*Psychology

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.

(For a larger view of this chart, right click and open in a new tab).

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considered scholarly, because, although generally written by experts, they do not focus on advanced research and are not peer-reviewed.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: 

Once you have located online sources you are considering using for your research project, it is important to critically evaluate the source for reliability.

One method to evaluate sources is the SIFT Method, developed by Mike Caulfield.

The SIFT Method

The SIFT method is used for critically navigating and assessing digital information. It is designed to evaluate the credibility of information, understand its context, and decide on its reliability. It involves four critical moves: Stop, Investigate the Source, Find Better Coverage, and Trace Claims to the Original Context. This method Adopting SIFT establishes a critical mindset when you pause to consider the source, search for diverse perspectives, and locate the original source of claims, fostering a more informed and critical approach to consuming digital content.

The four critical moves of SIFT:

1. Stop: Before engaging with content, pause to consider your familiarity with the source and its credibility. This step encourages mindful information consumption Ask yourself whether you know the website or source of the information, and what the reputation of both the claim and the website is.
2. Investigate the Source: Take a moment to understand the source's background. Knowing the author or publisher's expertise and agenda aids in interpreting the content accurately.For example, watching a video promoting milk benefits created by the dairy industry, recognizing the source's vested interest is key to understanding biased reporting. This awareness informs your understanding and critical assessment of the information presented.
3. Find Better Coverage: Look for reputable sources that cover the same topic. This helps in understanding different perspectives and the consensus around a claim. Should you start to feel bogged down while verifying facts, pause and reflect on your goal. For intentions like sharing, reading for enjoyment, or grasping basic concepts, confirming the credibility of the source may suffice. However, for in-depth research, it's beneficial to meticulously investigate and confirm each claim made in an article on your own.
4. Trace Claims to Original Context: Go back to the original source of the information to see it in its true context, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the material. Online content often lacks the full context, such as potentially misleading captions on seemingly real images. Similarly, health claims might reference research findings ambiguously. To address these issues, it's advised to track back to the original source of any claim, media, or quote to understand its true context and verify the accuracy of the claim you encountered.

Additional Evaluation Techniques

When finding sources online, 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?

Other Evaluation Acronyms

• 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 its validity change? 

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, www.usc.edu, 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 "site:.gov" (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.

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.