what makes a research article reliable

Finding Reliable Sources: What is a Reliable Source?

• What is a Reliable Source?
• Who Decides a Source is Reliable?
• Criteria for Evaluating Reliability
• Fact-Checking Sites

Types of Reliable Sources

• Next: Who Decides a Source is Reliable? >>
• Last Updated: Feb 14, 2024 1:46 PM
• URL: https://guides.libs.uga.edu/reliability

• Military & Veterans
• Transfer Students
• Education Partnerships
• COVID-19 Info
• 844-PURDUE-G
• Student Login
• Request Info
• Bachelor of Science
• Master of Science
• Associate of Applied Science
• Graduate Certificate
• Master of Business Administration
• ExcelTrack Master of Business Administration
• ExcelTrack Bachelor of Science
• Postbaccalaureate Certificate
• Certificate
• Associate of Applied Science (For Military Students)
• Programs and Courses
• Master of Public Administration
• Doctor of Education
• Postgraduate Certificate
• Bachelor of Science in Psychology
• Master of Health Care Administration
• Master of Health Informatics
• Doctor of Health Science
• Associate of Applied of Science (For Military Students)
• Associate of Science (For Military Students)
• Master of Public Health
• Executive Juris Doctor
• Juris Doctor
• Dual Master's Degrees
• ExcelTrack Master of Science
• Master of Science (DNP Path)
• Bachelor of Science (RN-to-BSN)
• ExcelTrack Bachelor of Science (RN-to-BSN)
• Associate of Science
• Doctor of Nursing Practice
• Master of Professional Studies

The average Purdue Global military student is awarded 54% of the credits needed for an associate's and 45% of the credits needed for a bachelor's.

• General Education Mobile (GEM) Program
• AAS in Health Science
• AS in Health Science
• BS in Organizational Management
• BS in Professional Studies
• AAS in Criminal Justice
• AAS in Small Group Management
• AAS Small Group Management
• Master's Degrees
• Bachelor's Degrees
• Associate's Degrees
• Certificate Programs
• Continuous Learning Courses
• Tuition and Financial Aid Overview
• Financial Aid Process
• Financial Aid Awards
• Financial Aid Resources
• Financial Aid Frequently Asked Questions
• Financial Aid Information Guide
• Tuition and Savings
• Aviation Degree Tuition and Fees
• Professional Studies Tuition and Fees
• Single Courses and Micro-Credentials
• Time and Tuition Calculator
• Net Price Calculator
• Military Benefits and Tuition Assistance
• Military Educational Resources
• Military Tuition Reductions
• Military Spouses
• Student Loans
• Student Grants
• Outside Scholarships
• Loan Management
• Financial Literacy Tools
• Academic Calendar
• General Requirements
• Technology Requirements
• Returning Students
• Work and Life Experience Credit
• DREAMers Education Initiative
• Student Identity
• Student Experience
• Online Experience
• Student Life
• Alumni Engagement
• International Students
• Academic Support
• Career Services
• COVID-19 FAQs
• Faculty Highlights
• Student Accessibility Services
• Student Resources
• Transcript Request
• About Purdue Global
• Accreditation
• Approach to Learning
• Career Opportunities
• Diversity Initiatives
• Purdue Global Commitment
• Cybersecurity Center
• Chancellor's Corner
• Purdue Global Moves
• Leadership and Board
• Facts and Statistics
• Researcher Request Intake Form

Most Commonly Searched:

• All Degree Programs
• Communication
• Criminal Justice
• Fire Science
• Health Sciences
• Human Services
• Information Technology
• Legal Studies
• Professional Studies
• Psychology and ABA
• Public Policy
• Military and Veterans
• Tuition and Fee Finder
• Financial Aid FAQs
• Military Benefits and Aid
• Admissions Overview
• Student Experience Overview
• Academic Support Overview
• Online Learning

How to Know if a Source Is Credible

Search engines make virtually limitless information available with just a few clicks, but they don’t guarantee quality or reliability. As a student, it’s your responsibility to identify misinformation, unreliable sources, and author bias in your research.

This article provides a comprehensive checklist that can help you evaluate sources and identify credibility for your academic research endeavors.

The What and Why of Credibility in Academic Research

To begin evaluating sources, it’s crucial to know what you’re looking for — which means understanding the basis of reliable information. Simply put, reliable information is based on demonstrable, objective facts and evidence rather than conjecture, opinion, or unproven figures. While citing other articles and including statistics is a good sign that a source is credible, remember that even exact numbers and details can become misinformation if presented inaccurately — so never stop at surface-level source analysis.

Why does credibility matter? Reliable sources lend weight to arguments, ensuring they stand up to scrutiny. Conversely, unreliable sources can introduce errors to a field of study, leading to flawed conclusions. This type of situation can affect the integrity of the broader knowledge base and adversely affect researchers’ reputations — not to mention the academic integrity of students like you.

A Checklist for Validating Academic Information

As information continues to proliferate, credibility becomes increasingly important. This checklist offers a structured approach to ensure your research is grounded in facts and evidence — not misinformation and bias.

1. Identify Who Provided the Information

Source credibility often hinges on the expertise and reputation of its provider.

• Author credentials: A source is only as reliable as its author. When comparing multiple sources, check every author’s academic and professional background.
• Author reputation: Go beyond the initial source to check the author’s credibility across academic databases, news sources, and additional publications. Identify their credentials and think critically about whether this positions them as an expert in the topic.
• Institutional affiliation: Reputable institutions typically adhere to rigorous publication standards. If a source comes from a recognized university or research body, it's likely undergone thorough review. This is not foolproof, but it serves as a green flag for accurate information.
• Peer review: In academia, peer review is the gold standard. It means other experts in the field have examined and approved the content. You can usually find this information in the editorial guidelines for the journal or website that published the content.

2. Acknowledge Any Potential Bias

Every piece of information carries a perspective, so discern its objectivity before using it as a source.

• Objective vs. subjective: While no source is entirely free from bias, it’s vital to distinguish between objective research and opinion pieces. The former is based on empirical evidence, while the latter reflects personal viewpoints.
• Funding sources: Research funded by organizations with vested interests might be skewed. Always check the acknowledgments or disclosure section.
• Affiliations: Authors affiliated with certain groups might have inherent biases. It doesn’t invalidate their work, but it’s an important consideration when determining whether to base your own research on their points.

3. Identify Claims Made Without Proper Data

Valid academic claims are rooted in evidence, and it is essential to scrutinize the data backing them.

• Evidence-based claims: In academic research, claims should be backed by facts. If a source makes broad assertions without evidence, approach it with caution.
• Transparent methodology: A credible source will detail its methodology, allowing peer review, process replication, or bias acknowledgment.
• Unsupported statements: Be wary of sweeping claims that don’t reference other studies. Even original research should cite background information, supporting sources, and related work.

4. Check the Purpose of the Information

Understanding the intent behind a source helps in assessing its relevance and potential bias.

• Informative vs. persuasive: Is the source aiming to inform based on evidence, or is it trying to persuade? Both can be valid, but it’s essential to know the difference and decide if the information is usable on a case-by-case basis.
• Primary vs. secondary sources: Primary sources offer direct evidence or firsthand testimony. Secondary sources analyze or interpret primary sources. While both can be credible, you should still understand and distinguish between them — especially as either type can be a biased source.
• Audience and conflicts: Consider the intended audience because this can shape the type of information being shared. A paper written for industry professionals may have a different tone and depth than one written for general readers.

5. Check Publication Dates

The age of a source can influence its relevance and applicability to current research in several key ways.

• Relevance and recency: In quickly evolving fields, recent publications and news sources are crucial, as they reflect the latest findings and consensus. Older sources can still offer foundational knowledge or a historical perspective; just be aware of the dates associated with all relevant information.
• Historical context: It’s crucial to understand how context shapes both new and older sources. Is the information still evolving, or is it based on long-accepted facts? What research did the author have access to at the time?
• Topic evolution: Comparing multiple sources from different dates can provide unique insight. Tracking the progression of thought on a subject can provide depth to your research, showing how current perspectives were shaped.

6. Assess the Source's Reputation

A source's standing in the academic community can be a strong indicator of its reliability.

• Citations: Sources frequently cited in other works, especially in academic databases, are often more likely to be credible.
• Retractions/corrections: Check if the source has any associated retractions or corrections. This might indicate issues with the content, but it may also indicate a dedication to sharing accurate information.

7. Verify Citations and References

Reliable academic work builds upon previous research, making citations a key component of credibility.

• Backed claims: Ensure that the source's claims are supported by credible references. These should be easy to find, easy to access, and not outdated.
• Authenticity of citations: Check the original publication cited to ensure all information has been represented accurately. You should never rely on a source’s representation of facts but rather check them against the originating source.
• Self-citation: While authors will sometimes cite their previous work, excessive self-citation can be a red flag.

Additional Tips for Research, Sourcing, and Citing

• Consult experts: If you’re unsure about a source, reach out to experts or professors in the field. Their experience can provide insights into the source's reliability.
• Check for comprehensive coverage: Reliable sources often cover topics in depth, addressing multiple facets of an issue rather than presenting a one-sided view.
• Examine the writing style: Credible sources typically maintain a professional tone, avoiding sensationalism or overly emotional language. Spelling and grammar errors are a red flag.
• Look for transparency: Trustworthy sources are transparent about their research methods, data collection, and any potential conflicts of interest.
• Check the domain: Citing sources with a “.edu” or “.gov” domain may be more relevant for an academic paper.
• Filter results: You can also limit your searches to peer-reviewed journals and academic databases at your school’s library or even using Google tricks .
• Use the CRAAP test: A simple way to remember the keys to an authoritative source is CRAAP — Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose.
• Simplify citing: Much of the information you use to check a source’s credibility will also be part of your formal sourcing list. Citation apps and extensions help you keep track of this information.

Remember, you’re responsible for avoiding false information and maintaining academic integrity with every word you write — so always stay vigilant in your research.

Purdue Global Offers Robust Resources to Enhance Academic Research

At Purdue Global, students have access to academic tutoring and support centers to assist them in their efforts. If you are ready to kick-start your academic journey or have questions, reach out today for more information about the 175+ online degree and certificate programs from Purdue Global.

About the Author

Purdue Global

Earn a degree you're proud of and employers respect at Purdue Global, Purdue's online university for working adults. Accredited and online, Purdue Global gives you the flexibility and support you need to come back and move your career forward. Choose from 175+ programs, all backed by the power of Purdue.

• Alumni & Student Stories
• General Education
• Legal Studies & Public Policy

Your Path to Success Begins Here

Learn more about online programs at Purdue Global and download our program guide.

Connect with an Advisor to explore program requirements, curriculum, credit for prior learning process, and financial aid options.

Scholar Speak

Tips & tricks for identifying a trustworthy article, written by justin hall.

In this modern digital age, where it has become incredibly easy for anyone to post their opinions online, it can sometimes be hard for academics, specifically students, to tell which information resources are credible and fact-based. “The ubiquitous nature of the Internet enables anybody to spread false and biased information easily.” (Hansraj et al., 2021, p. 2) However, there are several clues a reader can use to tell if an article is on the up-and-up.

One of the easiest methods a user can rely on to tell if an article is trustworthy is whether or not it is peer-reviewed. Peer-review means that the article has been looked over by other experts in the field before it was submitted to the greater academic community for viewing. When an article is peer-reviewed it automatically makes the article more trustworthy because the professionals who have reviewed it have checked the contents for accuracy and relevance to the field of study. We can usually trust that peer reviewed articles are legitimate because authorities in a field of study want to maintain the integrity of their chosen discipline. This means that they will go the extra mile to weed out any inaccuracies or articles of general poor- quality. Still, even the experts of a discipline are susceptible to error, which means peer-reviewed articles can sometimes be inaccurate or misleading. This means students need to go the extra mile when searching for and choosing trustworthy articles.

Once you have a good list of peer-reviewed articles to choose from, you can start to looking at the content of the articles themselves. Most articles will have clues hidden within their content that give an idea of whether or not the article can be considered trustworthy. One thing we should be on the lookout for when reading an article is the tone. Many unreliable articles may seem trustworthy at first because they have a persuasive tone that attempts to bring the reader over to their way of thinking. However, a reader must be vigilant in these situations and determine how and why they are being persuaded by an article.   For example, an article that is full of factual statements that can easily be cross checked through other reliable sources will likely be persuasive to a reader. On the other hand, a dogmatic article that uses emotions to sway a reader may also be very persuasive, but this doesn’t necessarily mean the article is factual. When choosing articles to use for their research, users must consider what the author is attempting to achieve in their article and how they go about reaching this goal. There is nothing wrong with a persuasive article. However, students must ensure that articles they choose for their research use facts and logic, rather than opinions and emotion. 

Another way to gauge the reliability of an article is by ascertaining the authority of the author and publisher.  For instance, a reader can investigate to see whether or not the author has any other credits to their name. If an author is well-known or has been published by reputable distributors in the past, this is a good indicator that they are more likely to be trustworthy. Likewise, if the reader has never heard of an author before or finds it hard to find any background information on the publisher then they should be wary of an article’s credibility. “Authority implies a neat positive or negative evaluation of a source’s author but tends to encourage a reductive focus on the absence or presence of specific academic or professional credentials and work experience”. (Elmwood, 2020, p. 278) Authors who have been through the research publishing process before are more likely to be credible. This is because they are less likely to put out disinformation that could tarnish the good reputation they have built over time. In the same vein, if the article cites other well-known authors or is backed by a well-known publisher it can strongly indicate that the author has done their research and can be viewed as more reliable source.    Unfortunately, there is no one way to tell if an article is trustworthy. However, by using all of these methods in tandem when checking the reliability of an article, users have a much stronger chance of choosing reliable and trustworthy articles.  

Elmwood, V. (2020). The journalistic approach: Evaluating web sources in an age of mass disinformation.  Communications in Information Literacy ,  14 (2). https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2020.14.2.6  

Hansrajh, A., Adeliyi, T. T., & Wing, J. (2021). Detection of online fake news using blending ensemble learning.  Scientific Programming, 2021.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/3434458  

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Written by graduate student employees, Scholar Speak hopes to bridge the gap between the library and its students through instruction on the use of library services and resources.

Recent Posts

• Introspection from the Interlibrary Loan Office September 4, 2024
• Vinyl Record Collection at the UNT Music Library August 15, 2024
• Have We Passed the Need for Literacy? August 8, 2024

Additional Links

Apply now Schedule a tour Get more info

Disclaimer | AA/EOE/ADA | Privacy | Electronic Accessibility | Required Links | UNT Home

• Directories
• What is UW Libraries Search and how do I use it to find resources?
• Does the library have my textbook?
• Who can access databases, e-journals, e-books etc. and from where?
• How do I find full-text scholarly articles in my subject?
• How do I find e-books?
• How do I cite a source using a specific style?
• How do I find an article by citation?
• How do I renew books and other loans?
• Do I have access to this journal?
• How do I request a book/article we don't have?
• How do I request materials using Interlibrary Loan?
• What does the “Request Article” button mean?
• How do I connect Google Scholar with UW Libraries?
• How do I pay fines?
• How do I access resources from off-campus?
• How do I know if my sources are credible/reliable?
• How do I know if my articles are scholarly (peer-reviewed)?
• What is Summit?
• Start Your Research
• Research Guides
• University of Washington Libraries
• Library Guides
• UW Libraries

FAQ: How do I know if my sources are credible/reliable?

UW Libraries has a whole guide, Savvy Info Consumers: Evaluating Information , which discusses different types of sources and how to approach evaluating their credibility/reliability.

What it means for a source to be credible/reliable can vary depending on the context of its use. Generally, a credible or reliable source is one that experts in your subject domain would agree is valid for your purposes. This can vary, so it is best to use one of the source evaluation methods that best fits your needs. Do remember that credibility is contextual!

It is important to critically evaluate sources because using credible/reliable sources makes you a more informed writer. Think about unreliable sources as pollutants to your credibility, if you include unreliable sources in your work, your work could lose credibility as a result.

There are certain frameworks that information professionals have put together to help people think critically about the information provided. 

Some of the methods that UW Libraries suggest are: 

5 W Questions (5Ws) : This method means thinking critically about each of your sources by answering five questions to determine if the source is credible/reliable. The acceptable answers to these questions will vary depending on your needs. The questions are:

• Who is the author? (Authority)
• What is the purpose of the content? (Accuracy)
• Where is the content from? (Publisher)
• Why does the source exist? (Purpose and Objectivity)
• How does this source compare to others? (Determining What’s What)

SMART Check : This method is particularly good at evaluating newspaper sources. Like the 5Ws method it also involves answering critical questions about your source. The criteria are:

• Source: Who or what is the source?
• Motive: Why do they say what they do?
• Authority: Who wrote the story?
• Review: Is there anything included that jumps out as potentially untrue?
• Two-Source Test: How does it compare to another source?

CRAAP Test : This method provides you with a set of criteria that make a source more or less credible. The criteria are:

• Currency: Timeliness of the information
• Relevance: Importance of the information for your needs
• Authority: Source of the information
• Accuracy: Truthfulness and correctness of the information
• Purpose: Reason the information exists

Additional Help

If you would like personalized support from UW Libraries on source evaluation you can

• Make an appointment with a librarian at the Odegaard Writing and Research Center
• Ask Us! Chat with a librarian live or email your question
• << Previous: How do I access resources from off-campus?
• Next: How do I know if my articles are scholarly (peer-reviewed)? >>
• Last Updated: Jan 8, 2024 1:15 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uw.edu/research/faq

Researching and Writing a Paper: Reliability of Sources

• Outline Note-Taking
• Summarizing
• Bibliography / Annotated Bibliography
• Thesis Sentences
• Ideas for Topics
• The Big List of Databases and Resource Sources
• Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary
• Full Text Advice
• Database Searching Videos!
• How to Read a Scholarly Article.
• Citation Styles
• Citation Videos!
• Citation Tips & Tricks
• Videos about Evaluating Sources!
• Unreliable Sources and 'Fake News'
• An Outline for Writing!
• Formatting your paper!

Techniques for Evaluating Resources

No matter how good the database you search in is, or how reliable an information website has been in the past, you need to evaluate the sources you want to use for credibility and bias before you use them*. (You may also want to spot fake news as you browse the Internet or other media - not all fake news is online).

This page discusses eight different tools for evaluating sources (there are so many different tools because evaluating the reliability or quality of information is an important topic, because there are many ways to look at the topic, and every librarian wants to help you succeed). Look through these approaches and use the approaches or combinations of approaches that work for you. The tools are:

5Ws (and an H)

A.S.P.E.C.T.

• Evaluating Research Articles
• Lateral Reading  ("what do other sources say?")

The CRAAP Test

We also have a variety of videos about evaluating sources available for your learning and entertainment: Click Here !

* Note: a biased source - and technically most sources are biased - can be a useful source as long as you understand what the bias or biases are. A source that is trying to be reliable will often identify some or all of its biases. (Every person has a limited perspective on the events they observe or participate in, and most of the time their perceptions are influenced by assumptions they may not be aware of. So, even when you have some really solid reasons to trust a source as 100% reliable and accurate, be alert for 'what is not mentioned' and for what biases there might be [this is particularly tricky when you share those biases, and why reviewing your research/paper/presentation with someone else is always a good idea]).

The 5Ws and an H.

Back to the top of the page

• Who are the authors or creators?
• What are their credentials? Can you find something out about them in another place?
• Who is the publisher or sponsor?
• Are they reputable?
• What is the publisher’s interest (if any) in this information?
• If it's from a website, does it have advertisements?
• Is this fact or opinion?
• Is it biased? Can you still use the information, even if you know there is bias?
• Is the the site trying to sell you something, convert you to something, or make you vote for someone?
• What kind of information is included in the resource?
• Is content of the resource primarily opinion? Is is balanced?
• Is it provided for a hobbiest, for entertainment, or for a serious audience?
• Does the creator provide references or sources for data or quotations?
• How recent is the information?
• Is it current enough for your topic?
• If the information is from a website, when was the site last updated?

Authority Information resources are a product of their creator's expertise and reliability, and are evaluated based on the information need and the context in which the information will be used. Authority is constructed: various communities often recognize different types of authority (knowledge, accuracy). Authority is contextual because you may need additional information to help determine the accuracy or comprehensiveness, and the sort of authority the source contains. (Writing a paper about ' urban myths ' requires different sorts of authority than writing a paper disproving an urban myth.)

Using this concept means you have to identify the different types of authority that might be relevant, and why the author considers themselves reliable, as well as why their community considers them reliable. An author can be a person, journalist, scholar, organization, website, etc. Author is different from authority, authority is the quality that gives an author trustworthiness....and not all authors have the same trustworthiness.

Evaluating research articles

Evaluating research articles: Evaluating evidence-based research articles in scholarly journals requires deep knowledge of the discipline, which you might not acquire until you are deeper into your education. These guiding questions can help you evaluate a research report, even if you are not an expert in the field. Questions include:

• Why was the study undertaken? The aim of the research may be intended to generate income, lobby for policy changes, evaluate the impact of a program, or create a new theory.  These variations in intent influence the research questions, the data collection, the analysis, and how the results are presented. To make best use of the findings for your purposes, you should keep the intent of the study in mind.
• Who conducted the study? It is important to look at who conducted the research, and if the organization or individual in question has the expertise required for conducting research on the topic. Looking to see if the organization is interested in a specific research outcome is also a good practice. The research should be clear about how the different stages of the study were conducted to guarantee its objectivity.
• Who funded the research? It is equally important to look at who sponsored or funded the study because this sometimes affects the objectivity or accuracy of the study. (If, for example, a soap-maker sponsors a study on the efficiency of different soaps, you should be critical of the results, particularly if their brand of soap is the best at cleaning.)
• How was the data collected? In the social sciences, structured interviews and self-completion questionnaires are perhaps the two most common ways of collecting quantitative data. How the people in the study were recruited is essential for determining how representative the results are. (There are two main types of samples, probability and non-probability samples. A probability sample is one in which every individual in the population has the same chance of being included in the study. It is also a prerequisite for being able to generalize the findings to the population. Pretend you survey first-year students by asking student clubs to share the survey on their social media. This non-probability snowball sample is more likely to reach students active in the clubs, therefore the results will not be representative of, or generalizable to, all students.)
• Is the sample size and response rate sufficient? The bigger the sample size the greater the chance that the results are accurate. After a sample size of around 1000, gains in accuracy become less significant. However, limited time and money often make such a large sample not practical. The similarity of the population also affects the desired sample size; a more diverse population requires a larger sample to sufficiently include the different parts of the population. The response rate is a complementary measure to the sample size, showing how many of the suitable individuals in the sample have provided a usable response. (In web surveys, response rates tend to be lower than in other types of surveys, and are therefore less accurate.)
• Does the research make use of secondary data? Data can be collected for the purposes of the study or existing data gathered for a different study can be used. If existing data sets collected for another study are used, reflecting on how usable that data is for the newer study is important.
• Does the research measure what it claims to measure? A commonly used word in statistics to describe the trustworthiness of research is ‘validity’. Validity refers to the extent to which an assumption or measurement is consistent with reality. Does it measure what it intends to measure? For example, a study investigates gender discrimination of faculty and looks at the number of cases of discrimination presented by female faculty. But, if the study does not look at the reason for these discrimination complaints (gender, ethnicity, religion, age, sexual orientation, etc.) it cannot be assumed that gender discrimination either increased or decreased.
• Can the findings be generalized to my situation? There is often a tendency to generalize research findings. Two key standards have to be met to do this. First, results apply only to the population of the study. Second, data must be collected via a probability sample, i.e. everyone eligible to be in the study has the same chance of being included in the study. Too often papers do not discuss many of the aspects of the data collection and analysis. Transparently and clearly describing how the research was conducted is essential for the reader to understand the trustworthiness of the research paper in their hands.

Lateral Reading

The Internet has democratized access to information, but the Internet has also been filled with a flood of misinformation, fake news, propaganda, and idiocy, presented as objective analysis. Since any single source is suspect, fact checkers read laterally.  They leave a site in its tab after a quick look around and open up new browser tabs in order to judge the credibility of the original site.

Lateral reading is the process of verifying what you are reading while you are reading it. It allows you to read deeply and broadly while gaining a fuller understanding of an issue or topic and determining whether, or how much, to trust the content as presented.

Vertical reading occurs when the reader simply reads the article or site without going further, assuming that if it ‘looks reliable’ it is reliable. The reader may use some superficial evaluation strategies to determine if the site is credible, such as reading the ‘about’ page, looking at its URL extension (.edu, .org, .com, .gov, etc.), or assessing its advertising. A good start, but there is much more to look at:

• Determine the author's reliability, intents, and biases, by searching for articles by other writers on the same topic (and also looking for other articles by that same author).
• Understand the perspective of the site's analyses. (What are they assuming, what do they want you to assume?)
• Determine whether the site has an editorial process or expert reputation supporting the reliability and accuracy of its content.

Use the strategies and ask the questions that professional fact-checkers use:

• Go beyond the "about" page of the site you are reading.
• Search for articles by other writers on the same topic.
• Search for articles about the site/publication you are reading (and/or articles about the authors featured on the site).

Ask the following:

• Who funds or sponsors the site where the original piece was published? (And who funds/sponsors the site you found the article at?) 
• What do other authoritative sources have to say about that site and that topic?
• When you do a search on the topic of the original piece, are the initial results from fact-checking organizations? (If so, what do they say?)
• Have questions been raised about other articles the author has written or that have appeared on that site?
• Does what you are finding elsewhere contradict the original piece? (If there are contradictions, what is the reliability of those contradicting sites?)

Are reliable news outlets reporting on (or perhaps more important, not reporting on) what you are reading? (Does why reliable news outlets are or are-not reporting on the topic increase or decrease the reliability of the site you are assessing?)

Sometimes the 'good answer' to the above questions is a 'yes', sometimes a 'no', and sometimes 'it's complicated'. Reliable and unreliable sources are everywhere in the information we have access to - some sources are rarely reliable, but even the most 'consistently reliable sources' are sometimes unreliable (everyone has blind spots and biases, and everyone is able to make mistakes). There are no consistent rules for which questions must be answered which way. However, if you ask these questions and find out what the answers seem to be you will have a better understanding of how reliable or unreliable a particular source is.

S.I.F.T. Method

SIFT (The Four Moves)

Use the SIFT method to separate fact from fake when reading websites and other media.

• What is its reputation?
• For deeper research, verify the information.
• Know what you're reading.
• Where is it from? Biases, point of view?
• Understand the context of the information.
• Find the best source on the subject.
• Trace claims, quotes or media back to its original context.
• Was the source you read/viewed an accurate depiction of the original?

More Information about the SIFT method , and a free 3-hour online course (five easy lessons) that will seriously improve your information evaluation skills!

!!! Do you have questions, confusions, or opinons about anything on this page, in this LibGuide, or anything else?      We are happy to Listen to and Answer Your Questions, Concerns, and more ! !!!

• << Previous: Citation Tips & Tricks
• Next: Videos about Evaluating Sources! >>
• Last Updated: Jul 30, 2024 2:49 PM
• URL: https://libguides.rtc.edu/researching_and_writing

What makes a scientific article credible? A look at peer review and impact factors

Imagine you want to eat out tonight and decide to try out a new restaurant in your town. How do you choose which restaurant to go to? Do you check online for reviews or ask your friends for recommendations? Now, imagine that you narrow your choices down to two restaurants. One of them has five-star reviews from the top chefs of your country and the other has no reviews. Which restaurant are you more likely to choose?

You’re probably even more selective when choosing which journal articles to rely on for evidence-based medicine. A vast amount of research is being published regularly and sifting through the numerous articles can be daunting. Here are three questions that will help you quickly determine an article’s credibility:

• Is it published in a peer-reviewed journal?
• Is it published in a journal with a high impact factor?
• Is it cited by other authors in their papers?

What is a peer-reviewed journal?

Peer-reviewed journals are considered the gold standard of scientific research publications. Reputable journals have subject matter experts who volunteer their time to review submitted articles and evaluate their credibility. Think of the peer-review process as a team of experts reviewing and approving the work before you see it.

How does the peer-review process work?

During the submission process, experts raise any concerns they may have with an article to the authors. An article is evaluated on its originality, significant findings, research methodology, and writing. The reviewers usually come back to the authors with comments and suggestions on how to make the article (e.g., study) better. The authors are then given a specific amount of time to respond back with their revisions. Once an article meets the standards of the editorial board, it is cleared for publication. If it doesn’t meet the standards, it will be rejected, and the authors will usually submit the article to another (usually less prestigious) journal.

How does the peer-review process differ across journal publications?

The length of time that the peer-review process takes differs across publications. As well, some journals do not share the authors’ names with the reviewers, and the authors are unaware of who reviewed their paper. Other journals fully disclose the authors’ names and affiliated institutions.

What are some problems with the peer-review process?

The peer-review process is not perfect. Faulty scientific papers do still get published due to potential loopholes. For example, a journal relies on the integrity of its editorial board. Experts are not paid for their work. They may be working with tight deadlines making it difficult for them to critically evaluate all the research that comes their way.

Experts also shouldn’t have any personal affiliations with the authors of the study. Would you trust a chef’s review of a restaurant if you found out he owned it? Or that the owner was his daughter? Finally, peer-reviewers only see the manuscript that is in front of them. They don’t get to see the raw data that the researchers used. So, any errors in the data may not be picked up by them.

Determining where an article is published is an important step for determining its credibility. The peer-review process is the first test of a scientific article’s credibility. Ideally, experts in the specific field will be best equipped to identify potential concerns with a paper’s methodology and findings. Rigorous journal standards should filter out dodgy scientific papers before they are released to the public. But, remember that the peer-review process does not guarantee a journal article’s validity.

What is an impact factor?

A journal publication that claims to be peer-reviewed may still be unreliable. One way to ensure its credibility is to examine its impact factor. The impact factor, or IF, of a journal publication is the number of times an average paper published in the journal is cited by other articles. It gives you an idea of how reputable the journal’s articles are. Ideally, an impact factor gives you an impression of a journal publication’s impact on the scientific community.

In general, credible journals have high impact factors. Conversely, a low impact factor may indicate that a journal is predatory and unreliable. However, the actual value of a specific impact factor may differ across disciplines. An impact factor of three may be considered low for a wide-ranging specialty (such as internal medicine), but considered high for a specific discipline such as physics. Impact factors are best used when compared between journals within your target field.

Where can you find a journal’s impact factor?

A journal’s impact factor can usually be found on the journal’s website. However, it may be tricky to locate. Sometimes, the impact factor listed may even be fake! One sign of a predatory journal is that they may list a made-up impact factor on their website to fake credibility. It’s important to verify the impact factor on a journal’s website with an online database that lists this type of information. The best-known site, Web of Science Journal Citation Reports (JCR) , is a great online resource to find the latest impact factor for a journal.

What are some problems with impact factors?

As we already mentioned, predatory journals may just make up an impact factor on their website. So, you’ll need to cross-reference what they state with credible databases.

Younger journals that may be credible won’t be able to have an impact factor for the first two years since impact factors aren’t calculated for journals that are less than two years old.

Also, impact factors are calculated using the average number of citations in a publication. This means that a journal with a few highly cited articles will have a high impact factor although most of the articles are not cited. So, a journal’s impact factor isn’t always an accurate reflection of how an individual paper is cited.

Does an article have multiple citations?

A great source to directly evaluate an article’s credibility is Google Scholar , which allows you to see how many times an article has been cited.

If an article is cited by other papers, this usually means that the authors’ citing it think that it’s legitimate and valuable research. Overall, articles with many citations are deemed valuable by many researchers.

Just as positive reviews of a product can be a good indication of the product’s quality, a well-received article with many citations can give you a good idea about the article’s quality.

The problem with citations

However, multiple citations do not always equal quality research. For example, researchers may cite their own work in other articles. These articles will then appear as highly cited on Google Scholar. As well, if there are thousands of citations it doesn’t necessarily mean that all of those citations are from credible authors. Think about the reviews you may find for a popular Thai restaurant promising authentic cuisine. How many of those reviewers have experience with authentic Thai cuisine in the first place?

So, now you know how to check an article’s credibility by looking for peer reviews, citations, and the journal’s impact factor. But what about the people writing the papers? Check out the next article in this guide to learn how to assess whether an author has the experience and credentials to write a credible research article .

Become a great clinician with our video courses and workshops

About the author.

Next article

Who are the people behind the papers examining an author’s credentials.

Learn the essential tips for finding and verifying an author’s credentials in a scientific journal article.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

How do you determine the quality of a journal article?

Published on October 17, 2014 by Bas Swaen . Revised on March 4, 2019.

In the theoretical framework of your thesis, you support the research that you want to perform by means of a literature review . Here, you are looking for earlier research about your subject. These studies are often published in the form of scientific articles in journals (scientific publications).

Table of contents

Why is good quality important, check the following points.

The better the quality of the articles that you use in the literature review , the stronger your own research will be. When you use articles that are not well respected, you run the risk that the conclusions you draw will be unfounded. Your supervisor will always check the article sources for the conclusions you draw.

We will use an example to explain how you can judge the quality of a scientific article. We will use the following article as our example:

Example article

Perrett, D. I., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S., Lee, K. J., Rowland, D. A., & Edwards, R. (1999). Symmetry and Human Facial Attractiveness.  Evolution and Human Behavior ,  20 , 295-307. Retrieved from  http://www.grajfoner.com/Clanki/Perrett%201999%20Symetry%20Attractiveness.pdf

This article is about the possible link between facial symmetry and the attractiveness of a human face.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

1. Where is the article published?

The journal (academic publication) where the article is published says something about the quality of the article. Journals are ranked in the Journal Quality List (JQL). If the journal you used is ranked at the top of your professional field in the JQL, then you can assume that the quality of the article is high.

The article from the example is published in the journal “Evolution and Human Behavior”. The journal is not on the Journal Quality List, but after googling the publication, it seems from multiple sources that it nevertheless is among the top in the field of Psychology (see Journal Ranking at   http://www.ehbonline.org/ ). The quality of the source is thus high enough to use it.

So, if a journal is not listed in the Journal Quality List then it is worthwhile to google it. You will then find out more about the quality of the journal.

2. Who is the author?

The next step is to look at who the author of the article is:

• What do you know about the person who wrote the paper?
• Has the author done much research in this field?
• What do others say about the author?
• What is the author’s background?
• At which university does the author work? Does this university have a good reputation?

The lead author of the article (Perrett) has already done much work within the research field, including prior studies of predictors of attractiveness. Penton-Voak, one of the other authors, also collaborated on these studies. Perrett and Penton-Voak were in 1999 both professors at the University of St Andrews in the United Kingdom. This university is among the top 100 best universities in the world. There is less information available about the other authors. It could be that they were students who helped the professors.

3. What is the date of publication?

In which year is the article published? The more recent the research, the better. If the research is a bit older, then it’s smart to check whether any follow-up research has taken place. Maybe the author continued the research and more useful results have been published.

Tip! If you’re searching for an article in Google Scholar , then click on ‘Since 2014’ in the left hand column. If you can’t find anything (more) there, then select ‘Since 2013’. If you work down the row in this manner, you will find the most recent studies.

The article from the example was published in 1999. This is not extremely old, but there has probably been quite a bit of follow-up research done in the past 15 years. Thus, I quickly found via Google Scholar an article from 2013, in which the influence of symmetry on facial attractiveness in children was researched. The example article from 1999 can probably serve as a good foundation for reading up on the subject, but it is advisable to find out how research into the influence of symmetry on facial attractiveness has further developed.

4. What do other researchers say about the paper?

Find out who the experts are in this field of research. Do they support the research, or are they critical of it?

By searching in Google Scholar, I see that the article has been cited at least 325 times! This says then that the article is mentioned at least in 325 other articles. If I look at the authors of the other articles, I see that these are experts in the research field. The authors who cite the article use the article as support and not to criticize it.

5. Determine the quality

Now look back: how did the article score on the points mentioned above? Based on that, you can determine quality.

The example article scored ‘reasonable’ to ‘good’ on all points. So we can consider the article to be qualitatively good, and therefore it is useful in, for example, a literature review. Because the article is already somewhat dated, however, it is wise to also go in search of more recent research.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Swaen, B. (2019, March 04). How do you determine the quality of a journal article?. Scribbr. Retrieved September 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/tips/how-do-you-determine-the-quality-of-a-journal-article/

Is this article helpful?

Get unlimited documents corrected

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

How to Determine if an Article is Reliable

• Reliable vs. Unreliable Sources
• Types of Sources
• Popular vs. Scholarly

Determine if an article is reliable

Reliable Sources:

Provide a thorough, well-reasoned theory, argument, or discussion based on strong evidence.

Most sources can be categorized as one of these types of sources:

• Scholarly peer-reviewed articles and books
• Trade or professional articles and books
• Magazine articles, books and newspaper articles from well-established publishers
• Magazine articles, books and newspaper articles written for entertainment purposes
• Websites and blogs
• Background sources

Professors typically prefer scholarly peer-reviewed articles and books, but usually accept sources from trade and well-established publishers. Individual websites and blogs can be hit or miss, so be sure to check with your professor or a Librarian before using. Background sources are great for facts, but often do not count towards citation requirements.

• Next: Types of Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jan 30, 2020 12:29 PM
• URL: https://library.loras.edu/reliable

Unless otherwise noted, the content of these guides by Loras College Library , is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License .

Some icons by Yusuke Kamiyamane . Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

More From Forbes

5 ways to identify reliable sources (and maintain your credibility).

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

As the dissemination of information increases, you need to be able to think critically and ... [+] independently.

The amount of information the world shares on a daily basis is immense and ever increasing, between tweets, emails, Facebook posts, WhatsApp messages and the number of news articles published. This can make identifying valid information from incorrect information difficult.

Your credibility hinges on the accuracy of the information you use. If you use information that others know is inaccurate, you will appear to be less credible, which can make it difficult for others to believe what you say in the future.

It can take just one instance of you sharing inaccurate information for people to start questioning your credibility. Here are five ways to help you identify a reliable source:

1.     Do you recognize the source? 

Name recognition is often the first thing you consider to determine reliability. If the name or source is familiar, you may tend to believe the information. If you have never heard of the source, you probably should do some research to learn about it. 

While name recognition can help with determining reliability, do not depend on that alone. Just because you recognize the source does not mean that it is a reliable source. 

Confirmation bias , believing what is familiar, can steer you in the wrong direction. Do your own research. Google the platform, publication or person’s name. You have to take it upon yourself to determine whether information is accurate or not.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

2.     Do you feel unsure about the accuracy of the information? 

When you read a statement, how does it make you feel? Have you said to yourself, “Really?” Check in with your gut. Intuition can help you discern reliable information.

Is the argument extreme , or does the article feel balanced and include diverse perspectives? Does the content seem old and not up-to-date? Are writers or speakers making statements without making attributions?

Be wary of the use of absolute words like “all,” “everything,” “none” or “only.” Look for phrases like “research shows” followed by the indication of a reference. 

3.     Would you share the source with your manager or cite it in a paper for a class?

If your job depends on the information, would you present it? What if your grade for the course you are taking depends on the paper you are writing or the presentation you are giving?

While you may think the information is reliable, would you go a step further and endorse that information?

4.     Is the source used elsewhere or by other reputable people?

Search to determine whether the information you want to use has been used by someone else. Has it been cited in an academic journal article? Is a professor or highly regarded expert on television using the information?

Even cross-checking to see if the information has been deemed accurate by others does not absolutely determine the information is true. Determination of reliability involves judgement. The more you examine information, the more you will flex your judgment muscles and get better at distinguishing the reliable from the bogus information.

5.     How close is the assertion to the primary source? 

The closer you are to the source of the information, the more reliable the information is. For example, the text of the law is better than reading a social media post that a citizen wrote that talks about the law. The closer you are to the source, the more factually correct the information is. The further you are away from the source, the more opinion and interpretation there will be, which can stray you from the truth.

As another example, did the situation happen to the author or speaker? Or is this an account of what happened to another person? Secondary sources can be accurate and reliable, but be cognizant of how far the content strays from the primary source so you can make the appropriate judgement.

An incredible amount of information exists. If you want to be seen as credible and command respect, it is your job to determine the accuracy of the information. Is the source recognizable? Does the information sound right? Would you share the content with others? Is the information found elsewhere? How close is the information to the primary source?

What helps you to identify reliable sources? Share with me your stories and thoughts via Twitter or LinkedIn .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Write for Us
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 18, Issue 3
• Validity and reliability in quantitative studies
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• Roberta Heale 1 ,
• Alison Twycross 2
• 1 School of Nursing, Laurentian University , Sudbury, Ontario , Canada
• 2 Faculty of Health and Social Care , London South Bank University , London , UK
• Correspondence to : Dr Roberta Heale, School of Nursing, Laurentian University, Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada P3E2C6; rheale{at}laurentian.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102129

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Evidence-based practice includes, in part, implementation of the findings of well-conducted quality research studies. So being able to critique quantitative research is an important skill for nurses. Consideration must be given not only to the results of the study but also the rigour of the research. Rigour refers to the extent to which the researchers worked to enhance the quality of the studies. In quantitative research, this is achieved through measurement of the validity and reliability. 1

• View inline

Types of validity

The first category is content validity . This category looks at whether the instrument adequately covers all the content that it should with respect to the variable. In other words, does the instrument cover the entire domain related to the variable, or construct it was designed to measure? In an undergraduate nursing course with instruction about public health, an examination with content validity would cover all the content in the course with greater emphasis on the topics that had received greater coverage or more depth. A subset of content validity is face validity , where experts are asked their opinion about whether an instrument measures the concept intended.

Construct validity refers to whether you can draw inferences about test scores related to the concept being studied. For example, if a person has a high score on a survey that measures anxiety, does this person truly have a high degree of anxiety? In another example, a test of knowledge of medications that requires dosage calculations may instead be testing maths knowledge.

There are three types of evidence that can be used to demonstrate a research instrument has construct validity:

Homogeneity—meaning that the instrument measures one construct.

Convergence—this occurs when the instrument measures concepts similar to that of other instruments. Although if there are no similar instruments available this will not be possible to do.

Theory evidence—this is evident when behaviour is similar to theoretical propositions of the construct measured in the instrument. For example, when an instrument measures anxiety, one would expect to see that participants who score high on the instrument for anxiety also demonstrate symptoms of anxiety in their day-to-day lives. 2

The final measure of validity is criterion validity . A criterion is any other instrument that measures the same variable. Correlations can be conducted to determine the extent to which the different instruments measure the same variable. Criterion validity is measured in three ways:

Convergent validity—shows that an instrument is highly correlated with instruments measuring similar variables.

Divergent validity—shows that an instrument is poorly correlated to instruments that measure different variables. In this case, for example, there should be a low correlation between an instrument that measures motivation and one that measures self-efficacy.

Predictive validity—means that the instrument should have high correlations with future criterions. 2 For example, a score of high self-efficacy related to performing a task should predict the likelihood a participant completing the task.

Reliability

Reliability relates to the consistency of a measure. A participant completing an instrument meant to measure motivation should have approximately the same responses each time the test is completed. Although it is not possible to give an exact calculation of reliability, an estimate of reliability can be achieved through different measures. The three attributes of reliability are outlined in table 2 . How each attribute is tested for is described below.

Attributes of reliability

Homogeneity (internal consistency) is assessed using item-to-total correlation, split-half reliability, Kuder-Richardson coefficient and Cronbach's α. In split-half reliability, the results of a test, or instrument, are divided in half. Correlations are calculated comparing both halves. Strong correlations indicate high reliability, while weak correlations indicate the instrument may not be reliable. The Kuder-Richardson test is a more complicated version of the split-half test. In this process the average of all possible split half combinations is determined and a correlation between 0–1 is generated. This test is more accurate than the split-half test, but can only be completed on questions with two answers (eg, yes or no, 0 or 1). 3

Cronbach's α is the most commonly used test to determine the internal consistency of an instrument. In this test, the average of all correlations in every combination of split-halves is determined. Instruments with questions that have more than two responses can be used in this test. The Cronbach's α result is a number between 0 and 1. An acceptable reliability score is one that is 0.7 and higher. 1 , 3

Stability is tested using test–retest and parallel or alternate-form reliability testing. Test–retest reliability is assessed when an instrument is given to the same participants more than once under similar circumstances. A statistical comparison is made between participant's test scores for each of the times they have completed it. This provides an indication of the reliability of the instrument. Parallel-form reliability (or alternate-form reliability) is similar to test–retest reliability except that a different form of the original instrument is given to participants in subsequent tests. The domain, or concepts being tested are the same in both versions of the instrument but the wording of items is different. 2 For an instrument to demonstrate stability there should be a high correlation between the scores each time a participant completes the test. Generally speaking, a correlation coefficient of less than 0.3 signifies a weak correlation, 0.3–0.5 is moderate and greater than 0.5 is strong. 4

Equivalence is assessed through inter-rater reliability. This test includes a process for qualitatively determining the level of agreement between two or more observers. A good example of the process used in assessing inter-rater reliability is the scores of judges for a skating competition. The level of consistency across all judges in the scores given to skating participants is the measure of inter-rater reliability. An example in research is when researchers are asked to give a score for the relevancy of each item on an instrument. Consistency in their scores relates to the level of inter-rater reliability of the instrument.

Determining how rigorously the issues of reliability and validity have been addressed in a study is an essential component in the critique of research as well as influencing the decision about whether to implement of the study findings into nursing practice. In quantitative studies, rigour is determined through an evaluation of the validity and reliability of the tools or instruments utilised in the study. A good quality research study will provide evidence of how all these factors have been addressed. This will help you to assess the validity and reliability of the research and help you decide whether or not you should apply the findings in your area of clinical practice.

• Lobiondo-Wood G ,
• Shuttleworth M
• ↵ Laerd Statistics . Determining the correlation coefficient . 2013 . https://statistics.laerd.com/premium/pc/pearson-correlation-in-spss-8.php

Twitter Follow Roberta Heale at @robertaheale and Alison Twycross at @alitwy

Competing interests None declared.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Reliability and validity: Importance in Medical Research

Affiliations.

• 1 Al-Nafees Medical College,Isra University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
• 2 Fauji Foundation Hospital, Foundation University Medical College, Islamabad, Pakistan.
• PMID: 34974579
• DOI: 10.47391/JPMA.06-861

Reliability and validity are among the most important and fundamental domains in the assessment of any measuring methodology for data-collection in a good research. Validity is about what an instrument measures and how well it does so, whereas reliability concerns the truthfulness in the data obtained and the degree to which any measuring tool controls random error. The current narrative review was planned to discuss the importance of reliability and validity of data-collection or measurement techniques used in research. It describes and explores comprehensively the reliability and validity of research instruments and also discusses different forms of reliability and validity with concise examples. An attempt has been taken to give a brief literature review regarding the significance of reliability and validity in medical sciences.

Keywords: Validity, Reliability, Medical research, Methodology, Assessment, Research tools..

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Principles and methods of validity and reliability testing of questionnaires used in social and health science researches. Bolarinwa OA. Bolarinwa OA. Niger Postgrad Med J. 2015 Oct-Dec;22(4):195-201. doi: 10.4103/1117-1936.173959. Niger Postgrad Med J. 2015. PMID: 26776330
• The measurement of collaboration within healthcare settings: a systematic review of measurement properties of instruments. Walters SJ, Stern C, Robertson-Malt S. Walters SJ, et al. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):138-97. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2159. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016. PMID: 27532315 Review.
• Evaluation of research studies. Part IV: Validity and reliability--concepts and application. Fullerton JT. Fullerton JT. J Nurse Midwifery. 1993 Mar-Apr;38(2):121-5. doi: 10.1016/0091-2182(93)90146-8. J Nurse Midwifery. 1993. PMID: 8492191
• Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. Kimberlin CL, Winterstein AG. Kimberlin CL, et al. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008 Dec 1;65(23):2276-84. doi: 10.2146/ajhp070364. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008. PMID: 19020196 Review.
• [Psychometric characteristics of questionnaires designed to assess the knowledge, perceptions and practices of health care professionals with regards to alcoholic patients]. Jaussent S, Labarère J, Boyer JP, François P. Jaussent S, et al. Encephale. 2004 Sep-Oct;30(5):437-46. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(04)95458-9. Encephale. 2004. PMID: 15627048 Review. French.
• Midwifery educators' knowledge of antenatal exercises in selected Nigerian midwifery schools. Ojong-Alasia MM, Moloko-Phiri SS, Matsipane MJ, Useh U. Ojong-Alasia MM, et al. Curationis. 2024 Aug 16;47(1):e1-e12. doi: 10.4102/curationis.v47i1.2495. Curationis. 2024. PMID: 39221715 Free PMC article.
• A psychometric assessment of a novel scale for evaluating vaccination attitudes amidst a major public health crisis. Cheng L, Kong J, Xie X, Zhang F. Cheng L, et al. Sci Rep. 2024 May 4;14(1):10250. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-61028-z. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 38704420 Free PMC article.
• Test-Retest Reliability of Isokinetic Strength in Lower Limbs under Single and Dual Task Conditions in Women with Fibromyalgia. Gomez-Alvaro MC, Leon-Llamas JL, Melo-Alonso M, Villafaina S, Domínguez-Muñoz FJ, Gusi N. Gomez-Alvaro MC, et al. J Clin Med. 2024 Feb 24;13(5):1288. doi: 10.3390/jcm13051288. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 38592707 Free PMC article.
• Bridging, Mapping, and Addressing Research Gaps in Health Sciences: The Naqvi-Gabr Research Gap Framework. Naqvi WM, Gabr M, Arora SP, Mishra GV, Pashine AA, Quazi Syed Z. Naqvi WM, et al. Cureus. 2024 Mar 8;16(3):e55827. doi: 10.7759/cureus.55827. eCollection 2024 Mar. Cureus. 2024. PMID: 38590484 Free PMC article. Review.
• Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simplified Chinese version of the knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in patients after total knee arthroplasty. Yao R, Yang L, Wang J, Zhou Q, Li X, Yan Z, Fu Y. Yao R, et al. Heliyon. 2024 Feb 21;10(5):e26786. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26786. eCollection 2024 Mar 15. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 38434342 Free PMC article.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Pakistan Medical Association

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

What Makes Valid Research? How to Verify if a Source is Credible on the Internet

January 28, 2019 David Childs Democracy & Me Blog , The Role Of Media 57

By Dr. David Childs, Ph.D. Northern Kentucky University Introduction Computer and digital technology has increased at an astounding rate within the last several decades. With the advent of various informational Internet resources such as social media, online articles, books and so forth many people purport to do thorough research, but lack the understanding of what research means. The advent of search engines has given everyone the illusion that they have done research and are experts on a particular topic. In reality, people simply pull information from unreliable sources, thinking that they have researched a topic thoroughly. What makes a source not reliable? What makes certain information unreliable and untrustworthy? This article will offer information and resources to help people be able to differentiate between what is a valid source of knowledge and what is not. What is research? Research should involve a thorough reading and analysis of an adequate number of sources on a given subject. One does not have to have a college degree to do research. But the proper time should be devoted in order to draw valid conclusions that can be held up as reliable research. As a side note, some information cannot be obtained without proper research methodologies and even research tools. Examples of this is research in the natural sciences such as biology, chemistry or physics, or in the social sciences in areas such as history, economics or sociology. With the hard sciences one must conduct countless experiments to arrive at certain conclusions that cannot be obtained by simply reading a lot of Internet articles and watching videos. Furthermore, to do valid historical work one must study many reliable primary sources or conduct countless interviews with people who were present during a certain time period the historian is studying. So in this way, valid natural or social science experiments cannot be replaced by reading a few articles on the Internet. At the very least, one can read the work of experts who have devoted their life to research in a particular subject. Teachers in K-12 schools often have not spent their lives conducting research in their field (Of course there are many exceptions to this). Even though some teachers may not be researchers, they have devoted their lives to studying, reading and mastering their content. In this way, a middle school science teacher (for example) can read thoroughly within a certain discipline and gain a wide enough knowledge base on a topic to become a reliable source of information and somewhat of an expert. The knowledge they have gained was achieved through much time and effort. There is no shortcut for conducting research on a topic thoroughly and adequately. In contemporary times, when many individuals do research, their primary means of gathering information is through the Internet. The Internet can be a great resource for gathering information, problems arise when people cannot differentiate between reliable and unreliable sources. Below are some key components that one should consider when trying to verify if an online source is credible. How to Find Reliable Information on the Internet 1) Identify the source of the information and determine whether it is reliable and credible. A good starting point for this is to identify the name of the writer and or the organization from which the source was derived. Is the source reputable and reliable? Is the person or organization a respected authority on the subject matter? What makes a person or organization an authority on a particular topic? It has become very easy to publish information on the Internet and as a result there are many people purporting to be an expert in a particular field that are not qualified to write on that topic. A good way to understand the danger of this is to liken it to public school teachers teaching subjects outside of their certification in order to remedy teacher shortages. For example, one might find a teacher certified in social studies teaching high school math. In this cases, students are not getting the proper instruction in math. In the same way, there is a lot information on the Internet written by individuals that have no expertise in the particular content in which they are writing about. For example, many people that dispute climate change and global warming are not scientists and often rely on political rhetoric to support their claims. Scientists who do work in climate change have devoted their entire lives to research in that area, often holding undergraduate and several graduate degrees in subjects like geology and earth science. When a person is thought to be a well-known and respected expert in a certain field, they have a proven track record of careful study and research and are validated by reputable institutions that are known for producing reliable research. Often non-experts will spend just a few days or weeks “researching” climate change, in an effort to “dispute” data that is backed by decades of careful research. One does not have to have a Ph.D. to understand and challenge mainstream scientific knowledge, but time and energy devoted to research cannot be bypassed.    2) Checking sources for validity against other reliable sources. It is important when doing research on the Internet to check the provided information against other reliable sources to verify accuracy. For example, if every reputable source reports that cigarette smoking causes cancer and one source says otherwise, the lone source should be questioned until further notice because it has no credibility or way to verify its information. When checking facts and data for accuracy provided in an Internet source one should look for reliable and trusted sources. These might include academic articles, books, universities, museums, mainline reputable religious organizations, government agencies and academic associations. Libraries, universities and professional organizations usually provide reliable information. There is a growing public mistrust of long established institutions that has added to the level of uncertainty about knowledge. But it is important to know that institutions have credibility for good reason. Their history, information and knowledge base is backed by hard work, and long held traditions.    3) Is the information presented in a biased way? When one is reading an article or any information on the internet it is important to determine if that information has a specific agenda or goal in mind. What is the author’s agenda? Does the author or organization have a particular religious, sociological or political bent? These factors determine the validity of an information source. For example, oftentimes newspapers will feature op-ed pieces in which the author states up front that the article is largely based on their personal views. Therefore, when one reads an op-ed piece, they understand going into the article that it will be slanted to the right or left or toward a certain worldview. The article is not be completely useless, but the reader should realize they have to sort through the bias and decided what information is helpful to them in their research.  The reader should also search for possible bias in the information presented (Could be political, sociological, religious bias, or other ideas drawn from a particular worldview) and or even claims made that seem unrealistic or unreasonable with no evidence to back it up. 4) Search for citations that support the claims made by the author or organization. Most articles or information on the web will provide a link to do further research on the topic or to back claims made. When this information is not adequately provided one can assume that the source is not reputable. In addition, a site can have many citations but the sources may not be credible or reliable sources. Health and fitness writer Robin Reichert states the following about the topic reliable sources. Readers should “follow the links provided” in the article to “verify that the citations in fact support the writer’s claims. Look for at least two other credible citations to support the information.” Furthermore, readers should “always follow-up on citations that the writer provides to ensure that the assertions are supported by other sources.” It is also important to note that the end designation of a website can help determine credibility. When websites end in “.com” they are often are for profit organizations and trying to sell a product or service. When one comes across a site that ends in “.org” they are often non-profit organizations and thus have a particular social cause they are trying to advance or advocate for. Government agency websites always end in “.gov” while educational institutions end in “.edu.” Government agencies, educational institutions or non-profits generally offer reliable and trustworthy information. Teachers in middle and high schools attempt should spend more time having students do research papers as it teaches students the value of citing valid sources. The projects often call for proper citations using one of the various styles of citation with the most popular being APA, MLA and Chicago. How to Verify if a Source is Credible on the Internet Below I have provided a number of resources for our average internet researchers, students and teachers. The idea of truth and valid, reliable resources are being challenged because people are unsure as to what information is valid and what is not. The links below offer a number of resources that can further offer tools to help  to understand how to do research properly. Resources and References A Comprehensive Guide to APA Citations and Format EasyBib Guide to Citing and Writing in APA Format MLA General Format Formatting a Research Paper EasyBib Guide to MLA 8 Format Chicago Manual of Style 17th Edition Evaluating Internet Resources Check It Out: Verifying Information and Sources in News Coverage How to Do Research: A Step-By-Step Guide: Get Started How can I tell if a website is credible? Detecting Fake News at its Source: Machine learning system aims to determine if an information outlet is accurate or biased. What does “research” mean and are you doing it?

This is a great source of information. There are many times I am reading an article or a research paper revolving around my work. A lot of times I find the information is skewed by antidotal evidence or bias. In addition, what helps here is discussing what websites are more credible vs others. I had no idea .com and .org had differences. One being for profit and the other being not for profit. This goes into what kind of addenda they have and what they want the reader to learn vs providing all of the facts. Lastly, looking at the resources provided and the validity of them is very important. I just read an article today that was advocating for fire based ambulance services vs private and all of the sources were extremely old, none of which were from this or the last decade. So, how can I find the article credible? Bottom line, I can’t.

I thought this article was very informative and gave great information on determining if a resource is reliable or not. I feel like we were never necessarily taught how to find reliable resources. There is a lot of “fake information” online and it can be hard to tell what an accurate resource is and what is not an accurate resource. I thought this article gave some great ways to make sure you have a credible resource. I think this is what is wrong with technology though, there is a lot of fake news that people think is real and from there it creates numerous inaccurate ideas.

I have always had a hard time finding credible resources when I have had to do research for assignments. Especially since the pandemic hit, I think it’s even harder to find credible sources because of all the fake news that has been spread. When I use an online resource, I never put much thought into thinking if it is credible enough or not. If I find a resource that fits, I use it.

I’m a very naive and gullible person that overlooks the sources of where I found the information. Fake news is also more popular than ever and I like how this article helps depict articles to decipher if they are fake or legitimate

I like that this article explains how to properly identify a credible source. We live in a time where it is so easy to believe sources online. It is easier than every for people to upload any information online for people to access and eventually use as not-credible sources.

I like how this article forms a cohesive and understandable format for checking for reliable resources. It also shows how to think critically about the articles used for research.

I like that this article informs about whether an article is credible or not. Doing pre -research to make sure that you are getting the same information for all of your sources. I like that the article tells us to look at bias in our sources because that is a really big factor.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Copyright © 2024 | WordPress Theme by MH Themes

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.180(9); 2009 Apr 28

Managing evidence-based knowledge: the need for reliable, relevant and readable resources

Nowadays few would argue against the need to base clinical decisions on the best available evidence. In practice, however, clinicians face serious challenges when they seek such evidence.

Research-based evidence is generated at an exponential rate, yet it is not readily available to clinicians. When it is available, it is applied infrequently. A systematic review 1 of studies examining the information-seeking behaviour of physicians found that the information resource most often consulted by physicians is textbooks, followed by advice from colleagues. The textbooks we consult are frequently out of date, 2 and the advice we receive from colleagues is often inaccurate. 3 Also, nurses and other health care professionals refer only infrequently to evidence from systematic reviews in clinical decision-making. 4 , 5

The sheer volume of research-based evidence is one of the main barriers to better use of knowledge. About 10 years ago, if general internists wanted to keep abreast of the primary clinical literature, they would have needed to read 17 articles daily. 6 Today, with more than 1000 articles indexed daily by MEDLINE, that figure is likely double. The problem is compounded by the inability of clinicians to afford more than a few seconds at a time in their practices for finding and assimilating evidence. 7 These challenges highlight the need for better infrastructure in the management of evidence-based knowledge.

Systematic reviews and primary studies

Some experts suggest that clinicians should seek systematic reviews first when trying to find answers to clinical questions. 8 Research that is synthesized in this way provides a base of evidence for clinical practice guidelines. But there are many barriers to the direct use by clinicians of systematic reviews and primary studies. Clinical practitioners lack ready access to current research-based evidence, 9 , 10 lack the time needed to search for it and lack the skills needed to identify it, appraise it and apply it in clinical decision-making. 11 , 12 Until recently, training in the appraisal of evidence has not been a component of most educational curricula. 11 , 12 In one study of the use of evidence, clinicians took more than 2 minutes to identify a Cochrane review and its clinical bottom line. This resource was therefore frequently abandoned in “real-time” clinical searches. 7 In another study, Sekimoto and colleagues 13 found that physicians in their survey believed a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of a treatment was equivalent to the treatment being ineffective.

Often, the content of systematic reviews and primary studies is not sufficient to meet the needs of clinicians. Although criteria have been developed to improve the reporting of systematic reviews, 14 their focus has been on the validity of evidence rather than on its applicability. Glenton and colleagues 15 described several factors hindering the effective use of systematic reviews for clinical decision-making. They found that reviews often lacked details about interventions and did not provide adequate information on the risks of adverse events, the availability of interventions and the context in which the interventions may or may not work. Glasziou and colleagues 16 observed that, of 80 studies (55 single randomized trials and 25 systematic reviews) of therapies published over 1 year in Evidence-Based Medicine (a journal of secondary publication), elements of the intervention were missing in 41. Of the 25 systematic reviews, only 3 contained a description of the intervention that was sufficient for clinical decision-making and implementation.

Potential solutions

Better knowledge tools and products.

Those who publish and edit research-based evidence should focus on the “3 Rs” of evidence-based communication: reliability, relevance and readability. Evidence is reliable if it can be shown to be highly valid. The methods used to generate it must be explicit and rigorous, or at least the best available. To be clinically relevant, material should be distilled and indexed from the medical literature so that it consists of content that is specific to the distinct needs of well-defined groups of clinicians (e.g., primary care physicians, hospital practitioners or cardiologists). The tighter the fit between information and the needs of users, the better. To be readable, evidence must be presented by authors and editors in a format that is user-friendly and that goes into sufficient detail to allow implementation at the clinic or bedside.

When faced with the challenges inherent in balancing the 3 Rs, reliability should trump relevance, and both should trump readability.

More efficient search strategies

One method for finding useful evidence is the “5S approach” 17 ( Figure 1 ). This framework provides a model for the organization of evidence-based information services.

The “5S” approach to finding useful evidence. This framework provides a model for the organization of evidence-based information services. Ideally, resources become more reliable, relevant and readable as one moves up the pyramid. To optimize search efficiency, it is best to start at the top of the pyramid and work down when trying to answer a clinical question.

Ideally resources become more reliable, relevant and readable as we move up the 5S pyramid. At the bottom of the pyramid are all of the primary studies, such as those indexed in MEDLINE. At the next level are syntheses, which are systematic reviews of the evidence relevant to a particular clinical question. This level is followed by synopses, which provide brief critical appraisals of original articles and reviews. Examples of synopses appear in evidence-based journals such as ACP Journal Club ( www.acpjc.org ). Summaries provide comprehensive overviews of evidence related to a clinical problem (e.g., gout or asthma) by aggregating evidence from the lower levels of relevant synopses, syntheses and studies.

Given the challenges of doing a good MEDLINE search, it is best to start at the top of the pyramid and work down when trying to answer a clinical question. At the top of the pyramid are systems such as electronic health records. At this level, clinical data are linked electronically with relevant evidence to support evidence-based decision-making. Computerized decision-support systems such as these are still rare, so usually we start at the second level from the top of the pyramid when searching for evidence. Examples at the second level include online summary publications, such as Dynamed ( www.ebscohost.com/dynamed ) and ClinicalEvidence ( http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/index.jsp ), which are evidence-based, frequently updated and available for a widening range of clinical topics. Online services such as Evidence-Updates ( http://plus.mcmaster.ca/evidenceupdates ), which include studies and syntheses rated for quality and relevance with links to synopses and summaries, have recently become available with open access.

Evidence-based information resources are not created equal. Users at any of the levels just described must ensure that evidence is reliable by being aware of the methods used to generate, synthesize and summarize it. They should know that just because a resource has references does not mean that it is evidence-based. And just because a resource uses “evidence-based” in its title does not mean that it is so. One publisher stated that sales can be enhanced by placing the term “evidence-based” in the title of a book (Mary Banks, Senior Publisher, BMJ Books, London, UK: personal communication, 2009). Rating scales that we find useful for evidence summaries and research articles are provided in Box 1 and Table 1 .

Guide for appraising resources for evidence-based information

Details on specific resources

Evidence-based medical texts

The following points could be used as a minimum checklist:

• Does the resource provide an explicit statement about the type of evidence on which any statements or recommendations are based? Did the authors adhere to these criteria? For example, claims about effectiveness of an intervention might be accompanied by a statement about either the level” of evidence (which would need to be defined somewhere in the text) or a statement about the exact type of evidence (e.g., “there have been 3 randomized controlled trials”).
• Was there an explicit and adequate search for this evidence? For example, a search for evidence about an intervention might have started with a look for adequate systematic reviews. If this was done, it might be followed by a search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.
• Is there quantification of the results? For example, statements about diagnostic accuracy should contain measures of accuracy such as sensitivity and specificity. The minimum criteria for an evidence-based resource would be adherence to the first point. Better resources should also address the other 2 points.

Meta-resources (e.g., listings or search engines for other resources)

• These resources should provide an explicit statement about the selection criteria for inclusion in the listing. Better resources should also include a descriptive review such as that described in the 3 points for evidence-based medical texts.

Scale for rating individual studies

Source: McMaster Online Rating of Evidence (MORE) system, Health Information Research Unit, McMaster University ( http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/more/AboutMORE.htm ).

Promoting specialized search methods and making high-quality resources for evidence-based information available may lead to more correct answers being found by clinicians. In a small study of information retrieval by primary care physicians who were observed using their usual sources for clinical answers (most commonly Google and UpToDate), McKibbon and Fridsma 18 found just a 1.9% increase in correct answers following searching. By contrast, others who have supplied information resources to clinicians have found that searching increased the rate of correct answers from 29% to 50%. 19 Schaafsma and colleagues 20 found that when clinicians asked peers for answers to clinical questions, the answers they received were correct only 47% of the time; if the colleague provided supportive evidence, the correct answers increased to 83%.

Question-answering services by librarians may also enhance the search process. When tested in primary care settings, such a service was found to save time for clinicians, although its impact on decision-making and clinical care was not clear. 21 , 22

What can journals do?

Journals must provide enough detail to allow clinicians to implement the intervention in practice. Glasziou and colleagues 16 found that most study authors, when contacted for additional information, were willing to provide it. In some cases, this led to the provision of booklets or videoclips that could be made available on a journal’s website. This level of information is helpful regardless of the complexity of the intervention. For example, the need to titrate the dose of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and confusion about monitoring the use of these drugs are considered barriers to their use by primary care physicians, and yet such information is frequently lacking in primary studies and systematic reviews. 23

Finally, journal editors and researchers should work together to format research in ways that make it more readable for clinicians. There is some evidence that the use of more informative, structured abstracts has a positive impact on the ability of clinicians to apply evidence 24 and that the way in which trial results are presented has an impact on the management decisions of clinicians. 25 By contrast, there are no data showing that information presented in a systematic review has a positive impact on clinicians’ understanding of the evidence or on their ability to apply it to individual patients.

Evidence, whether strong or weak, is never sufficient to make clinical decisions. It must be balanced with the values and preferences of patients for optimal shared decision-making. To support evidence-based decision-making by clinicians, we must call for information resources that are reliable, relevant and readable. Hopefully those who publish or fund research will find new and better ways to meet this demand.

• Sources of information for the practice of evidence-based health care should be reliable, relevant and readable, in that order.
• The “5S” approach provides a model for seeking evidence-based information from systems, summaries, synopses, syntheses and studies.
• Journal editors should work with authors to present evidence in ways that promote its use by clinicians.
• Journals should provide enough detail to enable clinicians to appraise research-based evidence and apply it in practice.

This article has been peer reviewed.

Sharon Straus is the Section Editor of Reviews at CMAJ and was not involved in the editorial decision-making process for this article.

Competing interests: Sharon Straus is an associate editor for ACP Journal Club and Evidence-Based Medicine and is on the advisory board of BMJ Group. Brian Haynes is editor of ACP Journal Club and EvidenceUpdates, coeditor of Evidence-Based Medicine and contributes research-based evidence to ClinicalEvidence .

Contributors: Both of the authors contributed to the development of the concepts in the manuscript, and both drafted, revised and approved the final version submitted for publication.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Identify Reliable Research Sources: Tips and Checklists for Researchers

When conducting a literature search, researchers may refer to a variety of sources such as books, newspapers, periodicals (journals and magazines), and websites to gather their information and steer their research into the desired direction. Any reliable research sources being referred to, if relevant, would need to be cited appropriately. Correct referencing adds credibility and value to the research and instills trust and confidence among the readers about the quality of the study. In addition to being relevant to the topic of study, it’s important that the sources also be reliable enough to be cited confidently. However, because of the information overload online sometimes researchers may find it difficult to verify the authenticity of their sources and filter correct information from all the noise. If the sources aren’t authentic, the credibility of the study itself could be questioned by the readers and may affect the reputation and trustworthiness of the author. It is, therefore, essential to be able to identify the different types of credible research sources.

Common information sources

The common sources that researchers refer to can be categorized as follows: scholarly/academic, popular/mainstream, and trade publications. The content in all these categories is published in peer-reviewed journals/periodicals, magazines, open access (OA) content, books, and websites.

The table 1 provides the differences between these three types of sources. The source used should depend on the type of article being written. For instance, popular magazines may not be an appropriate source to be cited in research articles. Selecting the correct source type for your article is the first step toward ensuring that a source is reliable and relevant.

Tips to determine if a source is credible 2,3

So, what makes a source credible? While conducting a literature search, researchers must mandatorily verify the reliability of the sources they are referring to. You could consider the following criteria and questions, collectively called the CRAAP Test , 4 to quickly evaluate the sources. This test was developed by the California State University in 2004.

• When was the information published or posted?
• Has the information been updated?
• Is your topic constantly evolving (e.g., technology, medical innovation, etc.) to require current data or will older sources suffice?
• [For websites] Are the links functional?
• Is the information relevant to your topic?
• Who is the intended audience?
• Is the information at an appropriate level (neither too basic nor too advanced for your needs)
• Can you confidently cite this source?
• Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor?
• What are the author’s credentials or organizational affiliations?
• Is the author an expert in the field or qualified to write on the topic?
• Is any contact information available?
• How is their reputation and experience in the research community or academia? What are their previously published works?
• [For websites] Does the URL reveal any information about the author or source? For e.g., .com (business or marketing, news) , .edu (informational) , .gov (informational) , .org (advocacy) , .net (technology, networking)
• Where does the information come from?
• Is the information reviewed and supported by evidence (appropriate citations)?
• Can the information be verified with already known reliable information?
• Is the language or tone unbiased and free of emotion?
• Any spelling, grammatical, or typographical errors?
• What is the purpose of the information? Inform/teach/sell/entertain/persuade?
• Do the authors make their intentions clear?
• Is the information fact, opinion, propaganda?
• Is the point of view objective and impartial?
• Any political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional, or personal biases?

For individual sources, you could also refer to the following checklist to start with and then add criteria as you go along, if required.

So, while you’re searching for appropriate sources to reinforce your research, do consult these checklists. Although these do not need to be strictly followed for every parameter, they would still give you a relatively clear idea about how reliable your source is.

We hope this article has provided some insight into identifying reliable research sources according to your need and determining the credibility of a source.

References:

• Is this scholarly? Peer reviewed? What is a trade publication? Henry Buhl Library, Grove City College website. [Accessed October 5, 2022]. https://hbl.gcc.libguides.com/c.php?g=1058529
• Turabian, Kate L. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations . 9 th Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2018.
• How to identify reliable information. Stevenson University website. [Accessed October 4, 2022]. https://www.stevenson.edu/online/about-us/news/how-to-identify-reliable-information
• Evaluating information. Applying the CRAAP test. California State University, Chico. [Accessed October 5, 2022]. https://library.csuchico.edu/sites/default/files/craap-test.pdf

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

What is Research Impact: Types and Tips for Academics

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

• Hirsh Health Sciences
• Webster Veterinary

Guide to Scholarly Articles

Getting started, what makes an article scholarly, why does this matter.

• Scholarly vs. Popular vs. Trade Articles
• Types of Scholarly Articles
• Anatomy of Scholarly Articles
• Tips for Reading Scholarly Articles

Scholarship is a conversation.

That conversation is often found in the form of published materials such as books, essays, and articles. Here, we will focus on scholarly articles because scholarly articles often contain the most current scholarly conversation.

After reading through this guide on scholarly articles you will be able to identify and describe different types of scholarly articles. This will allow you to navigate the scholarly conversation more effectively which in turn will make your research more productive.

The distinguishing feature of a scholarly article is not that it is without errors; rather, a scholarly article is distinguished by a few characteristics which reduce the likelihood of errors. For our purposes, those characteristics are expert authors , peer-review , and citations .

• Expert Authors  - Authority is constructed and contextual. In other words it is built through academic credentialing and lived experience. Scholarly articles are written by experts in their respective fields rather than generalists. Expertise often comes in the form of academic credentials. For example, an article about the spread of various diseases should be written by someone with credentials and experience in immunology or public health.
• Peer-review  - Peer-review is the process whereby scholarly articles are vetted and improved. In this process an author submits an article to a journal for publication. However, before publication, an editor of the journal will send the article to other experts in the field to solicit their informed and professional opinions of it. These reviewers (sometimes called referees) will give the editor feedback regarding the quality of the article. Based on this process, articles may be published as is, published after specific changes are made, or not published at all.
• Citations  - One of the key differences between scholarly articles and other kinds of articles is that the former contain citations and bibliographies. These citations allow the reader to follow up on the author's sources to verify or dispute the author's claim.

There is a well-known axiom that says "Garbage in, garbage out." In the context of research this means that the quality of your research output is dependent on the information sources that go into you own research. Generally speaking, the information found in scholarly articles is more reliable than information found elsewhere. It is important to identify scholarly articles and prioritize them in your own research.

• Next: Scholarly vs. Popular vs. Trade Articles >>
• Last Updated: Aug 23, 2023 8:53 AM
• URL: https://researchguides.library.tufts.edu/scholarly-articles

• Health A to Z
• Alternative Medicine
• Blood Disorders
• Bone and Joint
• Cardiovascular Diseases
• Child Health
• Coronavirus
• Dental Care
• Digestive System
• Disabilities
• Drug Center
• Ear, Nose, and Throat
• Environmental Health
• Exercise And Fitness
• First Aid and Emergencies
• General Health
• Health Technology
• Hearing Loss
• Hypertension
• Infectious Disease
• LGBTQ Health
• Liver Health
• Men's Health
• Mental Health
• Pain Management
• Public Health
• Pulmonology
• Senior Health
• Sexual Health
• Skin Health
• Women's Health
• News For Medical Professionals
• Our Products
• Consumer News
• Physician's Briefing
• HealthDay TV
• Wellness Library
• HealthDay Living
• Conference Coverage
• Custom Products
• Health Writing
• Health Editing
• Video Production
• Medical Review

Brain's Wiring May Trigger Depression in Some People

Key Takeaways

People with depression are more likely to have a distinct brain pattern

They have a 'salience network' that is 70% to 73% larger than people without depressive symptoms

The salience network is associated with reward processing, and could affect how people feel pleasure and enjoyment

FRIDAY, Sept. 6, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- A distinct brain pattern appears to make some people more likely to develop depression , a new study indicates.

“Deep” functional MRI brain scans revealed that a brain feature called the salience network is nearly twice as large in people with depression than in those without the condition, researchers reported Sept. 4 in the journal Nature .

The salience network is a group of brain regions thought to be involved in reward processing and focusing attention, researchers said.

“Having a larger salience network appears to increase the risk for depression—the effect is an order of magnitude larger than what we usually see in fMRI studies,” said senior researcher Dr. Conor Liston , a professor of psychiatry and neuroscience at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York.

Functional MRI scans identify patterns of activity in the brain by measuring changes in blood flow.

Researchers recruited six people with major depression to undergo repeated fMRI brain scans, and compared their results to those from 37 healthy people.

On average, the depression patients had salience networks that occupied 73% more brain surface compared to those of the control group.

The salience network “being implicated in depression kind of makes sense, because one of the main deficits in depression is anhedonia, which is the inability to feel pleasure and enjoy everyday activities,” said lead researcher Dr. Charles Lynch , an assistant professor of neuroscience at Weill Cornell Medicine.

The research team then looked at previous brain scans from hundreds of other patients, to validate what they’d found in this handful of people with depression.

Researchers found that the salience network was more than 70% larger, on average, in 299 patients with depression, compared to 932 healthy controls.

The data suggest that people with larger salience networks in childhood are more likely to develop depression later in life -- almost as if they were pre-wired for the condition, researchers said.

“For years, many investigators assumed that brain networks look the same in everybody,” Lynch said. “But the findings in this work build on a growing body of research indicating that there are fundamental differences between individuals.”

The team next plans to study the effects of depression treatments on the activity of brain networks, to see how drugs and other therapies work to quell depressive symptoms.

More information

The National Institute of Mental Health has more about depression .

SOURCE: Weill Cornell Medicine, news release, Sept. 4, 2024

What This Means For You

Some people might be pre-wired for depression from childhood, based on their brain development.

Related Stories