Does knowledge proximity attenuate or amplify the impact of credibility signals on knowledge use? Insights from two natural experiments

People rely on sources with greater credibility when deciding whether to use knowledge. However, the moderating role of knowledge proximity, that is, the perceiver’s proximity to the focal knowledge and its source, remains unclear. Prior literature suggests conflicting possibilities: individuals with high proximity may bypass source credibility, as they can evaluate the knowledge at minimal cost or rely on the credibility signal, as they can properly assess the signal. To investigate this, we exploited two natural experiments involving the addition of Information Systems (IS) journals to the Association for Information Systems (AIS) Senior Scholars’ List of Premier Journals and the Financial Times list. Based on our analyses of over 100,000 citations to 1,882 papers over observation windows of up to 20 years using difference-in-differences analysis, we found that papers in FT-listed journals receive approximately 30% more citations overall, while papers in AIS-listed journals receive approximately 36% more citations from proximate (IS) journals than from distant (non-IS) journals. We conclude that knowledge proximity amplifies the impact of source credibility on knowledge use, specifically when the knowledge, perceiver, and source credibility signals are closely aligned.