How do you evaluate the information you encounter on a daily basis? It might depend on what you intend to use that information for, if anything. If you’re informing yourself on a topic just because you’re interested in it, you might use different factors for deciding whether a piece of information is valuable than if you were seeking information as part of a research project for school or for work.

In a study of undergraduate research behavior by Kim & Sin (2011), students claimed they valued the following criteria most highly when choosing sources for their research:

• Accuracy

• Ease of access

• Easy to use

• Cost of use

• Currency

However, the authors’ study suggested that students’ claims about what they value in a source did not necessarily match their behavior when it came to choosing sources. Based on students’ behavior, the authors found that students actually valued the following criteria the most:

• Ease of access

• Cost of use

• Familiarity with the source

• Ease of use

• Comprehensiveness

Notice that “Accuracy,” the number one factor on the list of what students claim to value, does not even appear on the list of what they actually value.

Does this mean the students were lying to the researchers? Not at all! Instead, the authors’ findings suggest that students’ behavior did not necessarily match their ideals, which is likely true of all of us when it comes to evaluating information.

Fact or Fiction?

Think about what you value most when it comes to evaluating information that you encounter outside of the context of formal research—for example, news about current events. How do you evaluate the information you find? What criteria are most important to you when it comes to deciding what to believe?

These are important questions to consider because much of the time we may assume that the information we encounter, especially about the news, is accurate and objective simply because it comes from a news organization we trust. But according to Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in their book Blur: How to Know What’s True in an Age of Information Overload, there are different models of journalism that all have different methods and different goals.

Here are the models the authors discuss:

Journalism of verification: This is a traditional model of journalism that places high value on accuracy and context and seeks to convey facts rather than analysis or opinion. In this type of journalism, if the information is speculative rather than based on solid information, the journalist will make this clear to the reader.

Journalism of assertion: The emphasis in this model of journalism is immediacy with less of a concern for completeness or getting things right. This model is a product of the 24/7 news cycle that has become increasingly dominant in recent times.

Journalism of affirmation: The goal of this model of journalism is to affirm the beliefs of the audience. Information that goes into a news story is chosen to fit a particular ideology with little or no regard for objectivity or completeness.

When you encounter information, it helps to think which of the models it fits into most closely as you try to decide whether the information in the source is credible.

Using Metaliteracy to Evaluate Sources

Metaliterate learners reflect on information sources and content in order to use and share it in responsible ways. They evaluate content critically, including dynamic, online content that changes and evolves.

But they don’t consider the information in a vacuum. It is vital to understand what type of information is suitable for a particular situation or need. This may be research-based, editorial (from a particular point of view), or perhaps information from an expert presented in an accessible form.

Think about the three models of journalism above. The Journalism of Assertion model, with its need to make information available as soon as possible, strongly supports the need to evaluate dynamic, online content critically. If immediacy takes precedence over completeness and accuracy, it is in your court to engage in the necessary evaluation—particularly before sharing such information with others.

Conclusion

Before, you were asked to think about what criteria you value most when you are evaluating information. Like with the students that Kim & Sin studied, another study was conducted by the Media Insight Project to find out what criteria people value most in their search for information on a more everyday basis, particularly news.

It turns out that what people value most is not accuracy or ease of access or their familiarity with the source that published the information.

Instead, it’s their level of trust in the person who shared the information with them on social media.

This shows once again that what we think we value when it comes to judging the credibility of information does not always match up with what we actually value.

Getting to a more objective critical evaluation of a source may require extra steps such as taking the time to place the information source in context, learning to distinguish between opinion-based and research-based perspectives, and assessing content from different sources. Reflecting on the questions in the activity below will help you become more aware of your own habits and values in different contexts so that you may begin to develop investigative strategies to help you evaluate the information you encounter.

REFERENCES

Kim, K., & Sin, S.J. (2011). Selecting quality sources: Bridging the gap between the perception and use of information sources. Journal of Information Science, 37(2), 178-188. doi:10.1177/0165551511400958

Kovach, B. & Rosenstiel, T. (2010). Blur: How to know what’s true in the age of information overload. New York: Bloomsbury.

Metaliteracy Goals and Learning Objectives. (2014). https://metaliteracy.org/learning-objectives/

Rodriguez, A. (2017). Who shares the story, not who reports the news, is what counts for casual readers. Quartz. Retrieved from: https://qz.com/937590/for-casual-us-readers-the-person-who-shares-a-story-on-social-media-counts-for-more-than-the-actual-news-source/

Since “evaluate content critically” is very broad in scope, metaliterate learners also consider these more specific objectives. Read each objective below, and then answer the questions that accompany them.

Objective #1: Place an information source in its context in order to ascertain the value of the material for that situation.

Questions: In what situations might you want to make sure you are using a source that adheres to the journalism of verification? What about each of the other two types

Objective #2: Distinguish between editorial commentary and information presented from a more research-based perspective.

Questions: Which model(s) of journalism would fit the “research-based perspective?” And which fit the “editorial commentary” label? Can you think of instances where the lines blur?

Objective #3: Appreciate the importance of assessing content from different sources.

Questions: If you were to explain to a friend why it is important to assess different information sources, what rationale would you provide? What rationale would be most effective in moving from “claiming to value” to “actually valuing”?

Objective #4: Appreciate the importance of assessing content from different sources.

Questions: If you were to explain to a friend why it is important to assess different information sources, what rationale would you provide? What rationale would be most effective in moving from “claiming to value” to “actually valuing”?