Evaluation of Internet Information

Evaluation of Internet
Information

Dr. Ahmed-Refat AG Refat
TU-FOM 2/2/2014
WWW.SlideShare.net/AhmedRefat

Main Contents
1. Basic Concepts

2. Evaluation tools

3. Two Case studies ( application)
Basic
Evaluation Tool

Application

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
By the end of this study setting you will able to :
1. Understand why it's important to evaluate information
2. Identify the meaning and components of Information
Literacy,
3. Define Pseudoscience and Grey literature
4. Distinguish between popular and scholarly articles
5. Describe the Quality Criteria and HON-Code of health
information
6. Identify and apply basic criteria for evaluating
information (5Ws method and the 5 quality criteria
checklist)
7. Describe the types of internet sources and how to
evaluate the validity of information presented in these
sites

Main Contents of Presentation
1. Basic Concepts

2. Evaluation tools

3. Two Case studies ( application)


Basic Concepts
 21st Century Skills
 Information Literacy
 Pseudoscience
 Grey literature
 Popular vs. scholarly articles
 Propaganda
 Misinformation
 Disinformation,

Basic Concepts

21 Century
Skills
st


21st Century Skills
 Critical thinking skills….
 Problem solving skills….

Information literacy Skills.
 Communication skills….
 Self-direction and teamwork skills….
 Social responsibility,


Information
literacy
Skills

Information Literacy
 Information Literacy is the ability to:
 Identify

what information is needed,
 Understand how the information is
organized,
 Identify the best sources of information .
 locate those sources,
 Evaluate the sources critically,
 and Share that information.

Information &
Communication
Technology (ICT)
Skills

Definition of ICT Literacy
Using digital technology,
communications tools, and/or networks
To

Access, Manage, Integrate, Evaluate,
and Create information
in order to function in a knowledge society.

Importance of Information
Literacy
 IL is critically important because we are

surrounded by a growing ocean of
information in all formats.
 Not all information is created equal:
some is authoritative, current, reliable,
but some is biased, out of date,
misleading, false..

Components
of ICT

Five Critical Components of ICT

•


In 2000, the Association of College and Research
Libraries (ACRL),
a division of the American Library Association (ALA),
released:

"Information Literacy Competency
Standards for Higher Education ",
describing

Five standards
and numerous performance indicators


I.L Competency Standards for Higher
Education

The Five standards
 Standard #1 = Know
 Standard #2 = Access
 Standard #3 = Evaluate
 Standard #4 = Use
 Standard #5 = Ethical / Legal

Writing with Internet Sources “Harvard U.”


Writing with Internet Sources


Why
Evaluate Web
Information ?

Why Evaluate Web Information ?
 Anyone can put anything on the Web.
 There are

no uniform

standards for quality for
what can be put on the Web.

 Most Web sites are

not reviewed by experts in

a subject as scholarly journal articles are.

do not undergo any kind
of editorial process as most books and

 Most Web sites

many other types of print sources do.

 Lack of Guidelines

 Lack of Monitoring
 Immediate mobility of information
 Lack of Representation
 Searching for information (spiders)
 Bias/Objectivity of Information


Lack of Guidelines
There are no rules or standards
governing the type or quality of
information which a writer can put on
the Internet. Web sites may contain
factual information, opinions, data,
ideas, propaganda, self-promotion
and/or commercialism.


Lack of

Monitoring
There are currently no laws in

effect which govern the material
which is placed on the Internet.


Immediate mobility of
information
The most useful aspect of the Internet is
that a person can find the most up-todate information immediately from
almost anywhere in the world on almost
any topic with the just the click of a
mouse.


Lack of
Representation
Although there are hundreds of
millions of pages present on the
Web today, these sites represent
only the minority of the world's
population.


Searching for
information
With the Internet becoming more and
more commercial all the time it is
essential to constantly question, critique
and evaluate all aspects of Internet use.


Bias/Objectivity of
Information
Obtaining unbiased
information from any media
source has always been a
difficult task.

Challenge:

Marketing-Oriented Web Pages
On the Web, distinctions between
advertising and information can
become extremely blurred

Ads

WEB
Entertainment



Always validate or confirm information
on individuals, institutions or groups,
and countries that you find on the
Internet.
If you don't know who wrote what you
read or why they wrote it,
You don't know if it's reliable !!!.

“61%

of adults gather health
information online”
“Health searches impacted treatment
decision”
“Three-quarters of health seekers do
not check the source and date of the
health information they find online”

Spectrum of Web Information


Spectrum of Web Information
 Gray Literature

 Pseudoscience
 Popular articles
 scholarly articles

 Propaganda
 Misinformation
 Disinformation,

Grey Literature
 Information produced on all levels of

government, academics, business and
industry in electronic and print formats ,
but which is not controlled by
commercial publishing.
 i.e. where publishing is not the primary

activity of the producing body.”

Characteristics of Science and
Pseudoscience
Science


Pseudoscience

Pseudoscience
Science
 Their findings are

expressed primarily
through scientific
journals that are peerreviewed and maintain
rigorous standards for
honesty and accuracy.


Pseudoscience
 The literature is aimed

at the general public.
There is no review, no
standards, no prepublication
verification, no
demand for accuracy
and precision.

Pseudoscience
Science
 Reproducible results

are demanded;
experiments must be
precisely described so
that they can be
duplicated exactly or
improved upon..


Pseudoscience
 Results cannot be

reproduced or
verified. Studies, if
any, are always so
vaguely described that
one can't figure out
what was done or how
it was done.

Pseudoscience
Science

Pseudoscience

 Failures are searched

 Failures are ignored,

for and studied closely,
because incorrect
theories can often
make correct
predictions by accident,
but no correct theory
will make incorrect
predictions.

excused, hidden, lied
about, discounted,
explained away,
rationalized, forgotten,
avoided at all costs.


Pseudoscience
Science
 Does not advocate or

market unproven
practices or products


Pseudoscience
 Generally earns some

or all of his living by
selling questionable
products and/or
pseudoscientific
services .

Popular And Scholarly Articles

What is the difference
between popular
And
scholarly articles?

Popular Articles (Magazines)
 Are often written by journalists or

professional writers for a general
audience
 Use language easily understood by
general readers
 Rarely give full citations for sources
 Written for the general public
 Tend to be shorter than journal articles

Popular Articles (Magazines)


Scholarly Articles (Journals)
Are written by and for faculty,
researchers or scholars
 Uses scholarly or technical language
 Include full citations for sources
 Are often refereed or peer reviewed


(articles are reviewed by an editor and other
specialists before being accepted for
publication)


Scholarly Articles (Journals)



Propaganda

Misinformation
Disinformation,


Propaganda
Propaganda based in fact, but
facts represented in such a way
as to provoke a desired
response.


Disinformation
"The dissemination of
intentionally false/fabricated
information,



Misinformation
differs from propaganda in that it
always refers to something which
is not true.
It differs from disinformation in that
it is "intention neutral": it isn't
intentional, it's just wrong or
mistaken.

Evaluation Techniques


Evaluation Techniques
 Evaluating web pages skillfully requires you to

do two things at once:

Train your eye

and your fingers to employ
a series of techniques that help you quickly find
what you need to know about web pages;

Train your mind

to think critically, even
suspiciously, by asking a series of questions that
will help you decide how much a web page is to be
trusted.


Web Sites 5 Criteria
Evaluation

5W

Accuracy

W
WHO?

Authority
Where?
When

Objectivity

Currency

What?

WHY?


Coverage

THE 5 W’S
OF WEB SITE
EVALUATION

WWW = W? W? W? W? W?

1.

2.
3.
4.
5.

Who
What
When
Where
Why

THE 5 W’S OF WEB SITE EVALUATION

1- WHO wrote the pages and are
they an expert in their field?
 Can you identify an author or

sponsoring organization?
 Is the author or sponsor well
regarded in their field?
 Can you contact the author or
organization?


2- WHAT is the purpose of the
site?
 Is this site mostly fact or opinion?
 Are there links to the sponsoring

page, or is this a lone individual?
 Is this actually an advertisement
disguised as information?



3- WHERE does the information
come from?
 Does the author let the reader
know where they got their
information?
 Does the author provide
citations?




4- WHEN was the site created,
updated, or last worked on?
 Does the website tell when it was

created or last updated?
 Does it matter to me when this
information was posted to the
Internet?


5- WHY is the information
valuable?
 Is this new to me, or did I already
know these facts?
 Can I confirm the reliability of
this information by finding
similar facts elsewhere?

Criteria for Evaluating Web Resources


Basic Five Evaluation Criteria

1.Accuracy
2. Authority

3. Objectivity
4. Currency

5. Coverage

1-Accuracy -Criteria

 Is the information reliable and error-free?
 Can you find when was the last update?
 Is there an editor or someone who

verifies/checks the information?

1-Accuracy -Rationale
 Anyone can publish

anything on the

Web.
 Unlike traditional print resources, Web
resources rarely have editors or factcheckers.
 Currently, no Web standards exist to
ensure accuracy.

1-Accuracy-Verify

Read through/scan the Web

page and consider.
Ask a Reference Librarian if the
information you have found can
be verified elsewhere.

1. Accuracy

2.Authority
3. Objectivity
4. Currency

5. Coverage

2- Authority -Criteria
 Is the page signed?

 Are the author's qualifications available?
 Does s/he have expertise in this subject?
 Is the author associated with an educational

institution or other reputable organization?
 Does the publisher or publication have a reputation
for reliability?
 Is contact information for the author or group
available on the site?

2-Authority -Rationale
 It's often hard to determine a web page's authorship.
 Unlike traditional print resources, Web resources

rarely have editors or fact-checkers.
 There are no standards for information on the web
which would ensure that all information there is
accurate and useful.
 People create web pages for different reasons:






Personal
Advocacy
Commercial/Marketing
Informational

2-Authority -Verify
 Look at the top and bottom of the web page for






clues.
Use the WhoIs service to determine the page's
owner.
Is there a link to a main web site for the
group/educational institution/ organization hosting
this web page?
Look at the first part of the URL for the web page. Is
it .org? .edu? .gov? .net? .com?
Does the author or host have a web page explaining
who they are and what their mission or philosophy
is?


1. Accuracy

2. Authority

3.Objectivity
4. Currency

5. Coverage

3- Objectivity -Criteria
 Does the information show a

minimum of bias?
 Is the page a presentation of facts
and not designed to sway opinion?
 Is the page free of advertisements
or sponsored links?

3-Objectivity -Rationale
 Frequently the goals of the

sponsors/authors aren't clearly
stated.
 Often the web serve as a virtual
"Hyde Park Corner," a soapbox.
 The content of the page may be
influenced by the advertiser.

3-Objectivity-Verify
 Read through/scan the web page and

consider.
 Does the author or host have a web page
explaining who they are and what their
mission or philosophy is?
 See what other websites link to the site in
question. Google's link searches is one
method.
 Ask a Reference Librarian if information
about the author/ company/ organization is
available.

1. Accuracy
2. Authority
3. Objectivity

4.Currency
5. Coverage

4-Currency -Criteria
Is the page dated?
Can you find when was the

last update?
Are the links current and do
they point to existing pages?

4-Currency -Rationale
 Publication or revision dates are not always

provided.
 Pages with broken links may not be updated
regularly.
 If a date is provided, it may have various
meanings. For example it may indicate when
the material:
was first written
 was first placed on the Web
 was last updated


4-Currency-Verify
 Read through and scan the text to see if the

author attributes information/facts to a
particular year. e.g. "in 1997, 35 car accidents
were caused by chickens crossing the road."
 Scan through the bibliography or list of
references (be concerned if there isn't one!)
and see how current each item is. e.g. Cool,
Joe. (1975) "Current flying practices." Canine
Aviation 32(3):23-40.
 Look at the footer to see if the author has
included a date.

1. Accuracy
2. Authority
3. Objectivity

4. Currency

5.Coverage

5- Coverage -Criteria
 Is the information even relevant

to your topic?
 Do you think it is useful to you?
 Does this page have information
that is not found elsewhere?
 How in-depth is the material?

5-Coverage -Rationale
 Web coverage often differs from

print coverage.
 Frequently it's difficult to determine
the extent of coverage.
 Sometimes web information is justfor-fun or outright silliness.


5-Coverage-Verify
 Read through/scan the web page

and consider.
 Ask a Reference Librarian if the
information you have found can
be verified elsewhere.


Applications


Retrieved Results !!


(URL).
Much like the address on an envelope, each
part of a URL provides information about the
Web page.
http://www.wmich.edu/registrar/registration.html


URL Web Address
 What does the URL say about the producer of the web

site, and its purpose?

 .gov Government agency: www.whitehouse.gov

.net Internet Service Provider: www.whitehouse.net
 .Com Commercial site -Go there at your own risk.)

 .edu

Higher education - www.lesley.edu.

.org Organization; may be charitable, religious, or a
lobbying group - http://www.rtda.org.

http://www.whitehouse.net/


http://www.whitehouse.gov/


www.whitehouse.com


What can the URL tell you?
 Read

the URL carefully:

Look for a personal name (e.g., jbarker
or barker) following a tilde ( ~ ), a
percent sign ( % ), or or the words
"users," "members," or "people."


URL Web Address

~ ("tilde")
 Personal site http://www.members.tripod.com/~DAdams/qkbrdinf.html


Personal Pages on .edu Sites


What is the History of a Website?

The Wayback Machine:

www.archive.org allows you
to browse through 30 billion
web pages archived from
1996 to a few months ago.

Quality Criteria
Based on
International
Organization

Quality Criteria for Health related Websites

A- EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES
B-HON-Code

EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES

eEurope 2002: Quality Criteria for Health
related Websites
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Brussels, 29.11.2002 COM( 2002) 667 final

2.1 Transparency of Health Related Content
2.2 Authority of Health Related Content
Providers
2.3 Privacy and data protection of Health Data
2.4 Updating of Health Related Information
2.5 Accountability for Health Related Content
2.6 Accessibility in Health Related Content

Transparency and Honesty
 Transparency of provider of site – including name,

physical address and electronic address of the
person or organisation responsible for the site
 Transparency of purpose and objective of the site
Target audience clearly defined (further detail on
purpose, multiple audience could be defined at
different levels).
Transparency of all sources of funding for site
(grants, sponsors, advertisers, non-profit, voluntary
assistance).

Privacy and data protection

Privacy and data protection policy and
system for the processing of personal data,
including processing invisible to users, to be
clearly defined in accordance with
community Data Protection legislation


Updating of information
Clear and regular updating of the site,
with date of up-date clearly displayed
for each page and/ or item as relevant.
Regular checking of relevance of
information.


Accountability
user feedback, and appropriate oversight
responsibility .
Responsible partnering -all efforts should
be made to ensure that partnering or
linking to other websites is undertaken only
with trustworthy individuals and
organizations who themselves comply with
relevant codes of good practice.
Editorial policy -clear statement describing
what procedure was used for selection of
content.

Accessibility
Accessibility -attention to guidelines on
physical accessibility as well as general
findability, searchability, readability,
usability, etc.


B-HON –Code
Health on the
Net

HON-Code


http://www.hon.ch/


Health On the Net code of ethics " HONcode”


http://nihseniorhealth.gov/awards.html


Types of Internet Information Sources
 Web pages ….. ……. ……. …….
 Wiki

 Blogs
 Databases
 Social

networking

 Multimedia

 Forum , group

Wikis
A wiki is a publishing platform on which
many people can contribute new
content and revise existing content.
The content benefits from the collective
knowledge base and the dynamic
nature of the contributions.
Examples: Wikipedia,


To evaluate the content on a wiki
 The sponsorship of the wiki. This may be

explained on an "About" or similar page.
 The wiki, whether academic or popular, suits
your needs.
 The identity of those who are able to edit or
add content. If it is a select group, try to
determine if they have expertise in the wiki’s
topic.
 Changes to the page appear reasonable.

Blogs
A blog is a Web-based journal entry
platform that can accept reader
comments.
Entries are usually presented in
reverse chronological order.


To evaluate the content on a blog, look for
these clues
 Most blog postings focus on a discussion of

issues rather than day-to-day personal or
recreational activities.
 Blog postings are signed by an identifiable
author.
 The author has expertise on the topic of the
blog.
 Comments on blog postings emphasize
substantive discussion of the issues.

Social networking sites
 Social networking sites are online

communities in which members can interact
in a number of ways.
 Full‐featured communities offer the ability to
share a personal profile, initiate contacts
with “friends,” form groups of members with
similar interests, contact group members
directly, engage in discussions, share media
or photos, and discover other common
connections through ones’ contacts

To evaluate the content on a social
networking site, look for these clues:
 • The identity of the source of shared information can

be verified. This can be done by examining the
profile page if made public, verifying the named
source of the information, and so on.
 • Information on the profile page of the individual,
institution, company, or library can be verified.
 • The individual, institution, etc. contributing
information has expertise on the topic.


Multimedia
 Multimedia encompasses non‐textual presentations

such as audio, video, and Flash formats


To evaluate the content in a multimedia
presentation, look for these clues:
 • The presentation is sponsored by a reputable

institution, organization, or identified
individual(s)whose expertise can be verified.
 • If individuals appear or speak in a
presentation, they are identified and their
expertise can be checked.
 • The presentation or its accompanying
information includes contact information.

To evaluate the content in a multimedia
presentation, look for these clues:
 • The presentation or its accompanying

information includes contact information.
 • Comments that may accompany the
presentation evaluate its quality (even if you
don’t agree with what others have to say).
 • If previously recorded, the presentation can
be identified by date so that you can determine
the currency of the information provided.

http://www.aquasana.com.au/category/articles/


http://vegsource.com/harris/cancer_vegdiet.htm


http://www.prolifewater.com.sg/index.htm


Cited Sources
 http://21cif.com/tools/evaluate/tip_help.html














http://21cif.com/resources/wsi/media/wsi_author.swf
http://21cif.com/resources/wsi/media/wsi_publisher.swf
http://www.hon.ch/home1.html
(http://olinuris.library.cornell.edu
http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/infolitassessments.htm
http://www.aacu.org/about/index.cfm
http://www.ihealthbeat.org/articles/2011/2/1/report-80-of-internet-users-seekonline-health-information
http://www.lib.vt.edu/instruct/evaluate/
http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/evalcrit.html
http://guides.library.jhu.edu/evaluatinginformation
http://education.illinois.edu/wp/credibility/index.html
http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Webmasters/HON_CCE_en.htm


Thank You

?Qs
Comments !!

Evaluation of Internet Information

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Evaluation of Internet Information

Ähnlich wie Evaluation of Internet Information (20)

Mehr von Ahmed-Refat Refat

Mehr von Ahmed-Refat Refat (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Evaluation of Internet Information