Structural Model and Detailed Hypotheses

Figure 8. Research model from section 1.6 (Figure 2) with knowledge construction

represented by explicitation and evaluation, and perceived information quality—by relevance, understandability, and usefulness.

The initial research model introduced in section 1.6 (Figure 2) was formulated for the constructs of knowledge construction, perceived information quality, and information integrity. The examination of these constructs in Chapter 2 and in section 3.2 suggested that knowledge construction and perceived information quality should be treated as multidimensional constructs. In this section the hypotheses suggested in Figure 2 are reformulated at the level of the individual dimensions of knowledge construction and perceived information quality (PIQ). The resulting hypotheses are consistent with the hypotheses suggested in section 1.6.

The overall model suggested by the hypotheses justified in this section is presented in Figure 8. In Figure 8, the low level hypotheses corresponding to the hypothesis H1 in Figure 2 are labelled as H1a, H1b, H1c, H1d, H1e, and H1f. The low level hypotheses corresponding to the hypothesis H2 in Figure 2 are labelled as H2a and H2b.

3.3.1 KnowledgeConstructionResultsinBetterPerceivedInformation Quality(H1)

This section introduces the hypotheses elaborating the hypothesis H1 introduced in section 1.6.

3.3.1.1 H1a:ExplicitationPIQ—Relevance

Refinement, elaboration, and clarification make the new information meaningful in the context of the discussion by exposing the relationships between the new information and the pertinent aspects of the context. Information meaningful in a context is more likely to be perceived as applicable in the context or pertinent to the concerns of the contributors in the context. In health support group online discussions, elaboration and clarification of a new suggestion regarding health-related behaviour enable the

contributors to see its relevance to addressing their health-related issues.

Based on the justification above, higher levels of explicitation create more

opportunities for the information to be seen as relevant, so that ultimately explicitation causes relevance.

3.3.1.2 H1b:ExplicitationPIQ—Understandability

Refinement, elaboration, and clarification result in the information being restated in easier to understand form that is more likely to be perceived as easy to read and easy to comprehend. In health support group online discussions, elaboration and clarification of new suggestions regarding health-related behaviour (e.g., restating the suggestions in easier to understand, day-to-day language in response to queries by participants not used to medical jargon) make it easier for the contributors to understand the

Based on the justification above, higher levels of explicitation result in the information being reworded to make it easier to understand, so that ultimately explicitation

increases understandability.

3.3.1.3 H1c:ExplicitationPIQ—Usefulness

Refinement, elaboration, and clarification result in the new information being presented from a greater variety of perspectives, making it more likely that a perspective directly addressing the concerns of a particular contributor (and thus, valuable to the

contributor) emerges in the discussion. Thus, explicitation makes it more likely that the information is perceived as useful. In health support group online discussions,

elaboration of new information relating to a recommendation about a health-related behaviour is likely to result in the recommendation being restated in a form seen as informative and valuable by a particular contributor.

Based on the justification above, higher levels of explicitation create more

opportunities for the information to be seen as useful, so that ultimately explicitation increases usefulness.

3.3.1.4 H1d:EvaluationPIQ—Relevance

Justification and critical discussion of propositions derived from the new information enable the contributors to see the relevance of the propositions. In health support group online discussions, propositions are likely to be in the form of recommendations for health-related behaviour or medical interventions.

Higher levels of evaluation create more opportunities for the propositions, such as generalizations, emerging in the discussion to be seen as relevant, so that ultimately evaluation increases relevance.

3.3.1.5 H1e:EvaluationPIQ—Understandability

Justification and critical discussion of propositions derived from the new information make it easier for the contributors to comprehend the propositions, as reasons behind the propositions are restated in easier to understand form to convince the contributors participating in the discussion. In health support group online discussions, critical

discussion is likely to prompt the restatement of propositions initially formulated using specialist medical terms in day-to-day language, thus making the resulting information easy to read and clear in meaning.

Based on the justification above, higher levels of evaluation result in information that is easy to understand being generated in the discussion, so that ultimately evaluation increases understandability.

3.3.1.6 H1f:EvaluationPIQ—Usefulness

Critical discussion of propositions derived from the new information results in the propositions being restated, reshaped, adjusted, and changed. The proponents of the propositions are likely to restate them in forms in which their usefulness is evident to other contributors. In health support group online discussions, propositions are likely to be in the form of recommendations for health-related behaviour or medical

interventions. Critical discussion of such recommendations is likely to result in the recommendations being developed and restated to make them appear useful from the perspectives of the discussion contributors.

Based on the justification above, higher levels of evaluation create more opportunities for useful propositions to emerge in the discussion, so that ultimately evaluation increases usefulness.

3.3.2 KnowledgeConstructionResultsinBetterInformationIntegrity(H2)

This section introduces the hypotheses elaborating the hypothesis H2 introduced in section 1.6.

3.3.2.1 H2a:ExplicitationInformationIntegrity

Elaboration of the new information may result in information lacking integrity being immediately negated. New information lacking integrity is exposed, and information integrity is thus preserved. In health support group online discussions, a new suggestion regarding health-related behaviour may be immediately rejected by contributors with sufficient background to recognize that the information is, in fact, not grounded in research.

Based on the justification above, higher levels of explicitation result in better assurance that information that is not evidence based is exposed as such, so that ultimately

explicitation increases information integrity.

3.3.2.2 H2b:EvaluationInformationIntegrity

Critical discussion of propositions derived from the new information results in any flaws in the propositions being more readily discovered, leading also to the discovery of any problems with the integrity of the new information they are based on. In health support group online discussions, critical discussion is likely to result in

recommendations that are counter to scientific evidence being rejected, thus resulting in higher integrity of the information generated by the discussion.

Based on the justification above, higher levels of evaluation result in better assurance that information that is not evidence based is exposed as such, so that ultimately evaluation increases information integrity.

3.4 Summary

This chapter introduced the conceptualizations of knowledge construction, perceived information quality, and information integrity. Knowledge construction was

conceptualized as a multidimensional construct with the dimensions of explicitation and evaluation. Explicitation describes the extent to which lower level knowledge construction activities are present in the discussion, and evaluation describes the extent to which higher level knowledge construction activities are present. Perceived

information quality was conceptualized as a multidimensional construct with the dimensions of relevance, understandability, and usefulness. Information integrity was conceptualized as the extent to which recommendations regarding health-related behaviour or interventions in the discussion reflect evidence-based knowledge.

In the research model both explicitation and evaluation were hypothesized to affect information integrity and all of the dimensions of perceived quality.