Skip to main content

Psychology *

This is the primary research guide for Psychology students and faculty.

Understanding the Information Cycle

The Information Cycle is the progression of media coverage of a particular newsworthy event. Understanding this cycle will help you know what information is available on your topic and to better evaluate information sources covering that topic at that time.

Flow of Information

Scholarly vs Popular

What is the distinction between popular and scholarly sources? Below is a chart comparing works with a more scholarly focus and those that are less so. Additionally, there are three main types of publications:

  • Scholarly sources are intended for academic use with a specialized vocabulary and extensive citations; they  are often peer-reviewed. Scholarly sources help answer the "so what?" questions and make connections between variables (or issues).
  • Popular sources are intended for the general public and are typically written to entertain, inform or persuade. Popular sources help you answer "who, what, where, and when" questions. Popular sources range from research-oriented to propaganda-focused.
  • Trade publications share general news, trends, and opinions in a certain industry; they are not considered scholarly, because, although generally written by experts, they do not focus on advanced research and are not peer-reviewed.

For a detailed chart comparing these three types of publications, visit: 

More Scholarly More Popular
  Publishing source: Academic journals, government, some magazines and journals   Publishing source: Trade journals, magazines, newspapers, websites, blogs
  Author: Expert on the topic, someone who works in or knows that field

  Author: Anyone; may be a reporter or someone who feels like writing on the topic

  Audience: Specialized (often of peers or students), people interested in the topic   Audience: The general public
  Goal: To inform or present research; answer the "so what?" questions, make connections between variables/issues   Goal: Generally to entertain or persuade, may inform; answers the "who, what, where, and when" questions
  Content: Research-based   Content: Reporting events, the findings of others, or personal experiences; opinion-based
 Reviewers/Editors: Generally peer-reviewed or fact-checked by peers or staff editors  Reviewers/Editors: Staff editor may review
  Format: Standardized (for scholarly articles and formal reports); variable for other publications   Format: Variable: includes websites, blogs, and infographics
  Citations: Generally includes references, footnotes and/or links to sources   Citations: Usually none, may link to related resources 
  Vocabulary: Complex, generally technical and focused on the field, formal   Vocabulary: Familiar, non-technical; may focus on an emotional appeal
  Graphics: Used to illustrate a point   Graphics: Used for visual impact
  Title: May include: report, study, findings   Title: Often general, usually catchy
  Examples: Annals of Psychology, Mother Jones, National Academies Press   Examples: People, Time, My Blog

Evaluating Popular and Web-Based Sources

When finding resources, ask yourself the following questions to determine if they are appropriate to use (SCAAN test):

  • Source type: Does this source answer your research question? Is it an appropriate type (scholarly or popular, for instance) for your question? Does this contain the information you need to support your argument?
  • Currency: Is this source up-to-date? Do I need a resource that contains historical information?
  • Accuracy: Is this source accurate? Does its logic make sense to me? Are there any internal contradictions? Does it link or refer to its sources? Does more current data affect the accuracy of the content?
  • Authority: Who created or authored this source? Could the author or creator bring any biases to the information presented? Is the author or creator a reputable or well-respected agent in the subject area?
  • Neutrality: Is this source intended to educate, inform, or sell? What is the purpose of this source?

The interactive tutorial  "Evaluating your Sources" offers you practice exercises in source evaluation (may not work in Chrome).Evaluating Your Sources

Other acronyms include:

  • CARBS: Currency, Authority, Relevancy, Biased or Factual, Scholarly or Popular
  • CARS: Credibility (authority), Accuracy, Reasonableness, Support
  • CRAAP: Currency, Relevance (source), Accuracy, Authority, Purpose (neutrality)
  • DUPED: Dated, Unambiguous, Purpose, Expertise, Determine (source)
  • IMVAIN: Independent, Multiple sources quoted, Verified with evidence, Authoritative, Informed, Named sources
  • RADAR: Rationale, Authority, Date, Accuracy, Relevance

Finally, consider your own biases when reviewing your information. If the paper/presentation/article had the opposite position/result, would your opinion of it's validity change? 

Sorting Google Results

Google can be a powerful research tool that helps you find policy and legislative data, statistics, policy reports, and more. The trick is knowing how to get Google to find the good stuff for you.

Know your domains:

The end of a web address (URL), after the dot, is the domain. For example,, edu is the domain. You can use domains to filter out your Google results. 

Common domains are:

  • edu -- educational sites
  • org -- non-profit sites
  • gov -- government sites

I know that many statistics are available on government sites, so I can have Google search for sites that end in gov.

Google domain filtering:

Add the words "" (or org/edu/com/etc.) to the end of your Google search. Use a semicolon to separate domains.

The search below is asking Google to find sources about HIV infections in Los Angeles, and limiting my results to websites that end in .gov or .org -- in other words, I only want results from government or non-profit organizations.

Not Scholarly

With the advent of Open Access, more research is becoming available to a wider variety of researchers. Unfortunately, unscrupulous publishers are also entering the field. These are often called "predatory publishers". Their goal is to raise money - generally by tricking legitimate researchers into submitting their articles to be published for a nominal fee. However, most of these will accept any article by anyone on any topic and call it "scientific."

Check the journal before submitting: Tricks by predatory publishers:

  • Turn around time from 5 days to a month (the peer-review process takes a minimum of several months)
  • Spam: emails to republish an old article of yours (plagiarizing yourself), serve on a editorial board (they need legitimate names), guaranteed publishing (legitimate journals reject 50-90 of their submissions), instant publishing (see above)
  • Fake impact factor (made up numbers to trick potential authors; there are also fake impact factor sites)
  • Fake peer review (see above)
  • Fake editorial board (they invite people, but if you email members of the board, they may not even know they are being listed)
  • True ISSN and doi (journals can get an ISSN and get their articles a doi, even if they are not a legitimate authority)

Always check the journal website before submitting an article.