Chapter 10: Evaluating and Interpreting Information
All information is not equal. When you find research, some questions should be:
How dependable are the sources?
How convincing is the evidence?
What do the findings mean?
Where are the weak spots?
Evaluate the Sources
- · Determine the currency of the source
(The most recent isn’t always the most reliable- scientific research)
- · Assess the reputation of a printed source
(Is the source dependable?)
- · Assess the dependability of an internet or database source
(Is the source trustworthy?)
- · Consider the sponsorship and the motives for the study.
(Why is the study being done, who is sponsoring the study, what is their reasoning for sponsoring it)
- · Cross-check the source against other similar sources
(Compare and contrast the same information through different sources)
Guidelines for Evaluating Sources on the Web
- Sites domain:
.com- business/commercial organizations
.edu- educational institution
.gov- government organization
.mil- military organization
.net- anyone with simple software and internet access
.org- nonprofit organization
- · Purpose of the site
- · Look beyond the style
- · Assess the currency
- · Assess authors credentials
- · Decide whether the information makes sense
- · Compare the site with other sources
- · Look for quality
o Worthwhile content
o Organization
o Readable
o Expertise
o Peer review
o Up-to-date links
o Follow-up options
Evaluate the Evidence
This is very important because many times evidence is chosen to support a particular claim therefore deceiving the whole truth.
- · Determining the sufficiency of the evidence (is there enough evidence)
- · Differentiate hard from soft evidence (hard-facts soft-opinions)
- · Balanced and Reasonable (exaggerations, too good to be true, vital facts omitted)
- · How the facts are framed (Glass half empty or half full, 90-percent survival rate, 10-percent mortality rate)
Interpret your findings –know your certainty
- · The ultimate truth- the conclusive answer-all who investigate in agreement
- · The probable answer- best decision at the time with all that’s known
- Inconclusive answer- the truth is more ambiguous than expected
Examine the underlying assumptions
- · We think things to be true without proof.
- · Assumptions may alter research validity
Personal Bias
- · Our own views come into play sometimes without knowing
- · Sometimes we rationalize instead of reason
Other interpretations
- · Know another way people might view the work.
- · What else can your research imply
Avoiding Error
- · Faulty Generalization- jump from one or more observations to a distinct conclusion. Overstated generalization can be an exaggeration.
- · Faulty causal reasoning- You should be sure readers can draw conclusions that are similar to your own. You don’t want to ignore other causes or effects than the ones in your reasoning.
- · Faulty statistical reasoning- numbers can be misleading, graphs can also be misleading. Numbers can be manipulated, the average can vary (mean median mode) percentages can seem high or low due to sample size. Rankings can be misleading and correlation and causation can be confused.
Research
- · Validity- correct findings, a survey should measure what it’s expected to measure, measure accurately and precisely and the finding from the survey can be generalized to the target population.
- · Reliability- can be replicated, a survey’s results are consistent
- · Flaws-
o Epidemiological-sampling techniques
o Laboratory studies-limitations
o Human exposure studies- non- representative of general public
- · Measurement Errors
- · Deceptive Reporting
Guidelines for evaluating and Interpreting Information
- · Check the publication date
- · Know the reputation of the source
- · Check the quality
- · Know the sponsor
- · Determine whether the evidence is sufficient
- · Examine assumptions
- · Identify personal biases
- · Consider alternate interpretations
- · Supports all generalizations?
- · Look for statistical fallacies
- · Look for misleading info
- · Look for the whole story
Chapter 11: Summarizing and Abstracting Information
Summaries briefly explain the detailed work. They tell the essential message without having to take time to read the entire piece in depth.
Users expect a summary to be accurate, complete, readable, concise and without a technical style. Summaries should be easy and quick to read.
When summarizing others information, one should read the entire original to know what you’re trying to sum up. Reread the original and know the essential material. Edit the information and rewrite in your own words. Edit your work and check it with the original. And finally make sure that the summary your write is relaying the message of the original.
- · Closing summary appears at the end of a report’s conclusion section and it summarizes the gist of the entire report.
- · Informative abstracts are condensed versions of report. This allows viewers to get an idea of what the report is about before having to read it entirely.
- · Descriptive abstract just introduces the report without saying the main points. This type of summary allows people if they want to read the report or not.
- · Executive abstract have a persuasive feel. They cover the points, what did you find? What does it mean? And what should be done?
Ethical considerations: whoever is summarizing the piece of work ultimately chooses what they want to leave out and emphasize. This can be unethical because they could be leaving out essential points. Also sometimes summaries can be seen as plagiarism even though that’s not their intent. There can also be summaries that don’t capture the real story and are misleading to the original piece of work.
Therefore, when writing a summary try to make it as accurate and precise to the original work as possible, without leaving out important details.
No comments:
Post a Comment