Good Design Enhances Website Credibility

Posted on November 20, 2002

The design and appearance of a website can greatly increase the credibility of the website among consumers. Consumer WebWatch, a nonprofit research project with a mission to improve website credibility, has released findings from two joint Web-based research projects indicating that consumers need guidance in evaluating the credibility of website content, and that health and finance sites need to do a better job providing information critical to that credibility.

Whereas industry experts in one of the studies judged site credibility by the quality of content and its authorship, consumers often make the judgment using more superficial benchmarks, such as the appeal of site design. The two studies, "How Do People Evaluate a Web Site's Credibility? Results from a Large Study" conducted by Stanford University, and "Experts vs. Online Consumers: A Comparative Credibility Study of Health and Finance Web Sites," conducted by Sliced Bread Design, LLC, build on the findings of Consumer WebWatch's national poll of 1,500 adult Internet users conducted in April 2002, which sought to gauge consumer attitudes relating to the trust and credibility of Web sites.

One of the most surprising results revealed by these follow-up studies is the gap between consumers' reported attitudes and their actual online behavior. In the national poll, consumers said sites should provide clear information that would allow them to accurately assess a site's credibility. The information they believed essential for earning trust included providing timely, updated information, identifying sources of information and posting a clear privacy policy.

Even though consumers said they knew what factors were important when assessing a site's credibility, the Stanford study showed consumers were frequently distracted by superficial aspects of sites that had little to do with the depth, breadth, or the quality of the content. For example, nearly half the consumer participants (or 46.1 percent) assessed site credibility in part by overall design or look.

By contrast, the Sliced Bread Design study, which asked 15 experts in the health and financial fields to assess the credibility of sites in their respective specialties, showed that experts assigned more credibility to sites that provide unbiased information from reputable sources, disclose names and credentials of authors, and include citations for published articles.

"While consumers say they judge on substance, these studies demonstrate that consumers judge on aesthetics, and get distracted by bells and whistles," said Beau Brendler, director of Consumer WebWatch. "It's disturbing that consumers are being distracted by elements having little to do with a site's real quality, especially when they're using health or finance sites and making decisions that might dramatically affect their lives."

The Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab study invited 2,684 consumers to evaluate the credibility of two live websites randomly assigned from one of 10 content categories. A total of 100 sites were assessed. Study agents gathered and analyzed participants' comments to track which features of a site got noticed (or went unnoticed) as they evaluated the trustworthiness of the site.

"To look good is to be good - that's the primary test when people assess a Web site's credibility," said B.J. Fogg, Ph.D. "People evaluate TV news and politicians in the same way: presentation matters more than substance. Why should we expect the Web to be any different?"

B.J. Fogg headed the Stanford University study and is also a member of Consumer WebWatch's 26-member advisory board. Consumer WebWatch writer/researcher Leslie Marable served as project manager of these dual studies, and also co-authored both reports.

The Sliced Bread Design study took a different tack: Experts in the health and financial fields were asked to assess the credibility of sites in their specialty areas. A total of eight health and seven finance experts visited the same sites (10 health or 10 finance) as the consumers in the Stanford study and ranked these 10 sites on a scale of 1-to-10. In addition, the experts provided detailed written assessments for each site under evaluation in their field.

The Sliced Bread Design study reported that consumers who reviewed finance sites tended to rely even more heavily on design look issues when assessing these types of sites. For example, 54.6 percent of the Stanford study consumer comments related to finance sites referred to issues of a site's overall design or look.

On the other hand, only 16.4 percent of the finance experts conveyed comments about a site's overall look when assessing the credibility of finance sites. Likewise, 41.8 percent of consumers who assessed health sites made note of design look issues when assessing such sites, compared to a mere 7.6 percent of health experts who mentioned such surface design issues.

"Our study found that the experts thoroughly analyzed content when assessing Web site credibility," said Ellen R. Tauber, a principal of Sliced Bread Design. "Finance experts assigned the most credibility to finance sites with unbiased, broad content, and health experts assigned the most credibility to health sites that contained content cited from reputable sources. Experts' careful analysis sharply contrasted with the many consumers who based credibility on a site's visual appeal. This significant difference between expert and consumer credibility judgment methods clearly signals that education should steer consumers towards more meaningful review of Web site content rather focusing on looks alone."

As a result of these findings, Consumer WebWatch advocates that all Web publishers -- most especially those focused on health and financial topics -- adhere to a number of guidelines.

Consumer WebWatch's Recommendations to Web Publishers in the Health and Finance Fields

In addition to the five existing Consumer WebWatch guidelines for improving credibility among all websites, Consumer WebWatch suggests additional best practices for health and finance sites:

For Health Sites:

• Cite author-specific sources for all information.
• Provide the author's name and affiliation for all published information.
• Use reputable sources (from well-known institutions, peer-reviewed journals, etc.) when possible.
• Employ a review board of known experts to review content from lesser-known sources.
• Although site ownership is important, it is even more important to identify the source of each article posted.
• Avoid being overly commercial
• If the site has a commercial focus, avoid marketing-based articles and explain how for-profit interests may affect the site's content.
• Use detailed information from unbiased, reputable, third-party sources to provide supporting information about products for sale.
• Do not allow excessive, inline, or pop-up ad placement, including in-house and third-party product promotions.
• Edit the site carefully to ensure good grammar and spelling.
• Avoid flashy design that detracts from serious health content.

• Explain the site's commercial goals, target audience, and disclose any information that may contribute to bias.
• Provide articles that describe multiple viewpoints on financial issues.
• Clearly explain financial product recommendations.
• Provide education to help investors make informed decisions.
• If the site has a specific agenda, it should be explained. How the agenda might affect product recommendations or services provided should also be explained.
• Try to avoid, or keep to a minimum, instances of site unavailability, so that people can complete timely financial transactions.
• Provide quick, effective customer service, including direct-contact information and reasonable hours of operation.