Cues of credibility and price performance of life insurance comparison Web sites

Abstract

An array of Web sites is available to help consumers find the best deals on products and services. While these sites have the potential to save time and money by directly comparing alternatives, consumers still have the task of assessing the credibility of these comparison sites. Experts recommend that consumers look for certain key disclosures or “cues” to assess a site's credibility (e.g., a site's identity, the currency and authoritativeness of its information, its sponsors and business relationships, and its privacy practices). Focusing on 32 life insurance comparison Web sites, this research found that these recommended cues are often not present on Web sites and, when they are, do not seem to predict a site's ability to deliver the lowest‐priced quotes for term life insurance policies.

Trust in Prescription Drug Brand Websites: Website Trust Cues, Attitude Toward the Website, and Behavioral Intentions

“…Website trust cues refer to website content features that can function as heuristic cues or signals for consumers to use to determine whether or not to trust an unfamiliar website (Mayer, Huh, & Cude, 2005). For example, Consumer WebWatch (2002) advises consumers to look for information about website identity, advertiser and sponsor relations, information currency, and privacy practices.…”

“…For example, Consumer WebWatch (2002) advises consumers to look for information about website identity, advertiser and sponsor relations, information currency, and privacy practices. Trust cues take many different forms, including website identity information (e.g., site ownership, "About Us," contact information), third-party seals of approval or endorsements (e.g., BBBOnLine, TRUSTe, Verisign, Hackers Safe), information currency (e.g., last updated dates), presence of ads or commercial relationships to advertisers, privacy policy statement, warranty statement, links to other wellknown websites, and presence of consumer feedback features (Aiken & Boush, 2006;Consumer WebWatch, 2002;Cook & Luo, 2003;Lee & Huh, 2010;Mayer et al, 2005;Miyazaki & Krishnamurthy, 2002;Princeton Research Associates, 2002;Rifon, LaRose, & Choi, 2005). Existing studies have not extensively tested all of these trust cues and empirical evidence for the effects of different cues on consumers' perceived website trust has been rather mixed.…”

“…First, through an extensive and thorough search using the existing literature and popular search engines, a total of 108 DTC websites were identified. A coding scheme was developed to identify website trust cues based on previous literature, and on recommendations by health professionals, information search experts, and consumer organizations (e.g., Fogg et al, 2003;Mayer et al, 2005;Medical Library Association, 2003;Princeton Survey Research Associates, 2005). Table 1 presents items representing various website trust cues that were included in the coding scheme.…”

Factors Influencing the Perception of Website Privacy Trustworthiness and Users' Purchasing Intentions: The Behavioral Economics Perspective

“…Website quality Although privacy and security policies, and seals are designed to directly influence privacy perceptions, they have been shown to be more effective when combined with other, more peripheral, cues, such as brand image and website quality [91], [98]. The appeal of a website's design is related to the visual presentation and structure of the website [10], which is indicative of website quality [152] and company expertise and professionalism, and develops trusting beliefs [31], [96], [146]. Egger [36] assumed that a consumer's trust in online business starts to form even before any online interaction has taken place.…”

“…They reduce uncertainty [46] and concerns [53], and increase perceived security control [122]. Displaying information about the company on the website, especially related to its offline presence (e.g., physical address, contact details), reduces the uncertainty regarding the otherwise faceless e-commerce activity [76], [96], [83], [10]. We included the feedback aspects in the model, because customer reviews [80], [93], third-party assessments (e.g., rating services [138]), perceptions of social presence [47], [29], [57], and, in particular, word-of-mouth within social networks [83] have been shown to increase trust.…”