In this tutorial, you will learn about evaluating web sources.
After completing this module you should be able to:
Estimated time to complete: 30 minutes.
Why is it so important to be able to critically evaluate information that we find online? Well, there are several reasons, but here are a few of the most important:
Now that we know why it's important to think critically about the information we find online, let's go over some strategies that will help you discern credible from non-credible information.
First, please watch this 3-minute video from the News Literacy Project about strategies for spotting fake news and other non-credible information.
Let's dig deeper into some of the concepts mentioned in the video you just watched. All of the strategies mentioned are good ones for spotting false or misleading information, but how do we put them into practice?
One way to do this is by utilizing the CRAAP test.
CRAAP is an acronym for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. We'll discuss the CRAAP test in detail, but here's a quick video overview for you to watch.
The first criteria for evaluation is currency.
You lose credibility when your audience knows more current information about your topic than you, so to ensure that you're finding information that fits within your time parameters, consider the following questions.
Another criteria for evaluation is relevance. What's relevant to you will depend on your research topic.
For instance, if you're researching the prevalence of concussions in college football, then an article about reducing concussions for NFL players may not be that relevant to your research.
Consider this when determining relevance. Ask yourself if the article or webpage that you're reading is primarily about your research topic. If it is, then it's likely relevant. If your topic is mentioned briefly within the context of other information, then the source may not be that relevant to you and you can likely find something more useful.
Check Yourself!
Imagine that you're writing a paper on the ways in which college football players are affected by concussion. Which of the following two articles would be most relevant to you based on the criteria listed above?
Article one: College football concussion stats vary widely between teams.pdf
Article two: Banned for concussions, college football players still recruited.pdf
Another criteria for evaluation is authority.
Authority is a measure of how much we trust the author, researcher, or organization that creates information, to be fair, unbiased, thorough, and accurate.
How do we evaluate how trustworthy an author is? It's like you're interviewing them for a job. You want to know about the author's education, experience, and qualifications.
You often have to investigate beyond the article itself to find out more about an author's qualifications or the organization they work for. Try using a Google Search to find out more about the author of the Wheat Belly Blog (Links to an external site.).
Based on what you know about authority, is Dr. Davis the best authority you can find on the topic of gluten free diets?
The fourth criteria for evaluation is accuracy.
If you present inaccurate information, you will lose credibility with your audience, but how do you know if the information you've found is accurate?
You can start by asking yourself these questions:
Check Yourself!
Using the criteria listed above, which of these two articles passes the accuracy test?
Article one: Black Lives Matter, Opposing groups protest at Oregon State Capitol.pdf
Article two: Exposing BLM violence and extremism.pdf
The final criteria for evaluation is purpose.
Determining purpose can sometimes be a tricky process. A helpful question to ask yourself is, "Why does this information exist?" Some possible answers include:
1. To educate readers
2. To sell you or convince you of something
3. To provide commentary (critical or satirical) on a topic
A single source can have more than one purpose. A good example of this is the Borowitz Report (pdf) published by The New Yorker. The report provides satirical commentary on current events and it's generally critical of President Trump and his administration. If you were evaluating this source for a paper or project, you'd likely determine that its purpose was to provide satirical commentary, inform readers of current events, and to promote a particular political perspective.
Check Yourself!
Think back to the articles we just reviewed for accuracy. What do you think is the purpose(s) of each?
There are several websites that you can use to fact-check information you find online. Below, are a few that we like:
1. Snopes - (Links to an external site.) This website evaluates images, congressional bills, news stories, and most other information you can find online. They describe themselves as non-partisan and outline their evaluation methodology in detail.
2. Politifact - (Links to an external site.) Unlike Snopes.com, Politifact focuses only on fact-checking political information. Politifact is also a non-partisan organization and has a built-in corrections process if their initial evaluation contains incorrect information.
3. The News Literacy Project (Links to an external site.) - While this organization is not one that provides fact-checking services, it does offer comprehensive resources related to critically evaluating information you find online. This is a great resource to use if you want to check your own critical evaluation skills.
Remember that the CRAAP test is, at the end of the day, simply a set of guidelines for you to consider when evaluating information that you find online. The test works best when you pair it with your own knowledge on a topic and your common sense regarding what makes for a high-quality source.
Over time and with practice, you'll be able to easily distinguish an authoritative source from one that's less than credible.