Tentamen (uitwerkingen)

The Quality and Helpfulness of Answers to Eating Disorder Questions in Yahoo! Answers: Teens Speak Out

0 keer verkocht

Vak
Eating Disorder

Instelling
Eating Disorder

with teens was conducted, using a selection of question and answer sets drawn from Yahoo! Answers, a Social Q&A service, on the topic of eating disorders. Patterns to emerge from this study contribute to a general understanding of how young people use networked, peer-to peer platforms for...

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 2 van de 10 pagina's

Bekijk voorbeeld

Geupload op 1 augustus 2024
Aantal pagina's 10
Geschreven in 2024/2025
Type Tentamen (uitwerkingen)
Bevat Vragen en antwoorden

the quality and helpfulness of answers to eating

Instelling Eating Disorder
Vak Eating Disorder

Volgen

TIFFACADEMICS

Lid sinds 2 jaar 605 documenten verkocht

€15,20

In winkelwagen

Op verlanglijstje

100% tevredenheidsgarantie
Direct beschikbaar na je betaling
Lees online óf als PDF
Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten

The Quality and Helpfulness of Answers to Eating Disorder Questions in Yahoo! Answers : Teens Speak Out Leanne Bowler University of Pittsburgh Jocelyn Monahan University of Pittsburgh Wei Jeng University of Pittsburgh Jung Sun Oh University of Pittsburgh Daqing He University of Pittsburgh ABSTRACT This research project investigated teens’ perspectiv es on the quality and helpfulness of health information about eating disorders found on Yahoo! Answers , a Social Q&A site. A mixed methods approach was applied, using survey methods and semi -structured group interviews to gather data for the project. Eighteen teens completed a web -based questionnaire using sample question/answer set s about eating disorders from Yahoo! Answers . The teen participants were asked to choose one answer as “best” and then rank its credibility, accuracy, reliability, and helpfulness. Open -ended questions allowed teens to explain the rationale for their choic e of “best” answer and to discuss why the chosen answer might (or might not) be helpful for teens . Following the questionnaire, six teens participated in a focus group interview using a semi -structured format that asked open -ended “why” questions in order to draw forth comments on criteria for evaluating the quality and and helpfulness of health information in Yahoo! Answers , as well as to reveal aspects of critical thinking. Find ings suggest that , 1) teens make a distinction between health information in S ocial Q&A that is credible versus that which is helpful , 2) they value health information that isn’t from a credible source if it addresses other needs, and, 3) when making judgments about health information on th e Web , they apply an array of heuristics re lated to information quality, opinion, communication style, emotional support and encouragement , guidance, personal experience , and professional expertise . Keywords Teens, Social Q&A, Yahoo! Answers , Credibility, Information Quality, Eating Disorders, Hea lth Information Behavior. INTRODUCTION The Internet has become a valuable source of health information for young people. According to a 2010 study by the Pew Research Center 31% of teens got “health, diet, or physical fitness information” online, and 17% used the internet to research more sensitive health topics such as “drug use, sexual health, and depression.” Older tee ns – particularly girls - and teens from lower -income families are the most likely to seek out sensitive health information online (Lenh art et al., 2010, 26). Health information presents a particularly interesti ng case for study because of the relationship between people and their doctors. In a 2008 survey, although 50% of people reported they would prefer to go to their physicians firs t, only 11% actually went to their physicians first – 48% went online before consulting a physician, using “information triage” to create a health plan for themselves incorporating both doctors’ expertise and self -driven online research (Eysenbach 2008, 125) . It is known that teens who suffer from eating disorders are reluctant to speak directl y to a medical professional about the extent of their sympto ms or to seek diagnosis or treatment (Katzman et al., 2010) and the Web might be the option such teens choos e when seeking health information. Google , Facebook , and Youtube are common places that young people go to find health information, although teens might be hesitant to discuss sensitive information on social media services (Evers et al. 2013, 267). Social Q&A services (such as Yahoo! Answers ), are widely used and combine personalization with a greater sense of anonymity and a unique space for communicating with peers on sensitive health topics (Harper et al., 2009; Choi et al., 2013). A key element of info rmation quality is credibility. Nowhere is this more true than with health information on the Internet, where the credibility of the source helps to assure the accuracy and trustworthiness of complex information that the average person cannot on their own assess. In the particular environment of Social Q&A, where people can provide health information anonymously, how might teens make judgments about what is “good” health information and what is helpful ? And h ow do teens interpret credibility, a concept that permeate s the discourse on health information, but usually from the stance of information and health professionals and not young people? To discover what factors contribute to teen interpretations of the quality of health information, a mixed methods stu dy ASIST 2015,November 6 -10, 2015, St. Louis, MO, USA. Author s Reta in Copyright. with teens was conducted , using a selection of question and answer sets drawn from Yahoo! Answers , a Social Q&A service, on the topic of eating disorders . Patterns to emerge from this study contribute to a g eneral understanding of how young people use networked, peer -to-
peer platforms for seeking health information and further, how they make judgments about the credibility and helpfulness of health information online . Figure 1 presents a screen image from Yahoo! Answers . BACKGROUND While credibility i s defined differently across research fields, the most common theme across definitions is believability . Work on credibility judgments may attend to the credibility of the source, or the information structure and content (Hilligoss & Rieh 2008, 1468). A nu mber of frameworks for understanding the different levels at wh ich credibility operates have been proposed. Hilligoss & Rieh (2008) found that credibility operates on three levels: the conceptualization of credibility; heuristics that help guide credibilit y decisions; and credibility judgments based on specific cues (1473). Flanagin & Metzger (2010) ident ified heuristic, analytic, and social strategies used in making credibility decisions. Cognitive heuristics in credibility assessment suggest people balance the cognitive demand with the efficiency of decision making, guiding deci sions about credibility based on a series of adaptive “mental shortcuts” (Metzger et al. 2010, 416 -417). Recently, the research focus on information credibil ity has started to shif t to be more inclusive of different kinds of influences over information behavior, because paradigms like search contexts and social evaluation have become imperative to understanding how people judge the quality of online information (Eysenbach 2008; Gass er et al. 2010; Metzger et al. 2010). Particular emphasis has been p laced on the social aspects of credibility assessments; user -
generated content is often socially evaluated through “feedback systems, testimonials, and reputation syst ems” and other cues t hat aid in credibility assessments (Metzger et al. 2010, 420). This is particularly true on social quest ion and answer sites such as Yahoo! Answers (Jeon & Rieh, 2013; Matthews, 2015). Credibility research has also faced some methodological criticism, as o ften the gap between researchers’ and subjects’ perceptions of the definition and importance of “credibility” can undermine the usefulness of research (Gasser et al. 2010, 20 -21). Flanagin and Metzger (2010) use “believability” as a metric for young people in their reporting on credibility. Young people are generally willing to trust informati on they find online, but are aware of issues of credibility. Flanagin & Metzger (2010) surveyed over 2,500 Americ an youth between 11 and 18 and found that almost 90% of respondents thought some or a lot of online informatio n was believable, and 79% said they consider whether to believe information they find online (31 -32). They also found that young people were generally somewhat like ly to believe health information th ey found online, depending on experience; those who identified as technically capable also reported finding online information more credible, while those who had bad past experiences with online information found it less credible. Young people reported the y were more likely to use analytic (e.g., fact checking and information gathering) strategies to assess credibility than heuristic and social strategies, although many students identified “social endorsement and reputation” as important to credibility deci sions along with web security and source authority (Metzger 2010, 51). As with adults, the visual design of websites also influences perceptions of credibility (Fidel et al, 1999; Agosto, 2002a, 2002b; Fogg et al, 2003). There is a significant amount of li terature dedicated specifically to credibility assessments of health informa tion online that propose a number of different factors. Metzger & Flanagin (2013) suggest that decisions about credi bility are made based on cognitive heuristics; a number of facto rs Figure 1. Example of a “best answer” in Yahoo ! Answers, as chosen by the asker

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper TIFFACADEMICS. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €15,20. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 68175 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Begin nu gratis

Tentamen (uitwerkingen)

The Quality and Helpfulness of Answers to Eating Disorder Questions in Yahoo! Answers: Teens Speak Out

Document informatie

Onderwerpen

Geschreven voor

Verkoper

Ontvangen beoordelingen

Voorbeeld van de inhoud