Evaluating sources is essential as not all information is reliable, accurate, or appropriate to use in your academic studies, especially in today’s information landscape.
Social media, generative AI, fast-spreading propaganda, and online scams have made it easier than ever for misleading or false information to circulate widely. Using poor quality sources can lead to weak arguments, flawed conclusions, poor decisions, and in some contexts (such as healthcare), serious or even fatal consequences. On this page you will learn about what constitutes a good academic source, why and how to evaluate a source and how to interpret media sources critically.
Why should we evaluate sources?
The volume of information sources available to you can seem overwhelming. Your lecturers and librarians can direct you to good quality academic sources [hyperlink to finding information] but there are plenty more that you may consider using. Asking who created the information, how it was created and for what purpose is key to understanding the quality of the information you find. It will also help you decide if the information matches your need.
At university, evaluating sources is a core part of developing critical thinking skills [hyperlink to module]. Just as you would assess shoes before buying them - asking whether they fit, what they are made from, or what terrain they suit - you should assess sources before using them in your assignments. Your purpose, discipline, need and assessment task all influence what constitutes an appropriate source.
A useful way to think about this is to imagine your healthcare provider basing your treatment on crowdsourced online comments rather than expert medical research. Would you feel uneasy about that? Of course, there may be situations where both crowdsourced and expert-led sources can be valuable. For example, people living with a rare condition can provide insights into lived experience that may not yet be reflected in the academic literature, while expert research offers evidence-based understanding. Evaluating and weighing these different types of sources helps you make informed, balanced decisions.
Importantly, your assignments will be marked based on the quality of your evidence as well as your argument. Using well-chosen, credible sources strengthens your arguments, demonstrates academic judgement, and can improve your grades.
Evaluating information is about making informed choices which help you avoid misinformation, make evidence-based academic and real-world decisions, demonstrate critical thinking and meet academic expectations. Evaluating sources is not just about finding information, it’s about choosing the right information.
To help you evaluate sources effectively, there are established evaluation tools and frameworks such as the CRAAP test, BREAD and more advanced critical appraisal frameworks which provide structured ways to assess the quality and suitability of information.
Evaluating information using a thinking tool
When engaging with information for your assessments it is essential to apply critical thinking tools to assess reliability, bias, and relevance. A useful starting point is asking basic questions of any information source: what is it, who created it, for what purpose, and in what context? Deciding what your source is – a journal article, blog post, photograph, written diary – helps you to orientate yourself towards further questions to ask or the various evaluation tools you could use (plus it is key to working out how to reference [hyperlink to this page] an item).
Established frameworks can support the evaluation of most text-based sources. For example, the CRAAP test (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose) provides a simple but effective checklist for evaluating sources. Other models, such as BREAD tool (Bias, Relevance, Evidence, Author, Date) and discipline-specific frameworks like CASP checklists, offer more detailed approaches, particularly in health and social sciences.
When evaluating a source, one of the most important things to think about is who wrote it. For some subjects, this might be an organisation rather than a named individual.
Activity
Choose a piece of information you are using for your studies, watch the video and think about who wrote your source of information.
Why information exists
After considering who is responsible for a source of information, the next most important thing to consider is why the information exists. Sometimes this will flow logically from the question of who wrote something, but sometimes it takes a bit more thinking about.
| Purpose | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Persuade | Information can be provided to persuade the reader. Perhaps it is provided by a company selling a product – of course they will claim that their product is the best! Or perhaps it is from a political party or a pressure group, wanting to get you to take their side in a subjective argument. Persuasive writing can be very good, but you might need to make sure you balance it by reading something which is written from another perspective. |
| Entertain | It can also be provided to entertain the reader. There’s nothing wrong with that, but something written to entertain may not be particularly accurate, or may miss out details which are important, but considered “boring”. If you want a quick introduction to a topic, that’s OK, but for preparing an assignment, it’s probably best to find another source. |
| Inform or Educate | A lot of the information sources which you use at university will have been written to inform or educate the reader. This is often the best sort of source to use. However, it is worth thinking about how “deep” the information goes. In the same way that you need to think about your own writing and what it achieves, think about what you are reading. Does it describe something, does it explain something, does it critique something? |
If you think that perhaps what you are reading is not quite right (perhaps it is a very general description of a topic, for example), you might be able to follow links or references from it to other sources of information which are more detailed. For instance, many Wikipedia pages have links to academic books, journal articles and other sources where you can read more detailed information written by the experts.
Activity
Look at your piece of information, can you pinpoint why it was written – to persuade, entertain, inform or educate?
Information overload
Finally, there is so much information available that sometimes the amount can be overwhelming – we know this as information overload. Therefore, it can be important to stop and ask yourself whether something is relevant to your needs.
Activity
Choose a piece of information you are using for your studies, watch the video and think about whether the information is relevant to the topic you are studying and task you must complete.
Imagine you are doing research for an assignment on the health benefits and drawbacks of mobile phone use. You want to use up-to-date information, and you do a quick Google search. A page comes up with the title ‘Mobile phones and your health’. Take a look at the page and try evaluating it with that assignment in mind.
Evaluating different types of sources
As you gather information for your assignments you may need to use a range of media and sources, for example journal articles, art works, newspaper, videos, data sets and Generative AI. All these sources bring their own challenges in terms of evaluation and quality. Below you can learn more about how to evaluate some of the sources you find.
Evaluating journal articles
Journals (also known as Periodicals) are similar to magazines in that they are published regularly but are written by academics and researchers rather than journalists. The subject matter can be very detailed but will be rigorously researched and backed up with evidence. The hallmark of a good journal will be footnotes or in-text citations and a bibliography of reading to evidence research. They are also often peer-reviewed which means they have been through a thorough editorial process.
Journal articles can be opinion pieces, evidence-based or underpinned by theoretical concepts. The author may have a thesis statement, claim or argument that is backed up by evidence, showcasing their original research or thought. They may identify a gap in the knowledge and seek to offer a solution or new insights. The way that journal articles are written differ according to subject discipline. A humanities article is usually written as one continuous piece, sometimes with thematic sub-headings to signpost the direction of the argument. A social science, science or health article will follow a structured format with recognisable sections (although these can vary). Sciences follow the IMRaD format: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion.
This Anatomy of a scholarly article diagram explains the key components of a scholarly article. Click on the highlighted areas to read about what each section typically contains.
For health subjects, there is an evidence hierarchy which ranks the strength of different research study designs according to whether they are unfiltered (primary sources), filtered (secondary sources) or background information such as expert opinion.
| Type of Evidence | Features | Category | Source Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Systematic Review | This will be a comparison of several primary source articles on a stated theme in which the author will draw conclusions | Filtered | Secondary |
| Guidelines | These may be national or NHS Trust guidelines | Filtered | Secondary |
| Randomised Controlled Trials | A scientific study in which participants are randomly assigned to different groups to test the effectiveness or safety of an intervention while minimizing bias. | Unfiltered | Primary |
| Cohort Studies | Studies which select a group of individuals, called a cohort, who share a defining characteristic such as age, occupation, or exposure to a risk factor, and following them over a period to observe outcomes like disease incidence or behavioural changes | Unfiltered | Primary |
| Reports | Case reports are often written to communicate something unexpected, unusual or unique about the symptoms, signs, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up treatment of one patient. | Unfiltered | Primary |
| Expert Opinion | Guidance, recommendations, or interpretations that are based on the knowledge, clinical experience, and judgment of experts in the subject. | Unfiltered | Background |
Activity
Choose an article you are using for your studies. What is the central argument? What is the author’s thesis or gap in the knowledge? Note: look for clues in the abstract or introduction such as “This paper argues that...” Does the author signpost their argument clearly throughout the article?
Evaluating images
Images – real or fake – can influence perceptions of truth. They are never neutral and reflect the decisions made by the photographer or creator to represent a subject. Images can mislead through selective framing, digital manipulation, or lack of context. A photographer may choose an angle or perspective that will create impact and drive a narrative. They may choose to photograph in colour or black and white to create atmosphere and mood. Images may be constructed to trigger emotions, wants or urgency. They have a purpose and decoding that purpose is important to critically evaluating their meaning.
When evaluating images, key questions include: Who created the image? When and where was it produced? Has it been edited or reused in a different context?
Deepfakes are manipulated or AI generated media which can alter faces, voices, or backgrounds to fabricate realistic but false content. In an age of deepfakes it is more important to be vigilant about the purpose and validity of images. Look for unnatural voice fluctuations, eyes that appear unfocused, static positions with little natural head movement and a lack of natural facial movements.
When using an image or visual resource, it is important to think about where the image comes from.
This video considers how to analyse and evaluate the sources of the images we find. Additionally, reverse image searches can be helpful when thinking about the source of an image. They allow you to find similar images online, and to find the original source or the approximate date when a picture was first published on the internet.
| Reverse Image Platform | How to |
|---|---|
| Google Reverse Image Search | Select 'Search by image' |
| TinEye Reverse Image Search | Paste, drag or upload image |
Evaluating media sources
Online videos, screencasts, podcasts and video-sharing have become ubiquitous; therefore, it is important to look for good publishers.
To be media literate, you should be able to
- Access
- Analyze
- Evaluate
- Create
- Act
(The National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), 2026).
When you watch or listen to a programme, think about who produced the programme. Do the programme makers have a political agenda or are they free from bias, who is their audience and what message are they trying to convey? Is the information that they are conveying new, based on solid evidence or research, or based on opinion and conjecture? Do you trust what they are saying?
This video will help you deconstruct media images.
Evaluating news sources
News stories provide a snapshot of everyday life, which can inform theories or arguments. Nevertheless, there are pitfalls of using news which it is important to be aware of. Ask yourself these questions:
- Who owns or funds the platform? Is the news outlet affiliated to a political party, and does it express a particular viewpoint?
- Who is the intended audience of the news outlet and how does this affect the way news is reported?
- More interesting events are reported because they sell more newspapers. What has disappeared from view? What did the reporter neglect to report?
- Is the content factual reporting, opinion, or persuasion?
- Are sources named, verifiable and independent?
- Is the story corroborated elsewhere? (triangulation)
Checking the accuracy of your sources is important. In the fast-moving world of news, the story can change by the second and rapidly be turned into mis or disinformation.
Misinformation
- False and misleading information which has not been checked for accuracy
- Often shared accidentally
- Sensational clickbait
Disinformation
- False information that is purposely spread to deceive
- Hoaxes
- Spear phishing
- Manipulation of search rankings
Another term that is used is propaganda. Propaganda is a more systematic way of disseminating an ideology or doctrine. It is often biased and does not present both sides of an argument.
Events can also be misreported, due to lack of information and a lack of time to gather the facts properly.
What to look for:
- Headline–content mismatch
- Emotional or polarised language
- Lack of primary evidence
- Absence of publication standards or corrections policy
For some subjects it is not appropriate to include opinion pieces written by journalists, who are not experts in the given field. For example, health professionals need evidence-based research, not conjecture or stories designed to be emotive; and an archaeologist should use evidence from site reports rather than a local news story which provides the sketchiest of detail. This is not to say that news should never be read. Instead, news stories can be springboards to important research.
Here are some top tips to choosing new sources:
- Choose new sources that have a history of producing quality editorials and news e.g. The Times or the BBC.
- Check scientific and business stories for evidence of research. Do they include original raw data or research? Do they cite their sources?
Fake news mimics ordinary news in its style and content but is created without editorial control and is often misleading. It does not take a rigorous stance on fact-checking and can be designed to manipulate thoughts and feelings.
This infographic will help you identify fake news.
Evaluating gen-AI output
The CRAAP and BREAD evaluative tools can be applied to outputs from Generative AI tools. Although AI tools may produce fluent and authoritative-sounding responses, their outputs still require verification. Techniques such as triangulation (checking claims against multiple independent and credible sources) are essential when using AI-generated content responsibly. Find out more about using BREAD with GenAI on the university Guidance to Generative AI.
Evaluating data
Dirty or bad data is any data that is incorrect, incomplete, unrepresentative, or even badly formatted and as such impacts on the integrity of research outputs.
When assessing the validity of data ask yourself the following questions:
1. Can I trust the data? Who has published it? What is their purpose?
2. Do I trust the sample size? Is the data comprehensive or partial? Are there limitations?
3. Do I know how the data was collected and whether it was collected ethically?
4. When was it collected? Is it timebound?
5. Can I use the data? Does the data have any restrictions on reuse?
For more information about data collection methods, try Sage Research Methods.
Key takeaways
You have now considered a few key aspects of evaluating your information sources – who wrote them, why do they exist, and are they relevant?
Can you see how these might apply to different sources of information you use for your studies and in your life outside of university?
Activity
To reflect on your learning in this area, try doing a web search for a topic you are studying. Take a look at the first three different websites and try evaluating them. Which parts of evaluating information are the easiest to apply? Which are the hardest? And do they help you consider which of these sources you might use?
Critically evaluating information is a key academic skill. By developing this skill, you will be able to question scholarly arguments and create more rigorous and robust responses in your writing.
By applying consistent critical appraisal methods across text, GenAI outputs, and images, you can develop a more robust and transferable approach to evaluating information and start to select the good academic sources from the myriad of sources available to you.
Credit
Written by David Bedford, Lynsey Blandford, Ruth Collingwood, Michelle Crowther, Kate Davies and Catherine Sherwood.
Last updated 2026.