Source credibility

If a speaker displays characteristics of honesty, integrity, sincerity, and can show that they are trustworthy and ethical, the audience will be more inclined to believe the message being communicated to them, even if they do not remember every aspect of the interaction.

Although the joke may only be a small element of the entire speech, someone will recall it and share it with others and perhaps speak kindly of the speaker and wish to interact with that person again, or promise to purchase product or feel inclined to tell anyone who will listen about what they learned.

Lateral Reading is a strategy identified as essential for evaluating the credibility of digital information, as demonstrated by research from Wineburg and McGrew, which highlights its effectiveness in distinguishing reliable sources from misinformation.

Wineburg and McGrew’s research demonstrated that professional fact-checkers excelled in this technique, outperforming students and historians in identifying reliable sources.

[15] Carillo and Horning expanded on this by highlighting the strategy's application in educational contexts, where it serves as an effective method for teaching students how to navigate information online.

For instance, the credibility would be incredibly low if a recently published author walked on a stage as opposed to Stephen King gracing the place with his presence.

Recent research by Wineburg and McGrew (2019) emphasizes the importance of 'lateral reading', a method where evaluators leave a source to verify its claims using multiple external references.

This technique has proven to be effective in identifying bias and uncovering alternative motives, especially in interactions where initial judgments may need revision based on additional evidence.

For example, a teacher delivers a lecture and informs the students that the works of Gabriel García Márquez are not considered magical realism and uses one article in which to defend this argument to make it fit the speech.

The social psychologists John R. P. French and Bertram Raven introduced the five bases of power: Coercive, Reward, Legitimate, Referent, and Expert.

Coercive power is based on the perception that the persuading agent has the ability to provide negative results, such as punishment or other reprimand, for the target of the influence.

[32] This aligns with research suggesting that citing authorities in speeches that advocate a position makes little difference in shifting listener opinion.

One study found that random citizens who contributed to a blog increased their credibility over time, to the point that traditional media outlets quoted them as sources.

[32] Researchers like Paul Cook argue that misinformation has become a pervasive societal issue, comparable to a "hyperobject," a concept describing huge, complex problems that resist traditional solutions.

[38] Similarly, researchers Carillo and Horning advocate for teaching "lateral reading," a technique where readers cross-check multiple sources to verify information.

[39] Studies, such as those by McGrew, show that even brief interventions focused on these skills can significantly enhance students' ability to assess source credibility.

[40] These findings support the need for integrating digital literacy into educational curriculums to equip individuals with tools to navigate information.

The Media Credibility Index is a relatively new publication, produced annually by the Next Century Foundation (NCF), together with the International Council for Press and Broadcasting.

It is currently being developed to try and cover a wide range of publications, assessing them in terms of press freedom, accuracy, incitement, bias, sensitivity and transparency, awarding plus or minus points as is seen fit.

Points awarded are only based on items reported to the International Council for Press and Broadcasting that have been posted on the NCF media blogs.

Research by Westerman, Spence and Van Der Heide (2011) shows that there is a curvilinear effect for the number of followers, "such that having too many or too few connections results in lower judgments of expertise and trustworthiness."

Participants also indicated that the blog's message/content needed to be authentic, insightful, informative, consistent, accurate, timely, popular, fair, and focused.

Lu et al. (2023) conducted a study that investigated how attention to COVID-19 information and perceived source credibility affect the evaluation of government performance in Hubei province, China, using two waves of panel data from 1896 respondents.

Interestingly, higher perceived credibility of local institution sources negatively moderates the relationship between information attention and central government performance evaluation.

[57] A study conducted by Yiwei Xu, Drew Margolin, and Jeff Niederdeppe in 2020 investigated challenges in promoting measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination among U.S. parents.

Their experiment tested messages from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) aimed at enhancing credibility and reducing vaccine hesitancy.

While original hypotheses weren't supported, messages highlighting CDC's expertise increased perceived goodwill and trustworthiness, particularly among initially hesitant parents.

This research offers insights applicable to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, suggesting similar strategies could bolster public trust and increase information source credibility during health crises.

By editing articles, students learn to recognize biases, add reliable academic sources, and critically assess the credibility of existing content.

Wikipedia's transparent editing process, coupled with its emphasis on sourcing, provides an ideal platform for practicing skills, like lateral reading.