Misplaced Pages

:Evaluating sources: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:28, 18 December 2007 editLquilter (talk | contribs)Administrators42,361 edits attempting to write the caution about "original" in the nutshell← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:45, 19 July 2023 edit undoBD2412 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, IP block exemptions, Administrators2,449,032 editsm Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources: Clean up spacing errors around ref tags., replaced: /ref>E → /ref> ETag: AWB 
(247 intermediate revisions by 29 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{essay|WP:EVAL|WP:EVALUATE|interprets=the ]}}
{{proposed|]}}


{{nutshell|When using primary sources, editors should stick to describing what the sources say. Any interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims require a secondary source.}}
{{nutshell|Sources should be critically evaluated to assess authorship, credibility, and objectivity. Any source that has not itself been evaluated prior to publication must only be used with caution and should be only used to make strictly factual, descriptive comments.}}


'''Evaluating sources''' refers to assessment of the use of sources in Misplaced Pages, within the context of relevant content policies. Source evaluation is usually facilitated by classing sources and their uses as ''primary'', ''secondary'', or ''tertiary''. Source evaluation should always include checking for source bias and assessment of arguments used by sources. This essay examines how to evaluate sources within the context of Misplaced Pages's content policies. Part of evaluating a source is deciding whether it is a ''primary'', ''secondary'', or ''tertiary'' source. For the policy on sourcing issues, see ] of ], and ]. If there are inconsistencies between this page and the policies, please update this page.


Appropriate sourcing is a complicated issue, and these are general rules. The decision as to what type of sources are more suitable on any given situation is a matter of common sense, good editorial judgment, and context, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages to achieve ] among the involved editors. In cases where a consensus is not forthcoming, it may be helpful to ]. The decision as to which sources are appropriate in any given situation is a matter of common sense and good editorial judgment, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages to achieve ]. In cases where a consensus is not forthcoming, it may be helpful to ].


== Definitions == == Types of sources ==
Sources of information are commonly categorized as ], ], or ]s. In brief, a primary source is one close to the event with firsthand knowledge (for example, an eyewitness); a secondary source is at least one step removed (for example, a book about an event written by someone not involved in it); and a tertiary source is an encyclopaedia or textbook that provides a general overview.
Classing sources as primary, secondary, or even tertiary is common and is usually helpful in evaluating a source. However, the common terms "primary", "secondary", and "tertiary" may be used differently in different contexts. (For example, scientists may refer to "the primary literature" while humanities scholars may describe similar literature as "the secondary literature".) To minimize conflict and confusion, ensure that all editors are using the terms in the same way, and understand how ''you'' are using the terms.


The way these concepts are applied to particular sources can change over time. A newspaper article that we regard as a secondary source now, might be regarded as a primary source in 100 years, because it would be close to the event in relation to those reading about that event 100 years from now.<ref name="Stebbins">Stebbins, Leslie Foster. ''Student Guide to Research in the Digital Age''. Libraries Unlimited'', 2006, pp. 61–79. {{ISBN|1591580994}}</ref>
===Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources (categorical view)===
Sources may be divided into three basic categories of how they relate to the subject being written about.<ref>Various professional fields treat the distinction between primary and secondary sources in differing fashions. Some fields and references also further distinguish between secondary and tertiary sources. Primary, secondary and tertiary sources are broadly defined here for the purposes of Misplaced Pages.</ref>
For the purposes of Misplaced Pages content policies and guidelines, primary, secondary and tertiary sources are broadly defined as follows:


=== Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources ===
*'''Primary sources''' are original works and unevaluated data.<ref name="Turabian"/> Depending on the field, this can range from speeches, personal correspondence, published editorials, manuscripts, works of fiction, incidents captured on film, witness reports, laboratory notebooks, field notes, and even artifacts. Whether opinion or observation, this material has not been evaluated by a third party; thus, the source of the material may be described as ''very close to the origin'' of the material -- its observer or creator.
{{anchor|ps|primary|primary source|primary sources}}

{{See|Misplaced Pages:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources}}
*'''Secondary sources''' are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims, or create a general overview.<ref> notes that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets primary sources", is a "second-hand account of an historical event" or "interprets creative work". It also states that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets research results" or "analyzes and interprets scientific discoveries".</ref><ref> states simply that: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."</ref> This is what is commonly referred to as "peer-reviewed literature" and professional journalism; it may also include technical encyclopedias and dictionaries that compile scholarly essays.<ref name="Turabian">{{cite book
*'''Primary sources''' are sources of original work, as well as historical items and references close to the subject. Depending on the field, this can range from speeches, personal correspondence, published editorials, manuscripts, works of fiction, incidents captured on film, photographs, artwork, witness reports, legal documents, laboratory notebooks, field notes, peer-reviewed articles publishing original research, and even artifacts.
{{anchor|ss|secondary|secondary source|secondary sources}}
*'''Secondary sources''' are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims.<ref>{{citation|last=Thomas|first=Susan|title=Research Help:Primary vs. Secondary Sources|year=2007<!--April 03, 2007-->|
url=http://lib1.bmcc.cuny.edu/help/sources.html|publisher=Borough of Manhattan Commmunity College, A. Philip Randolph Memorial Library|location=New York}} notes that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets primary sources", is a "second-hand account of an historical event" or "interprets creative work". It also states that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets research results" or "analyzes and interprets scientific discoveries".</ref><ref> states simply that: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."</ref> Depending on the field, these may include textbooks, review articles, and peer-reviewed articles publishing original research. They are best used for representing significant points of view.<ref name="Turabian">{{citation
| last = Turabian | last = Turabian
| first = Kate L | first = Kate L
| authorlink = Kate L. Turabian | authorlink = Kate L. Turabian
| last2= Booth|first2=Wayne C.|authorlink2=Wayne C. Booth
| coauthors = ], Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, and the staff of the University of Chicago Press
| last3=Colomb|first3=Gregory G.
| last4=Williams|first4=Joseph M.
<!-- and the staff of the University of Chicago Press -->
| title = A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations | title = A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations
| publisher = The University of Chicago Press | publisher = UC Press
| date = 2007 | location = Chicago
| pages = 25-27 | year = 2007
| isbn = 0226823377 | pages = 25–27
| id = {{ISBN|0-226-82337-7}}
}}</ref> Critically, these materials have been evaluated by someone other than the creator or observer, typically through a peer review process, or editorial board policies (fact-checking), thus providing them with strong indicia of reliability.
}}</ref>


{{anchor|ts|tertiary|tertiary source|tertiary sources}}
*'''Tertiary sources''' are materials that synthesize secondary sources.<ref name="Booth">{{cite book
*'''Tertiary sources''' are materials that provide an overview of primary and secondary sources,<ref name="Turabian"/> such as encyclopedias, textbooks, and other ]. Misplaced Pages is a tertiary source.
| last = Booth
| first = Wayne C.
| authorlink = Wayne C. Booth
| coauthors = Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams
| title = ]
| publisher = The University of Chicago Press
| date = 2003
| pages = 76
| isbn = 0226065685
}}</ref> This includes publications such as encyclopedias or other ]; introductory textbooks may also be considered tertiary to the extent they sum up widely accepted results of large amounts of primary and secondary sources. It also includes "review articles" in some disciplines, although a review article might include some original commentary as well.


These definitions are not mutually exclusive. Primary sources, for example, might draw on secondary sources to make interpretive, analytic, or synthetic claims. In such cases, sources should be evaluated according to how they are used.
==== Examples of categorical classifications ====


=== Examples ===
Examples of '''primary sources''' include archaeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, trials, or interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field research, experiments or observations; original philosophical works, religious scripture, administrative documents, and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos, and television programs.<ref>Definitions of primary sources:
*The define primary sources as providing "an inside view of a particular event." They offer as examples: '''original documents''', such as autobiographies, diaries, e-mail, interviews, letters, minutes, news film footage, official records, photographs, raw research data, and speeches; '''creative works''', such as art, drama, films, music, novels, poetry; and '''relics or artifacts''', such as buildings, clothing, DNA, furniture, jewelry, pottery.
*The offers this definition: "Primary sources enable the researcher to get as close as possible to what actually happened during an historical event or time period. Primary sources were either created during the time period being studied, or were created at a later date by a participant in the events being studied (as in the case of memoirs) and they reflect the individual viewpoint of a participant or observer."</ref>


Examples of '''secondary sources''' include .... ==== Primary sources ====
{|class="wikitable sortable"
|-
! field/discipline !! types of primary sources
|-
|Anthropology||artifact, field notes, fossil, photograph
|-
|Art||architectural model or drawing, building or structure, letter, motion picture, organizational records, painting, personal account, photograph, print, sculpture, sketch book
|-
|Biology||field notes, plant specimen, research report
|-
|Economics||company statistics, consumer survey, data series
|-
|Engineering||building or structure, map, geological survey, patent, schematic drawing, technical report
|-
|Government||government report, interview, letter, personal account, press release, public opinion survey, speech, treaty or international agreement
|-
|History||artifact, diary, government report, interview, letter, map, news report,<ref name=news>An article from an old newspaper is regarded as primary-source material for an historian looking back at that period, because it's an example of writing that stems directly from the timeframe and the society he's studying. However, a recent newspaper report of, for example, a car accident is a secondary source regarding that accident, unless the reporter was personally involved or an eye witness.</ref> oral history, organizational records, photograph, speech, work of art
|-
|Law||code, statute, court opinion, legislative report
|-
|Literature||contemporary review, interview, letter, manuscript, personal account, published work
|-
|Music||contemporary review, letter, personal account, score, sound recording
|-
|Psychology||case study, clinical case report, experimental replication, follow-up study, longitudinal study, treatment outcome study
|-
|Sociology||cultural artifact, interview, oral history, organizational records, statistical data, survey
|-
|}<small>{{cite web | title = Primary Sources, What Are They? | publisher = Lafayette College Libraries and Academic Information Resources | date = 2005 | url = http://ww2.lafayette.edu/~library/guides/primarysources/definitions.html | accessdate = 2007-12-19 }}</small>


==== Examples by field ====
Examples of '''tertiary sources''' include


{| class="wikitable" width="95%" border="1" cols=3 0
===Primary and secondary sources (relative view)===
| width="15%" | <div align="center"><b>Discipline</b></div>
While it is sometimes useful to categorize works into categories of ''primary'' or ''secondary'' based on their genre or description, in more scholarly and academic writing, library scientists and historians generally classify works not on their genre, but on their ''primariness'' and ''secondariness'' with respect to the subject matter being discussed.
| width="28%" | <div align="center"><b>Primary</b></div>
| width="28%" | <div align="center"><b>&nbsp;Secondary</b></div>
| width="28%" | <div align="center"><b>Tertiary</b></div>
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" | <b>Art</b>
| width="28%" | Painting
| width="28%" | Criticism of Vincent van Gogh
| width="28%" | Encyclopedia of Art
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" | <b>Engineering</b>
| width="28%" | Patent
| width="28%" | Derwent World Patents Index
| width="28%" | Patent literature usage guide
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" | <b>History</b>
| width="28%" | Autobiography
| width="28%" | Biography
| width="28%" | Biography index
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" | <b>Literature</b>
| width="28%" | Novel
| width="28%" | Book about a genre of fiction
| width="28%" | Poetry Handbook
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" | <b>Psychology</b>
| width="28%" | Notes from a clinical psychologist
| width="28%" | Monograph on learning disabilities
| width="28%" | Psychology dictionary
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" rowspan="2" | <b>Biology</b>
| width="28%" rowspan="2" | Original research on nematodes published in a peer-reviewed journal
| width="28%" align="left" | <p>Biological abstracts
</p>
| width="28%" | <p></p>
|- valign="top"
| width="28%" align="left" | Review of current nematode research
| width="28%" | Biological abstracts
|- valign="top"
| width="15%" | <b>Theatre</b>
| width="28%" | Video of a play
| width="28%" | Biography of a playwright
| width="28%" |
|}


<small>Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen – </small>
*'''Primary sources''' are ''original'', or ''authoritative'' source for a particular thought or idea. They are typically created at roughly the time being studied, by one with direct personal knowledge of the events being described.


== Evaluation ==
*'''Secondary sources''' are sources that relate or discuss information originally presented elsewhere. Secondary sources often (but not always) include generalizations, analyses, syntheses, interpretations, or evaluations of the original information.
=== Original research and verifiability ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:No original research|Misplaced Pages:Verifiability}}


] and ] are the two core content policies that determine how sources are used on Misplaced Pages. All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to analyses, syntheses, or original conclusions. Original analysis by Wikipedians may not be added to articles.
*'''Tertiary sources''' are not often recognized as authoritative in academic writing, although the phrase is sometimes used to describe encyclopedias or other references that compile published material.


Edits should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages. Passages should not be taken out of context in a way that changes their meaning.
''Primariness'' and ''secondariness'' are relative terms, and some sources may be classified as primary ''or'' secondary, or both, depending on how they are used. The distinction between primary and secondary is often a blurred one. For example, if a historical text discusses old documents to derive a new historical conclusion, it is considered to be a primary source for the new conclusion, but a secondary source of information found in the old documents.


Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used, but any part of an article that relies on a primary source should:
==Implications==
* only make descriptive claims about the material found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
The following section provides guidance on the use of sources as it applies to specific content policies.

=== Neutral point of view ===
''Please expand''

{{main|Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view}}
Secondary sources (categorical definition) are usually preferable because their presentations of facts, analyses, arguments, and context have been evaluated by someone other than the creator. However, despite evaluation, they may be biased or inaccurate, so caution is required to preserve the ]. Care should also be taken to avoid ] and ensure the information cited is used in context.

=== No original research ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:No original research}}
All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to new analysis, syntheses or original conclusions that are not ]. Interpretive claims, analysis, or synthetic claims ''must be appropriately sourced''; they may not be original analysis by Misplaced Pages editors.

Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used in Misplaced Pages, but no original interpretations or conclusions may be drawn from primary sources. Descriptions of primary sources must hew closely to the original. Anyone, even a non-specialist, who reads the primary source should be able to verify that the Misplaced Pages passage simply reflects the content of the primary source.

Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. To the extent that an article or particular part of an article relies on a primary source, that part of the article should:
* only make descriptive claims about the information found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
*make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source. *make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.


Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary or secondary sources.
Drawing conclusions not explicit in the reference cited is original research regardless of the type of source. It is important that references are cited in context and on topic.

Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary and/or secondary sources. "Common knowledge" claims may be cited to tertiary sources.

=== Verifiability ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Verifiability}}
Information in an article must be ] in the references cited. Article statements generally should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages, nor on passing comments. Passages open to interpretation should be precisely cited or avoided. Passages should not be taken out of context in a way that changes their meaning or interpretation. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source's author(s).


=== Biographies of living persons === === Biographies of living persons ===
''Please expand''

{{main|Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons}} {{main|Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons}}
Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable secondary sources (categorical type), it will violate the ] and ] policies. Material about living persons available solely in primary sources (categorical type), in ], or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all in biographies of living people, either as sources or via external links. Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable secondary sources, it will violate the ], ], and ] policies, as well as ].


Material about living persons, regardless of its source, must be carefully evaluated to ensure ], and avoid ]. Use of primary sources that have been unevaluated may easily lead to syntheses that constitute ], which is not permitted in Misplaced Pages and is particularly problematic in material about living persons. Material about living persons must be carefully evaluated to ensure ], and avoid ]. The use of primary sources may easily lead to syntheses that constitute ]. Editors should not use public records as a source about a subject &mdash; such as birth certificates, home evaluations, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, or trial transcripts &mdash; unless these have been used by a reliable, secondary source. For example, if writing about a subject who had a messy divorce, do not go the courthouse to retrieve court papers about it; instead, rely on secondary sources, such as mainstream newspapers, that have written about the divorce. If they have not written about it, nor should Misplaced Pages.


=== Notability === === Notability ===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Notability}} {{main|Misplaced Pages:Notability}}
A subject merits its own article on Misplaced Pages when it is notable enough to have received acknowledgment in multiple, reliable, secondary sources. If an article lacks ] that reasonably demonstrate its importance, it may be listed for ].


== Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources ==
''TBD''
<!--merge examples into disciplines...Examples of '''primary sources''' include archaeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, trials, or interviews; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field research, experiments or observations; original philosophical works, religious scripture, administrative documents, and artistic and fictional works such as poems, scripts, screenplays, novels, motion pictures, videos, and television programs.<ref>Definitions of primary sources:
*The define primary sources as providing "an inside view of a particular event." They offer as examples: '''original documents''', such as autobiographies, diaries, e-mail, interviews, letters, minutes, news film footage, official records, photographs, raw research data, and speeches; '''creative works''', such as art, drama, films, music, novels, poetry; and '''relics or artifacts''', such as buildings, clothing, DNA, furniture, jewelry, pottery.*The offers this definition: "Primary sources enable the researcher to get as close as possible to what actually happened during an historical event or time period. Primary sources were either created during the time period being studied, or were created at a later date by a participant in the events being studied (as in the case of memoirs) and they reflect the individual viewpoint of a participant or observer."</ref> Examples of '''secondary sources''' include ....Examples of '''tertiary sources''' include-->
=== In the sciences ===


; Peer-reviewed literature
== Applications of source typing ==
When evaluating sources of scientific material, sources that were evaluated by someone other than the scientist / author when they were published are the most reliable. This includes peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals. The general rule is to ''always consider the source''. The critical element in evaluating the source of material that is to be included in Misplaced Pages ''was previously published in a source that reviewed that information''. Journal articles that have passed through the peer-review process are thus the most highly reliable sources of scientific information.


Peer-reviewed literature is ''reliable'' as a source for propositions, ideas, observations, and other scientific data. However, care must be taken that multiple propositions, ideas, observations, and other data are not stitched together to form a new proposition or idea. The sum total of a piece of writing in Misplaced Pages should not advance a unique or novel interpretation. This is ], even if each individual component is sourced to highly reliable peer-reviewed literature; ''original research may not be published in Misplaced Pages''.
=== In literature, arts, and history===


; Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other non-peer-reviewed sources
Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, and textbooks that distill peer-reviewed literature and scientific findings into lay-person language may be easier to understand for the non-expert. If available, they must be used carefully as they are further interpretations of the original work. This sort of coverage is not available for all scientific topics, and is not required to establish reliability of a scientific proposition. Lay-person language interpretations, if confusing or inaccurate, should be buttressed by reference to the original material. In a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.


Scientific findings that are originally presented in non-peer reviewed literature must be used with particular care, as they have not been reviewed for ''scientific'' accuracy. For example, a newspaper may run an article on a scientist and her latest work, or a scientist might maintain a blog about his research. The descriptions of the scientist's ''previously unpublished findings'', as published in the newspaper or on the blog, are not as reliable a description of that research as a peer-reviewed journal article. If it is important to discuss such findings in the Misplaced Pages article, the most reliable source available should be used. If a peer-reviewed article is published ''after'' a newspaper, blog, or other non-peer-reviewed publication of the research, both may be used, but in a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.
==== In articles about works of fiction ====


; Review articles
=== In mathematics ===
Review articles are articles published within scientific journals that survey and synthesize the state of research in a particular area. Review articles can be very helpful in understanding a topic, and on-point review articles should be cited or included as "further research". Review articles, like encyclopedias or textbooks, may also be useful to cite for general propositions about a field. However, there are three issues to consider when using review articles. First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. In a conflict over what a paper said, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable than a review article's summation of the publication's findings. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research. If possible, the summarized later research should be reviewed and cited ''directly'' when describing any points from that research; however, it is permissible to reference the review article as citing the earlier material. Third, a review article that advances new information or its own new synthesis may be cited for those propositions, just as any publication may. However, the source should be carefully evaluated because review articles may not be peer reviewed


=== In political topics === == See also ==
* ]

* ]
=== In religion ===
* ]

=== In the sciences ===


== References == == References ==
{{reflist}} {{reflist|2}}


{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}} {{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}}

]

Latest revision as of 22:45, 19 July 2023

Essay on editing Misplaced Pages
This is an essay on the Primary sources policies.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
Shortcuts
This page in a nutshell: When using primary sources, editors should stick to describing what the sources say. Any interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims require a secondary source.

This essay examines how to evaluate sources within the context of Misplaced Pages's content policies. Part of evaluating a source is deciding whether it is a primary, secondary, or tertiary source. For the policy on sourcing issues, see this section of Misplaced Pages:No original research, and Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. If there are inconsistencies between this page and the policies, please update this page.

The decision as to which sources are appropriate in any given situation is a matter of common sense and good editorial judgment, and should be discussed on individual article talk pages to achieve consensus. In cases where a consensus is not forthcoming, it may be helpful to seek some assistance in reaching an agreement.

Types of sources

Sources of information are commonly categorized as primary, secondary, or tertiary sources. In brief, a primary source is one close to the event with firsthand knowledge (for example, an eyewitness); a secondary source is at least one step removed (for example, a book about an event written by someone not involved in it); and a tertiary source is an encyclopaedia or textbook that provides a general overview.

The way these concepts are applied to particular sources can change over time. A newspaper article that we regard as a secondary source now, might be regarded as a primary source in 100 years, because it would be close to the event in relation to those reading about that event 100 years from now.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources
  • Primary sources are sources of original work, as well as historical items and references close to the subject. Depending on the field, this can range from speeches, personal correspondence, published editorials, manuscripts, works of fiction, incidents captured on film, photographs, artwork, witness reports, legal documents, laboratory notebooks, field notes, peer-reviewed articles publishing original research, and even artifacts.

  • Secondary sources are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical, or synthesized claims. Depending on the field, these may include textbooks, review articles, and peer-reviewed articles publishing original research. They are best used for representing significant points of view.

  • Tertiary sources are materials that provide an overview of primary and secondary sources, such as encyclopedias, textbooks, and other compendia. Misplaced Pages is a tertiary source.

These definitions are not mutually exclusive. Primary sources, for example, might draw on secondary sources to make interpretive, analytic, or synthetic claims. In such cases, sources should be evaluated according to how they are used.

Examples

Primary sources

field/discipline types of primary sources
Anthropology artifact, field notes, fossil, photograph
Art architectural model or drawing, building or structure, letter, motion picture, organizational records, painting, personal account, photograph, print, sculpture, sketch book
Biology field notes, plant specimen, research report
Economics company statistics, consumer survey, data series
Engineering building or structure, map, geological survey, patent, schematic drawing, technical report
Government government report, interview, letter, personal account, press release, public opinion survey, speech, treaty or international agreement
History artifact, diary, government report, interview, letter, map, news report, oral history, organizational records, photograph, speech, work of art
Law code, statute, court opinion, legislative report
Literature contemporary review, interview, letter, manuscript, personal account, published work
Music contemporary review, letter, personal account, score, sound recording
Psychology case study, clinical case report, experimental replication, follow-up study, longitudinal study, treatment outcome study
Sociology cultural artifact, interview, oral history, organizational records, statistical data, survey

"Primary Sources, What Are They?". Lafayette College Libraries and Academic Information Resources. 2005. Retrieved 2007-12-19.

Examples by field

Discipline Primary  Secondary Tertiary
Art Painting Criticism of Vincent van Gogh Encyclopedia of Art
Engineering Patent Derwent World Patents Index Patent literature usage guide
History Autobiography Biography Biography index
Literature Novel Book about a genre of fiction Poetry Handbook
Psychology Notes from a clinical psychologist Monograph on learning disabilities Psychology dictionary
Biology Original research on nematodes published in a peer-reviewed journal

Biological abstracts

Review of current nematode research Biological abstracts
Theatre Video of a play Biography of a playwright

Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen – James Cook University

Evaluation

Original research and verifiability

Main pages: Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Verifiability

No Original Research and Verifiability are the two core content policies that determine how sources are used on Misplaced Pages. All sources should be used in a way that does not give rise to analyses, syntheses, or original conclusions. Original analysis by Wikipedians may not be added to articles.

Edits should not rely on unclear or inconsistent passages. Passages should not be taken out of context in a way that changes their meaning.

Primary sources that have been published by a reliable source may be used, but any part of an article that relies on a primary source should:

  • only make descriptive claims about the material found in the primary source, the accuracy and applicability of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and
  • make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about the information found in the primary source.

Tertiary sources can be useful in providing context and avoiding original research in topics where there exist very large amounts of primary or secondary sources.

Biographies of living persons

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons

Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable secondary sources, it will violate the No original research, Verifiability, and Notability policies, as well as Biographies of living persons.

Material about living persons must be carefully evaluated to ensure neutral point of view, and avoid undue weight. The use of primary sources may easily lead to syntheses that constitute original research. Editors should not use public records as a source about a subject — such as birth certificates, home evaluations, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, or trial transcripts — unless these have been used by a reliable, secondary source. For example, if writing about a subject who had a messy divorce, do not go the courthouse to retrieve court papers about it; instead, rely on secondary sources, such as mainstream newspapers, that have written about the divorce. If they have not written about it, nor should Misplaced Pages.

Notability

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Notability

A subject merits its own article on Misplaced Pages when it is notable enough to have received acknowledgment in multiple, reliable, secondary sources. If an article lacks secondary sources that reasonably demonstrate its importance, it may be listed for deletion.

Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources

In the sciences

Peer-reviewed literature

When evaluating sources of scientific material, sources that were evaluated by someone other than the scientist / author when they were published are the most reliable. This includes peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals. The general rule is to always consider the source. The critical element in evaluating the source of material that is to be included in Misplaced Pages was previously published in a source that reviewed that information. Journal articles that have passed through the peer-review process are thus the most highly reliable sources of scientific information.

Peer-reviewed literature is reliable as a source for propositions, ideas, observations, and other scientific data. However, care must be taken that multiple propositions, ideas, observations, and other data are not stitched together to form a new proposition or idea. The sum total of a piece of writing in Misplaced Pages should not advance a unique or novel interpretation. This is original research, even if each individual component is sourced to highly reliable peer-reviewed literature; original research may not be published in Misplaced Pages.

Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other non-peer-reviewed sources

Newspaper articles, encyclopedias, and textbooks that distill peer-reviewed literature and scientific findings into lay-person language may be easier to understand for the non-expert. If available, they must be used carefully as they are further interpretations of the original work. This sort of coverage is not available for all scientific topics, and is not required to establish reliability of a scientific proposition. Lay-person language interpretations, if confusing or inaccurate, should be buttressed by reference to the original material. In a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

Scientific findings that are originally presented in non-peer reviewed literature must be used with particular care, as they have not been reviewed for scientific accuracy. For example, a newspaper may run an article on a scientist and her latest work, or a scientist might maintain a blog about his research. The descriptions of the scientist's previously unpublished findings, as published in the newspaper or on the blog, are not as reliable a description of that research as a peer-reviewed journal article. If it is important to discuss such findings in the Misplaced Pages article, the most reliable source available should be used. If a peer-reviewed article is published after a newspaper, blog, or other non-peer-reviewed publication of the research, both may be used, but in a conflict, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable.

Review articles

Review articles are articles published within scientific journals that survey and synthesize the state of research in a particular area. Review articles can be very helpful in understanding a topic, and on-point review articles should be cited or included as "further research". Review articles, like encyclopedias or textbooks, may also be useful to cite for general propositions about a field. However, there are three issues to consider when using review articles. First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. In a conflict over what a paper said, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable than a review article's summation of the publication's findings. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research. If possible, the summarized later research should be reviewed and cited directly when describing any points from that research; however, it is permissible to reference the review article as citing the earlier material. Third, a review article that advances new information or its own new synthesis may be cited for those propositions, just as any publication may. However, the source should be carefully evaluated because review articles may not be peer reviewed

See also

References

  1. Stebbins, Leslie Foster. Student Guide to Research in the Digital Age. Libraries Unlimited, 2006, pp. 61–79. ISBN 1591580994
  2. Thomas, Susan (2007), Research Help:Primary vs. Secondary Sources, New York: Borough of Manhattan Commmunity College, A. Philip Randolph Memorial Library notes that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets primary sources", is a "second-hand account of an historical event" or "interprets creative work". It also states that a secondary source "analyzes and interprets research results" or "analyzes and interprets scientific discoveries".
  3. The National History Day website states simply that: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."
  4. ^ Turabian, Kate L; Booth, Wayne C.; Colomb, Gregory G.; Williams, Joseph M. (2007), A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, Chicago: UC Press, pp. 25–27, ISBN 0-226-82337-7
  5. An article from an old newspaper is regarded as primary-source material for an historian looking back at that period, because it's an example of writing that stems directly from the timeframe and the society he's studying. However, a recent newspaper report of, for example, a car accident is a secondary source regarding that accident, unless the reporter was personally involved or an eye witness.
Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)
Content (?)
P
G
Conduct (?)
P
G
Deletion (?)
P
Enforcement (?)
P
Editing (?)
P
G
Style
Classification
Project content (?)
G
WMF (?)
P
Categories: