期刊文章JMIR出版公司搜索引擎选择和分类标准对疫苗接种信念和态度的卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析影响两个实验控制Google输出%A Allam,Ahmed %A Schulz,Peter Johannes %A Nakamoto,Kent %+卢加诺大学(universit della Svizzera italiana)传播科学学院传播与健康研究所，蓝色大楼1楼，卢加诺，6900，瑞士，41 58 666 4821，布菲街13号G，卢加诺，6900，ahmed.allam@usi.ch %K消费者健康信息%K搜索引擎%K搜索行为%K互联网%K信息存储与检索%K在线系统%K公共卫生信息学%K疫苗接种%K健康传播%D 2014 %7 02.04.2014 %9原文%J J Med Internet Res %G English %X背景:在过去的二十年中，互联网已经发展成为我们日常生活中的必需品。搜索引擎的选择和排序算法对信息的全球传播和其他传播过程产生了巨大的影响。目的:本研究关注的是在搜索引擎中运行的选择和排序/排名标准对用户在网站上关于疫苗接种的知识、信念和态度的影响。特别地，它是为了比较搜索引擎的效果，这些搜索引擎提供的网站强调接种疫苗的好处与那些关注疫苗的坏处，并与正常的谷歌作为对照组。方法:我们使用操纵搜索引擎进行了2次在线实验。一项试点研究旨在验证与互联网上搜索和使用健康信息相关的危险健康素养的存在，方法是探索两个被操纵的搜索引擎的影响，这两个搜索引擎只产生赞成或反对接种疫苗的网站，一组人接受正常的谷歌作为对照。采用前后试验设计;参与者是参加瑞士卢加诺留学项目的美国市场营销学生。 The second experiment manipulated the search engine by applying different ratios of con versus pro vaccination webpages displayed in the search results. Participants were recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform where it was published as a human intelligence task (HIT). Results: Both experiments showed knowledge highest in the group offered only pro vaccination sites (Z=–2.088, P=.03; Kruskal-Wallis H test [H5]=11.30, P=.04). They acknowledged the importance/benefits (Z=–2.326, P=.02; H5=11.34, P=.04) and effectiveness (Z=–2.230, P=.03) of vaccination more, whereas groups offered antivaccination sites only showed increased concern about effects (Z=–2.582, P=.01; H5=16.88, P=.005) and harmful health outcomes (Z=–2.200, P=.02) of vaccination. Normal Google users perceived information quality to be positive despite a small effect on knowledge and a negative effect on their beliefs and attitudes toward vaccination and willingness to recommend the information (χ25=14.1, P=.01). More exposure to antivaccination websites lowered participants’ knowledge (J=4783.5, z=−2.142, P=.03) increased their fear of side effects (J=6496, z=2.724, P=.006), and lowered their acknowledgment of benefits (J=4805, z=–2.067, P=.03). Conclusion: The selection and sorting/ranking criteria of search engines play a vital role in online health information seeking. Search engines delivering websites containing credible and evidence-based medical information impact positively Internet users seeking health information. Whereas sites retrieved by biased search engines create some opinion change in users. These effects are apparently independent of users’ site credibility and evaluation judgments. Users are affected beneficially or detrimentally but are unaware, suggesting they are not consciously perceptive of indicators that steer them toward the credible sources or away from the dangerous ones. In this sense, the online health information seeker is flying blind. %M 24694866 %R 10.2196/jmir.2642 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2014/4/e100/ %U https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2642 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24694866