INTD 150 Library and Internet Research

Evaluating Sources and Relevance Source Authority Source Bias Currency Relevance of information

Radio performances of “War of the Worlds” have sparked “mass panic” Reaction to original performance by Orsen Welles mostly exaggerated But it did cause mass panic… …in 1949 in Ecuador …in 1944 in Chile …and in 1968 in Buffalo, NY Why?

Common Hoaxes appear on Facebook and elsewhere Snopes.com – internet rumors TruthorFiction.com – email hoaxes FactCheck.org – political rumors

Source Evaluation should occur twice Before Research: Where should I look for sources? What will I accept as authoritative? During & After Research: Are these sources authoritative? Do these sources provide needed information?

Most non-academic sources contain Bias: religious, ideological, and/or political Everyone has an angle or reason for publishing – you need to determine what that angle/reason is. Academic and scientific research should be published for the purpose of furthering the field (aka neutral bias) – not for trying to convince others of a particular or subjective viewpoint.

Scholarly research requires neutral point of view Example: A religious source discussing a scientific breakthrough. Good source for examining science in the religious community Poor source of objective information regarding a particular scientific idea

Read a website’s “About” page or do some background research Wikipedia often contains such information AllSides.com tells you the bias of the article for popular news topics

Fakenewswatch.com identifies fake news sources Beware Fake news sites Fakenewswatch.com identifies fake news sources

Scholarly, Trade & General sources: Choosing the right tool for the job Difference depends on audience and subject matter: Academic Research: Scholarly Ex: For History, use Historical Abstracts database Casual Research: General Professional/Specialized Research: Trade

Scholarly sources are informative Purpose: to further the goal of research Audience: Academics and Researchers Tone: Highly technical, formal review process, provide references Subject Coverage: Detailed and narrow focus

Trade Sources are field-specific Purpose: to provide specialized information and sell related products Audience: Professionals and Experts in that field Tone: Highly technical, may or may not have formal review process and references Subject Coverage: Detailed and narrow focus

General Sources are aimed at public Purpose: to entertain and provide advertising revenue Audience: General Public Tone: Casual, no formal review process, few or no references Subject Coverage: Brief and broad

Authority of a source depends on the discipline

Universities, Research hospitals, and Government agencies are authoritative for disciplines in: Science/Medicine/Statistics/Social Sciences Website Extensions .edu .org .gov

Humanities (Art, Music, History, English, etc.) Universities, Museums, and Government agencies are authoritative for disciplines in the Humanities (Art, Music, History, English, etc.) Website Extensions .edu .org .gov

Domain Extensions mostly indicate a source’s authoritativeness Mainly Authoritative .gov – Government .mil – US Military .edu – Educational/University (with one exception) .org – Not-for-profit Organization (check affiliation) Not necessarily authoritative .com – Company; most common website; can be used for personal websites of professionals (important to look at the author biography and/or “about” page to determine authority) .net – Older, originally designated networks .org – Check for organizational bias Can be conservative, liberal, religious, affiliated with other, disreputable organizations www.whitehouse.com vs www.whitehouse.gov (For why domain extensions are important…)

.edu sources may be student work Some students host their papers on class websites – these are not authoritative Be careful of inadvertently using student homework assignments from .edu sources

Currency is important for research Limit results to the past 10 years for most academic research Websites should have recent timestamps/copyright notices Primary sources are an exception (also some historical or obscure sources)

Copyright date can indicate authority Which NY City travel guide would you trust in 2017?

Author biographies can indicate authority Who would you trust regarding physics? Who would you trust regarding engineering?

Layout and Advertisements can indicate authority (or lack thereof) Websites should have minimal ads General rule of thumb: If it looks like it’s from a 12 year old…it probably is.

Some sources are automatically authoritative Encyclopedias and other reference sources Any peer-reviewed journal Government websites and documents Academic library collections (except for popular material collections) Note: Not everything in a PUBLIC library is authoritative for ACADEMIC research – many popular items (though it would be authoritative for personal research in many circumstances)

Biographical and Publishing information can determine print source authority Self-Publishing: Frowned upon in academic research (no peer-review process) Self-publishing ≠ “Vanity Press” (A quick search can tell you if the publisher is either of these) There are exceptions: Your textbook is self-published, but do a bit of research on Badke and you’ll find he’s a noted expert in his field, well-respected, and a bona fide librarian.

Relevance of information retrieved depends on your needs

Checking the subject headings may provide more information Subject headings clarify the subject matter Subject headings reinforce the title

“Times Cited” can indicate importance of research NOTE: Excessive self-referencing (cited by its own author) is frowned upon – only appropriate in limited amounts