6.5: Evaluating Research

Why Evaluating Resources Matters

Evaluating resources is one of the most important steps in producing high-quality research. In a world where information is everywhere online articles, videos, social media posts, podcasts, blogs, and even AI tools not all sources are accurate, reliable, or trustworthy. Some information may be outdated, misleading, biased, or simply incorrect, and using weak sources can weaken your arguments, confuse your audience, and damage your credibility as a speaker.

Strong public speaking requires strong research, and strong research begins with knowing how to judge the quality of the information you find. By learning to evaluate resources effectively, you can identify credible authors, verify facts, recognize bias, and select evidence that truly supports your message. This skill helps you become a more careful researcher, a more confident speaker, and a more informed consumer of information both inside and outside the classroom.

Website Evaluation Checklist

Authority: Who is responsible for the site?

• Who is the author or organization behind the site? Is the author clearly named? Is there an institutional affiliation (university, research center, government agency)?
• What are the author's credentials or expertise? Are degrees, job titles, or professional experience listed and relevant to the topic?
• Is there clear contact information? Can you find a name, email, phone number, or physical address for verification?
• Does the URL suggest a reputable affiliation? .edu (educational), .gov (government), .org (nonprofit), .com (commercial), .mil (military), .net (ISP)—generally, .edu and .gov are the most reliable.

Objectivity: Is the purpose of the site clear?

• Is the site’s purpose or mission stated? Look for a 'Mission,' 'About Us,' or 'Purpose' section.
• Who is the intended audience? Is the tone professional, academic, general public, or persuasive?
• Is the content factual or opinion-based? Are statements supported with evidence, or are they emotionally charged and opinion-driven?
• Is the site transparent about content selection? Are criteria for including information or sources explained?
• Are sponsors or affiliations disclosed? Look for funding sources, advertisers, or affiliations that may bias the content.

Accuracy: Is the information trustworthy and well-supported?

• Are facts and claims documented with sources? Are citations, footnotes, or references included?
• Can information be verified with other sources? Do facts match those from credible print or academic sources?
• Are quality links provided? Are external links to respected, relevant sources (not broken or spammy)?

Currency: Is the information up to date?

• Is there a publication or last-updated date? Check for a date stamp at the top or bottom of the page.
• Is the information current for the topic? For fast-changing fields (e.g., technology, health), is the info less than 1–2 years old?

Usability: Is the site user-friendly and reliable?

• Is the site easy to navigate? Are menus, search features, and layout intuitive and organized?
• Is the content readable and appropriate for the audience? Avoid overly technical jargon unless it's intended for experts.
• Are there noticeable spelling or grammar errors? Poor writing may indicate a lack of professionalism.
• Can you easily find the home page? Look for a link to the homepage or parent organization.
• Is the site stable and accessible? Does it load quickly? Do all pages and links work reliably?

Checklist for Evaluating Social Media Sources (YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, X, etc.)

Author / Creator

• Can you identify who created the content (name, credentials, background)?
• Does the creator have expertise or real experience related to the topic?
• Has this creator shared credible content in the past?

Purpose and Intent

• Is the content meant to inform, persuade, entertain, or sell something?
• Is there a financial motive (sponsored content, affiliate links, ads)?
• Does the creator appear to be presenting balanced information or pushing a single viewpoint?

Accuracy of Information

• Does the creator cite any credible sources, data, or research?
• Can the claims be verified through reputable, independent sources?
• Are facts presented clearly, or are they oversimplified or exaggerated?

Bias and Framing

• Does the content leave out important context or opposing viewpoints?
• Is emotional or sensational language used to influence the audience?
• Are images, clips, or statistics being edited in a misleading way?

Quality and Professionalism

• Is the information well-organized and clearly presented?
• Does the creator correct mistakes or update old videos/posts?
• Are comments, duets, stitches, or follow-up videos raising credible concerns?

Impact

• After watching/reading, do you understand the topic better, or do you feel confused?
• Would this content strengthen a college-level speech once verified, or is it too unreliable?

Article Evaluation Checklist

Currency: The Timeliness of the Information

• When was the information published or posted? Check the date of publication to ensure the content is recent enough for your topic.
• Has the information been revised or updated? Look for update notices or revision dates to confirm the information is current.
• Are the links functional? Test all links, broken links may indicate outdated or poorly maintained content.

Relevance: The Importance of the Information for Your Needs

• Who is the intended audience? Determine whether the article is written for experts, students, or the general public.
• Is the information at an appropriate level? Ensure the content is not too basic or overly technical for your research needs.
• Would you be comfortable using this source for a research paper? Ask yourself whether the quality and tone of the article meet academic standards.

Authority: The Source of the Information

• Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor? Identify the individual or organization responsible for the content.
• Are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations given? Check for professional or academic affiliations that establish expertise.
• What are the author's qualifications to write on the topic? Look for degrees, experience, or publication history relevant to the subject.
• Is there contact information, such as a publisher or e-mail address? Reliable sources usually provide a way to contact the author or publisher.
• Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source? Domains like .edu, .gov, or .org often indicate more trustworthy sources.

Accuracy: The Reliability, Truthfulness, and Correctness of the Content

• Is the information supported by evidence? Citations, data, and references to other credible sources help verify accuracy.
• Has the information been reviewed or refereed? Check whether the article has been peer-reviewed or professionally edited.
• Can you verify any of the information in another source? Cross-reference the facts with other reliable sources.
• Does the language or tone seem biased and free of emotion? Objective writing avoids extreme or emotional language.
• Are there spelling, grammar, or other typographical errors? Frequent errors may signal lack of professionalism or credibility.

Purpose: The Reason the Information Exists

• What is the purpose of the information? Determine whether the goal is to inform, persuade, entertain, or sell.
• Do the authors/sponsors make their intentions or purpose clear?

Transparency about motives or goals indicates trustworthiness.

• Is the information fact? opinion? propaganda? Understand the nature of the content to assess bias or reliability.
• Does the point of view appear objective and impartial?

 Balanced presentations are more credible than one-sided arguments.

• Are there political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional, or personal biases? Recognize underlying influences that might shape the content.

Checklist for Evaluating AI-Generated Research (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc.)

Accuracy and Verification

• Have you checked all facts, statistics, and examples through credible, independent sources?
• Does the AI provide references and can those references be verified as real and correct?
• Does the information sound plausible but may be oversimplified or lacking context?

Bias and Completeness

• Is the AI presenting one viewpoint or giving a balanced explanation?
• Did the AI leave out key information, nuances, or limitations of a topic?
• Could the AI be reflecting common biases found in online data?
• Clarity and Understanding

Does the AI explanation make sense for your speech, audience, or assignment?

• Is the language appropriate (reading level, tone, accuracy)?
• Does the response help you understand the topic enough to find real sources?

Prompt Quality

• Was your prompt clear, specific, and detailed?
• Would improving your prompt (adding context, length, or purpose) lead to a better response?
• Did you ask follow-up questions to refine the results?

Use and Ethical Considerations

• Are you treating AI as a partner, not a substitute, for research?
• Are you avoiding citing the AI directly and instead using it to guide you to real, credible sources?
• Can you explain how you used AI in your research process if asked?

Reliability

• After verification, does the AI-generated information hold up as accurate and useful?
• Does the final product reflect your own understanding, analysis, and judgment?

Example \(\PageIndex{1}\)

Example 1: College Student Evaluating Resources for a Presentation

Naomi is preparing an informative speech on how social media influences spending habits among college students. She finds a popular TikTok video that claims “most students buy things impulsively because of influencer pressure.” Before using this in her speech, she evaluates the source: she checks whether the creator has expertise (they don’t), examines whether evidence is cited (none is provided), and notices that the video uses dramatic language to attract views. Naomi decides the video is not a credible resource. Instead, she examines a scholarly article from her campus library database that includes actual survey data and clear methodology. Because the study provides transparent research, reliable statistics, and balanced conclusions, Naomi uses that evidence to support her main points.

Example 2: Professional Evaluating Resources for a Business Presentation

Elena, a project manager, is preparing a presentation proposing new software for her company. She begins researching by reviewing industry blogs, vendor websites, and promotional videos, but she recognizes these sources may be biased toward selling a product. To evaluate quality, she checks who authored the information, looks for independent reviews, and compares claims with reports from reputable business research firms. She also examines cost analyses from neutral consulting groups to verify savings projections. By prioritizing independent, data-driven sources over marketing materials, Elena builds a balanced, well-supported business presentation her leadership team can trust.

Key Takeaways 

• Evaluating resources helps ensure that the information you use in a speech is accurate, credible, and trustworthy.
• Not all sources, whether social media, websites, scholarly articles, or AI tools are equally reliable, so careful analysis is essential.
• Strong speakers and professionals build their arguments on well-evaluated, high-quality evidence that audiences can depend on.

Exercises 

• Evaluate Three Resource Types: Locate one social media post, one website, and one scholarly article on the same topic, then use the evaluation checklists to determine which source is strongest and why.
• AI Verification Practice: Generate a short explanation of a topic using AI, then verify each claim using independent credible sources and write a brief reflection on what was accurate, inaccurate, or missing.
• Credibility Ranking Exercise: Provide students with four different sources about the same issue (e.g., a blog, a sponsored article, a research study, and a government report). Students rank them from most to least reliable and explain their reasoning in two to three sentences.