This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Quality/Credibility of eHealth Information and Trust Issues (485) Information Quality in Digital Media (316)

Published on in Vol 20, No 1 (2018): January

How Experts’ Use of Medical Technical Jargon in Different Types of Online Health Forums Affects Perceived Information Credibility: Randomized Experiment With Laypersons

How Experts’ Use of Medical Technical Jargon in Different Types of Online Health Forums Affects Perceived Information Credibility: Randomized Experiment With Laypersons

How Experts’ Use of Medical Technical Jargon in Different Types of Online Health Forums Affects Perceived Information Credibility: Randomized Experiment With Laypersons

Authors of this article:

Maria Zimmermann1 Author Orcid Image ;   Regina Jucks1 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (44) Tweetations (20) Metrics

Journals

  1. Waring M, Jake-Schoffman D, Holovatska M, Mejia C, Williams J, Pagoto S. Social Media and Obesity in Adults: a Review of Recent Research and Future Directions. Current Diabetes Reports 2018;18(6) View
  2. Zimmermann M, Jucks R. Investigating the Role of Communication for Information Seekers’ Trust-Related Evaluations of Health Videos on the Web: Content Analysis, Survey Data, and Experiment. Interactive Journal of Medical Research 2018;7(2):e10282 View
  3. Kienhues D, Jucks R, Bromme R. Sealing the gateways for post-truthism: Reestablishing the epistemic authority of science. Educational Psychologist 2020;55(3):144 View
  4. König L, Jucks R. Effects of Positive Language and Profession on Trustworthiness and Credibility in Online Health Advice: Experimental Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2020;22(3):e16685 View
  5. Xu Z, Ellis L, Umphrey L. The Easier the Better? Comparing the Readability and Engagement of Online Pro- and Anti-Vaccination Articles. Health Education & Behavior 2019;46(5):790 View
  6. Nieroda M, Lophatananon A, McMillan B, Chen L, Hughes J, Daniels R, Clark J, Rogers S, Muir K. Online Decision Support Tool for Personalized Cancer Symptom Checking in the Community (REACT): Acceptability, Feasibility, and Usability Study. JMIR Cancer 2018;4(2):e10073 View
  7. Witchel H, Thompson G, Jones C, Westling C, Romero J, Nicotra A, Maag B, Critchley H. Spelling Errors and Shouting Capitalization Lead to Additive Penalties to Trustworthiness of Online Health Information: Randomized Experiment With Laypersons. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2020;22(6):e15171 View
  8. Zimmermann M, Jucks R. With a View to the Side: YouTube’s Sidebar and YouTuber’s Linguistic Style as Hints for Trust-Related Evaluations. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 2019;35(14):1279 View
  9. Kranzbühler A, Kleijnen M, Verlegh P, Teerling M. When Similarity Beats Expertise—Differential Effects of Patient and Expert Ratings on Physician Choice: Field and Experimental Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2019;21(6):e12454 View
  10. Yavary A, Sajedi H, Saniee Abadeh M. Information verification in social networks based on user feedback and news agencies. Social Network Analysis and Mining 2020;10(1) View
  11. König L, Jucks R. Influence of Enthusiastic Language on the Credibility of Health Information and the Trustworthiness of Science Communicators: Insights From a Between-Subject Web-Based Experiment. Interactive Journal of Medical Research 2019;8(3):e13619 View
  12. Xu Z. I don’t understand you but I trust you: using computer-aided text analysis to examine medical terminology use and engagement of vaccine online articles. Journal of Communication in Healthcare 2021;14(1):61 View
  13. Loda T, Erschens R, Junne F, Stengel A, Zipfel S, Herrmann-Werner A. Undergraduate Medical Students’ Search for Health Information Online: Explanatory Cross-Sectional Study. JMIR Medical Informatics 2020;8(3):e16279 View
  14. König L, Jucks R. Hot topics in science communication: Aggressive language decreases trustworthiness and credibility in scientific debates. Public Understanding of Science 2019;28(4):401 View
  15. Chi Y, He D, Jeng W. Laypeople's source selection in online health information‐seeking process. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2020;71(12):1484 View
  16. Hendriks F, Mayweg-Paus E, Felton M, Iordanou K, Jucks R, Zimmermann M. Constraints and Affordances of Online Engagement With Scientific Information—A Literature Review. Frontiers in Psychology 2020;11 View
  17. Cerdan Chiscano M, Jiménez-Zarco A. Towards an Inclusive Museum Management Strategy. An Exploratory Study of Consumption Experience in Visitors with Disabilities. The Case of the CosmoCaixa Science Museum. Sustainability 2021;13(2):660 View
  18. Zimmermann M, Mayweg-Paus E. The role of collaborative argumentation in future teachers' selection of online information. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2021;35(2-3):185 View
  19. Dawson R, Lawrence K, Gibbs S, Davis V, Mele C, Murillo C. “I Felt The Connection”: A Qualitative Exploration of Standardized Patients’ Experiences in a Delivering Bad News Scenario. Clinical Simulation in Nursing 2021;55:52 View
  20. Boyce L, Harun A, Prybutok G, Prybutok V. Exploring the factors in information seeking behavior: a perspective from multinational COPD online forums. Health Promotion International 2022;37(2) View
  21. Klatt E. The Human Interface of Biomedical Informatics. Journal of Pathology Informatics 2018;9(1):30 View
  22. Bagla P, Kumar K. Evaluating Consumer Behavior to Identify Significant Factors Influencing Trust in Web-based Health Information. International Journal of Next-Generation Computing 2022 View
  23. Shan Y, Ji M, Xie W, Qian X, Li R, Zhang X, Hao T. Language Use in Conversational Agent–Based Health Communication: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2022;24(7):e37403 View
  24. Schneider J, Rosman T, Kelava A, Merk S. Do Open-Science Badges Increase Trust in Scientists Among Undergraduates, Scientists, and the Public?. Psychological Science 2022;33(9):1588 View
  25. Mayweg-Paus E, Zimmermann M, Lefke C. “You Are Not Alone”–Opportunities and Challenges for University Students’ Collaborative Engagement When Dealing With Online Information About COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology 2021;12 View
  26. Liu X, Lin S, Jiang S, Chen M, Li J. Social support acquisition in online health communities: a social capital perspective. Internet Research 2023;33(2):664 View
  27. Fisher K, Haegeli P, Mair P. Travel and terrain advice statements in public avalanche bulletins: a quantitative analysis of who uses this information, what makes it useful, and how it can be improved for users. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 2022;22(6):1973 View
  28. Plessis A, van Rooyen D, ten Ham-Baloyi W. Screening and managing women with chorioamnionitis in resource-constrained healthcare settings: Evidence-based recommendations. Midwifery 2022;107:103287 View
  29. Hubner A, Bond R. I am a scientist . . . Ask Me Anything: Examining differences between male and female scientists participating in a Reddit AMA session. Public Understanding of Science 2022;31(4):458 View
  30. Peng W, Lim S, Meng J. Persuasive strategies in online health misinformation: a systematic review. Information, Communication & Society 2023;26(11):2131 View
  31. Petrič G, Cugmas M, Petrič R, Atanasova S. The quality of informational social support in online health communities: A content analysis of cancer-related discussions. DIGITAL HEALTH 2023;9:205520762311556 View
  32. Zhao W, Meng K, Sun L, Ma J, Jia Z. Language style and recognition of the answers in health Q&A community: Moderating effects of medical terminology. Journal of Information Science 2023:016555152311713 View
  33. Chen Y, Lin H, Zhang J, Zhao Y. Online health information consumers’ learning across health-related search tasks from the perspective of retrieval platform switching. Journal of Information Science 2023:016555152311699 View
  34. Giles H, Edwards A, Walther J. Communication accommodation theory: Past accomplishments, current trends, and future prospects. Language Sciences 2023;99:101571 View
  35. Liao D, Yan J, Wilson S. How Does Physician (Non)accommodation Affect Patient Behavioral Intention? Using a Web-Based Experiment to Examine Indirect Effects of Language Type on Behavioral Intention Through Goal Inferences and Source Appraisals. Journal of Health Communication 2023;28(9):585 View
  36. Kavanagh E, Chur-Hansen A, Ferencz N. A critical analysis of online social support for young people experiencing chronic pain. Australian Journal of Psychology 2023;75(1) View
  37. Dayton Z, Dragojevic M. Effects of Jargon and Source Accent on Receptivity to Science Communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 2024;43(1):104 View
  38. van Nooijen C, de Koning B, Bramer W, Isahakyan A, Asoodar M, Kok E, van Merrienboer J, Paas F. A Cognitive Load Theory Approach to Understanding Expert Scaffolding of Visual Problem-Solving Tasks: A Scoping Review. Educational Psychology Review 2024;36(1) View
  39. Zhao Y, Zhang L, Zeng C, Chen Y, Lu W, Song N. Factors influencing online health information credibility: a meta-analysis. Aslib Journal of Information Management 2024 View
  40. Sparks J, Waddell T. Easy to read, easy to judge: Assessing readability as a heuristic for credibility in news. Newspaper Research Journal 2024;45(2):229 View
  41. Nesset V, Davis E, Vanderschantz N, Stewart-Robertson O. APRD: action partnership research design: reimagining the role of the user in library and information science research. Journal of Documentation 2024 View
  42. He W, Chima S, Emery J, Manski-Nankervis J, Williams I, Hunter B, Nelson C, Martinez-Gutierrez J. Perceptions of primary care patients on the use of electronic clinical decision support tools to facilitate health care: A systematic review.. Patient Education and Counseling 2024;125:108290 View

Books/Policy Documents

  1. Branaghan R, O’Brian J, Hildebrand E, Foster L. Humanizing Healthcare – Human Factors for Medical Device Design. View
  2. Hendriks F, Distel B, Engelke K, Westmattelmann D, Wintterlin F. Trust and Communication. View