Photos Make Websites More Credible
This and many other posts are also available as a pretty, well-behaved e-book: On Web Development.
An important finding of Stanford University’s work concerning web credibility is that “photos make websites more credible.” A prior study of B.J. Fogg et al., Web Credibility Research: A Method for Online Experiments and Early Study Results (PDF, 25 KB), again revealed that “a photograph of an author had significant effects on how people perceived the credibility
|Credibility measure||No author photo (mean)||Casual author photo (mean)||Formal author photo (mean)||Statistically significant? (between groups)|
|How believable is article?||.70||.41||.92||p = .03|
|How trustworthy is article?||.17||-.17||.41||p = .003|
|How competent is article?||.35||.15||.67||p = .02|
|How credible is article?||.34||.15||.47||NS|
|How unbiased is article?||.76||.58||.63||NS|
|How expert is article?||.27||-.09||.47||p = .009|
|Composite measure (combining all six items)||.42||.17||.60||p = .02|
Though this is just one out of quite a few aspects of web credibility—the Stanford-Makovsky Web Credibility Study 2002 (PDF, 461 KB) is still a highly recommendable read—it is an important one, eventually still surprising. As professional sites should address all major credibility factors it’s interesting to note the potential of many sites. It’s no rocket science to create credible, trustworthy offers of information (no, MySpace), and we shouldn’t get tired to work on that, either.
About the Author
Jens Oliver Meiert is a technical lead and author (sum.cumo, W3C, O’Reilly). He loves trying things, including in the realms of philosophy, art, and adventure. Here on meiert.com he shares and generalizes and exaggerates some of his thoughts and experiences.
If you have any thoughts or questions (or recommendations) about what he writes, leave a comment or a message.
On March 29, 2007, 22:39 CEST, Steffen said:
As this article doesn’t provide a picture of the author, I can hardly believe these facts, Jens. Are there any implications by showing your Werder Bremen pride, too?
Jens, despite the fact that you’ve used a direct quote from the Fogg et al. paper, it’s going beyond the evidence to claim that “a photograph of an author had significant effects on how people perceived the credibility […]” because that particular difference is reported to be statistically insignificant, i.e. a direct contradiction of the statement.
Choose “believable” instead and you are on statistically safer ground, pace your disciplinary preference for p value thresholds.
There may be a slight methodological difficulty concerning the degree of separation between the semantics of “believable” vs “credible”.
It seems to be a trap into which the authors themselves fell and perhaps should have prompted them to check whether subjects might have experienced a similar confusion, possibly resulting in artefacts in the form of lower scores for “credible” and higher scores for “believable”.
The longer paper probably provides full details of the self-report technique question design, although at the moment, I don’t have the inclination to check.
Still, it does seem worth sorting out a formal photo for one’s audience. Perhaps it’s a subtle issue of “manners” in what is a relatively impoverished information stream compared to the face-to-face interactions which usually inform our perceptions of others.
On May 18, 2007, 1:05 CEST, alex said:
I think the problem arrising with photos is that users/readers who don’t come from a “computer” background, need visual enhancements to absorb information : when I’m in the tube in london, with all those newspapers arround, I open one, look at photos 80% of my reading time.
I think the deep issue is the opposite : We do not look at photos when we know a site is credible -> we go straight for the text and content. Now if we do not know about the credibility of a site, we are going to look for credible information (not cut and paste info), then we are going to check photos …
Well not sure if what i say makes sense.
Have a look at the most popular posts, possibly including:
- CSS Practice: Pseudo-Namespaces in Complex Projects
- 25 Excellent Usability/UX Articles and Resources
Perhaps my most relevant book: CSS Optimization Basics (2018). Writing CSS is a craft. As craftspeople we strive to write high quality CSS. In CSS Optimization Basics I lay out the, at least some of the most important aspects of such CSS.
Looking for a way to comment? Comments have been disabled, unfortunately.