图书情报工作

图书情报工作 >

2020 , Vol. 64 >Issue 13: 100 - 110

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.13.014

情报研究

影响网络不实信息可信性的关键认知启发识别及分类研究——基于扎根理论

  • 陈楷 ,
  • 尹春晓
展开
  • 西南大学计算机与信息科学学院 重庆 400715
陈楷(ORCID:0000-0002-3329-9198),本科生。

收稿日期: 2019-11-05

  修回日期: 2020-03-25

  网络出版日期: 2020-07-05

基金资助

本文系国家自然科学基金青年项目"网络不实信息可信性探索：认知启发双重影响机制及其边界条件研究"（项目编号：71701169）研究成果之一。

收起

The Study of Identification and Classification on Key Cognitive Heuristics of Online Inaccurate Information Credibility: A Grounded Theory Perspective

  • Chen Kai ,
  • Yin Chunxiao
Expand
  • College of Computer and Information Science, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715

Received date: 2019-11-05

  Revised date: 2020-03-25

  Online published: 2020-07-05

Fold

摘要

[目的/意义] 识别影响网络不实信息可信性的关键认知启发并对其进行分类，为网络不实信息的传播提供理论参考，并为业界及政府控制不实信息的传播提供一定的参考。[方法/过程] 基于18位网络用户的访谈资料和文献中的认知启发，采用扎根理论的研究方法，最终识别出10个主范畴启发式，并分为四大类，由此构建了网络不实信息可信性的认知启发分类模型。[结果/结论] 共识启发式、自我认知启发式及一致性启发式是主导性认知启发式，认证启发式及声誉启发式是保障性认知启发式，外观感知启发式、传递启发式及内容启发式是支持性认知启发式，新颖启发式及意图启发式是驱动性认知启发式。

关键词： 不实信息; 可信性; 认知启发; 扎根理论

本文引用格式

陈楷 , 尹春晓 . 影响网络不实信息可信性的关键认知启发识别及分类研究——基于扎根理论[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020 , 64(13) : 100 -110 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.13.014

Abstract

[Purpose/significance] The identification of key cognitive heuristics of online inaccurate information credibility can provide theoretical suggestions for information dissemination, and provide some guidance for industry and government about how to control inaccurate information dissemination.[Method/process] Based on structured interview data of 18 online users, adopting grounded theory, 10 key cognitive heuristics were identified and a classification model was built based on 4 types of cognitive heuristics.[Result/conclusion] Consensus heuristics, self-cognition heuristics, and consistency heuristics are dominate cognitive heuristics; authentication heuristics and reputation heuristics are promising cognitive heuristics; appearance heuristics, transmission heuristics and content heuristics are supportive cognitive heuristics; novelty heuristics and Intent heuristics are driving cognitive heuristics.

Key words： inaccurate information; credibility; cognitive heuristics; grounded theory

参考文献

[1] 霍良安. 突发事件发生后不实信息的传播问题研究[D].上海:上海交通大学,2012.
[2] 方星,黄培清.突发事件发生后不实信息的传播问题研究综述[J].上海管理科学,2016,38(6):114-118.
[3] 邓小凤. 基于不实信息传播模型的企业声誉突发事件情景分析[D]. 上海:上海交通大学, 2014.
[4] 高群. 基于微博舆情不实信息的监测措施研究[J]. 中国报业, 2013(18):14-15.
[5] 刘彦君,吴玉辉,李荣,王井.科技类不实信息及其传播[J].情报杂志,2016,35(9):111-116.
[6] CARR N. The shallows:what the Internet is doing to our brains[M]. New York:W. W. Noron & Company,2010.
[7] FISKE S T, TAYLOR S E. Socail cognition:from brains to culture[M]. Thousand Oaks:Sage Publication,2013.
[8] HILLIGOSS B, RIEH S Y. Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment:construct, heuristics, and interaction in context[J]. Information processing and management, 2008, 44(4):1467-1484.
[9] METZGER M J, FLANAGIN A J, MEDDERS R B. Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online[J]. Journal of communication, 2010, 60(3):413-439.
[10] 陈洁. 会计师提供不实信息致第三人损害的民事责任[J]. 人民司法, 1999(12):37-39.
[11] CROCCO A G, VILLASIS-KEEVER M, JADAD A R. Two wrongs don't make a right:harm aggravated by inaccurate information on the internet[J]. Pediatrics, 2002, 109(3):522-523.
[12] STRICKER R B, JOHNSON L, HARRIS N, et al. Inaccurate information about lyme disease on the internet[J]. The pediatric infectious disease journal, 2005, 24(6):577-578.
[13] 霍夫兰,贾尼斯,凯利,等. 传播与劝服[M]. 张建中,李雪晴,曾苑,等译. 北京:中国人民大学出版社,2015.
[14] EDELSTEIN A S, TEFFT D P. Media credibility and respondent credulity with respect to watergate[J]. Communication research, 1974, 1(4):426-439.
[15] FLANAGIN A J, METZGER M J. Perceptions of Internet information credibility[J]. Journalism & Mass communication quarterly, 2000, 77(3):515-540.
[16] 胡磊. 国外互联网信息可信性研究发展历程及特征分析[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2012, 38(2):100-106.
[17] 国佳, 郭勇, 沈旺, 等. 基于在线评论的网络社区信息可信度评价方法研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(17):137-144.
[18] 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.
[19] 张星, 夏火松, 陈星, 等. 在线健康社区中信息可信性的影响因素研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(22):88-96,104.
[20] 刘晓波. 互联网信息可信性的研究现状与评价框架构建[J]. 情报科学, 2013(4):33-38.
[21] FOGG B. The elements of computer credibility[C]//Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. New York:Association for Computing Machinery,1999.
[22] TVERSKY A, KAHNEMAN D. Judgment under uncertainty:heuristics and biases[J]. Science, 1978, 185(4157):17-34.
[23] SUNDAR S S. Tthe main model:a heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility[C]//METZGER M J, FLANAGIN A J. Digital media, youth, and credibility. Cambridge:The MIT Press,2008.
[24] YIN C X, SUN Y Q, FANG Y L, et al. Exploring the dual-role of cognitive heuristics and the moderating effect of gender in microblog information credibility evaluation[J]. Information technology & people, 2018, 31(3):741-769.
[25] ZHANG K Z K, ZHAO S J, CHEUNG C M K, et al. Examining the influence of online reviews on consumers' decision-making:a heuristic-systematic model[J]. Decision support systems, 2014, 67(C):78-89.
[26] LLAMERO L. Conceptual mindsets and heuristics in credibility evaluation of e-word of mouth in tourism[J]. Online information review, 2014, 38(7):954-968.
[27] PANDIT N R. The creation of theory:a recent application of the grounded theory method[J]. The qualitative report, 1996, 2(4):1-14.
[28] PALOMO R R, MARTÍNEZ, BOSCH I C. The influence of social and environmental labels on purchasing:an information and systematic-heuristic processing approach[J]. Innovar, 2015, 25(57):121-132.
[29] GLASHEEN M. What you see is what you get, but do you get what you see:higher education students' evaluation of the credibility of online information[D]. Ireland:University of Limerick,2013.
[30] RIEH S Y, KIM Y M, YANG J Y, et al. A diary study of credibility assessment in everyday life information activities on the web:preliminary findings[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 2010, 47(1):1-10.
[31] LIM S. College students' credibility judgments and heuristics concerning Wikipedia[J]. Information processing & management, 2013, 49(2):405-419.
[32] VIJAY T, PRASHAR S, PARSAD C, et al. An empirical examination of the influence of information and source characteristics on consumers' adoption of online reviews[J].Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2017,9(1):75-94.
[33] BROOKS L, GHINEA G, CHEN S, et al. Usability and credibility evaluation of electronic governments:users' perspective[J]. Brunel University, 2010,10(1):1-380.
[34] 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.
[35] SANDERS W S. Identity, trust, and credibility online:evaluating contradictory user-generated information via the warranting principle[M]. California:University of Southern California,2012.
[36] SUNDAR S S, KNOBLOCH-WESTERWICK S, HASTALL M R. News cues:information scent and cognitive heuristics[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007,58(3):366-378.
[37] YANG H. Online news and the effects of heuristic cues on audiences' attitudes[J]. ETD archive, 2014, 8(23):1-89.
[38] MBIPOM G, HARPER S. The interplay between web aesthetics and accessibility[J]. Manchester eScholar,2013,7(21):1-8.
[39] JUNG E H, WALSH-CHILDERS K, KIM H S. Factors influencing the perceived credibility of diet-nutrition information Web sites[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2016, 58:37-47.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉