Evaluating Sources: Online

The acronym CRAAP can help one remember important questions to ask when evaluating a resource.

Currency: the timeliness of the information

• When was the information published or posted?
• Has the information been revised or updated?
• Is the information current or out-of date for your topic?
• Are the links functional?

Relevance: the importance of the information for your needs

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

Authority: the source of the information

• Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor?
• Are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations given?
• What are the author's qualifications to write on the topic?
• Is there contact information, such as a publisher or e-mail address?
• Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source?

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

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

Purpose: the reason the information exists

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

The CRAAP test was developed by Sarah Blakeslee and other librarians at California State University, Chico.

When evaluating information on the web, it's important to not just pay close attention to the document at hand, but to seek out independent information about the resource and author/publisher. A study by the Stanford History Education Working Group found reported:

We observed [students, historians, and professional fact checkers] as they evaluated live websites and searched for information on social and political issues. Historians and students often fell victim to easily manipulated features of websites, such as official-looking logos and domain names. They read vertically, staying within a website to evaluate its reliability. In contrast, fact checkers read laterally, leaving a site after a quick scan and opening up new browser tabs in order to judge the credibility of the original site. Compared to the other groups, fact checkers arrived at more warranted conclusions in a fraction of the time.

Mike Caufield proposed the SIFT acronym to help remember steps to investigating online information further.

• Stop: Ask yourself what you know about the source.
• Investigate the Source: Who is the author? What is their purpose? What information do other sources tell us about them?
• Find Better Coverage: When you find a claim you are interested in, see what trusted sources say about the claim.
• Trace Claims, Quotes, and Media to the Original Context: Can you find the original claim or statistic from the person who is supposed to have said it?