1. Evaluating Information
Dr. Joe Dennis • •
Chapter 7 deals with how to evaluate information and how to avoid plagiarism.
Smoking is good for you!

2. Being honest and ethical
Do high power electric transmission lines cause cancer? Believing that the answer was yes, one student planned to give a speech warning about the dangers. However, as he investigated the matter and read articles by scientific experts, he became convinced that transmission lines do NOT cause cancer. So he changed to a different topic.
This student is an example of an ethical investigator. He was willing to work hard and gather the best information available. And he was honest in admitting that his original idea was wrong.

3. Finding Trustworthy Information
CRITERIA
Current?
Factual?
Verifiable?
Reliable?
Unbiased?
[CLICK] When you collect information for a speech, you need to determine which items are valuable and which are worthless. But how do you separate the good from the bad? To be considered trustworthy, information should meet the following criteria.
[CLICK] FACTUAL: Is the information factual? Is it based on facts—not on hearsay, distortions, or oversimplifications?
[CLICK] RELIABLE: Is the information reliable? Does it come from sources that are honest and authoritative?
[CLICK] WELL-SUPPORTED: Is the information well-supported? Is there a lot of strong evidence, such as examples and statistics, to prove a case?
Well-supported?
Comprehensive?

4. Apply Critical-Thinking Skills
To be a savvy consumer of information, you need to develop critical-thinking skills. You need healthy skepticism. This is not sour negativity that rejects everything. Instead, it’s open-minded inquiry that asks probing questions:
“What is the source of this information?”
“How do you know this is true?”
“Why did this happen?”
Let’s begin with how to recognize dubious claims.

5. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Reject claims based solely on anecdotes
Imagine that a magazine writer makes this argument: “If teenagers have parents who are constantly unhappy and fighting, they will turn to excessive use of alcohol and drugs.” To back up this argument, the writer tells anecdotes about three troubled teenagers that he knows, and all of them had parents who fought. Has the writer proved his case? No, he has used only anecdotes, which by themselves prove nothing. To prove his argument, he would need reliable studies by trustworthy scholars involving hundreds—even thousands—of teenagers.

6. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Reject claims based solely on testimonials
The writer of a book states that the way to stop smoking is to go through a program of hypnosis. She recounts testimonials from five people who underwent hypnosis, and all five swear that hypnosis caused them to quit smoking for good. Has the writer succeeded in proving her point? No. While hypnosis may have helped five people, their experience does not prove that hypnosis is a panacea for all smokers. More evidence is needed—such as carefully controlled medical studies that compare various treatments.

7. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Reject claims based solely on opinions
Imagine a speaker who argues sincerely and forcefully that women are temperamentally incapable of becoming effective leaders of a business team. He says that he bases his argument on years of experience and observation in the business world. He defends his idea with strong emotion and an air of certainty. Does his argument have any merit? No, because it is based solely on opinion—not on evidence. Some speakers persuade listeners to accept their point of view because they are on fire with conviction. But strong opinions do not constitute proof.

8. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Find multiple sources
Since 2003, there have been nine CDC-funded or conducted studies that have found no link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and ASD, as well as no link between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and ASD in children.
It is a big mistake to limit yourself to just one source because that one source may be wrong. Let’s take an imaginary example. Suppose that you are doing research, and the first source you come across is an expert who says that green is the most visible color for cars in terms of highway safety. What if you stopped at this point? Unless you investigate, you would not find out that all the other experts say that red is the most visible color. You would end up giving your audience erroneous information.

9. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Use common sense
It is a big mistake to limit yourself to just one source because that one source may be wrong. Let’s take an imaginary example. Suppose that you are doing research, and the first source you come across is an expert who says that green is the most visible color for cars in terms of highway safety. What if you stopped at this point? Unless you investigate, you would not find out that all the other experts say that red is the most visible color. You would end up giving your audience erroneous information.

10. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Examine Opposing Viewpoints
You should find out everything possible about the viewpoints of those who disagree with you. From an ethical standpoint, evaluating all sides of an issue might lead you to modify your own position. From a practical viewpoint, examining the views of opponents can help you anticipate the objections that some listeners might make to your own arguments. You can design your speech to overcome the objections. Also, you can plan what you will say in the question-and-answer period if a listener challenges you.

11. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Cite flaws in opposing viewpoints
You should find out everything possible about the viewpoints of those who disagree with you. From an ethical standpoint, evaluating all sides of an issue might lead you to modify your own position. From a practical viewpoint, examining the views of opponents can help you anticipate the objections that some listeners might make to your own arguments. You can design your speech to overcome the objections. Also, you can plan what you will say in the question-and-answer period if a listener challenges you.

12. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Recognize the fallibility of experts
M.D. = Trustworthy expert?
Don’t be overawed by sources who have an M.D. or Ph.D. after their names. Some M.D.’s are con artists who make a fortune on Web sites and TV shows by peddling worthless—sometimes harmful—products or therapies. Some Ph.D.’s write books arguing ridiculous notions such as the contention that the Nazi murder of millions of Jews never happened.
Nurse Betty

13. Applying Critical-Thinking Skills
Beware of groups with misleading names
Sometimes organizations use impressive names to suggest that they are unbiased, neutral, and fair-minded when in reality they have hidden backers with an agenda that is different from what the public expects. For example, The National Wetlands Coalition sounds like an environment-protection group, but The Wall Street Journal reports that it is financed by oil companies and real-estate developers whose goal is to reduce the amount of wetlands protected by federal law.

14. Real or Fake?
Sometimes organizations use impressive names to suggest that they are unbiased, neutral, and fair-minded when in reality they have hidden backers with an agenda that is different from what the public expects. For example, The National Wetlands Coalition sounds like an environment-protection group, but The Wall Street Journal reports that it is financed by oil companies and real-estate developers whose goal is to reduce the amount of wetlands protected by federal law.

15. Don’t be swayed by widespread dissemination
All over the Internet, there are thousands of documents that report what is supposedly a fact: The American space agency NASA spent $12 billion to develop a ballpoint “space pen” for astronauts working in zero gravity. The report is offered as an example of government waste. The report is false. When some people make preposterous claims like this and their “facts” are challenged, they defend themselves by saying, “It must be true—it’s all over the Internet.” But widespread appearance on the Internet is no proof of accuracy. Unfortunately, misinformation can be spread to all parts of the planet in mere seconds.

16. Don’t be swayed by widespread dissemination
All over the Internet, there are thousands of documents that report what is supposedly a fact: The American space agency NASA spent $12 billion to develop a ballpoint “space pen” for astronauts working in zero gravity. The report is offered as an example of government waste. The report is false. When some people make preposterous claims like this and their “facts” are challenged, they defend themselves by saying, “It must be true—it’s all over the Internet.” But widespread appearance on the Internet is no proof of accuracy. Unfortunately, misinformation can be spread to all parts of the planet in mere seconds.
Snopes.com

17. Analyzing Internet Sites
Watch out for photo manipulation
Let’s say you visit a Web site on how to take care of a car’s exterior. The suggestions look like objective, reliable material. One of the tips is a Web link (“high-quality wax”). If you click on the link, you will go to a page that is openly commercial—it sells exterior wax. Unknown to you, the original page and the wax page are both operated by the same source—a company that sells wax. The company has done nothing illegal, but it has acted unethically in leaving you with the impression that the tips page was written by impartial researchers who are honestly recommending the best product. You have been manipulated. To avoid being manipulated, weigh Web advice carefully and verify that the information is corroborated by sources that you know you can trust.

18. Analyzing Internet Sites
Watch out for fake news
Let’s say you visit a Web site on how to take care of a car’s exterior. The suggestions look like objective, reliable material. One of the tips is a Web link (“high-quality wax”). If you click on the link, you will go to a page that is openly commercial—it sells exterior wax. Unknown to you, the original page and the wax page are both operated by the same source—a company that sells wax. The company has done nothing illegal, but it has acted unethically in leaving you with the impression that the tips page was written by impartial researchers who are honestly recommending the best product. You have been manipulated. To avoid being manipulated, weigh Web advice carefully and verify that the information is corroborated by sources that you know you can trust.

19. Analyzing Internet Sites
Watch out for photo manipulation
Let’s say you visit a Web site on how to take care of a car’s exterior. The suggestions look like objective, reliable material. One of the tips is a Web link (“high-quality wax”). If you click on the link, you will go to a page that is openly commercial—it sells exterior wax. Unknown to you, the original page and the wax page are both operated by the same source—a company that sells wax. The company has done nothing illegal, but it has acted unethically in leaving you with the impression that the tips page was written by impartial researchers who are honestly recommending the best product. You have been manipulated. To avoid being manipulated, weigh Web advice carefully and verify that the information is corroborated by sources that you know you can trust.

20. Analyzing Internet Sites
Investigate sponsors and authors Author credentials Background information California man dressed as woman videos women in changing room
The truth
Investigate the sponsors and authors of a website. Is the author an authority on the subject? Is the sponsor an unbiased, fair organization? If you can’t find the answers to these questions on the website itself, send an and ask for the credentials of the author and background details about the sponsor.