Designing for Trust: How Online News Consumers View and Interpret Informational Transparency Boxes

Abstract

Amid a global decline in the perceived credibility of news organizations, the idea that providing greater transparency into journalistic decision-making may help increase consumer trust has gained popularity. A number of news organizations has integrated “transparency boxes” into article page design to provide readers with information about why and how the story was reported, particularly in controversial stories. However, limited research to date suggests these boxes are only sometimes effective and readers often do not notice them. The present study examines the role transparency box design plays in both shaping readers’ attention to their contents and their perception of reporting ethics and credibility, in the context of local news reporting about suicide. In a two-article mixed-factorial eye-tracking experiment, (N = 90) participants read two articles containing a transparency box in which the design of the boxes varied in position, visual prominence, and shape. Study results show that both a “no-box” design and high-contrast box design drew readers’ attention to information boxes relative to other design treatments, and attention to box content situationally affected perceptions of reporting ethics, but did not significantly influence perceptions of the news organization’s credibility. Implications of the findings for the design of future journalistic transparency elements are discussed.

Keywords:

• Transparency
• eye-tracking
• trust
• credibility

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Although participants viewed one of three State conditions and one of the three Chronicle conditions, the fully-crossed 3 x 3 design and two possible orders resulted in18 unique experimental conditions.

2 Participants who viewed the Chronicle article as the first article were nominally less less likely to view the process box (58%) than those who viewed it second (71%); conversely, participants who viewed the State article first were nominally more likely to view the process box (80%) than those who viewed it second (71%).