公信力：修订间差异

求闻百科，共笔求闻
交互式浏览历史
添加的内容 删除的内容
可视化wikitext
小 （机器人：清理不当的来源、移除无用的模板参数）
小 （机器人：清理不当的来源、移除无用的模板参数）
 

（未显示2个用户的3个中间版本）

第3行： 第3行：
传统意义上，公信力有两个基本要素：可信度和专业度，两者都由主观和客观组成。可信度更多地建立在主观因素基础上，但也包括客观衡量标准，如公认的可靠信息。专业度同样可被主观感知，同时也包括相关信息的客观的特征，如凭证、证书和信息质量等。<ref>Flanagin and Metzger (2008), Digital media and youth: Unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility. In M. Metzger, & A. Flanagin (Editors), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 5-28). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.</ref>公信力的次要要素包括信息来源的活力和吸引力。
传统意义上，公信力有两个基本要素：可信度和专业度，两者都由主观和客观组成。可信度更多地建立在主观因素基础上，但也包括客观衡量标准，如公认的可靠信息。专业度同样可被主观感知，同时也包括相关信息的客观的特征，如凭证、证书和信息质量等。<ref>Flanagin and Metzger (2008), Digital media and youth: Unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility. In M. Metzger, & A. Flanagin (Editors), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 5-28). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.</ref>公信力的次要要素包括信息来源的活力和吸引力。


1990年代中期开始，网络已成为一个重要的信息源，网络公信力也因此成为一个重要的研究课题。[http://www.credibility.ucsb.edu/ 加州大学圣巴巴拉分校公信力和数字媒体工程]正进行此方面的研究，并将其列为近期研究重点。研究内容包括数字媒体、青年人和公信力。此外，斯坦福大学的[http://captology.stanford.edu 科技说服者实验室]{{Wayback|url=http://captology.stanford.edu/ |date=20110305123819 }}也已展开[[斯坦福网络公信力工程|网络公信力]]的研究，并提出网络公信力的主要组成和概述性理论--[http://credibility.stanford.edu/pdf/PITheory.pdf 显释论]{{Wayback|url=http://credibility.stanford.edu/pdf/PITheory.pdf |date=20110511190850 }}。
1990年代中期开始，网络已成为一个重要的信息源，网络公信力也因此成为一个重要的研究课题。[http://www.credibility.ucsb.edu/ 加州大学圣巴巴拉分校公信力和数字媒体工程]正进行此方面的研究，并将其列为近期研究重点。研究内容包括数字媒体、青年人和公信力。此外，斯坦福大学的[http://captology.stanford.edu 科技说服者实验室]也已展开[[斯坦福网络公信力工程|网络公信力]]的研究，并提出网络公信力的主要组成和概述性理论--[http://credibility.stanford.edu/pdf/PITheory.pdf 显释论]。


== 新闻公信力 ==
== 新闻公信力 ==
根据[[职业记者协会]]制定的道德守则，职业操守是记者公信力的基石。（[http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp 参阅前言]{{Wayback|url=http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp |date=20180320184606 }}）
根据[[职业记者协会]]制定的道德守则，职业操守是记者公信力的基石。（[http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp 参阅前言]）


== 科学公信力 ==
== 科学公信力 ==
科学公信力被定义为，可提供公认可靠信息源的一般科学的延伸。<ref>{{cite book |author= Bocking, Stephen |title=Nature's experts: science, politics, and the environment ||publisher=Rutgers University Press |location=New Brunswick, NJ |year=2004 |page=[https://archive.org/details/naturesexperts00step_0/page/164 164] |isbn= 0-8135-3398-8}}</ref>该术语也做狭义用，如针对科学家或某一领域研究的公信力评估。此地，科学公信力指研究成果是否遵循科学原理。<ref>{{cite book |author=Alkin, Marvin C. |title=Evaluation roots: tracing theorists' views and influences |publisher=Sage |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif |year=2004 |page=134 |isbn=0-7619-2894-4}}</ref>评估科学成果质量最常用的方法是[[同行评审]]和科学著作的发表。<ref>{{cite book |author=Bocking, Stephen |title=Nature's experts: science, politics, and the environment ||publisher=Rutgers University Press |location=New Brunswick, NJ |year=2004 |page=[https://archive.org/details/naturesexperts00step_0/page/165 165] |isbn=0-8135-3398-8}}</ref>其他方法也包括由一组专家共同评估，这一方法的能够产生很多专业的评论，发表在[[科克伦协作网]]<ref>[http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/revstruc.htm What is a Cochrane review] {{Wayback|url=http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/revstruc.htm |date=20120116021144 }} ''The Cochrane Collaboration'', Accessed 05 January 2009</ref>和[[政府间气候变化专门委员会]]<ref name= Agrawala1998>{{Cite journal |last=Agrawala |first=S. |year=1998 |title=Structural and Process History of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |journal=Climatic Change |volume=39 |issue=4 |pages=621–642 |doi=10.1023/A:1005312331477 |url=http://www.springerlink.com/index/N302233443147421.pdf |postscript=<!--None--> }}{{Dead link|date=2020年3月 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>之类的网站上。
科学公信力被定义为，可提供公认可靠信息源的一般科学的延伸。<ref>{{cite book |author= Bocking, Stephen |title=Nature's experts: science, politics, and the environment ||publisher=Rutgers University Press |location=New Brunswick, NJ |year=2004 |page=164 |isbn= 0-8135-3398-8}}</ref>该术语也做狭义用，如针对科学家或某一领域研究的公信力评估。此地，科学公信力指研究成果是否遵循科学原理。<ref>{{cite book |author=Alkin, Marvin C. |title=Evaluation roots: tracing theorists' views and influences |publisher=Sage |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif |year=2004 |page=134 |isbn=0-7619-2894-4}}</ref>评估科学成果质量最常用的方法是[[同行评审]]和科学著作的发表。<ref>{{cite book |author=Bocking, Stephen |title=Nature's experts: science, politics, and the environment ||publisher=Rutgers University Press |location=New Brunswick, NJ |year=2004 |page=165 |isbn=0-8135-3398-8}}</ref>其他方法也包括由一组专家共同评估，这一方法的能够产生很多专业的评论，发表在[[科克伦协作网]]<ref>[http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/revstruc.htm What is a Cochrane review] ''The Cochrane Collaboration'', Accessed 05 January 2009</ref>和[[政府间气候变化专门委员会]]<ref name= Agrawala1998>{{Cite journal |last=Agrawala |first=S. |year=1998 |title=Structural and Process History of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |journal=Climatic Change |volume=39 |issue=4 |pages=621–642 |doi=10.1023/A:1005312331477 |url=http://www.springerlink.com/index/N302233443147421.pdf |postscript=<!--None--> }}{{Dead link|date=2020年3月 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>之类的网站上。


社会大众左右着争议性问题的科学权威判断，如[[生物技术]]。<ref name=Brossard2007>{{Cite journal |last1=Brossard |first1=Dominique |last2=Nisbet |first2=Matthew C. |year=2007 |title=Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding U.S. Opinion on Agricultural Biotechnology |journal=International Journal of Public Opinion Research |volume=19 |issue=1 |page=24 |doi=10.1093/ijpor/edl003 |url=http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/19/1/24 |laysummary=http://www.news.wisc.edu/13734 |postscript=<!--None--> |access-date=2011-03-12 |||}}</ref>同时，科学的公信力和权威性受到非主流观点的质疑。他们鼓吹[[替代医学]]<ref>{{Cite journal |format= |last1=O'callaghan |first1=F.V. |last2=Jordan |first2=N. |year=2003 |title=Postmodern values, attitudes and the use of complementary medicine |journal=Complementary Therapies in Medicine |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=28–32 |doi=10.1016/S0965-2299(02)00109-7 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0965229902001097 |pmid=12667972 |postscript=<!--None--> ||||access-date=2011-03-12 }}</ref>，质疑[[科学共识]]（如提出[[艾滋病重估运动]]）。<ref>{{cite journal |author=Smith TC, Novella SP |title=HIV denial in the Internet era |journal=PLoS Med. |volume=4 |issue=8 |pages=e256 |pmid=17713982 |pmc=1949841 |doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040256 |url=http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040256 |date=August 2007 ||||access-date=2017-11-23 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Epstein, Steven |title=Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge ||publisher=University of California Press |location=Berkeley |year=1996 |isbn=0-520-21445-5}}</ref>
社会大众左右着争议性问题的科学权威判断，如[[生物技术]]。<ref name=Brossard2007>{{Cite journal |last1=Brossard |first1=Dominique |last2=Nisbet |first2=Matthew C. |year=2007 |title=Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding U.S. Opinion on Agricultural Biotechnology |journal=International Journal of Public Opinion Research |volume=19 |issue=1 |page=24 |doi=10.1093/ijpor/edl003 |url=http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/19/1/24 |laysummary=http://www.news.wisc.edu/13734 |postscript=<!--None--> |access-date=2011-03-12 }}</ref>同时，科学的公信力和权威性受到非主流观点的质疑。他们鼓吹[[替代医学]]<ref>{{Cite journal |format= |last1=O'callaghan |first1=F.V. |last2=Jordan |first2=N. |year=2003 |title=Postmodern values, attitudes and the use of complementary medicine |journal=Complementary Therapies in Medicine |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=28–32 |doi=10.1016/S0965-2299(02)00109-7 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0965229902001097 |pmid=12667972 |postscript=<!--None--> ||||access-date=2011-03-12 }}</ref>，质疑[[科学共识]]（如提出[[艾滋病重估运动]]）。<ref>{{cite journal |author=Smith TC, Novella SP |title=HIV denial in the Internet era |journal=PLoS Med. |volume=4 |issue=8 |pages=e256 |pmid=17713982 |pmc=1949841 |doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040256 |url=http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040256 |date=2007-08 ||||access-date=2017-11-23 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Epstein, Steven |title=Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge ||publisher=University of California Press |location=Berkeley |year=1996 |isbn=0-520-21445-5}}</ref>


== 参考 ==
== 参考 ==
第17行： 第17行：


== 著作 ==
== 著作 ==
* Chesney, T. (2006). An empirical examination of Wikipedia’s credibility. First Monday, 11(11), URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_11/chesney/index.html {{Wayback|url=http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_11/chesney/index.html |date=20121124120229 }}
* Chesney, T. (2006). An empirical examination of Wikipedia’s credibility. First Monday, 11(11), URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_11/chesney/index.html
* Flanagin, A.J., & Metzger, M.J. (2007). The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society, 9(2), 319-342. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20110720074837/http://www.comm.ucsb.edu/documents/flanaginmetzger.pdf
* Flanagin, A.J., & Metzger, M.J. (2007). The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society, 9(2), 319-342. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20110720074837/http://www.comm.ucsb.edu/documents/flanaginmetzger.pdf
* Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. (2008). Digital media and youth: Unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility. In M. Metzger, & A. Flanagin (Editors), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 5–28). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
* Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. (2008). Digital media and youth: Unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility. In M. Metzger, & A. Flanagin (Editors), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 5–28). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
第27行： 第27行：


== 外链 ==
== 外链 ==
* Handbook of Management Scales: Credibility {{Wayback||date=20200729002607 }}
* Handbook of Management Scales: Credibility
* [http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/4/3/3/2/9/p433298_index.html College students’ news habits, preferences, and credibility perceptions]
* [http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/4/3/3/2/9/p433298_index.html College students’ news habits, preferences, and credibility perceptions]


取自“https://www.qiuwenbaike.cn/wiki/公信力”