When evaluating a source of information to ensure it is a worthy, college-level resource, you need to examine three elements:
Establishing Authority
In the world of research and information studies, "authority" is viewed as how the experience, education, and/or reputation of a source can lead someone to trust it. When a source has "authority" people accept that the information the source provides is credible or trustworthy, and they will have more comfort in believing and using it.
In the academic world, authority is given to those who have extensive education in the subject area (a doctorate, typically), and who have experience exploring and expanding knowledge and expertise through original research or analysis.
Look for an author's credentials before using a source.
Establishing Bias
In Information Literacy and research, bias is a nuanced concept. Everyone has bias, to some degree or another. When considering the bias of an information source, one is really looking to evaluate influence and objectivity of the information.
Student Bias
The student searching for information should be aware of confirmation bias--finding information that only supports what the student already believes-- as well as considering that personal biases might affect the search terms one chooses when seeking information. A student must strive to keep an open mind when researching in order to find a diversity of information sources. Once information has been located, the student must evaluate it for the information creator's bias.
Information Source Bias
Bias in an information source usually reveals itself in how the information is being presented.
Bias often exists in what is excluded in a source. Compare multiple sources of information on the same topic to see what facts might be left out of a more biased website, article, or other information source.
Funding bias
The corporations or entities that have funded or hosted studies should be listed. The funding entity may indicate conflict of interest. Example: a research study on nicotine addiction that is funded by a tobacco company.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Bias does not necessarily mean a source is not factual. The absence of bias does not equal fact. The presence of bias does not in itself eliminate the validity of a source. This concept can be seen most clearly when evaluating the balance of an information source.
Balance in Research
Reliable research/information is balanced. It provides multiple perspectives, as opposed to showing a single side of an issue. But not all perspectives deserve equal consideration. A perspective that is unsupported by evidence does not need to be presented simply to give "equal" weight to an issue. This is considered a false balance. While a well-balanced information source provides conflicting points of view, there is no need to give credence to information that is not valid. Example: An article about the scientific fact of gravity should not be expected to include arguments against the existence of gravity. In an effort to be objective or impartial, an information creator should not be providing a platform for junk science or outlandish statements. An information source with false balance is a questionable source.
Establishing Credibility
Context and Corroboration
An information source should not be taken at face value. Sources should be examined for both context and corroboration.
Corroboration is the process of double-checking information. Do multiple sources from an array of information types say the same things? If Wikipedia; a scholarly journal; a reference book edited by a professional; and a dictionary all say that "Giraffes are spotted," but a single source found on www.weirdgiraffes.com claims that "giraffes are striped," you would be unlikely to believe that last source. It is not corroborated by other scholars. If you were uncertain--or really attached to the hope of encountering a striped giraffe--you might demand photographic evidence, then check to see that the photos were not altered. A good researcher would find multiple sources to support the striped giraffe theory, and when those sources were not found, that good researcher would reject the striped giraffe source's credibility. The giraffe example is a silly one, but students often rely on uncorroborated sources for academic topics such as climate change.
After verifying corroborating sources, the student can gage whether information has been used in context. Context is the difference between saying "Brevity is the soul of wit" OR "Brevity is wit." (Thanks go to the Simpons cartoon for that example.)
An information source might quote well-researched statistics, but if some stats have been highlighted while other crucial numbers are ignored, the author might be trying to muddy the context of those statistics on purpose. How is the author of an information source using statistics? Are they being misrepresented due to context? Scroll down to see a list of resources for statistics that can help students double check sources of information.
Ask a Librarian
Issues of authority, bias, and credibility can be complex. Ask a librarian for help. You can contact your librarian through multiple mediums.
For more information specific to website evaluation, please also see Website Evaluation
All guides are available under the CC-BY-NC-SA license.