Evaluating Information Sources

When you encounter any type of information source, ask yourself: 

1. Authority - Who is the author? What is their point of view? 
2. Purpose - Why was this source created? Who is the intended audience? 
3. Publication & format - Where was it published? On what medium? 
4. Relevance - Is this relevant for your research? What is the scope? 
5. Date of publication - When was it written? Has it been updated? 
6. Documentation - Did they cite their sources? Can you find those sources? 

Authority 

• Who is the author/publisher/creator/sponsor? 
• What are their credentials? 
• What else have they written? 
• Can you find information about them online? 
• Have you seen them cited in other relevant information sources? 
• In which contexts and communities does the author have expertise? 
  • Does the author represent a particular worldview? 
  • Do they represent specific gender, racial, sexual, political, social and/or cultural orientation? 
  • Do they privilege some forms of authority over others? 
  • Do they have a formal role in a reputable institution (e.g. professor at Harvard, city council member)? 

Purpose

• Why was this source created? To inform? Persuade? Entertain? Sell something? 
• Does the author/creator make their purpose clear to the reader? 
• Does the point of view appear objective? 
• Are there political, ideological, cultural, institutional, or personal biases? 
• Does it fill any other personal, professional, or societal needs? 
• Who is the intended audience? 
  • Is it for scholars? 
  • Is it for a general audience? 

Publication & format 

• Where was it published? 
• Was it published in a scholarly publication, like an academic journal? 
  • Who was the publisher? A university press? 
  • Was there a peer-review process? 
  • Which discipline, or field of study, is the journal from? 
• Does the publication have a particular editorial position? 
  • Is it considered a conservative or progressive outlet? 
  • Is the publication sponsored by any organizations or companies? Do those sponsors have particular biases? 
• Were there any apparent barriers to publication? 
  • Was this self published? 
  • Were there any outside reviewers or editors? 
• Where, geographically, was it originally published? In what language? 
• In what medium was this published? 
  • Was it published in print? Online? Both? 
  • Is it a blog? YouTube video? Podcast? A TV episode? An article from a print magazine? 
    • What does the medium tell you about the intended audience? 
    • What does the medium tell you about the source's purpose? 

Relevance

• How is it relevant to your research? 
  • Does it analyze the same primary sources you are researching? 
  • Does it cover the people/topic you're researching, but from another perspective or using other sources/data? 
  • Can you apply the author's theoretic or analytic framework to your own research? 
  • How many other sources have you examined before choosing this source? 
• What is the scope of coverage? 
  • Is it a broad overview? Is it an in-depth analysis? 
  • Does the scope match your research needs? 
  • Is the geographic region or time period relevant for your research? 

Date of publication 

• When was the original publication date? 
• What version or edition of the source are you using? 
  • Are there differences in editions, such as a new introductions, footnotes, or chapters? 
  • If the publication is online, when was it last updated? 
• What has changed in your field since the publication? Is this still accurate information? 
• Are there any published reviews, responses or rebuttals?

Documentation

• Did they cite their sources?
  • If not, do you have any other means to verify the reliability of their claims?
• Who do they cite?
  • Is the author affiliated with any of the authors they're citing?
  • Are the cited authors part of a particular academic movement or school of thought?
• Look closely at the quotations and paraphrases from other sources:
  • Did they appropriately represent the context of their cited sources?
  • Did they ignore any important elements from their cited sources?
  • Are they cherry-picking facts to support their own arguments?
  • Did they appropriately cite ideas that were not their own?
• If they use links for their citations, are the links functional?