How people assess online content and services

An exploratory qualitative research report for Ofcom by DUCKFoOT Research Ltd.

Executive summary

• The main purpose of this exploratory qualitative research is to examine how people assess the veracity, trustworthiness, independence and balance of online content and services. A secondary purpose is to explore how perceptions about the presence or absence of online regulation may underpin or influence peoples online behaviour.
• Overall, 122 people ^(-1-) took part in the study which comprised group discussions, a diary study with follow-up interviews, and an eye-tracking exercise. The sample included a variety of home internet users: from light to heavy users, and recent adopters to long-term, everyday users of online content.
• The study found that the majority of participants value the internet highly and see it as something that has changed their lives. Participants also see its negative sides, and voice a number of concerns, primarily for their own and their familys online safety. Concerns include computer viruses, being ripped off, keeping their children safe online, as well as concerns about inadvertently doing something potentially illegal such as downloading copyrighted music from a file-sharing site. The research found that issues about the veracity of online content were not voiced as frequently, and were more likely to be mentioned in relation to activities such as homework or medical advice.
• Whether participants were evaluating a site in terms of either its safety or veracity, they were influenced by a range of factors including the amount of internet experience they have, their confidence online, their overall life experiences and their cognitive skills.
• In this study, most participants said they had bought and installed virus software. However, beyond this, most showed low levels of understanding and conscious use of the tools provided by internet service providers (ISPs) or search engines to make the internet safer.
• In relation to assessing the trustworthiness of online content, this study found that a perception of familiarity was the most important factor. Judgements were not always conscious or thought through. Familiarity appeared to come about in two ways; first, through consciously recognising cues (such as a known company name or logo) based on recalling previous online or offline experiences, and second, by a swift, intuitive judgement ^(-2-). For example, a new site may look similar to other sites known to the participants in terms of its layout or ease of use, or it may look similar to a real-world cue (such as a shop window, in the case of a travel website). In such cases, intuitive judgements could, on occasion, lead to a false perception of familiarity and subsequent trust.
• The study demonstrated how first impressions are not necessarily the end of the process. The initial intuitive responses may be followed by a more conscious evaluative process, using a range of functional and cognitive skills to interact with and evaluate online content. This process varied by individual and by online activity and incorporated a range of factors:
• These included reading the site for signs such as geographic contact details, evaluating the look and feel of a site, with participants reassured by a professional presentation, or checking to see if the information is up-to-date. For those aware of security symbols, these provided a sense of trust. However, few participants mentioned looking for a padlock symbol as a sign of security when carrying out an online transaction.
• Other factors incorporated ease of navigation and reputation. Many participants drew on off-line reputation or word-of-mouth recommendations from friends or family when deciding which sites to use and trust. Some participants, who were familiar with how search engines work, felt that popular websites provided a good indicator of what to trust, along the lines that what is popular is successful and what is successful can be trusted. Checking the popularity of a site in terms of number of users was frequently cited as a measure of trustworthiness.
  Only a small proportion of participants said that they undertook detailed research or cross-checking against other sources. For most participants, when researching and checking was undertaken, it was generally confined to price comparisons and reading fellow users reviews.
• The study found that a sites URL ^(-3-) is not generally checked when first visiting a site, nor is it used by many as a follow-up cue when looking around a new site and making a decision on whether to trust it.
  The research also highlighted how a participants desire for content has the potential to override all other factors in establishing trust. Therefore the nature of a personal interest and the depth of emotional engagement with the content are factors that can affect the evaluation process. The reward, for example a new purchase, may override the potential perceived risks involved in undertaking an online transaction.
• In terms of participants awareness and understanding of regulation, most did not think that the internet was formally regulated. They understood and accepted the internet to be like the real world, with no universal mechanism to protect them. They felt that they have to decide for themselves what they can trust and take personal responsibility when online. However, a few participants were unsure as to whether the internet was regulated, with some saying they had assumed it must be.
• There was also a perception that the people or organisations that provide specific online services or content were responsible for making sure that users can trust sites and be safe online. In addition, users of sites who contribute content (such as Facebook) were expected to show common sense, integrity and respect towards other members of the online community.
• When discussing the idea of formal internet regulation, most participants felt that it was impracticable because of its global scale, complexity and diversity. There were mixed views on the idea: some felt regulation would be a positive aim, even if unrealistic, others felt it could restrict individual users freedom as they thought that anything goes on the internet - that as individuals we take personal responsibility and choose whether to go online and which sites to visit.
• In contrast, most participants were aware that television is formally regulated. They felt that television regulation is important because it involves mass and diverse audiences sharing public events and once broadcast it is too late to rectify if there is a problem. Television was perceived to be a public entity that reflects societys shared code of conduct and socially acceptable standards. As such, participants thought it warranted regulation for individual protection from uninvited intrusion and to protect viewers from potentially harmful or inappropriate content.
  Overall, the study found that participants used both intuitive judgements and explicit, conscious processes when evaluating which online content to trust. Participants thought that the provision of information and tools would be useful in helping them make decisions about online content and services.

Footnotes:

  1.- The sample comprised of 48 people in 6 focus groups; 34 participants who were asked to keep a diary for two weeks, at the end of which they were interviewed, and 40 people who participated in an eye-tracking exercise to monitor what people looked at in the first 10 seconds of seeing a website.

  2.- Intuitive judgement is associated with the psychological theory of heuristics which relates to processing information and making decisions. Heuristics can be described as a rule of thumb shortcut that allows humans to make judgments quickly and efficiently. Such rule-of-thumb strategies allow people to operate without needing to constantly stop to think about the next course of action.

  3.- URL stands for Uniform Resource Locator. In everyday language it represents the address of a website and can be found in the address bar when visiting a website. For example, the URL for the Ofcom homepage is http://www.ofcom.org.uk.