1.1 Critical evaluation – CRAAP transcript

Currency relates to when the information or resource was created.

Consider:

• When was the information published or updated? Is there a date at all? Be careful about using the copyright or footer dates – this often refers to when information on an entire site has been updated, not necessarily the page you are looking at.
• If the source is old, is the information still relevant? This can depend on your topic, or the type of information you are using (e.g. historical facts won’t change, whereas things like technological information and health information will, and it’s important that the information you use is up to date).
• Is it the most recent version of the publication? You might use a source from 2018 only to realise that there is a 2023 edition of the same publication with updated information.

Relevance relates to whether the source is suitable for your needs

Consider:

• Is the information related to your topic or does it answer your question?
• Who is the audience for this information?
• Is it at an appropriate level for your audience (i.e. not too basic or advanced). Is there jargon and terminology in it that your audience won’t be familiar with? Information aimed at a particular audience (e.g. school students) may not be comprehensive enough for your purposes.
• Have you looked at a variety of sources before deciding this is the one you’ll use?

Authority relates to the source of the information.

Consider:

• Who created the work? Authors/corporate authors or publishers?
• Is the author qualified to write about the topic? What are their credentials and affiliations? Are they experienced, educated or an expert in the field? If they’re a corporate author, are they a respected, legitimate organisation or company?
• Is there contact information such as a publisher or email address?
• Who is the publisher? Consider the different reasons a publisher may have for publishing information (related to purpose/objectivity) e.g. University Press vs. a commercial publisher vs. a government department.
• For online sources, the URL might reveal something about the author or source e.g. .com .edu .gov .org .net

Accuracy relates to the correctness and reliability of the content.

Consider:

• Where does the information come from?
• Is it website/report/research paper from a government department? These are often considered to be reliable and credible sources of information. They are often primary sources of data. However, as with any other source of information, it is recommended that you assess the authority, currency, purpose and objectivity of anything produced by governments.
• Is the information supported by evidence?
• Has the information been reviewed?  Peer reviewed journals have the most academic credibility.
• Can you verify any of the information in another source or from personal knowledge? Look for a reference list or links to corroborating/verifying information.
• In scientific papers/research, can the research be replicated? Is there enough information about how the information was gathered/analysed (particularly for data)?
• Are there spelling, grammar or typographical errors?

Purpose relates to why the information was created and whether it is objective.

Consider:

• What is the purpose of the information? Why was it created? Some common examples include:
• to try and sell something
• to inform
• to educate
• to entertain or amuse (satire/parody)
• to persuade
• to offer an opinion or perspective
• Information published to sell a product or advocate a particular point of view can be presented out of context and be influenced by the author’s viewpoint.
• If something is created to sell an idea or product, the information is likely to be bias and can potentially exclude information that contradicts its aims.
• Can you detect any bias? Opinion pieces often contain bias, as do advertisements.
• Does the language or tone seem unbiased and free of emotion or does it attempt to appeal to your emotions through the use of emotive language or images? Most academic sources use objective language and specific examples; look for emotionally charged or vague language which may indicate the information is biased or misrepresenting the facts.
• Has information been intentionally or unintentionally excluded? Sources that don’t present all facts or cover all perspectives, and ignore contradictory or conflicting information, may be biased and trying to persuade. Scholarly, reliable information should be objective and present all sides of an argument.