Even if trust in the process of how information is made has been acknowledged as a key aspect of the credibility of information, there is little earlier research on how and if people use or want information on information making when doing credibility assessments. Swedish archaeology administrators were interviewed (n=10). Interview transcripts were analysed using close reading and an approach based on the constant comparative method. Information needs relating to work processes, methods and technologies, context and situation and non-needs (i.e. lack of need) of information on information making were identified similarly to two types of reputational and four types of non-reputational cues of how information was made. Experienced information needs about information making and preferences for reputational and non-reputational cues in credibility assessments were related to individuals? epistemic distance to the context where information making took place, and if the interviewees positioned themselves as insiders or outsiders in that particular context. To understand the dynamics and interaction of credibility criteria, it can be useful to look at how and what they are used to justify and what are people?s underpinning epistemic beliefs, instead of merely pointing to the differences in beliefs and enumerating situation-specific credibility criteria. People?s flexibility in switching between reputational and non-reputational cues, and positioning themselves as insiders and outsiders, could be seen as an opportunity rather than as a sign of their inferior informational competences.