Information sources come in a variety of genres, each marked by specific conventions and target audiences. Among the broader categories of genres you will find:
Popular communication ~ informs and entertains the general public.
Magazines like Time and Rolling Stone and books like Michael Jackson : music's living legend by Rosemary Wallner, distributed by Rockbottom Books are examples of popular sources.
Scholarly communication ~ disseminates research and academic discussion among professionals within disciplines. Journals such as Memory & Cognition and Journal of Abnormal Psychology are examples of scholarly sources.
Trade communication ~ allows practitioners in specific industries to share market and production information that improves their businesses. Variety or Elevator World are examples of trade publications.
Author's Credibility
Do you believe everything you read? Knowing more about an author can help you judge her or his credibility. If you were writing about the relationship between human activity and the temperature of the earth, whose work would you choose to include in your paper? Look for clues that suggest their level of expertise and/or bias.
A. An atmospheric physicist at Winston University and founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, a think tank on climate and environmental issues
B. A Washington Post staff writer who has written articles such as "Arctic Ice Shelf Crumbles Into Sea," "In Infrastructure Debate, Politics Is Key Player," and "President's Reform Efforts Get Results."
C. Current president of Greater Chipiwick Environmental Club, and publisher of a Web site that discusses the major causes of global warming in the last 100 years.
In terms of evaluating an author, credentials include degrees received, titles held, professional affiliations, years of activity in a field, publication history, fields of inquiry, and the characteristics of publications in which their work has appeared.
Website credibility
Similar to judging a publication and the author, you can make several decisions about whether or not a source of information is valid from simply looking at the URL (the website’s address). The extension is the first clue. Rank the following web extensions by giving them a 1,2, or 3 (1 being the most credible, 3 being the least).
.com .mil .net .gov .edu .co.uk
This webpage was built with information found at http://www.lib.washington.edu/. Why do you think I feel I can trust that website? .edu is the extention for some sort of learning institution. An application must be sent in for a .gov, .mil, and .edu domain extension. Because they are verified, you can trust their content a bit more.
Research Credibility and the Wiki
The reason teachers, professors and other people who will read your work are going to be sketchy about you using wikipedia.org as a source for your information is because of the credibility of not only the author, its validity, as well as the site itself. Encyclopedia Brittanica has useful information; however, even its fact checkers can find an average of 3 errors in several of their articles after printing. Fact checkers have found an average of 4 errors on Wiki. Not to mention that anyone – ANYONE – alter any of the documents on Wiki. The best way to always approach information on Wiki is to make sure there are references and to take a few moments to check a few of them before holding too much stock in them.
Before reviewing the questions below, select one of the following sources as most useful for a research paper on the current use of primates in scientific laboratories?
A. "Monkeys in our Labs," by Scott Gottieber, a USA Today staff writer. Published in USA Today Dec 15, 1989. Includes chart, "Number of Test Primates in the US, 1975-1985."
B. Laboratory Primate Advocacy Group website. LPAG is a nonprofit organization. Website last updated in 2001. "LPAG believes that the laboratory is no place for monkeys and nonhuman great apes."
C. "Better numbers on primate research," by Constance Holden. Published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Appeared in Science, a scholarly publication, on March 30, 2001.
When deciding whether or not an information source is useful in the context of your research, you should consider the following issues regarding content. Click on the linked term to the right of each issue for a set of activities that will clarify your understanding of each:
Objectivity: Are the goals for this publication clearly stated?
Is there a particular bias evident? Is the viewpoint of the author's affiliation reflected in the message or content? Does the information appear to be valid and well-researched?
Quality: Does this appear to be quality work?
Is the information well-organized? Has the author used good grammar? Are the graphics – images, tables, charts, diagrams – appropriate and clearly presented?
Coverage: How does it cover your topic?
Is it comprehensive? an overview? highly detailed and narrowly-focused? Does the work update other sources?
Relevance: Does the work address your research question or meet the requirements of your assignment? Is the content appropriate for your research topic or assignment?
Built with information from University of Washington’s Research 101 website for use in the classroom.
http://www.lib.washington.edu/uwill/research101/index.html