Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size

Social media self-efficacy and information evaluation online

“…Although early work in this domain primarily examined face-to-face contexts and the factors influencing the credibility of human sources (see Wilson & Sherrell, 1993 for a review), recent work has naturally migrated to online environments by examining a range of phenomena, from the design elements that bolster a website's perceived credibility (Fogg et al, 2001), to factors influencing the credibility of blogs (Kaye & Johnson, 2011), to the elements of credible online product reviews (Willemsen, Neijens, & Bronner, 2012). In part, the motivations for examining credibility online stem from the considerable differences in this context that obscure how people have traditionally evaluated information and source credibility (Metzger, Flanagin, Eyal, Lemus, & McCann, 2003), coupled with the serious consequences of inappropriately relying on misinformation today, given its prevalence and prominence (Horrigan & Rainie, 2006).…”

Influence Of Social Communications On Changes In Marketing Concept

“…At that time, the main aim of social communication was the development of human spiritual and creative potentials, and since then, despite the failure of Enlightenment ideas, which have not changed public consciousness for the better (Adam'yanz, 2009), social communications have invariably been accompanying human activities, mutating due to technological progress and constantly gaining new, more and more diverse forms and means. The efficiency of mass communications was studied in (Lasswell, 1948;Weiss, 1969;Schramm & Roberts, 1971;Williams, Rice, & Rogers, 1988;Wilson & Sherrell, 1993;Preiss, Gayle, Burrell, Allen, & Bryant, 2006;Neuman & Guggenheim, 2011 and others). The influence of various media and communications on mass behavior is studied in (Rogers, 1986;Webster, 1989;Wilson & Sherrell, 1993;Williams, Strover, & Grant, 1994;Shanahan & Morgan, 1999;de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006;Hoffman, Glynn, Huge, Sietman, & Thomson, 2007;Rahman & Saeed, 2013 and others).…”

“…The efficiency of mass communications was studied in (Lasswell, 1948;Weiss, 1969;Schramm & Roberts, 1971;Williams, Rice, & Rogers, 1988;Wilson & Sherrell, 1993;Preiss, Gayle, Burrell, Allen, & Bryant, 2006;Neuman & Guggenheim, 2011 and others). The influence of various media and communications on mass behavior is studied in (Rogers, 1986;Webster, 1989;Wilson & Sherrell, 1993;Williams, Strover, & Grant, 1994;Shanahan & Morgan, 1999;de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006;Hoffman, Glynn, Huge, Sietman, & Thomson, 2007;Rahman & Saeed, 2013 and others). However, the influence of social communications transformations, caused by globalization processes, on the development of marketing concepts key principles was not considered in literature.…”

“…1 -"modifying" relation from the spontaneous nature of market economy to science and art). At this period (from the late 1980's to the end of 2000's), mass social communications were actively studied (Rogers, 1986;Williams et al, 1988;Webster, 1989;Wilson & Sherrell, 1993;Williams et al, 1994;Shanahan & Morgan, 1999;Scheufele, 2002;O'Keefe, 2003;Preiss et al, 2006;Hoffman et al, 2007;Rahman & Saeed, 2013;and many others). And as a result, the mechanisms for influence and social manipulation of masses, for the imposition of certain stereotypes and opinions and the suppression of others opinions have been revealed.…”

Digital Media and Perceptions of Source Credibility in Political Communication

“…That study manipulated the source credibility of the communicator and found that less credible sources were perceived as having given a worse presentation than higher credibility speakers and were rated as less fair and honest, even though the message was held constant across conditions. In the decades that followed, scholars concluded that source credibility is positively associated with persuasion (Albarracín and Vargas, 2010;Wilson and Sherrell, 1993), an effect moderated by factors including issue involvement, timing of source identification, and how closely the position advocated by the source matches the receiver's position and his or her own expectations (O'Keefe, 2002; see also Pornpitakpan, 2004). Some of this work looked specifically at how source credibility affects political persuasion, finding that greater political persuasion results from high-rather than low-credibility sources (Chebat, Filiatrault, and Perrien, 1990; see also Morton and Villegas, 2005), and that moderators such as issue involvement and the alignment between receivers' beliefs/expectations and the position advocated affect political persuasion (Iyengar and Simon, 2000;Iyengar and Valentino, 2000;Nelson and Garst, 2005).…”