It is crucial to evaluate information for reliability, especially for sources published solely on the internet, such as articles on Wikipedia. The reliability of a publication does not depend on a single criterion or reliability label but on a set of internal criteria (structure, content, authorship, etc.) and external criteria (peer review, reviews, etc.). The more criteria are met, the more reliable the publication is.
Important: These criteria are at best indicative and do not necessarily provide proof of the scientific qualifications of a researcher or the reliability of a publication. An author with a high Hirsch-index may sometimes oversimplify things, frequently cited articles can become outdated, staff members of scientific institutions or universities may not always be the most competent researchers in their field, and even peer review does not guarantee that an article was (solely) evaluated based on its content merits.
In any case, it is advisable to approach the content of scientific publications critically and, whenever possible, verify the information through mutually independent sources.
A scientific publication is systematically structured and includes (most of) the following components:
Every author writes an article or book from a certain perspective and with a specific purpose. This perspective can be purely scientific, but there may also be other motives and interests at play.
Every piece of information (publication) is always colored by the information provider (author). This, in itself, is not a problem, but sometimes this coloring can lead to a (gross) distortion of the facts.
A (gross) distortion means that information is deliberately twisted or concealed with the aim of leading the reader to the conclusion the author presents. You can recognize this manipulation by a number of characteristics:
To form your own judgment about the quality of the information found, the technique of critical reading is important. In principle, there are two types of text-critical arguments: internal and external:
An older publication is not necessarily outdated. However, it may be less reliable when:
Therefore, it is always a good idea to seek recent publications on your topic, along with the most important older publications.
Note: In most disciplines, it often takes months (for articles) or even years (for books) before researchers see their publications appear. As a result, the published information is often older than the publication date suggests.
An important criterion for assessing the reliability of information is the profile of the author. There are four types of qualifications on which you can evaluate the profile of an author:
Important! These qualifications do not provide authors with credibility in all domains but are only applicable to their area of expertise. For instance, a professor of musicology may not necessarily possess the appropriate qualifications to make reliable statements about the Holocaust.
Before a publication is accepted by a scientific publisher, it must undergo evaluation. This evaluation can be carried out by members of the editorial board or by specialized fellow scientists.
To prevent factors other than the content from influencing the evaluation, the names of the authors are often hidden from the colleagues who conduct the evaluation, and vice versa (double-blind peer review). Because this anonymity can also result in less constructive feedback, the system is under pressure. In some journals, reviewers have the option to reveal their identity after publication, thus acknowledging their often unpaid efforts.
Every publication is part of a scientific network and is evaluated by experts. You can find these evaluations through reviews or citations.
How many times have other researchers cited this article? The more it has been cited, the more value is attached to this article. However, keep in mind that relatively new articles may not have had the chance to establish themselves.
Below is an example of a citation score in Web of Science. You can see the number of times this article has been cited in the Web of Science Core Collection and the total number of citations in all databases of Web of Science.
Please note: These numbers are not absolute; only the citations indexed in Web of Science are shown. Therefore, it is possible that this article is also cited elsewhere. For this reason, access via Web of Science, especially for articles in the humanities, may have limitations.
Does the journal have an impact factor, and how high is it? The impact factor is a measure of the frequency with which an "average article" in a journal is cited in a specific year or period. A high impact factor indicates that an average article in the journal is cited relatively frequently. By comparing journals within a specific field, it becomes clear which journal has a higher impact factor.
You can find impact factors in the Journal Citation Reports, and increasingly, they are also available in the editorial section of a journal.
Example of a journal with an impact factor in the Journal Citation Reports:
Keep in mind the following criteria for quality control:
When you are dealing with conflicting information, the following advice may be useful:
Below are some quality criteria summarized in key terms for the substantive evaluation of website quality.
Is the content of the source well-founded and accurate?
Pay special attention to:
Is the content of the source up-to-date?
Pay special attention to:
Authority:
Pay special attention to:
Tip: To assess the importance or authority of the website, you can use Google's link filter to check how many external websites refer to the respective source website. For example, if you type link:UHasselt.be, you will get a list of all websites that refer to the UHasselt website. However, keep in mind that, more than with other publications, the number of references to a website is not an absolute guarantee of reliability.
What is the scope and depth of the information?
Pay special attention to:
Suppose that you use Google to search for the birth date of Sir Isaac Newton. When you carefully examine the results, you notice that different websites mention different dates. Some sites state 1642 as the birth year, while others mention 1643.
Which of the two found birth years is correct? In this case, you quickly realize that the difference is due to calendar changes. When Newton was born, it was indeed December 25, 1642. However, according to the current calendar system, he would have been born on January 4, 1643.
When you encounter conflicting information, it is best to try to find a reliable website that mentions both options and explains which one is correct or why they differ.
Some guidelines:
Wikipedia is the world's largest online internet encyclopedia, freely accessible and editable by anyone. It is important to exercise caution regarding the accuracy of the information provided.
As with all sources where the author is unknown, you should consult a second source to assess the quality of the information.
Many Wikipedia articles include references at the end of the text, indicating the sources from which the information was derived. You can use these original sources for your paper. If no sources are mentioned, it is not advisable to rely on the text from Wikipedia.