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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:14, 6 January 2008 editFrancis Schonken (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users68,468 edits per talk page Misplaced Pages talk:Evaluating sources#SWOT analysis← Previous edit Revision as of 16:12, 6 January 2008 edit undoJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 editsm moved Misplaced Pages:Evaluating sources within the context of Misplaced Pages's content policies to Misplaced Pages:Evaluating sources: Undoing WP:POINT disruptionNext edit →
Line 3: Line 3:
{{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|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 several methods for the evaluation of sources. 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. 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.


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 ]. 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 ].
Line 13: Line 13:


=== Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources === === Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources ===
===Definitions===
{{anchor|ps|primary|primary source|primary sources}} {{anchor|ps|primary|primary source|primary 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, witness reports, legal documents, laboratory notebooks, field notes, peer-reviewed articles publishing original research, and even artifacts.
;Primary source : ''See also ]''

:Primary sources are very close to the origin of a particular topic, issue or situation being written about. Examples of primary sources include archeological artifacts; photographs; historical documents such as diaries, census results, video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, or trials; tabulated results of surveys or questionnaires; written or recorded notes of laboratory and field research, experiments or observations, published experimental results by the person(s) actually involved in the research; original philosophical works, religious scripture, administrative documents, and artistic and fictional works.<ref>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.</ref><ref>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>

:Any source cannot be anything but a ''primary'' source for a Misplaced Pages article that has that source as its main topic.<ref>For example:
*An individual cannot him/herself be anything but a primary source for a Misplaced Pages article on that person
*A book cannot be anything but a primary source for a Misplaced Pages article on that book or on its author</ref>


{{anchor|ss|secondary|secondary source|secondary sources}} {{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-->|
;Secondary source : ''See also ]''
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

:A secondary source is at least one step removed from the described topic. Secondary sources are reports that draw on research and other references to make interpretive, analytical or synthesized claims.<ref> defines "secondary source" as "a work that interprets or analyzes an historical event or phenomenon. It is generally at least one step removed from the event."</ref><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> has: "Secondary sources are works of synthesis and interpretation based upon primary sources and the work of other authors."</ref>

:Depending on the field, secondary sources may include textbooks, review articles, and peer-reviewed articles publishing original research.

:Secondary sources are best used for representing significant points of view.<ref name="Turabian">{{citation
| last = Turabian | last = Turabian
| first = Kate L | first = Kate L
Line 45: Line 32:
| pages = 25-27 | pages = 25-27
| id = ISBN 0-226-82337-7 | id = ISBN 0-226-82337-7
}}</ref> }}</ref>


{{anchor|ts|tertiary|tertiary source|tertiary sources}} {{anchor|ts|tertiary|tertiary source|tertiary sources}}
*'''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.
;Tertiary source : ''See also ]''


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.
:Tertiary sources are publications such as encyclopedias or other ] that sum up many secondary<ref name="Turabian"/> and primary sources. Many introductory textbooks may also be considered tertiary to the extent they sum up widely accepted results of large amounts of primary and secondary sources.


=== Examples === === Examples ===
Line 135: Line 122:
<small>Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen - </small> <small>Table source: Saylor, Ward & Hooper, Helen - </small>


==Evaluation==
==SWOT analysis on primary, secondary and tertiary sources==
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Sources - SWOT analysis}}
Comparing advantages and disadvantages of primary, secondary and tertiary sources can not be done in a one-dimensional way. One type of source is not by definition worse or better than another type. It depends on context, what you're trying to use the source for, sound editorial judgement etc.

]
There are techniques with which to compare advantages and disadvantages in a multi-dimensional way, that provide an easy to follow overview. The model used here is borrowed from business planning, ]. Each type of source has its specific advantages and disadvantages, the idea is to exploit Strengths and Opportunities to the maximum, avoiding Weaknesses and Threats. The analyses below highlight only major directions.

Even non-for-profit organisations like Misplaced Pages are businesses for which a SWOT analysis makes sense. The general objective is to improve Misplaced Pages. The SWOT analyses below are however "product placement" SWOTS, not analyses of the organisation as a whole. The finite business objective for which these SWOT analyses are presented below is to provide proper sourcing for all articles, which is a subset of the general goal of improving the encyclopedia by implementing core content policies like ]. Three "products" are presented to the "customers" (= Misplaced Pages editors) concurrently in order to reach that business goal. Below are reasons for which to choose source types depending on circumstances.

===Primary sources===
;Strengths : Low risk of deformation of what the original source actually says.
;Weaknesses : Relatively narrow scope of the source.
:Primary sources are not a good instrument to establish ]
;Opportunities : Primary sources, which are often illustrations, poignant quotes or music/video, may improve attractiveness and insight greatly, and are for that reason widely appreciated.
;Threats : Regarding media, the best primary source material is often unavailable for Misplaced Pages through copyright, and can for that reason be sumarily removed. Lots of Wikipedians have gotten discouraged over this.
:An overdose of primary sources makes a poor encyclopedia article (otherwise ] would be regarded as an encyclopedia).
:Primary sources are disliked by many editors for their susceptibility to misinterpretation.

===Secondary sources===
;Strengths : Secondary sources likely combine different angles of approach to a subject.
;Weaknesses : Secondary sources may contain POVs (from their authors or publishers) that are difficult to detect.
;Opportunities : Misplaced Pages's bread-and-butter: sourcing by secondary sources is rarely rejected.
;Threats : Involves a lot of tediousness fighting with implementation of ] code or academic ]s

===Tertiary sources===
;Strengths : More likely to be balanced from the outset.
;Weaknesses : By the time information reaches a traditional tertiary source, it can easily be outdated.
;Opportunities : and similar tertiary sources without copyright impediments make the base of thousands of Misplaced Pages articles.
;Threats : Who cares about antiquated views?

==Evaluation per content policies and guidelines==
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Evaluating sources within the context of Misplaced Pages's content policies}}
=== Original research and verifiability=== === Original research and verifiability===
{{main|Misplaced Pages:No original research|Misplaced Pages:Verifiability}} {{main|Misplaced Pages:No original research|Misplaced Pages:Verifiability}}
Line 188: Line 144:
=== 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, sources, especially secondary sources. If an article lacks sufficient sources that reasonably demonstrate its importance, it may be listed for ]. 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 == == Academic definitions of primary/secondary sources ==
Line 209: Line 165:


== See also == == See also ==
* ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]

Revision as of 16:12, 6 January 2008

Essay on editing Misplaced Pages
This is an essay.
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 time, because it would be close to the event in relation to those reading about that event 100 years hence.

Primary, secondary, and tertiary 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, 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 Chronology of a play

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 {{citation}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help) 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.; 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
Category: