edShare@GCU

edShare@GCU (Glasgow Caledonian University)

PAF to PURE Workshop 4

Measurement (Direct Entry Students) Summer Schoo

Cartlidge, Duncan

Substructure (MDE)

A brief guide on what to consider when assessing sources of information. Based on the CRAAP method

Gardiner, Lisa

 
 
Evaluating sources guide 
Why evaluate? 
Not all information sources are equal. You have to decide if the information you have found meets 
your needs and is of sound quality. This guide will help you learn how to do this. 
Currency: How old can the source be and still be useable? 
It depends on your topic.  The general rule is no older than ten years. In health and life sciences the 
rule is usually no older than five years for research articles and no older than ten years for books and 
other types of articles.  It is important to check the publication date because information can 
become obsolete or unusable due to changes in practice, legislation or technology. 
 Most databases and search engines will let you choose a date range. 
 On websites it can be difficult to determine how up to date the information is. Not all 
websites have publication dates. Use your judgement and try to find a second, dated source 
to confirm the first.  
Relevance: How much of the source is about your topic? 
 How many times do your keywords appear in the abstract or article? 
 Is the information comprehensive and how much information is provided? 
 Who is the intended audience? Is the language used aimed at members of the public, 
students or academic researchers? 
Accuracy: How reliable and correct is the source? 
 Does it complement or contradict your own knowledge or information you found 
elsewhere? 
 Are the facts supported by evidence or verified by another source? 
 How was the source compiled? 
o Does it present research findings and is the research methodology explained? 
o Where there are calculations, are they free from errors? 
o Has the information been edited and checked for spelling or grammatical errors? 
o Is it logically structured?  
o Does it cite the work of others to support or refute their arguments? If so, are the 
references sufficiently detailed to allow follow-up? 
 
 
This work Evaluating sources guide by Lisa Gardiner Glasgow Caledonian University is a derivative of SMILE 
created by Marion Kelt Glasgow Caledonian University used under a CC- By 4.0 International License.  
Evaluating sources guide by Lisa Gardiner Glasgow Caledonian University is licensed under CC- By 4.0 
International License by Lisa Gardiner  
 
Authority: Can I trust the author? 
 Who is the author?  
o Journal articles and books often provide brief details of current employment and 
areas of expertise. 
o You can also run a search on the author in a database such as Web of Science. 
 If there is no named author, what is the organisation who produced the information? Are 
they a professional body or a well-established organisation? 
If you can't find out who the author is, or their level of expertise - do you really want to use the 
source? 
 If it is an article, is it peer-reviewed (reviewed and accepted by subject experts prior to 
publication)? 
 Is the journal or publisher reputable or well-known in your field of study? 
Purpose: Why was the source written? 
There are many types of sources. What is the purpose of the piece of writing you have found?  
 Does it share recent research? For example, a journal article describing and explaining the 
process and outcomes of a scientific experiment. 
 Does it aim to persuade you? For example, an advertisement or campaign literature from a 
charity or pressure group. 
 Does it provide practical guidance? For example, trade journals or patient information 
leaflets. 
What is the tone of the source? 
 Is it based in fact or personal opinion? 
 Is the argument balanced or one-sided? 
Are the writer’s links to sponsors or institutions made clear? 
In conclusion 
Sources are rarely all in complete agreement on a topic. Often academics will hold differing views 
and will attempt to support their hypotheses with research evidence. By demonstrating a depth of 
research in your work, you show consideration for all aspects of a topic. If there is contradictory or 
conflicting information that you have failed to consider, your conclusions may be questioned. You 
need to demonstrate that you are aware of alternative views and explain why you disagree. 
These are some of the main general points to consider when assessing information. 
If our guide hasn’t answered your question on source evaluation or you need more help  
Contact your Librarian [link opens in new window] 


Evaluating sources guide

PAPER 29 - A secondary analysis of risk factors contributing to the prevalence of TB in informal settlements: A study of Khayelitsha in Cape Town, South Africa

Mashoto Moropane, Andre Kruger, Chioma Okoro and Abdulrauf Adedira

W099 TG59 2020 Web Conference 
Last updated: Friday, 04 September 2020 Page 1 
I (name)___Mashoto Moropane, Andre Kruger, Chioma Okoro and Abdulrauf Adediran____, 
the creator(s) of (title of presentation)    
___A secondary analysis of risk factors contributing to the prevalence of TB in informal 
settlements: A  study of Khayelitsha in Cape Town, South Africa___________________ 
authorise the W099 TG59 organising committee to display this work in perpetuity on the 
edShare@GCU educational resource repository. 
I confirm that no third party content is included in my work or, where third party content is 
included, it is openly licensed or I have obtained permission to use said content in this work. 
I retain copyright for this work. The work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Individuals 
and/or organisations who wish to use my work are free to share (to copy and redistribute 
the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon 
the material) for any purpose, even commercially. Individuals and/or organisations who 
wish to share or adapt my work can do so under the following terms: 
 Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and
indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in
any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
 I agree to this presentation remaining on the W099 TG59 Website & the
edShare@GCU resource indefinitely.
Signed: 
Date: 
x
08-09-2020


PAPER 29 - A secondary analysis of risk factors contributing to the prevalence of TB in informal settlements: A study of Khayelitsha in Cape Town, South Africa

PAPER 2 - Impacting Construction Health and Safety Performance Using Virtual Reality - A Scoping Study Review

Mark Swallow & Sam Zul

Glasgow Caledonian University

Not a member yet

PAF to PURE Workshop 4

Substructure (MDE)

Evaluating sources guide

PAPER 29 - A secondary analysis of risk factors contributing to the prevalence of TB in informal settlements: A study of Khayelitsha in Cape Town, South Africa

PAPER 2 - Impacting Construction Health and Safety Performance Using Virtual Reality - A Scoping Study Review

Measurement External Walls

Collaborate Webinar Recording 030920

Sustainability Assessment - Case Study 3

Politics 2: Political Theory

L4 Precipitation analysis - a brief history

Data sources:

652

7,745