DocJohn's blog:

I found DocJohn's blog entry interesting. I wanted to add my two cents.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

<a href="http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2006/10/30/few-consumers-check-source-of-online-health-information/">
Few Consumers Check Source of Online Health Information</a>
by John M. Grohol, Psy.D.
October 30, 2006

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I think the majority of online users are internet illiterate. Just because it's almost 2007 doesn't mean most online users know how to use a search engine. Hoping online users will verify their source of info online is asking a lot.

I have talked to many of my friends and family back home, and they are clueless how to search info online. These people have been connected to the internet for over 5 years.

Other examples include: some don't know what a message board (or support forum) or what a weblog (or blog) is and so many AOL users don't know how to go beyond the functions of AOL.

It still amazes me my old coworkers didn't know how to access a search engine. They couldn't understand the difference between intranet and internet. I'd explain it over and over and yet they'd still be stuck in and on one or the other.

I went to visit my favorite coworker (an executive's secretary) this week and told her to go to Google and type in "patent" to find the United States Patent and Trademark Office Home Page. Do you know what she typed into the Google search box? (giggle) She typed "google patent." Oh my goodness gracious! She's been using the internet since the year 2000. I've helped her search things online so many times in the past. Why doesn't she learn by now?

I've met so many people like her. I think they are afraid of the internet.

I'd be interested in reading the results of an internet literacy survey. How many people know how to access Google, Yahoo, or other search engines? How many people know how to do an advanced search? How many people know how to find WebMD or even know what WebMD is all about? How many venture to international domains?

WOW!!! I'm not so Internet illiterate as I thought!!

It does amaze me how uninformed folks still are on internet AND computer works. I have a couple of friends who are not saavy at all and I'm always having to visit their home, fix their computer and show them how to search for the info they need. I think I'll start charging a fee for this work LOL

I'd pay you, I need someone with patience, and not an attitude.
It's arrogant instructors and family members who lack patience when I ask for help,that are 2 of the main reasons I've fallen behind.
In 2007, I'm going to put my mind to devoting time each day for just "me",read,hobbies,learn how to do more stuff on the computer,take more outdoor walks,and devote some playtime to my dogs.

When I took the "Advanced Internet" class through my university, they actually "taught" us to look at sources and figure out how one could verify them. But that people don't astonishes me a bit too. I would think they'd do like the article wonders about and use WebMD or something they've "heard" of (I tend to like what the Mayo Clinic says). I read all the stuff, the quacks and "out there" health people too, just to get "ideas" about other things I might try when the default, established, medical people (who often seem to just copy one another's pages) get less useful. You'd think too that anyone with advice or pills costing money, people would be wary but they're not. Too willing to accept instant miracles as the TV with its infomercials shows. The goal of an advertisement is to make money, not help a person. If information wanted to be helpful, it would be free (like PC is). All the sites that have this wonderful, new, information and they tell you to buy their "vitamins" -- they're selling whatever, not trying to be helpful and informative. That's what I don't understand why people can't see it. Put a "Dr." in the name and people think it's legit.

Hmm. I don't always check the date because sometimes the date is not relevant. If I'm searching to find side effects that consumers have reported having when on a psych med then I don't check either the source or the date, for example.

Maybe it depends on what kind of information you are after.

That being said, sure there is a lot of uncritical thinking out there...

I guess I'm just reminded of some work that has been done on how people (generally speaking) are pretty bad at reasoning when performance is compared to Bayesian norms. That used to be taken as evidence that people were fairly irrational. Now there is one theorist who (fairly convincingly) maintains that people are tracking relevance rather than probabilities. The upshot of that is that Bayesian norms aren't the standard that people are aspiring to. The same thing could be happening here...