Vetting Information

Information Vetting Criteria (Prevent a world of disinformation and junk science)

The World Wide Web offers students, teachers and researchers the opportunity to find information and data from all over the world. Because so much information is available, and because that information can appear to be fairly anonymous, it is necessary to develop skills to evaluate what you find. Most books, journal articles and other written materials have already been evaluated by editors, scholars, publishers or other experts in a field. However, when you are using the web there are no filters. Anyone can write a Web page. Documents of the widest range of quality, written by authors of the widest range of authority, are available on an even playing field. Excellent resources reside along side the most dubious.

Unfortunately, we can no longer trust the media for information, because they selectively opt for what news to report (do not publish anything opposed to their bias) and they no longer assign "Reporters" that fact check, investigate then report on a subject, most just parrot or reinterpret the information to fit their bias or their employers bias and then publish (this is called yellow journalism), thusly we have a world of disinformation and junk science. An honest Reporter/Investigator/Researcher, starts out with a healthy amount of skepticism and either confirms or finds the information unfounded then publishes their story without bias, including appropriate history regarding the story.

Under this cover you will find some criteria that can be applied to web documents plus some links to some tremendous sites that discuss Evaluating Web Sources.

Credibility	Content
Source A site should display the institutions or organizations' name as well as the name and the title of the authors. Credentials What are the author's credentials/qualifications? Are they in the same subject matter as the subject of the page? Conflict of interest What is the relationship between the author and the sponsor of the page? Is there a possibility of bias? Context What is the setting in which the health information is provided? Is the information part of an advertisement or endorsement? Currency The date of the original document and the date of content posting should be displayed. Editorial Review Process Does the site have an editorial process or a way of reviewing the information on its site and if so is the process described?	Accuracy The validity of the information should be explained and the underlying data that led to the conclusions presented. Evidence The information presented should reflect the principles of evidence-based, including sound research and expert opinion. Completeness A comprehensive review of a topic should be presented--a balanced presentation of all sides References Are there related links or articles, or other evidence supporting the author's ideas, opinions, statements? Are these references peer-reviewed journal articles, established reference books or authoritative texts?
Disclosure	Interactivity
Purpose of the site. The mission statement of the site should be clearly stated and the site should match its purpose. When a website asks for user input or registration, the purpose and use of obtaining that information should be disclosed.	Feedback A link to send criticism and comments to the site's sources should be included. Chat Rooms Whether a moderator is present should be posted, along with a warning that the information may not be accurate. The moderator should be identified along with his expertise and affiliations.
Caveats
Sites that market services and products have different agendas than those that are primarily content providers. Additionally, users must be aware of the potential for misinformation and recognize the critical need to assess the quality of the information provided.

Checklist for Evaluating Electronic Information Sources

CREDIBILITY: Trustworthy source, author identified, can be contacted, known or respected authority, author's credentials, evidence of quality control, organizational support
ACCURACY: Current, date of update/revision, factual, detailed, exact, comprehensive, audience and purpose reflect intentions of completeness and accuracy
REASONABLENESS: Fair, balanced objective, reasoned, no conflict of interest, absence of fallacies or slanted tone.
SUPPORT: Listed sources, contact information, available corroboration, claims supported, documentation supplied. A source you can triangulate (find at least two other sources that support it).

This HON code symbol is a quality code symbol you will see on many health pages. The Health On the Net Foundation has elaborated a Code of Conduct to help standardize the reliability of medical and health information available on the WorldWide Web. The HON code defines a set of rules to: hold Web site developers to basic ethical standards in the presentation of information; and help make sure readers always know the source and the purpose of the data they are reading.

To be certified by HON, a Web site must formally apply for registration. If accepted, it must subsequently comply with all the principles enumerated in the HONcode. You can search for legally registered HON sites by using HON.

Junk Science: How Politicians, Corporations, and Other Hucksters Betray Us (Hardcover)

Junk Science Judo: Self-Defense against Health Scares and Scams (Hardcover)

unSpun: Finding Facts in a World of Disinformation (Paperback)

Some Criteria Links

Health Information Technology Institute	White Paper: Quality Assessment Criteria for Assessing the Quality of Health Information on the Internet
Johns Hopkins University Library	Evaluating Information Found on the Internet. Page put together by the electronic and distance education librarian.
Discovery Page	Questionnaire format for evaluating pages
Internet Detective	Internet Detective is an interactive, online tutorial which provides an introduction to the issues of information quality on the Internet and teaches the skills required to evaluate critically the quality of an Internet resource.
Ithaca College	ICYouSee Critical Thinking Guide. This site has some exercises to do for learning how to evaluate web sites.
Kent State University	Criteria for evaluating web resources put together by library staff.
Health On the Net Foundation	HON Code of Conduct for medical and health web sites
University of Colorado Health Sciences Center	Evaluating Medical Information on the Internet
University of California at Berkeley	Evaluating Web Pages. Techniques to Apply and Questions to Ask. This is an eight-point evaluation checklist put together by the UC Berkeley Library staff.

RETURN