1 / 11

Evaluating Internet Based Information

Evaluating Internet Based Information. What is the primary purpose of the site?. (will you use this site / info?) Is it ... Advocacy or Propaganda (promoting an opinion) Commercial (is it trying to sell you something?) Reference or Information (is it instructional?).

aine
Download Presentation

Evaluating Internet Based Information

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluating Internet Based Information

  2. What is the primary purpose of the site? (will you use this site / info?) • Is it ... • Advocacy or Propaganda (promoting an opinion) • Commercial (is it trying to sell you something?) • Reference or Information (is it instructional?)

  3. Critique internet based information for: • 1 Author information - who wrote this? • 2 Site / publisher information - who publishes or owns the site? • 3 Currency - when was the page written? • 4 Accuracy - is the information reliable? • 5 Bias - why was this page written?

  4. 1 Author information (who wrote the page?) • Title / position? Credentials? • Does it provide contact information? • Is the author quoted by other sources?

  5. 2 Site information (who owns/publishes the site?) • Does the site have authority for its claims? • Does it link to an organisational affiliation? (Look for a header or footer identifying the sponsor or affiliation of the site). • Does it provide contact information? • The URL can provide source information. Check the domain, e.g: .edu or .com or .ac or .gov or .org or .net • Do other reputable sites link to this site?

  6. 3 Currency (when was the page written?) •Is the information up-to-date enough for your purpose? • Is the page dated? When was it last updated? • Are the links within it current or expired?

  7. 4 Accuracy (is the information reliable?)• Is the information factual, detailed, exact and comprehensive? • Can the information be verified in other sources and / or are there links to supporting evidence? • Is it well designed and without spelling or grammatical errors?

  8. 5 Bias / Purpose (why was this page written?) • Is the information balanced and objective? Is the language used emotive, or designed to sway opinion? • Who is the intended audience? (academics, potential customers?) Is there advertising on the page? • Does the author have any connection to an organisation or institution that may influence their treatment of the topic? Souce: http://www.library.otago.ac.nz/robertson/pdf/Google%20search%20tips.pdf University of Otago. Accessed (27/6/11)

  9. Journal Impact Factor (IF) • Used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field • It is a measure reflecting the average number of citations to recent articles published in a journal • Calculated yearly for those journals that are indexed in Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports. Calculation Method 2008 impact factor = A/B. Where A= the number of times articles published in 2006 and 2007 were cited by indexed journals during 2008. And B= the total number of citable items* published by that journal in 2006 and 2007. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor (Accessed 19/6/12) *Citable items are usually articles, reviews, proceedings, or notes; not editorials or Letters-to-the-Editor.)

  10. Example IFs • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor • http://www.sciencegateway.org/rank/index.html • In NZ http://sciencewatch.com/dr/sci/11/apr17-11_1/ Rubbish? http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/623042/description#description

  11. Random & Irrelevant… • 7/10 statistics are made up • 80% of people think that they are above average drivers

More Related