Information research is performed in many different ways throughout the Internet. Once an information is found, the assessment of its relevance and trustiness happens through objective criteria and on the premise of subjective factors. What are such criteria and factors? And how are they changing in a growing social connected net?
A typical situation: You sit with friends together and discuss; a fact is cited, but you do not believe it and want to prove it is wrong, so you quickly check it in the Internet. We increasingly rely on our digital backbone, which now it is even ubiquitous available through mobile phones. The net becomes our extended memory – not in any case it is easy to find an answer quickly, but is getting easier thanks to sources such as Wikipedia.
But how do we trust these sources? Sources can have very different approaches, trusted behind the information they offer:
- Wikileaks anonymously “publishes and comments on leaked documents alleging government and corporate misconduct.”
- Bloggers stand with their reputation behind an information.
- Demand Media attempts to deliver thousands of answers each month from amateur writers and film-makers.
- Wikipedia relies on voluntarily work and editors to deliver accurate information or highlight it if it is not the case.
- Newspapers have a reputation of professional journalism.
But how do we decide in our daily information research source whether it is trusted or untrusted? There are many nuances between these two poles and various personal criteria on how to assess a source. I am curious to know what is desicive for you. Here is a list of questions, which might apply or not:
Source Criteria:
- Who is behind the source?
- Is it a well-known institution or person?
- Where does it originally come from?
- Does it indicate an author?
- Is the article old or up-to-date?
- Does it have comments? How many comments?
- Has the website a commercial intention or is the information service a common good?
- Is the article personally or objectively written?
- Does it have many or none citation to other sources?
- How well written is the article?
- How open is the person behind a presented page? For example, does the author have a biography or a Twitter account?
Network factor:
- Who has recommended the source? Is it a friend, colleague or peer?
- Is it a link from a well-known or unknown blog post to the source?
- Does the source have many readers/subscribers?
- Is it often cited? Can it be checked for example through a Twitter search or Technorati rank, in case of a blog.
Appearance:
- Is the website professionally designed?
- Do you like the design? Would you trust an information source with an appalling design?
- Does it focus on content or rather advertisement?
- Can you navigate easily or are there obstacles to find your information?
- Is it a rather closed site or does it link to a website?
These are only some examples showing how tricky it is to evaluate a source and set the needed range of skills to assess an information from different angles. How can these skills be learnt? A topic for another post.
Related posts:
- A shift in information sharing: Faster, more intensive and direct Something has changed. Information sharing isn’t what it used...
- The social web and the challenge of finding expertise Wouldn’t it be great if you had a question,...
- Information silos vs. open data in development organizations Accurate data is key for development work. Opening data...
- Cairo, Johannesburg, Mumbai – 24 hrs Google Buzz and location-based information pops up everywhere In this blog post, I will dive into the...

This blog explores worldwide social innovations and how people benefit from infor- mation and communication technologies.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Lesetipp: "When do we trust an information source?"!von @ckreutz http://bit.ly/4T5K3G
Too long ago to own up too–yes, measured in decades–I took a high school class on mass media, and was shocked, shocked to learn that something was not necessarily true simply because it appeared in the New York Times, or Times Magazine, or on the nightly news. And more recently, I heard a university media professor calling out for an “authoritative” structure for verifying online identities. It made me remember a laugh a little about the appearance of a Twitter account for the Dalai Lama some time ago. The hoax came out within about 48 hours, after maybe10,000 folks (well, including me) had chosen to “follow” the profile.
Given my progressive inclinations and general sympathies for the ACLU, there are substantial, even life-and-death reasons for someone to conceal their identity, so I don’t look for any “objective” verification source.
Everything on your list is right and useful–yet at the end of the day, at the point where action is required, we have to, as we have always had to, move forward with the best possible decision we can make, in the midst of reasonable–even unreasonable–skepticism. That said, for the most part, I’ve experienced more reasonable and actionable skepticism online than what I historically remember from earlier news and information sources (outside, perhaps, of peer-reviewed studies–which nevertheless also come under criticism now and then).
dlcsubs When do we trust an information source?: Information research is performed in many different ways througho… http://bit.ly/4nL4u0
Reading: When do we trust an information source? http://ping.fm/2Zxpk
Interesting post as ever! The ability to assess the value of information found is one aspect of information literacy. Stanford university have undertaken a lot of work about how credibility is established in virtual environments http://credibility.stanford.edu/guidelines/index.html
Here at IDS we are beginning to do more work on information literacy or information capabilities. We are interested in strengthening people’s ability to search for and assess the value of information and have been doing some work here at IDS and in collaboration with INASP. However we are also interested in another aspect of information capabilty that precedes either of these two skills…. the concept that information from other people is worth looking for when faced with a problem. is it possible to change information behaviours so that people are more likely to look for info? This was discussed at the KM4Dev workshop last year in a short discussion Strategies for Changing Cutures of Information Use – notes here http://wiki.km4dev.org/wiki/index.php/Strategies_for_Changing_Culture_of_Information_Use