Evaluating Sources
Nelson Poynter Memorial Library
Welcome to the Evaluating Source learning module. In this module you will learn:
Self-assessment activities include:
This module is designed to be completed in 20 minutes.
The saying "Don't judge a book by its cover" can apply to all types of resources. As you go through your research process, you may come across a vast number of resources on your topic. A novice researchers will accept the first document he or she finds, or else judge the quality of the resource based only on the look and feel of the item. In contrast, an expert researcher will judge the quality of an item based upon the suitability of its contents and the quality of the evidence and arguements. Use this learning module, as a framework to guide you from lower levels of evaluation that examine the suitabilty of sources, to higher levels of analysis on the quality of the research content and rhetoric within the ongoing scholarly conversation.
Step 1: In order to pick and choose among all these books, articles, videos, webpages, and other sources, apply this simple framework to help you quickly decide whether the resources that you find are suitable or not.
How current the information needs to be depends upon the structure and requirements of your assignment:
The information published in scholarly books and articles are at least 6 months to 1 year older than their copyright or printing date. The traditional writing, editing, and publishing process just takes that long. Creating or editing a webpage can be a less time consuming publishing process; hence websites and newspapers MAY be more current than traditional print sources.
Things to consider regarding the currency of the source:
Things to consider regarding the currency of the topic:
Remember, the scholarly conversation on a subject never stops, as new information comes to light, and as new methods, perspectives, and areas of knowledge emerge. What is accepted as "fact:" one day, may be completely revised or refuted in the future.
To be valuable, the information that you use may need to fit specific parameters. Ask yourself:
Does this resource meet the requirements of your instructor and assignment?
Is this resource appropriate for your audience?
Is this resource on your topic of interest?
When an author is identified, ask yourself:
If the document doesn't identify an author, the you need to look at the publishing organization to assess the credibility. Ask yourself:
Valuable information should always strive for accuracy, reliability, and truth.
Scholarly books and journal articles frequently go through the peer review process before they are published. Peer reviewers will vet the quality of the research, writing, and analysis to determine whether the document should or should not be published. Ideally, this editorial process simultaneously raises the credibility of the published scholarly sources, while weeding out the research of lesser quality.
While not scholarly in nature, newspaper articles are frequently reviewed before they are published. The editor will make editorial changes to the story content, structure, and grammar while a fact checker will verify any quotes or factual statements before the article is published. This editorial and review process, similarly increases the credibility of newspaper articles.
Assessing the credibility of websites in the open web can be a difficult task; it can be difficult to determine who wrote the web page and to know how much editorial control was exerted before publication. A website isn't necessarily uncredible or inaccurate; it just means you need to be cautious. Ask yourself:
Examine why the information was written and published. Ask yourself:
Look For:
Tip: Use the Google Advanced Search to find out what pages link to the website.
Show/hide comprehension question...
Step 2: Once you have selected your sources, you will begin the secondary level of analysis. You probably won't be able to fully engage and evaluate your sources until after you've done some preliminary reading, become familiar with your topic, and developed a few ideas of your own. As you're reading, consider the type of evidence that the documents use to support their argument or to make a research claim?
|
Type of Evidence |
What is it? |
How to Evaluate the Quality |
Beware! |
|---|---|---|---|
Intuition
|
When we rely on "common sense" or "gut feeling" or "hunch"
|
Sometime "intuition" really comes from a vast well of past experience and knowledge
|
Intuition is private, there is no way to judge its reliability or dependability
|
Authority
|
Expert sources -- relying on others to interpret the evidence
|
Primary sources (direct observation) is stronger while Secondary sources (hearsay) are weaker in quality.
|
Example: A research article from Journal of the American Medical Association (primary source) is a better source than a discussion of that same article in a popular news magazine such as Newsweek (Secondary source)
|
Personal experience & observations
|
The direct participation or observation an activity or event
|
Primary sources (direct experience or observation) is stronger
|
Be wary of: Selectivity – personal experiences vary greatly Personal interest – something to gain from believing their testimony Omitted information – rarely provide sufficient info about the basis for their judgment
|
Case studies & examples
|
The systematic observation of a single individual or event
|
Look to see how systematic and encompassing the observation are. How have the observation accounted for bias of perspective and experience?
|
Be wary of vivid case studies. They should be viewed more as striking examples than as proof. Vivid examples demonstrate the outlying possibilities rather than the norm.
|
Analogies
|
Uses similarity as a form of evidence -- If two things are alike in one aspect, then they will probably be alike in other respects as well.
|
Focus on 2 factors:
|
Be wary of catchy or folksy slogans that sound persuasive, but may have little relevance to the topic under discussion
|
Research studies
|
Systematic collection of observations to avoid bias Publically verifiable data – data obtained under conditions that other qualified people can make similar observations and obtain similar results Control – minimizing extraneous factors that might affect the accuracy and interpretation of generalization Precision in language – tries to be concise and consistent in use of language
|
What is the quality of the source? Most dependable research studies are presented in peer-reviewed journal articles
Are there special strengths in the research methodology?
Has the study been replicated?
How far can we generalize the research studies
|
Outliers:
Remember: Science neither proves nor disproves. It accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, but may revise those conclusions if warranted by new evidence or perspectives. The concept of absolute proof is not scientific
|
"I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts. But I will also renew the tough, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and curb Russian aggression. I will build new partnerships to defeat the threats of the 21st century: terrorism and nuclear proliferation; poverty and genocide; climate change and disease. And I will restore our moral standing, so that America is once again that last, best hope for all who are called to the cause of freedom, who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future."
Higher Emotions
Lower Emotions
"I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed."
Appeal to the logical reasoning of the reader with the use of :
"However, although private final demand, output, and employment have indeed been growing for more than a year, the pace of that growth recently appears somewhat less vigorous than we expected. Notably, since stabilizing in mid-2009, real household spending in the United States has grown in the range of 1 to 2 percent at annual rates, a relatively modest pace. Households' caution is understandable. Importantly, the painfully slow recovery in the labor market has restrained growth in labor income, raised uncertainty about job security and prospects, and damped confidence. Also, although consumer credit shows some signs of thawing, responses to our Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices suggest that lending standards to households generally remain tight."
Step 3: One publication is NOT the end of an argument AND a single research study is just one step in the long process of research.
To be able to effectively answer these questions, you may need to do more research to trace the evolution of your topic. In order to comparatively evaluate your sources, examine how your group of articles, books, and websites relate, counter, or build upon each other.
Use these creative agreements and disagreement to expand your own understanding of your topic and encourage your own creative thinking
Don't assume one type of resources is better than another. All kinds of resources, whether it is a book from the library, an peer reviewed journal article, or an organizational website, should all be evaluated carefully.
Evaluating sources is also not one stop shopping. Think of it instead, as a series of stages; once you individually evaluate and choose your documents, you need to evaluate your sources as a collected group. It is this secondary stage of synthesis and analysis where a deeper level of evaluation happens.
Finally, know that evaluation is an art, not a science. In this module, you have learned how to evaluate sources using the CRAAP framework, to examine the strengths and weaknesses of various types of evidence, and how to discern the assess rhetorical arguments using Aristotle's Triangle of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. While these frameworks can help you, no one way of evaluating is perfect and the value of the various resources changes over time and from person to person.
Click here to complete additional Library Instruction Modules
To return to the Nelson Poynter Memorial Library home page.
Or call the Nelson Poynter Library Information Desk:
Phone: 727-873-4405