Skip to Main Content

LING 261: Intercultural Pragmatics (Bordería)

Popular Vs. Academic/Scholarly (Peer-Review)

This section of the guide with provide a brief refresher on the typical differences between popular and scholarly articles, as well as provide a number of paired examples of popular and scholarly articles, where each pair discusses the exact same research study, but in very different ways.

Popular Articles (Magazines/Newspapers) Scholarly Articles (Journals)
Written by journalists, columnists, reporters, bloggers, etc. Written by scholars, academics, and researchers.
Written for non-experts and the casually interested. Written for (and by) those with expertise in the field.
Sometimes referenced, but rarely with academic/scholarly sources. Thoroughly referenced, with credible and reputable sources.
Written to entertain, inform, provoke, and make money. Written to advance scholarship and academic knowledge.
Usually reviewed by an editor, though freelance work may be un-reviewed. Usually reviewed by academics and scholars (hence “peer-review”).
Examples: Time, Newsweek Global, National Geographic, The New Yorker Examples: Annual Review of Critical Psychology, Cinema Journal, American Journal of Education, Nature

Fact Checking Strategies

The CRAAP test is a basic set of evaluation criteria and questions that you can apply to any source that you find.  CRAAP is an acronym for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose.  The test also helps consumers of information to identify the rhetorical situations (audience, author, purpose, medium, context, and content) of the media that they consume.

Currency: the timeliness of the information.

  • When was the information published or posted?
  • Has the information been revised or updated?
  • Is the information current or outdated for your topic?
  • Are the links still functional and up to date?   

Relevance: the importance of the information for your needs.

  • Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question?
  • Who is the intended audience?
  • Is the information at an appropriate level (i.e. not too elementary or advanced for your needs)?
  • Have you looked at a variety of sources before determining this is one you will use?
  • Does the format fit your needs?

Authority: the source of the information.

  • Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor?
  • Are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations given?  If so, what are they?
  • What are the author's qualifications to write on the topic?
  • Is there contact information, such as a publisher or e-mail address?
  • Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source?
    •  examples:
      • .com (commercial), .edu (educational), .gov (U.S. government)
      • .org (nonprofit organization), or
      • .net (network)

Accuracy: the reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content.

  • Where does the information come from?
  • Is the information supported by evidence?
  • Has the information been peer-reviewed or refereed?
  • Can you verify any of the information in another source or from personal knowledge?
  • Does the language or tone seem biased and free of emotion?
  • Are there spelling, grammar, or other typographical errors?

Purpose: the reason the information exists.

  • What is the purpose of the information? to inform? teach? sell? entertain? persuade?
  • Do the authors/sponsors make their intentions or purpose clear?
  • Is the information fact? opinion? propaganda?
  • Does the point of view appear objective and impartial?
  • Are there political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional, or personal biases?

The CRAAP Test was developed by Sarah Blakeslee and other librarians at California State University.  Read more via:
Blakeslee, Sarah.  "The CRAAP Test."  LOEX Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 3, 2004, https://commons.emich.edu/loexquarterly/vol31/iss3/4.

Trying to figure out if something you see on the Internet is real or not? Try: 

The SIFT Method

  1. Stop
    1. Do you recognize the website?
    2. What was your purpose in getting to this webpage?
  2. Investigate the Source
    1. Where’s the content from? Webpage, webpage’s other coverage, author, author’s affiliation, etc.
    2. Is the caption misleading?
  3. Find Better Coverage
    1. Can you find a more trusted source for the same information?
    2. Is there a consensus for the information provided?
  4. Trace Claims, Quotes, and Media to the Original Context
    1. Can you trace back the information to its original source?
    2. Whose research/reporting is this article written on?

 

For more information about the SIFT method you can read the free, short ebook: Web Literacy for Student Fact Checkers by Mike Caulfield (Washington State University).