Skip to Main Content

Evaluating Sources Guide: Techniques

Why do we need to evaluate our sources?

Whether it's in daily life, academic work, or professional settings, everyone needs information. In our daily lives, we make decisions based on information we seek, encounter, or that is provided to us, whether it's a new recipe to try, a new medication to take, or which car to buy. In academic work, students are expected to learn new information and to utilize it to strengthen the claims and recommendations they make in their assignments. Utilizing high quality sources increases the quality of your work; you draw on their accuracy and authority in order to build your own. In professional contexts, decision-making should similarly be informed by high-quality information.

Our purpose or need shapes what type of information is relevant and which sources we might trust. For example, when selecting a new recipe to try, we might consider a number of factors, including who wrote it, user reviews, nutrition information, or the time and skill level required. When seeking academic or professional information, we want to similarly evaluate our sources to ensure we are selecting accurate and reliable information to meet our needs. 

Evaluation Techniques

The three techniques below can guide you through evaluating your sources. No one technique is necessarily better than the others, but offer different ways of conceptualizing similar concepts. Feel free to choose one your prefer, or mix and match as works best for your purposes!

Note: The word "text" is used in this guide to refer to a given piece of writing or media (e.g., an article, social media post, video, image, etc.). "Source" is used to refer to the creator and/or publisher of a given text (e.g., the author, artist, website, organization, etc. from which a text originates). 

SIFT infographic

The SIFT Method

The SIFT method is a technique for engaging with information to verify its accuracy; it is often recommended when evaluating whether a text, claim, or piece of information is "fake news." This method is sometimes called "lateral reading," since you are reading multiple texts alongside each other (that is, laterally). You can use SIFT as part of your process when applying CRAAP or RADAR. SIFT is designed as a process in which one step leads to the next in order. Follow the steps below to implement SIFT:

Stop

  • Before engaging too deeply with a text, stop to consider the source (e.g., the creator, website, publisher, etc.). Then move to the next step ("investigate") for questions to help you do so.
  • Additionally, if you become overwhelmed at any point in the process, stop and remember why you are conducting your evaluation. Avoid straying too far away from your original purpose.

Investigate the source

  • Who is the creator and/or publisher of the text? What is their reputation? Are they reliable and trustworthy? Are they known to specialize in this type of information? (Try the "About" section of their website or Wikipedia to obtain background context.)
  • Is the creator an expert in the field or do they have relevant education, knowledge, or experience to otherwise inform their claims?
  • What might be the bias or motivations of the creator and/or publishing source?

Find better coverage

  • Compare the text to a similar one from a trusted source. Do they agree or disagree, and on what points? Why might there be disagreement? What bias or motivations might be at play?
  • Is there a consensus between the different texts/sources you find? If one text or source disagrees with the consensus, why might that be? (Are they the one voice of reason or should their claims be questioned?)

Trace claims, quotes, and media to their original context

  • Where did the information originally appear? Has any context been added or removed (or edited out)?
  • Has the creator of the text in question represented the information accurately and fairly when compared to the original context?
Attribution: SIFT text and graphics adapted from “SIFT (The Four Moves)” by Mike Caulfield, licensed under CC BY 4.0.

CRAAP infographic

The CRAAP test

The CRAAP test is a heuristic, or set of criteria, applied to a text to determine its usefulness to the reader in the context of their information need. Many people choose CRAAP to guide their source evaluation because of its humorous and memorable name. The RADAR test is similar to CRAAP; the SIFT method may be combined with either. Unlike SIFT, the criteria of CRAAP and RADAR can be applied in any order rather than a sequenced set of steps. Use the criteria below to conduct a CRAAP test:

Currency

  • When was the text written and/or published? How does the social and/or historical context affect your understanding of the text?
  • Has the text been updated or revised?
  • Online texts: Are links functional?
  • Consider: More recent is not always better. Sometimes your purpose is to compare information across time periods or to find out opinions from a given point in time/history. Also, processes like peer review take time, so a very recent publication date may reveal that peer review was not conducted.

Relevance

  • What is the relevance of this text's information to your information need? For college work, does the text meet the requirements of your assignment?
  • Who is the intended audience of the text? Is it at an appropriate level for your purpose? (e.g., an elementary school textbook does not meet your needs for a college-level research paper, unless your topic is related to elementary education!)
  • Does this text raise more questions or avenues of research on the given topic? Do you need to revise your inquiry in response?

Authority

  • Who is the author or creator of the text? What is their reputation? What might their biases be?
  • Is the author or creator an expert in the field or do they otherwise have relevant education, knowledge, and experience that lends them authority on this topic? Do they have any relevant professional credentials or affiliations?
  • Where was the text published? Is the publishing organization a trusted, reliable authority on the type of information presented?
  • Online texts: Does the URL domain reveal anything about the source? (i.e., does the URL end in .com, .edu, .gov, or something else?)

Accuracy

  • How accurate is the information in the text? If you are not an expert on the topic yourself, consider the following:
    • What evidence (if any) does the creator provide for their claims? Is the evidence fact-based or emotional? Are the arguments logical?
    • From where has the creator sourced their evidence? What was their methodology?
    • Has the information been reviewed or approved, for example, by an editor or a peer review board?
    • Can you verify the information in the text with a trusted source elsewhere? [This is where lateral reading/the SIFT method may come in handy.]
  • What is the magnitude of any errors? Do they invalidate other information or the claims contained in the text? For example, minor spelling or grammar mistakes can indicate a lack of accuracy, but can also simply be a sign that the creator is not a native speaker of the language being used. 

Purpose

  • Why did the author create this text? Why was this text published? 
  • Are the claims and information presented neutrally and objectively?
  • Is the purpose of the text to inform, educate, convince, entertain, generate profit, propagandize, etc.?
Attributions:

The CRAAP test was originally developed by Sarah Blakeslee at the Meriam Library at California State University (2010).

CRAAP graphic created by Jessica D'Atri, Babson College, using Canva; modeled on graphic from “SIFT (The Four Moves)” by Mike Caulfield, licensed under CC BY 4.0.

RADAR infographic

RADAR

RADAR is a heuristic, or set of criteria, applied to a text to determine its usefulness to the reader in the context of their information need. The CRAAP test is similar to RADAR; the SIFT method may be combined with either. Unlike SIFT, the criteria of RADAR and CRAAP can be applied in any order rather than a sequenced set of steps. Use the criteria below to apply RADAR:

Rationale

  • Why did the author create this text? Why was this text published? What might be the biases of the creator and/or publisher?
  • Are the claims and information presented neutrally and objectively?
  • Is the purpose of the text to inform, educate, convince, entertain, generate profit, propagandize, etc.?

Authority

  • Who is the author or creator of the text? Are they an expert in the field or do they otherwise have relevant education, knowledge, and experience that lends them authority on this topic? Do they have any relevant professional credentials or affiliations?
  • Where was the text published? Is the publishing organization a trusted, reliable authority on the type of information presented?
  • Online texts: Does the URL domain reveal anything about the source? (i.e., does the URL end in .com, .edu, .gov, or something else?)

Date

  • When was the text written and/or published? How does the social and/or historical context affect your understanding of the text?
  • Has the text been updated or revised?
  • Online texts: Are links functional?
  • Consider: More recent is not always better. Sometimes your purpose is to compare information across time periods or to find out the opinions held at a given point in time/history. Also, processes like peer review take time, so a very recent publication date may reveal that peer review was not conducted.

Accuracy

  • How accurate is the information in the text? If you are not an expert on the topic yourself, consider the following:
    • What evidence (if any) does the creator provide for their claims? Is the evidence fact-based or emotional? Are the arguments logical?
    • From where has the creator sourced their evidence? What was their methodology?
    • Has the information been reviewed or approved, for example, by an editor or a peer review board?
    • Can you verify the information in the text with a trusted source elsewhere? [This is where lateral reading/the SIFT method may come in handy.]
  • What is the magnitude of any errors? Do they invalidate other information or the claims contained in the text? For example, minor spelling or grammar mistakes can indicate a lack of accuracy, but can also simply be a sign that the creator is not a native speaker of the language being used. 

Relevance

  • What is the relevance of this text's information to your information need? For college work, does the text meet the requirements of your assignment?
  • Who is the intended audience of the text? Is it at an appropriate level for your purpose? (e.g., an elementary school textbook does not meet your needs for a college-level research paper, unless your topic is related to elementary education!)
  • Does this text raise more questions or avenues of research on the given topic? Do you need to revise your inquiry in response?
Attributions:

RADAR was originally developed by Jane Mandalios of the American College of Greece (2013).

RADAR graphic created by Jessica D'Atri, Babson College, using Canva; modeled on graphic from “SIFT (The Four Moves)” by Mike Caulfield, licensed under CC BY 4.0.