In our modern world, the challenge most researchers face is not finding resources, but evaluating resources. Creating convincing but inaccurate informational resources is a breeze and we are so inundated with information that its often difficult to take the time to spot sophisticated or unintentional misinformation. Everyone can be fooled by misinformation, so even experts need to closely evaluate the information they incorporate into their research.
There are lots of ways to evaluate literature and the core of all the methods is a high level of critical thinking. The AACODS checklist, created by Jess Tyndall, is an example of an evaluation model that relies on the reader's critical thinking skills. Below are the areas the model uses to evaluate information. The questions are intended to serve as a place to start when considering the multitude of factors that can impact information accuracy. Ask the questions about the source you are using to determine whether a source is worthwhile.
Why should we listen to what they are telling us?
When deciding which information to believe, use, or trust, we must first look at who created the information and decide if they are in a position to give us this information.
How we evaluate authority depends greatly on societal constructs. Authority is constructed in that various communities may recognize different types of authority.
The context in which the information is gathered, created and used affects the information giver's authority. For example, a kindergarten teacher has authority on a subject within her classroom to her students, but not when speaking to a group of adults in bar about the same subject.
What has the information creator done to ensure the information is correct?
When evaluating information, we want to see what the creator of the information has done to ensure the accuracy of the information being presented. Things like peer-reviewing, correct and findable citations, clear explanations of how the information was gathered, and quick publishing of corrections can bluster a creator's reputation of accuracy.
What does this information apply to?
Anytime we are evaluating information, we need to be aware of the scope and berth of the information. It is difficult to make broad, sweeping, and general statements while still maintaining accuracy. Facts can change considerably based on the time, place, circumstances, involved population groups etc of the event. For example, statistics for asthma rates are going to be different if we are looking at a specific neighborhood versus an entire country or for the year 1953 versus the year 2023. Even scholarly works, made by the foremost experts on very niche areas, rarely make definitive statements and often conclude that more research needs to be done to fully understand the topic. How can we verify or compare information if we don’t know what exactly the information applies to?
How can biases affect this information?
Deciding the objectivity and biases of an information provider is perhaps the most important aspect of evaluating information in any context. Everyone has bias and that bias affects what we believe and what we tell others. Researchers will need to ask themselves what the author’s or organization’s agenda or mission is outside of the information in the document we are evaluating. Keep in mind that people's potential biases are rarely stated or acknowledged, so those looking to evaluate information will have to do some digging.
How does time or timing affect this information?
Almost all information changes over time. More facts come to light, viewpoints change, potential biases are uncovered as time passes. Knowing the timeframe our information covers as well as when the literature was written and published is important to evaluating the resource. We need to know the context for the information which can be gauged from the time it was collected and published. For example, a pro-industrial organization may use a statistic about drops in pollution to bolster a claim about how factories are not harming the environment. However if the data was collected during the height of the 2020 pandemic, when quarantine stopped travel and limited factory operations, the claim would be misleading. On the other hand, we have to acknowledge that some information degrades and becomes less accurate over time. Researchers need to critically evaluate how time of publication will change the information presented.
What is the impact of this information to the field and to us as researchers?
Researchers need to critically consider the significance of the information they are evaluating in relation to the topic they are researching. On one hand, why bother with an item of literature that doesn't add anything new to the topic? (Keep in mind that adding a diverse viewpoint that has been historically ignored does add value to a topic even if it reiterates known information.) However, some of the most impactful and salacious information ends up being misinformation. Popular media can make insignificant events or data seem life-altering, and we only realize years later that it was not impactful. Most importantly, we need to decide if our source has any significance on the topic we are researching specifically. An article that addresses a different topic can be taken out of context and force to fit our topic, but that doesn't mean the information is valid in the context of our research.