Effects of Positive Language and Profession on Trustworthiness and Credibility in Online Health Advice: Experimental Study

Abstract

Background When searching for health information, many people use the internet as their first source of information. In online health forums, for example, users post their questions and exchange health advice. In recent years, information givers from various professions have begun to use positive language (indicated by the frequent use of positively valenced adjectives) to communicate their information and persuade their audiences. Objective The goal of the current study was to answer the following research questions: (1) How does positive language, in comparison to neutral language, influence the trustworthiness of a person arguing in an online health forum and the credibility of their health claims; (2) How does working for a university, compared to working for a lobbying organization, influence the trustworthiness of a person arguing in an online health forum and the credibility of their health claims; and (3) Do the two factors of language style and professional affiliation interact with each other to influence trustworthiness and credibility judgments? Methods In a 2 × 2 between-subject experiment, 242 participants read a post from an online health forum and subsequently rated the trustworthiness of the forum post author and the credibility of their information. Within the post, the professional affiliation (scientist vs lobbyist) and language style (neutral vs positive) of the forum post author was varied. Results When the forum post author used a positive language style, they were perceived as less trustworthy (high Machiavellianism [P<.001; η2p=.076], low Integrity [P=.001; η2p=.045], and low Benevolence [P=.02; η2p=.025]) and their information was perceived as less credible (low Message Credibility [P=.001; η2p=.045]). The professional affiliation of the forum post author did not influence their trustworthiness or the credibility of their information. Conclusions When searching for health information, information seekers evaluate the language style of forum posts to decide whether forum post authors are trustworthy and their information is credible.

Eine Frage der Erwartungen?

“…Beispielsweise wurden im Kontext wissenschaftlicher Gesundheitsinformationen neutral formulierte Empfehlungen glaubhafter wahrgenommen als solche, die viele positive Adjektive enthielten (vgl. König und Jucks 2020 , S. 5). Die Teilnehmenden erwarten des Weiteren, dass in einer Expert*innendebatte ausgewogen und vielfältig debattiert wird, worunter sie auch Einblicke in methodische Prozesse und das Aufgreifen der Unsicherheit wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse verstehen.…”

The Development and Evaluation of an e-Learning Course That Promotes Digital Health Literacy in School-age Children: Pre-Post Measurement Study

“…Furthermore, digital health literacy has become an increasingly important topic because people regularly turn to the internet when searching for health information [ 8 - 12 ]. In such situations, people are often confronted with inaccurate online health information and therefore need the ability to evaluate the trustworthiness of information sources and the credibility of their information [ 10 , 13 - 18 ]. Teaching adequate evaluation strategies seems especially important because laypeople often base their trustworthiness judgments on factors like the enthusiasm of an information source and their tone of voice [ 19 ].…”

What Shapes Our Trust in Scientific Information? A Review of Factors Influencing Perceived Scientificness and Credibility

“…credibility assessmentfor example, a two-column text appears more scientific than a single-column one (Hahn et al, 2020). Names or titles increase perceived scientificness and credibility König & Jucks, 2020). …”