1. Evidence Evaluating and Using Sources

2. Do you believe everything you hear? No, you probably don’t. You take a number of variables into account: 1.Who said it? Do you trust that person? 2.Does it fall in alignment with your existing knowledge? What happens if you don’t know the person well enough to judge their credibility? What if you don’t know anything about the topic? Because we don’t have all of the time in the world to check facts, we rely on piecemeal knowledge and our gut to assess information. Don’t be seduced by your gut. Just because you believe or want to believe doesn’t make it true.

3. Revisiting Carnegie’s Quotes In the section, "How to Win People to Your Way of Thinking," in Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People, he writes, (A) "Few people are logical. Most of us are prejudiced and biased. Most of us are blighted with preconceived notions, with jealousy, suspicion, fear, envy and pride. And most citizens don't want to change their minds about their religion or their haircut or communism or their favorite movie star." (B) Carnegie later quotes another author as saying, "The result is that most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do."

4. The Traditional Way of Assessing Evidence—Degrees of Separation Primary Source: an original object or document -- the raw material or first-hand information. Primary sources include historical and legal documents, eyewitness accounts, results of experiments, statistical data, pieces of creative writing, and art objects Secondary Source: something written about a primary source. Secondary sources include comments on, interpretations of, or discussions about the original material. You can think of secondary sources as second- hand information. Secondary sources include newspaper stories, book/movie reviews, critique articles, descriptions of scientific experiments Why do you think people like primary over secondary sources? Are primary sources necessrarily better?

5. Assessing Evidence in the Digital Age The system of primary and secondary categorization is a remnant of a bygone era. People still follow it, but you shouldn’t place your trust in one or the other. Here are some other concerns: Should you trust certain kinds of sources, such as the New York Times or The American Medical Association's Journal? They go through a fact checking process, right? ▫All sources are fallible. Plagiarism, making up stories, falsifying research results. Example: The Lancet on MMR vaccine and autism. After 10 yrs no one could validate the findings. Falsified findings led to the doctor being stripped of his medical license Are certain kinds of websites more trustworthy than others? [.gov,.edu,.com,.org,.mil,.net] ▫Not necessarily. Think of them as indicators of bias

6. What can you do? Rely on “good sources”: ▫Authority—who wrote it? No author not necessarily bad, but question. Does the author have credentials? ▫Objectivity– how biased is the work? Bias isn’t bad. Every writer has a purpose and writes to that end. Does the author consider alternate positions or at least address a few? ▫Currency—when was the work written/produced? Older isn’t usually better. One of the problem with scholarly sources is that articles generally take over a year from submission to publication ▫Content and Organization--How in depth does the source get on the topic? Is there enough information? If what you get is superficial or gives only minimal data – one or two sentences or paragraphs – then the source doesn’t really give you much content. You should find details and explanations provided which offer substantial information. What kinds of information are offered? Graphs? Quotes? Stats? Stories? Historical examples? Does the source give you info on the sources—website? Article? Speech? Organization?

7. More…. Research your research. There is no easy way. You have to look for reputable sources and then check their findings against other reputable sources. You’ll sometimes find discrepancies. At those points, go with the position that has more evidence, regardless of what your “gut” tells you. ▫Professional authors and television commentators have reputations. Google them ▫Newspapers have reputations. Google them ▫Organizations have mission statements. Read them and then Google them