Believe it or not, a Google search does not always give you reliable, accurate information. Will you eat anything that someone hands you? Probably not! You would want to know what it is made of, is it something you want, and will it be good for you. The same goes for websites; it is up to you to determine whether a website is reliable, and contains information that you need.
This page details two strategies for evaluating online sources: SIFT and CRAAP. While SIFT is a newer, more efficient method of weeding out online disinformation, the CRAAP test contains a series of relevant questions for determining if a source is current, relevant, authoritative, accurate, and purposeful.
SIFT is an online evaluation strategy, developed by digital literacy expert Michael Caulfield (Washington State University Vancouver), to help you judge whether or not online content can be trusted for credible and reliable information. SIFT is quick and simple 4-step process, and can be applied to all types of online content.
SIFT stands for:
STOP
INVESTIGATE THE SOURCE
FIND BETTER COVERAGE
TRACE CLAIMS, QUOTES, AND MEDIA BACK TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONTEXT
Watch the following introduction video, then click on the tabs above to learn more about the 4 steps of SIFT. For more information on how to use SIFT, check out the Evaluating Online Sources research guide (including classroom activities and online tools) at: https://libguides.riohondo.edu/evaluatingsources
STOP
The first move of SIFT is the simplest. STOP reminds you of two things:
Here are some quick evaluation questions to ask at STOP:
If your answer to any of these questions is "I don't know," then, it's time to move onto the next step of SIFT--Investigate.
INVESTIGATE THE SOURCE
This step is where you start to answer the questions you asked yourself at STOP: What type of content is this? Who wrote and published it? Does the information appear to be reliable and appropriate?
Investigating the source does not require in-depth research and analysis. Rather, this step is a quick check into the expertise and agenda of the online content in question.
This involves a method called "lateral reading," which suggests that users "get off the page" to investigate a source through other websites (such as Wikipedia). It only takes about a minute or two, and enables you to learn about what others have written about your source (rather than solely relying on the source itself).
Please watch the following short video [2:44] to learn more this effective strategy:
FIND BETTER COVERAGE
If the quality of your source is low or questionable, it's time to find better coverage.
This involves searching for other, more reliable sources whenever you need to verify a claim or information.
The first video [1:34] introduces the concept of finding better coverage, while the second video [4:28] explains this process in more detail:
TRACE CLAIMS, QUOTES, AND MEDIA BACK TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONTEXT
A lot of things you encounter online have been stripped of context. This includes: false, attention-grabbing headlines; inaccurate or misleading reporting and re-reporting; manipulated, edited sound and video; memes and images being shared with inaccurate captions, etc.
In most cases, the more a story circulates, the more it becomes warped and you may end up with a false version of an event or piece of research. This is when you need to investigate further and trace information (claims, quotes, media) back to the original source for full context.
The below video [4:10] discusses the use of fact-checking sites, along with tips on how to trace claims and stories to their original source.
Click the following link to take the online library workshop:
