In the process of finding a topic and tracking down sources for course- or work-related projects, you have likely had to evaluate the credibility and authenticity of available research resources--not only research articles themselves, but the paths that you followed in finding those articles. The project one assignment formalizes this process, asking us to consider two different types of research tool a bit more reflectively than most of us do during actual research.
Anecdotally, most everyone already knows that the Internet, while a handy research resource, is poorly organized in the extreme--organization is sacrificed in favor of sheer volume. Search engines, catalogs, and indices attempt to assert some control over the chaos, to varying degrees of success. Since there is very little regularity to the content available on the Internet, it's challenging to organize that content according to a system that will apply to all types of content and serve the interests of all end users.
So how do we evaluate web resources--how do we decide, first, whether an individual web site's content is truly relevant to our interests, and second, whether what the site has to say is trustworthy? When we read research articles published in professional and scholarly journals, at least we know that it has been "vetted" through peer review process, a gatekeeping standard that ensures the legitimacy (if not the correctness) of scholarly research. In the case of web resources, however, there are few "gatekeeping" conventions to ensure the credibility of web sites.
If you have used the Internet for research (whether to write an article, to look up a box score, or to buy a car), you probably already have a set of intuitive standards for judging web material. These standards can be refined into a set of critical methods. Here, in broad-brush strokes, is one formulation of this set of methods:
1. Depth and Scope. How complete is the coverage? Does it offer a comprehensive collection or does it simply reflect the author's "favorites"?
2. Source. Who has "published" the material? Can you verify facts, statistics, quotes, etc. found in the source? Does the authoring agent have a known reputation, good or bad, for accuracy? For example, the National Center for Educational Statistics has an excellent reputation for providing valid and useful data; can you find it? The same is true of many other government sites. Begin government searches at THOMAS, WWW Virtual Library, or a similar major entry point.
3. Quality Control. Even if you are new to a field, you can make some superficial judgments that will help evaluate quality: link accuracy, typos, and misspellings. Beyond this level, you can determine if an editorial board, especially one composed of known professionals, has screened the information.
4. Currency. Basically, you need to know how recently, even how often, and by what a site has been updated or reviewed, and by what reviewing agency. One site that deals with the issues of both currency and quality control in a very straightforward manner is (http://www.webelements.com/). I recommend it for your review. Don't be confused by the content (chemical elements). Note the prominence of information regarding the site's quality (mid-page list of reviews and awards), as well as the site's currency (last line, page bottom).
You can adopt a number of methods for making your searches less frustrating.
1. Do trial and error to discover the right level of generality. Do not use search terms that are too general. To dissuade yourself from such a practice, search for the word "science." Then, go to dinner, a long dinner, perhaps in Paris! To avoid such frustrations, decide what your search terms should be. For example, searching for George Washington will also get you George Washington Carver and George Washington University. One place to start refining your terms is to consult the Psychological Abstracts Thesaurus, usually available in your library. Another place to refine terms is to try Google (Scholar Search) for your topic. A corollary to this point is to use an appropriate search path. Search engines "parse" and catalog records (sites) in all sorts of ways. Here are just a few major ones:
2. Since the web has no "librarian," you will have to search even the darkest corner of the web to convince yourself you have done a complete search. That difficulty is unlikely to go away soon, simply because, although the web is a "fast" publication medium, it is still often slow to get even breaking news into a useful form.
3. Do not rely on just searching the web. You have heard about "networking," and you have probably even done a fair amount of it on your own. In this process, you typically rely on "informants," people you believe have some specific expertise, to help resolve your problems. Use those same strategies to support electronic searching. Ask experts for help; ask friends for help; locate listservs and newsgroups that match your interests and join them.
4. Try many search terms and paths rather that just one. Often an odd path will bring you into exactly that dark corner of the web that has your answer. For example, you may be looking for statistics on a specific topic that should be available at a government site. If you cannot find them there, can you identify the researchers and contact them directly? Or, go to their organization's page to see if they post information of that kind.
5. Do not be afraid to GUESS. You could extend my earlier example of a name search (George Washington) by looking at variations: US Presidents, Military Heroes, Famous tobacco growers, etc. Do not be reluctant to try variant spellings.
6. Similarly, experiment with addresses. You may notice that I provided the urls for our search pages, rather than just page titles; I did that so you could delete some of the ending identifiers to try to access the sites at a higher level (called "peeling back" the address).
7. Do not get distracted by interesting tidbits. Life is short! I suggest that you write out a potential itinerary and ask yourself how the proposed paths and the stops along it are likely to satisfy your needs. I also suggest setting a time limit per session. Then, stick to the itinerary. Honor the time limit.
8. Do not rely on bookmarks to help you remember a good search path--or if you do, be sure to rename the bookmark. If you ever examine bookmarks closely, you will discover that some of them are simply cryptic. The url provides no clue where it will take you. A useful technique is to keep your email (or word processing) program open as you search; add good urls to a document in that program; add an explanation about the url; mail it to yourself. Once you have it in hand, you can either print it out and file it in your research methods folder OR save it to some local, desktop medium where you can name it in some useful way (Shakespeare Dictionary Search). Then, if you ever have to reconstruct the search, you can open that file and use the links from it. Clickable even!
End of Page
Last Modified: