not peer reviewed and does not have references does not meet standards of academic writing and may weaken the credibility of your paper.
Anyone with access to a computer, time, and the ability to make a web
page can place information on a personal website, so you want to be particularly alert when you encounter online content that is not part of an already established academic journal. However, do keep in mind that many academic journals are open access and make their content available as freely as that on a personal web site (see https://doaj.org for a list of peer‐reviewed open‐access journals), and you can often find citation information and abstracts for scholarly sources online.
In general, the five areas you want to consider when getting information from websites are accuracy, authority, objectivity/advocacy, currency, and coverage. We briefly explain these categories in Table 3.2 and illustrate how they can be used to determine the validity of online information.
Table 3.2 Evaluating Internet Sources
| Evaluation category | Questions to ask |
|---|---|
| Accuracy | Can you verify any of the information from your own experience, and does the information seem consistent with other sources you have found? Are there references or links indicating the source(s) of the information? Are you able to access the references cited, either through the library or through the internet, and do those sources seem credible? Does the website conform to standards of academic writing and grammar? |
| Authority | Who is taking credit for the information on the site? Is there an author listed? If an author is not listed, why? What credentials does the author have that make him or her qualified to write about this topic? Are you able to contact the author or find out other background information? |
| Objectivity or Advocacy | What kind of website is this (e.g., entertainment, business, reference, news, advocacy, or personal), or what is the site's purpose? What is the site's domain (e.g., .com, .gov, .edu, .org, .net, .mil, or a country code such as .uk)? How might the site's purpose affect the kind of information it includes or excludes? Does the site present different perspectives? |
| Currency | When was the information put on the website, and when was it originally written? What is the copyright date, and when was the page was last updated? Do hyperlinks on the site take you to active web pages? |
| Coverage | Does the author present information in a fair and comprehensive manner? What kind of tone does the author use? Whose perspectives and voices are included and excluded? Are perspectives other than the author's acknowledged and addressed? How does the author treat ideas that conform to or differ from the author's perspective? What kinds of outside support does the author use? |
For some websites, an organization or sponsor claims authorship, rather than a single author. In this case, you want to ask the same questions you would of a single author. If it is not possible to determine who sponsors the site, you can try truncating the URL (the web address) by deleting the part of the address to the right of the leftmost single backslash and then hit “enter.” For example, http://www.pharmtech.com/virus‐spread‐threatens‐pharmaceutical‐supplies‐and‐clinical‐research takes you to an article about the impact of the coronavirus (COVID‐19) on access to pharmaceutical products more generally. Truncating the URL to the left‐most single backslash will give you http://www.pharmtech.com, which is a website aimed at people within pharmaceutical industries. Knowing this information gives you important context for assessing the credibility of any content within that site.
For example, take the following address, which leads you to a site with information about evaluating websites: https://lib.nmu.edu/help/resource‐guides/subject‐guide/evaluating‐internet‐sources. Truncating it to the left‐most single backslash will give you the URL https://lib.nmu.edu, which is the library's home page for Northern Michigan University. Knowing that this is an educational site, rather than a commercial or personal one, gives you information that can help determine the purpose of the information on the page.
Determining the source and purpose of the information you find on the site can highlight some of the possible biases or assumptions that shape the information. Each of the following URLs contains information about ADHD, but each has a different purpose, as Table 3.3 indicates. To practice evaluating websites, apply the criteria outlined in Table 3.2 to the following links:
https://www.farrin.com/dangerous‐drugs/Ritalin‐lawyer‐north‐carolina‐legal‐help is a page for a law firm;
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/medicating/drugs is part of a public television series about medicating children;
https://www.team‐adhd.com/adhd‐treatment is part of the website for a pharmaceutical company;
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/attention‐deficit‐hyperactivity‐disorder‐adhd/index.shtml is part of the National Institute of Mental Health's website.
Table 3.3 Web Pages, Advocacy, and Coverage for ADHD
| URL | https://www.farrin.com/dangerous‐drugs/Ritalin‐lawyer‐north‐carolina‐legal‐help |
| Host/author | James Scott Farrin, a law firm |
| Site's purpose | This site is a marketing tool to recruit potential clients for the law firm, which is a for‐profit business. |
| Possible limitations of the site | This site offers information about attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), specifically about the dangerous side effects of drugs used to treat ADHD. Although the medical information on this site might be accurate, because the site does not provide information about the benefits of pharmaceuticals used to treat ADHD or about nonpharmaceutical treatment, the coverage is weakened. Therefore, any arguments you make about treating ADHD should draw information from sources that are independent of this website. |
| URL |
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/medicating/drugs
|
