Skip to Main Content

Introduction to Library Research

An overview of the basic skills and information needed to begin searching in research databases and evaluating information.

Evaluating Sources

Evaluating sources is an important part of the research process, as it allows you to critically think about the information you are interacting with, and decide if it meets your needs and is appropriate for your assignment or project. 

This page will provide tips and methods for evaluating sources and cover the following topics:

  • What Does it Mean to Evaluate Sources?
  • Methods for Evaluating Sources
    • CRAAP Test
    • SIFT Method
  • Self-check quiz 

What Does it Mean to Evaluate Sources?

Evaluating sources is a fancy way of saying that we take steps to identify whether the information we read and include in our research is credible and appropriate for our needs. While we have a large amount of information available to us, both in print and online, that doesn't mean all information we encounter will be valid, useful, or accurate. 

Part of writing research papers include searching for information and evaluating those sources for credibility. You have to decide where to look, how to recognize credible sources, and how to verify information when needed. Not only is this a skill that is required for writing effective papers, but it is a skill that you will use everyday as you encounter information online and in-person. 

Below are a couple of methods for evaluating sources. 

Methods for Evaluating Sources

horizontal infographic representing the acronym CRAAP. Calendar icon labeled Currency. Puzzle icon labeled Relevance. Person with star rating icon labeled Authority. Check mark icon labeled Accuracy. Question mark icon labeled Purpose.

CRAAP is an acronym and stands for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy and Purpose.

The CRAAP Test provides you with a list of questions to help you evaluate the information that you find and encourages critical thinking about the sources you consult. Not all criteria apply equally at the same time to all resources.

Currency: to determine if the date of publication of the information is suitable for your project.

  • When was the information published or posted?
  • Is the information current or out-of-date for your topic? Why is or isn't the date important for the content or source?
  • Has the information been revised or updated?
  • If there are any embedded links, are they functional?

Relevance: to determine how applicable the information is for the purpose of your project.

  • For what audience or level is the information written (general public, scholars/experts, etc.)?
  • Is the information at an appropriate level for your needs (i.e. not too simple or advanced)?
  • Does the information relate to your topic, answer your question, or expand your knowledge on the topic?
  • Explain why you would or would not reference information from this source in your project.

Authority: to determine if the source author, creator, or publisher is knowledgeable or has expertise on a topic. 

  • Who is the author? What are their credentials? Are they associated with a credible institution or organization?
  • What are the author's qualifications to write on this topic?
  • Who is the publisher?
  • Is there contact information available for either the author or publisher?
  • Does the URL (if a web-based source) reveal anything about the source?
    • .com (commercial), .edu(education), .gov (government), .net (network)

Accuracy: to determine the reliability, truthfulness, or correctness of the content.

  • Where does the information come from?
  • Is the information supported by evidence (in-text citations, reference list, etc.)?
  • Has the information been reviewed for correctness (peer-reviewed, fact-checked, etc.?)
  • Would you be able to verify any of the information in another source or from prior knowledge?
  • Does the language and tone of writing seem to be free of emotion? Is there any use of biased language or tone?
  • Are there spelling, grammar, or other typographical errors?
  • Is there any conflict of interest between the author and the sponsors of the source? Could it be inferred that someone was influenced to present information in a specific way?

Purpose: to determine the reason why the information exists.

  • Why was this source written (to inform, teach, sell, entertain, persuade, etc.)?
  • Do the authors/publishers make their intentions and purpose clear?
  • Is the information presented fact, opinion, propaganda ... ?
  • Does the point of view seem objective and impartial?
  • Are there political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional, or personal biases evident?
  • What conclusions are presented and is the information complete? Is anything major excluded?

Infographic for acronym SIFT. The Letter S above a stop icon labeled "stop." The letter I over a magnifying glass icon labeled "investigate source." The letter F over a checkmark icon labeled "find better coverage." and the letter T over an person icon labeled "trace claims."

The SIFT Method is a series of steps a person can take in order to determine the reliability of a source. This method is frequently used and was created to help evaluate sources on the web, like news articles, videos, and other media. Each letter in the acronym "SIFT" corresponds to a step you can take to evaluate your source.

  1. Stop
  2. Investigate the source
  3. Trace claims, quotes, and media to the original context 
  4. Find better/trusted coverage

Stop

The first move reminds us to do a simple task: stop. 

When you first encounter a source and start to read it -- STOP. Ask questions like:

  • Are you familiar with the website or source?
  • Do you trust the source? Why?

If you aren't familiar with a source, stop and move on to the other steps in the SIFT method to get a sense of what you're looking at. Don't read or share a source until you know what it is. 

Investigate the Source

The key idea is to know what you're reading before you read it. Taking a moment to figure out what you're reading before you read it can help you decide if a source is worth your time, and if it is, will help you better understand its purpose and trustworthiness. 

Scenario:

You find two articles on your topic from two different organizations. Upon first glance, both of these articles and organizations look legitimate, so you consider using them both for your paper. However, you remember your professor telling you that it was important to evaluate your sources, so you decide to take a closer look to determine reliability. You Google both organizations and find out that one is a decades-old professional organization well-respected in the field, and one is a small organization that does not have the qualifications or expertise on the topic you are researching.

Here are some tips:

  • Do a Google search. This may seem counterproductive, but it is actually very important to see what the web tells you about the author or organization publishing information. It is easy for organizations, especially organizations intentionally trying to spread misinformation, to mislead you when describing their own mission and values. It is much easier to get a clearer picture of the motivations and authority of a source by looking at what others have to say about it. 
  • When in doubt, look for a different source. It is okay to abandon a source when you are unsure about its authority or accuracy. 

Trace claims back to the original context

Most of the time, what you encounter on the web is not original reporting or research. Rather, it is often commentary or re-reporting of a news story or a piece of research. In all likelihood the author of the article you are reading did no original reporting, fact-checking, or verifying of information before publishing their review, blog post, or re-reported story. 

It is also common to encounter information (quotes, video clips, images) that has been stripped of context or purposely presented out of context to try and mislead you. In any situation where you feel that you are viewing information out of it's original context, it is important to trace those claims back to the original source.

Strategies for tracing claims:

  • Look for citations or attributions. If an article says something like "originally reported by," or "according to," then it's time to stop and do a search to find the original article or source. If the source you are looking at does not clearly identify where claims originate, find a new source.
  • Follow links. If a source has another page linked in the text, follow the link. Many times this will bring you back to the original source. 
  • Quick Check- Do a Google Search. If you are unsure of a claim, do a separate Google search with the intention of verifying the information. Type keywords from the article into Google and observe the following information in the search results:
    • consensus, disagreement, or controversy. What do other sources say? For example, if you see a post that Keanu Reeves died, a quick Google search can tell you if it is confirmed or contradicted by other sources.
    • determine accuracy (is it true?) by trying to find the same information shared by a source you can confirm is credible, like a major newspaper. If a Google search is showing that the same information is being shared by multiple major news outlets, that's a good indication that the information is valid. 

 

Find Better/Trusted Coverage

Often times, especially on social media, content appears in front of us with very little effort. Rather than just click on information that comes your way, it is a better strategy to seek out "trusted coverage" that better suits your needs. Invest time in finding a more reliable source.

Strategies:

  • Rely on established media and other sources that utilize fact-checking strategies before publishing information.  
  • Trade up - use your strategies for tracing claims to find the same information published by a more reliable source. 
  • Utilize fact-checking sources. 

For a more in-depth overview and self-paced lessons, please take the Check, Please! Starter Course developed by Mike Caulfield. 

The SIFT Method portion of this guide was adapted from the canonical version of "Check, Please!" (Caufield). As the authors of the original version have not reviewed any other copy's modifications, the text of any site not arrived at through the above link should not be sourced to the original authors, rather to the author of this LibGuide. 

Evaluating Sources Self-Check Quiz