extended-abstract

Authority vs. peer: how interface cues influence users

Authors:

S. Shyam Sundar,

Anne Oeldorf-HirschAuthors Info & Claims

CHI EA '09: CHI '09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Pages 4231 - 4236

https://doi.org/10.1145/1520340.1520645

Published: 04 April 2009 Publication History

Abstract

From the most e-mailed stories of the day to the most favorite stocks of the week, Web interfaces are rife with cues conveying other users' ratings and reviews of products and services. Do these peer opinions indeed affect our decisions? And if so, are they as strong in their impact as cues conveying authority/expertise (i.e., high source credibility)? We explored these questions through an experiment (N = 243) guided by the heuristic-systematic model in social psychology. Bandwagon/peer cues are generally more persuasive, but when they are inconsistent, the authority cue influences decisions. In general, task involvement promotes systematic processing of these cues. Interestingly, we found no difference in perceived authority between CNET Editor's Choice seal and a seal from a fictitious "authority" (Zig!), among other indications of heuristic processing. We discuss design implications for user interfaces in general and recommendation agents in particular.

References

[1]

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (1986), 1173--1182.

[2]

Braunsberger, K. The effects of source and product characteristics on persuasion. Dissertation Abstracts International: Humanities and Social Science, 57, 6--A (1996), 2575.

[3]

Chaiken, S. Heuristic and systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (1980), 752--766.

[4]

Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43, 3(2006), 345--354.

[5]

Hu, M., & Liu, B. Mining and summarizing customer reviews. Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (2004), 168--177, Seattle, WA.

Digital Library

[6]

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approach. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown, 1981.

[7]

Reimer, T., Mata, R., & Stoecklin, M. The use of heuristics in persuasion: deriving cues on source expertise from argument quality. Current Research in Social Psychology, 10, 6 (2004), 69--84.

[8]

Senecal, S., & Nantel, J. The influence of online product recommendations on consumers' online choices. Journal of Retailing, 80, 2 (2004), 159--169.

[9]

Smith, D, Menon, S., & Sivakumar, K. Online peer and editorial recommendations, trust, and choice in virtual markets. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19, 3 (2005), 15--37.

[10]

Sundar, S. S. The MAIN Model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73--100). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2007.

[11]

Sundar, S. S., Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Hastall, M. R. News cues: Information scent and cognitive heuristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58, 3 (2007), 366--378.

Digital Library

[12]

Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication 51, 1 (2001), 52--72.

[13]

Sundar, S. S., Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., & Xu, Q. The bandwagon effect of collaborative filtering technology. WIP presented in ACM SIGCHI (2008).

[14]

Surowiecki, J. The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations. New York: Doubleday, 2004.

Digital Library

[15]

Sunstein, C. R. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2007.

Digital Library

Cited By

Malhotra PShin S(2025)Understanding information credibility evaluation on bounded social media places: A mixed methods studyCommunication Monographs10.1080/03637751.2025.2455714(1-24)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2025.2455714
Kim DKuru OZeng JKim S(2023)Fostering mask-wearing with virality metrics and social media literacy: evidence from the U.S. and KoreaFrontiers in Psychology10.3389/fpsyg.2023.115106114Online publication date: 24-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1151061
Wang SChu THuang G(2023)Do Bandwagon Cues Affect Credibility Perceptions? A Meta-Analysis of the Experimental EvidenceCommunication Research10.1177/0093650222112439550:6(720-744)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502221124395
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Authority vs. peer: how interface cues influence users
1. Information systems

Recommendations

Integrating website usability with the electronic commerce acceptance model

This paper analyses the role of website usability in a B2C electronic commerce environment. The authors identify dimensions of website usability that have been examined in the literature and integrate those usability dimensions within an electronic ...
Software Engineering for User Interfaces

The discipline of software engineering can be extended in a natural way to deal with the issues raised by a systematic approach to the design of human-machine interfaces. Two main points are made: that the user should be treated as part of the system ...
Smile-Encouraging Digital Appliances

Can technology influence people's mood? This department explores how we might induce emotion through the design of products and user interfaces. The authors describe different ideas and prototypes for motivating people to smile, which they argue will ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI EA '09: CHI '09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 2009

2470 pages

ISBN:9781605582474

DOI:10.1145/1520340

General Chair:
Dan R. Olsen
Brigham Young University
,
Program Chairs:
Ken Hinckley
Microsoft Research
,
Meredith Ringel Morris
Microsoft Research
,
Scott Hudson
Carnegie Mellon University
,
Saul Greenberg
University of Calgary

Copyright © 2009 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s).

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 April 2009

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Extended-abstract

Conference

CHI '09

Sponsor:

CHI '09: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 4 - 9, 2009

MA, Boston, USA

Acceptance Rates

CHI EA '09 Paper Acceptance Rate 385 of 1,130 submissions, 34%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CHI 2025

Sponsor:
sigchi

ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 26 - May 1, 2025

Yokohama , Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

58
Total Citations
View Citations
2,201
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)163
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12

Reflects downloads up to 01 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Malhotra PShin S(2025)Understanding information credibility evaluation on bounded social media places: A mixed methods studyCommunication Monographs10.1080/03637751.2025.2455714(1-24)Online publication date: 13-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2025.2455714
Kim DKuru OZeng JKim S(2023)Fostering mask-wearing with virality metrics and social media literacy: evidence from the U.S. and KoreaFrontiers in Psychology10.3389/fpsyg.2023.115106114Online publication date: 24-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1151061
Wang SChu THuang G(2023)Do Bandwagon Cues Affect Credibility Perceptions? A Meta-Analysis of the Experimental EvidenceCommunication Research10.1177/0093650222112439550:6(720-744)Online publication date: 19-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502221124395
Park SJung J(2023)The interplay between social media virality metrics and message framing in influence perception of pro-environmental messages and behavioral intentionsTelematics and Informatics10.1016/j.tele.2023.10194778:COnline publication date: 1-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.tele.2023.101947
Elsantil YEid RBedair K(2022)The Impact of Credibility Attributes on Consumer Intention to Adopt Information on Social Networking SitesInternational Journal of Online Marketing10.4018/IJOM.29939312:1(1-22)Online publication date: 22-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.4018/IJOM.299393
Meinert JKrämer N(2022)How the expertise heuristic accelerates decision-making and credibility judgments in social media by means of effort reductionPLOS ONE10.1371/journal.pone.026442817:3(e0264428)Online publication date: 16-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264428
Xiao X(2022)Let’s verify and rectify! Examining the nuanced influence of risk appraisal and norms in combatting misinformationNew Media & Society10.1177/1461444822110494826:7(3786-3809)Online publication date: 28-Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221104948
Lee BCho E(2022)The Relative Effects of Trust and Distrust on Information Acceptance from Mobile Word-of-Mouth and the Moderating Role of Event Significance and the Aggregate PreferenceInternational Journal of Human–Computer Interaction10.1080/10447318.2022.204191039:3(628-642)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2022
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2041910
Santia MPingree RBryanov KWatson B(2021)Agenda Setting by News and by the Audience in a News Portal Panel ExperimentMass Communication and Society10.1080/15205436.2021.199947725:4(554-577)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2021
https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2021.1999477
Mingolla CHudders LCauberghe V(2020)Framing Descriptive Norms as Self-Benefit Versus Environmental Benefit: Self-Construal’s Moderating Impact in Promoting Smart Energy DevicesSustainability10.3390/su1202061412:2(614)Online publication date: 14-Jan-2020
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020614
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten