Two online experiments examined whether news labels attract reader attention and affect news story credibility. Both studies showed that labels garner little attention from newsreaders and do not influence perceptions of news story credibility. However, Study 2 demonstrated that a label that explained the type of news story produced better recall of labels and more accurate recommendations of what the label should be. Findings suggest that if labels act as cognitive heuristics, they are weak ones.
AmazeenMAMuddimanAR (2018) Saving media or trading trust?Digital Journalism6(2): 176–195. DOI: 10.1080/21670811.2017.1293488.
2.
AmazeenMAWojdynskiBW (2018) The effects of disclosure format on native advertising recognition and audience perceptions of legacy and online news publishers. Journalism1–20. Epub ahead of print 7February2018. DOI: 10.1177/1464884918754829.
3.
AmazeenMAWojdynskiBW (2019) Reducing native advertising deception: Revisiting the antecedents and consequences of persuasion knowledge in digital news contexts. Mass Communication and Society22(2): 222–247. DOI: 10.1080/15205436.2018.1530792.
BhandariM (2018) Social media cues and news site name: What do they mean for online news perception?Newspaper Research Journal39(2): 169–179. DOI: 10.1177/0739532918775699.
6.
ChaikenS (1980) Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology39(5): 752–766.
CurryALStroudNJ (2019) The effects of journalistic transparency on credibility assessments and engagement intentions. Journalism: Theory, Practice and Critism. Online First Advance Publication. DOI: 10.1177/1464884919850387.
9.
FoggBJCuellarGDanielsonD (2009) Motivating, influencing, and persuading users: An introduction to captology. In: SearsAJackoJA (eds) Human Computer Interaction Fundamentals. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Inc, pp.109–122.
HoltonAAChyiHI (2011) News overload and the overloaded consumer. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking15(11): 619–624. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2011.0610.
JohnsonTJKayeB K (2014) Credibility of social network sites for political information among politically interested Internet users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication19(4): 957–974. DOI: 10.1111/jcc4.12084.
14.
JohnsonTJKayeBK (2016) Some like it lots: The influence of interactivity and reliance on credibility. Computers in Human Behavior61: 136–145. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.012.
KarlssonMClerwallCNordL (2014) You ain’t seen nothing yet: Transparency’s (lack of) effect on source and message credibility. Journalism Studies15(5): 668–678. DOI: 10.1080/1461670X.2014.886837.
17.
KarlssonMClerwallCNordL (2017) Do not stand corrected: Transparency and users’ attitudes to inaccurate news and corrections in online journlaism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly94(1): 148–167. DOI: 10.1177/1077699016654680.
18.
KohringMMatthesJ (2007) Trust in news media: Development and validation of a multidimensional scale. Communication Research34(2): 231–252. DOI: 10.1177/0093650206298071
19.
KrouwerSPoelsKPaulussenS (2019) Moving towards transparency for native advertisements on news websites: A test of more detailed disclosures. International Journal of Advertising, 1–20. Epub ahead of print 20February2019. DOI: 10.1080/02650487.2019.1575107.
20.
LasorsaD (2012) Transparency and other journalistic norms on Twitter: The role of gender. Journalism Studies13(3): 402–417. DOI: 10.1080/1461670X.2012.657909.
21.
LinXSpencePR (2018) Identity on social networks as a cue: Identity, retweets, and credibility. Communication Studies69(5): 461–482. DOI: 10.1080/10510974.2018.1489295.
MessingSWestwoodSJ (2014) Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research41(8): 1042–1063. DOI: 10.1177/0093650212466406.
24.
MetzgerMJFlanaginAJ (2013) Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics. Journal of Pragmatics59: 210–220.
25.
MeyerP (1988) Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism Quarterly65(3): 567–574. DOI: 10.1177/107769908806500301.
NewhagenJE (1994) Effects of televised government censorship disclaimers on memory and through elaboration during the gulf war. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media38(3): 339–351. DOI: 10.1080/08838159409364269.
28.
ShahDVMcLeodDMGotliebMR, et al. (2009) Framing and agenda setting. In: NabiRLOliverMB (eds) The Sage Handbook of Media Processes and Effects. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, (pp.83–98).
SundarSS (2008) The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In: MetzgerMJFlanaginAJ (eds) Digital Media, Youth and Credibility. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, (pp.73–100).
31.
SundarSSKnobloch-WesterwickSHastallMR (2007) News cues: Information scent and cognitive heuristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(3): 366–378. DOI: 10.1002/asi.20511.
32.
TewksburyDJensenJCoeK (2011) Video news releases and the public: The impact of source labeling on the perceived credibility of television news. Journal of Communication61(2): 328–348. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01542.x
ThorsonKVragaEEkdaleB (2010) Credibility in context: How uncivil online commentary affects news credibility. Mass Communication and Society13(3): 289–313.
35.
WojdynskiBWEvansNJ (2016) Going native: Effects of disclosure position and language on the recognition and evaluation of online native advertising. Journal of Advertising45(2): 157–168. DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2015.1115380.
36.
YaleRNJensenJDCarcioppoloN, et al. (2015) Examining first-and second-order factor structures for news credibility. Communication Methods and Measures9(3): 152–169. DOI: 10.1080/19312458.2015.1061652.
