CARS--Evaluating Internet Sources

Credibility
Accuracy
Reasonableness
Support
 

Indicators of Lack of Credibility

• Anonymity 
• Lack of Quality Control 
• Negative Metainformation. If all the reviews are critical, be careful.
• Bad grammar or misspelled words. Most educated people use grammar fairly well and check their work for spelling errors. An occasional split infinitive or comma in the wrong place is not unusual, but more than two or three spelling or grammar errors is cause for caution, at least. Whether the errors come from carelessness or ignorance, neither puts the information or the writer in a favorable light.
• Emotional earnestness accompanied by exaggeration or absolutes. Even in very controversial areas (gun control, global warming, abortion, capital punishment) and promotional contexts (product claims and evaluations) we expect reasons, data, and emotional restraint. Articles where the writer's feelings have clearly taken over from thinking make us wonder if we are reading ideology instead of information and arguments that might persuade us. Breathless, sweeping generalizations should set off your baloney detector. For example, "Did you know that none of the vitamins and supplements sold in stores work correctly with your body chemistry? Only SuperDuperVite has been formulated to blah blah blah."
• Claims of unique, secret information (which is now on the Web site) or claims of such dramatic implications that you should expect widespread discussion. For example, "The CIA was responsible for the assassination of President Kennedy." Conspiracy theories in general, because they run counter to official reports and often counter to reason, should be met with great caution.

Evidence of Quality Control

• Information presented on organizational web sites 
• On-line journals that use refereeing (peer review) by editors or others 
• Postings of information taken from books or journals that have a quality control process

 

Indicators of a Lack of Accuracy

• No date on the document 
• Vague or sweeping generalizations 
• Old date on information known to change rapidly
• Very one sided view that does not acknowledge opposing views or respond to them 

Indicators of a Lack of Reasonableness

• Intemperate tone or language ("stupid jerks," "shrill cries of my extremist opponents") 
• Overclaims ("Thousands of children are murdered every day in the United States.") 
• Sweeping statements of excessive significance ("This is the most important idea ever conceived!") 
• Conflict of Interest ("Welcome to the Old Stogie Tobacco Company Home Page. To read our report, 'Cigarettes Make You Live Longer,' click here." or "The products our competitors make are dangerous and bad for your health.")

Indicators of a Lack of Support

• Numbers or statistics presented without an identified source for them 
• Absence of source documentation when the discussion clearly needs such documentation 
• You cannot find any other sources that present the same information or acknowledge that the same information exists (lack of corroboration)

Note: Appearances can be deceiving. Don't assume that a great-looking Web site is automatically credible. Very professional and sophisticated Web page templates are available for a few dollars, so that anyone and his pet skunk can put up a site that looks expensive and authoritative. Good looks are not evidence of credibility.