借势发力 合作共赢 激发健康科普新动力...
 | This is an essay on the Wikipedia:Reliable sources policy. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: This page briefly describes some main points within the Wikipedia:Reliable sources policy related to "What is a reliable source" (with appropriate links to the more exhaustive information on each topic). |
A reliable source is one that presents a well-reasoned theory or argument supported by strong evidence. Reliable sources include scholarly, peer-reviewed articles or books written by researchers for students and researchers, which can be found in academic databases and search engines like JSTOR and Google Scholar.
Magazine and newspaper articles from reputable sources are generally reliable as they are written by journalists who consult trustworthy sources and are edited for accuracy. However, it's important to differentiate between researched news stories and opinion pieces. Websites and blogs can vary in reliability, as they may contain misinformation or be genuine but biased; thus, it's essential to evaluate the information critically. Online news sources are often known for sharing false information.
Overview
editA credible source strives to publish accurate information. These sources base their content on evidence and rarely share false or misleading details. When they do make errors, they promptly correct them. They also have standards to verify information and recognize potential biases in their work. Moreover, credible sources implement editorial and ethics policies, avoid conflicts of interest, and refrain from using sensational language.
Credible sources can make mistakes, but these should be rare and quickly corrected. Some questionable sources might include legitimate articles to hide their true intentions. Evaluating publications requires extensive research and knowledge. Generally, it’s beneficial to rely on professionals to assess credibility, especially for scientific claims or local newspapers, which vary significantly in quality and reputation.
There has always been a concern that mainstream media's commitment to objectivity may lead to giving equal weight to unreliable opinions, such as the belief in a flat Earth or anti-vaccine claims. Most news outlets are reconsidering how to present these opinions without inadvertently elevating them beyond their actual merits.
Untrustworthy sources often use inflammatory language and questionable funding, promoting misinformation and conspiracy theories. They may publish factual information but distort meaning through bias. It's advised not to trust news from these sources.
Evaluating sources
editWho is the author?
edit- A source's reliability depends on its author. Check the author's academic and professional background when comparing sources
- Author reputation
- Verify the author's credibility through academic databases and news sources
- Consider their credentials to assess expertise on the topic
- Institutional affiliation
- Reputable institutions follow strict publication standards
- Sources from recognized universities or research bodies likely undergo thorough review
Purpose
edit- Understanding intent - informative vs. persuasive
- Is the source aiming to inform based on evidence or trying to persuade?
- Both can be valid; it's essential to know the difference
- Primary vs. secondary sources
There are three types of sources based on their originality: primary, secondary, and tertiary.
- Primary Sources: First-hand accounts like original research articles, literary works, podcasts, diaries, and statistics.
- Secondary Sources: Second-hand accounts that analyze or discuss primary materials, such as journal articles, newspaper articles, and books.
- Tertiary Sources: A mix of primary and secondary sources, providing summaries or overviews, including textbooks, fact books, almanacs, dictionaries, and encyclopedias.
Bias
editEvery piece of information carries a perspective; assess its objectivity before using it as a source. Distinguish between objective research (based on evidence) and opinion pieces (reflecting personal viewpoints). Research funded by vested organizations may be biased; check acknowledgments or disclosure sections. Authors' affiliations may indicate biases; this should be considered when using their work for your research.
Data
editValid academic claims require evidence and data scrutiny.
- Evidence - based claims must be supported by facts; caution is needed for unsupported assertions.
- Transparent methodology is essential for credibility; it enables peer review, replication, and bias acknowledgment.
- Be cautious of unsupported statements and broad claims lacking references to other studies, even original research.
Publication dates
editThe age of a source affects its relevance and usefulness in research.
In fast-changing areas, recent publications are important for the latest findings. Older sources may provide foundational knowledge or history, but one must consider their date. Understanding the context of both new and old sources is essential for clarity. Additionally, comparing sources from different times can highlight the evolution of ideas.
See also
edit- Wikipedia:Advanced source searching
- Wikipedia:Independent sources
- Wikipedia:Reliable source examples
- Wikipedia:Reliable sources and undue weight
- WP:Suggested sources – List of specific reliable sources
- Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources - List of commonly discussed sources
- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Good research
Academic websites
edit- "What are credible sources?: Fact checking". Guides at University of the Sunshine Coast.
- "Finding Reliable Sources: What is a Reliable Source?". University of Georgia.
- "Research Basics: How do I know if a source is credible?". Henry Buhl Library at Grove City College.
- "4 ways to differentiate a good source from a bad source". University of Texas at El Paso.