Hernández 2013).…”

Section: Wikipedia Mentionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can alternative indicators overcome language biases in citation counts? A comparison of Spanish and UK research

Mas-Bleda

2016

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compares Spanish and UK research in eight subject fields using a range of bibliometric and social media indicators. For each field, lists of Spanish and UK journal articles published in the year 2012 and their citation counts were extracted from Scopus. The software Webometric Analyst was then used to extract a range of altmetrics for these articles, including patent citations, online presentation mentions, online course syllabus mentions, Wikipedia mentions and Mendeley reader counts and Altmetric.com was used to extract Twitter mentions. Results show that Mendeley is the altmetric source with the highest coverage, with 80% of sampled articles having one or more Mendeley readers, followed by Twitter (34%). The coverage of the remaining sources was lower than 3%. All of the indicators checked either have too little data or increase the overall difference between Spain and the UK and so none can be suggested as alternatives to reduce the bias against Spain in traditional citation indexes.

show abstract

“…This is true despite Internet users' concerns about the credibility of the information found there (Metzger, Flanagin, and Medders, 2010;Nofrina et al, 2009), which may be driving results of studies showing that people perceive the same information to be less credible if they think it comes from Wikipedia than if they think it comes from Encyclopaedia Britannica Kubiszewski, Noordewier, and Costanza, 2011). Related to this, and to the information aggregation aspect of the wiki model, Sundar, Knobloch-Westerwick, and Hastall (2007) found that source credibility was a powerful cue affecting participants' perception of the credibility of a news story located on a news aggregator website.…”

Section: Wikipediamentioning

confidence: 73%

Digital Media and Perceptions of Source Credibility in Political Communication

Flanagin

Metzger

2014

Oxford Handbooks Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and KeywordsThe rich research heritage on source credibility is fundamentally linked to processes of political communication and the provision of political information. Networked digital technologies, however, have recently complicated the assessment of source credibility by modifying people's ability to determine source expertise and trustworthiness, which are the foundations upon which credibility evaluations have traditionally rested. This chapter explores source credibility in online contexts by examining the credibility of digital versus traditional channels, the nature of political information conveyed by social media, and the dynamics of political information online. In addition, this chapter considers related research concerns, including the link between credibility and selective exposure, the potential for group polarization, and the role of social media in seeking and delivering credible political information. These concerns suggest challenges and opportunities as information consumers navigate the contemporary information environment in search of the knowledge to make them informed members of a politically engaged citizenry.

show abstract

Perceived credibility of Internet encyclopedias

Cited by 48 publications

References 15 publications

The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia

The People’s Encyclopedia Under the Gaze of the Sages: A Systematic Review of Scholarly Research on Wikipedia

Can alternative indicators overcome language biases in citation counts? A comparison of Spanish and UK research

Digital Media and Perceptions of Source Credibility in Political Communication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About