Evaluating information
- 2. You can evaluate information and the seeking process by: A. Assessing usefulness of information B. Applying criteria for evaluating authority and credibility C. Reflecting on the information seeking process
- 3. Wider context – You should consider own bias – You should consider prejudice, deception and manipulation – You should recognise the cultural, social, economic and historical context in which information is both created and interpreted information (and how you then in turn interpret it)
- 4. Assessing usefulness – Information needs to be checked, to see whether it is based on: fact – a thing that can be shown to be true opinion – a personal view or judgment belief – a personal conviction prejudice – irrational preconceived opinion – Valid arguments are based on facts and clearly established propositions – Invalid arguments are based on beliefs and prejudice
- 5. Question constantly – What kind of information is it? – Who is the author? – Who is supplying it? – Why is it being provided? – Who is the audience? – Where did information come from? – How current is it? – How accurate is it?
- 6. Evaluation criteria There are lots of ways to evaluate a piece of information, we’ll look at two simple models that use: – Acronyms – Graphics
- 7. Value (including efficiency) What is the value of this information? Who decides? Also ask about its efficiency, can you then be directed to other works Should you back up and check other research that includes the information you are looking at? –Would refining searches be more useful in terms of efficiency? –Use annotated bibliographies?
- 8. Quality (including reliability) – Is it reliable? Do you know where the information came? – Is it a primary, secondary or tertiary source? – Can you identify any bias by author? Is it implicit or explicit?
- 9. A note on “peer reviewed” articles” Peer-reviewed means “journal articles” which have been reviewed by other experts in the field In databases tick peer-reviewed to limit articles to those that are peer- reviewed Consider: Although peer-reviewed journals have survived as guarantors of quality, it is because they have followed the rules of the research/academic game. It is possible that while they may contain facts, some types of research are seen better than other types
- 11. What is the Difference? Scholarly – Authors are authorities in their fields/specialists/ experts/scholars/ researchers – Include author’s credentials Popular – Authors are magazine staff members or free lance writers/ generalists – Often exclude author’s credentials
- 12. Difference…. Scholarly – Authors cite their sources in endnotes, footnotes, or bibliographies Popular – Authors mention sources but seldom cite them in formal bibliographies
- 13. Difference …. Scholarly – Articles go through peer-review process – Almost no advertising and color Popular – No peer-review process – Contain numerous advertisements and color
- 14. Difference …. Scholarly – Articles inform or report research – Illustrations – in the form of charts, diagrams, or graphs to explain research Popular – Articles normally entertain – Illustrations - Numerous and colorful to add marketing appeal
- 15. Difference …. Scholarly – Language – Use of jargon specific to the particular discipline – Often have an abstract at the beginning of the article – Often have the order, introduction, literature review, methodology, findings, analysis, conclusion Popular – Language – Simple and everyday – Rarely contain abstracts – Have an introduction and conclusion but no set format in between
- 16. Difference …. Scholarly – Often published by professional organization or university – Indexed in subject indexes, such as MLA, PsychInfo . . . Popular – Published for profit – Indexed in popular indexes
- 17. So how should you look at your resources? – Think CRAAP then reflect – Currency (is it up to date/still being used?) – Relevance (is it useful to you, your practice and your industry?) – Authority (does the author have mana in the research sector?) – Accuracy (is the information supported with evidence or a peer review?) – Purpose (why was this article written in the first place?)
- 18. Currency Two aspects : currency as in time and currency as in “money” Time: –When was it written? –Do you want current information or do you also need background information? –Websites: check dates Money: –Is it relevant to the social, legal, economic and cultural context you live and work in? –If using it for practice, is the work context the same (is it transferable at little cost)?
- 19. Relevance How is it relevant? Does the information describe or critique? Remember your research question but be open to modifying it
- 20. Authority • Do they have the authority to speak? • Who has given them this mandate? • Are they to speak on behalf of others : consider Maori, disability etc • Is this a subjective or objective view? • Is it scholarly or popular? • Is it a personal blog? • Can you contact this person?
- 21. Accuracy Especially important if gathering data •Does presentation of data match the purpose •Is data accurately presented If grammatical, content or spelling errors, what might this tell you? •Can you trust what you read, hear and see? Does it “feel” accurate for what you are observing? If not, can you find other sources to back up claims? •Is the referencing accurate so you can find sources?
- 22. Purpose: (1)usefulness Always consider values and bias in information. –Does the information promote any political, religious, commercial, cultural, historical or theoretical position? –If so, is it useful for others? –Can you use information for other purposes e.g. disability writings for other marginalised groups?
- 23. Purpose: (2)audience – Who is information produced for? General public, academics, practitioners, clients, colleagues, students – Does the style, tone , vocabulary, images, format etc suggest an intended audience? – What is it’s intention? To convince, manipulate, inform, entertain? – Does the publisher give you an indication of the audience ?
- 24. Reflection Few people know how to ask “What information do I need to do my job? When do I need it? In what form? And from whom shall I be getting it?” Fewer still ask: “what new tasks can I tackle now that I have this data, which old tasks should I abandon? Which tasks shall I do differently?” Raw material needs to be directed towards a task, performance or decision (Drucker cited in Breivik ,2005 p.23) THIS IS EVIDENCE BASED BEST PRACTICE!
- 25. Reflect: have I moved on? – Traditional thinking concentrated mainly on what the situation ‘is’ – In taking this approach, you limited the opportunity for creative thinking and for change – Lateral thinking is a strategy that creates new ways of doing things in the future – The results from this kind of thinking that will contribute to future knowledge
Editor's Notes
- #10: How long before role is trumped by a more informal system of quality controlled by discerning readers-you!!