Deciding If a Source la Useful R~2a 133

2. Decide whom you'll send it to and how you'll reach them -

.. face -to -face? on the phone? on a website such as Google Forms

or SurueyMonkey ? via email?

..•
3. Write questions that require specific answers and can be answered
easily. Multiple-choice questions will be easier to tally than open-
ended questions .

••
4. Write an introduction that explains the survey's purpose. Be sure
to give a due date and to say thank you.
5. Test your questions on several people, making sure that the ques-

••
tions and any instructions are clear.

)} Go to INQUIZITIVE FOR WRITERS for an interactive activity on Finding

Sources, and practice your skills before applying them in your writing.

M
•• R-2 Evaluating Sources

"'- Searching the Health Source database for information on the incidence
of meningitis among college students, you find twenty-eight articles.
A Google search on the same topic produces more than 12 million hits.

■
How do you decide which ones to read? This chapter presents advice on
evaluating potential sources and reading your chosen sources critically.
■
R-2a Deciding If a Source Is Useful
■ As you consider potential sources, keep your PURPOSE in mind. If
■ you're trying to persuade readers to believe something, look for
II sources representing various stances; if you're reporting on a topic,
you may need sources that are more factual or informative. Con-
I sider your AUDIENCE. What kinds of sources will they find persuasive?
If you're writing for readers in a particular field, what counts as EVI-

't DENCE in that field? Consider most or all of the following questions
as you look for useful sources: ·

''
• Is the source relevant? How well does it relate to your purpose? What
would it add to your work? To see what it covers, look at the title
and at any introductory material (such as a preface or an abstract).

~
134 R-2a EVALUATING SOURCES

• What are the author's credentials? Has the author writte

works on this subject? Is the author known for a particular P
on it? Is the author an expert? a scholar? a journalist? Wi your
audience find this person credible? If their credentials are not
stated, search to see what reliable sources say about the author.
• What is the STANCE ? Does the source explain various points of
view or advocate only one perspective? Does its title suggest a
certain slant? If it's online, check to see whether it includes links
to other sites and, if so, what their perspective s are. You'll want
to consult sources with various viewpoints and understand the
biases of each source you use.
• Who is the publisher? If the source is a book, what kind of company
published it? If an article, what kind of periodical did it appear
in? Books published by university presses and articles in scholarly
journals are reviewed by experts before they are published. Many
books and articles written for the general public also undergo
careful fact-checking, but some do not.
• At what level is it written? How hard is it to understand ? Texts
written for a general audience might be easier to understand but
not authoritativ e enough for academic work. Scholarly texts will
be more authoritativ e but may be hard to comprehen d.
• How current is it? Check to see when books and articles were pub-
lished and when websites were last updated. (If a site lists no date,
see if links to other sites still work; if not, the site is probably too
dated to use.) A recent publication date or update, however, does
not necessarily mean that a potential source is useful-som e top-
ics require current information ; others call for older sources.
• Is it cited in other works? If so, you can probably assume that some
other writers regard it as trustworthy.
• Does it include other useful information? Is there a bibliograph y th at
might lead you to other sources? How current or authoritativ e are
the sources it cites?
• Is it available? If it's a book and your school's library doesn't h ave
it, can you get it through interlibrary loan ? If it's online and there's
a paywall, can your library get you access ?
 Ftndfn1 Relevant Sourcet R.. '.le 123

----
..
--._-- R-1e Finding Relevn nt St.>-. "es

•._ You 'll need to choose from many sources for your research -from
reference works, books , periodicals, and websites to surveys, inter-
views, and other kinds of field research that you yourself conduct.

••
Which sources you turn to will depend on your topic . If you're
researchi ng a literary topic, you might consult biographical refer-
ence works and scholarly works of criticism. If you're researching
a current issue, you'd likely consult news articles, books, and social

•
illl
media posts on your topic. For a report on career opportunities in
psychology, you might interview someone working in the field.

•• Primary and seconda ry sources. Check your assignme nt to see if

you are required to use primary or secondary sources - or both. Pri-
mary sources are original works, such as historical documents, liter-

--
ary works, eyewitness accounts, diaries, letters, and lab studies, as
well as your own original field research. Secondary sources include
scholarly books and articles, reviews, biographies, and other works
that interpret or discuss primary sources.

-- Whether a source is considered primary or secondary sometime s

depends on your topic and purpose. If you're analyzing a poem, a crit-
ic's article analyzing the poem is a secondary source-b ut if you're

-- investigating the critic's work, the article would be a primary source.

Scholarl y and popular sources . In many of your college courses,

you'll be expected to rely primarily on scholarly sources that are

-- written by experts for readers knowledgeable on the topic and that

treat their subjects in depth. Popular sources, on the other hand, are
written for a general audience, and while they may discuss scholarly

,
II research, they are more likely to summari ze that research than to
report on it in detail. That said, the distinction can be blurry: many
scholars write books for a general readershi p that are informed by
those authors' own scholarship, and many writers of popular sources
It
I
 Scholarly Source

{ ,.'\ NIH 'P11blk Acee,~

1~ .1 Aotl!o, M.. " •<111'1
•• ✓ 1\1, ~'ft'f1 f\'1 I 1111 lfl Jl(f'r ft\ 1~1'(1 JOl't'l'-11 1
"t'-nut A11't""1 " "' ""''"' e>tt ~ tubft.- 4 ffl 41ffl.l l CF¥-"
"ub/1 ,he,d ,n , ~ -, ,..~ ~1~ "' ~"' " "~ .... . ........ ,.,,,r- ,011•1tfUttt ,.~~ ~ 2'19'0l!-
~<>t-~ ii,. ...,~ .... ........,.."
an ncade,m ,c J R•"--"""' ~ " HI -'1'9Uf1 1 U ,f ) " " - ,tg,1
NIW/!IO ~~ ~! 1 1ffl)

ll"'\ Uma _. .. 1"1t~ t\t.'t.\CJ IK® I

Sound1 Ilk!! 11 N11roln l1t: hhavlontl M1mlfntatlon1 of N!llfDIHllffl In lv,rydtly

Ll'9
N~hola, S. 11<~•~ ~ V~gct et>d M@
J!'.lln.1!,J,1~~
~'"'""'J'~t t,. J- ~ l.1:- 1&..t.~f!:

AIH!tract Go 10- el
Includes an
abstract
f;J, i, known about n1.rd 11i1t1' ~-,ryda)" Mha,-ior. Tht 1oa1 of thb ,tudr WIJ to dd<!rib. haw narci~t ism
;, mlnit... t-.<! in .--.,yd~ •\if,, , \/, Ina th• Eloctn>nlc.Ilr Acth·1tod R0<0nl,,r (L\R), WI obt•ln..l
nan1 "'1i,:tk Nh);,ior from partieip,nts' ,,,.'),lay U,..... Th, Atult. 1ugH1 th·• t th• d.Anln1
ch.,...,..,uti.,. of n•raw1n tb•t h••·• bo.n ,,tabli1bod from qu"tlonnalro ind labontory·baood ltcldl..
aJ"e home ou, ln n&rdul1ts' day.. to-day Mha'"-ion. Narcl1JUU do lndMd beha,-. ln more mravvted and

len ~ b l , W'l:ys than non -ni.rclui.iu, skip clus mo" (unon1 nuclu1sts lUgh in
•>.;>loitotl,,non/ ontitlomont only). ind UH more MXUal lanru•I•· Furthermore, ,,,. found that th. link
boh,'ffn nuclulsm •nd d.iHiJ'ff"ble boba,'ior le stren,U,onod when controllln1 for Hl!-.s!Mm. thus
•:a•ndinc prior questionnalr.-b..nd Andlnp Cl.uilhJa...R®in.,.lnimlrnrnki & l o •Y 2lll!Al to
obs,,,,..._ rul-world boh.,.;o,.
~·words: nucissisrn, Mhavior. personalitytra.its, an-ui.l beh&vior1 langu.Ag• UM

Cites academic
N>n:is.ist. love >ttontlon. Luck)· fur them, they b.,,. I'OClntly ,-ived a considerable omount of ii from
research w ith .iadamic psychologists, ,specially in labori.tory u · (e.g., Bacl< Sc-bmulcl'" Si Ealnff 29JQ; au.sh.man
consistent ~ I..199.5; ~ ll.J.51:1.t · · ; i\liU~t~). Thisbbontor;l'UN?dihu
= - ~ _____nas about why narcissists do what th9)• do {Holtma n & Stn1ht
documentation
style.
~~--=~=: Twt1Difl & C,mnbcU ~Q.<29.i Yazicr & Fundn...222.2). Despite all this attention
m r.surdt■n , howl'\-v, ",. still know little about "'°M.t na.rcissiru actually do in their 9Vff)-day livu.
2Qt0ai

The ilim of this paper is to h,lp """"" •n empirical buis fur a mon oomplote und.rstandlng of narcisaism
by ""-1>\oting boh>.,'ioul monifesQtions of nuclssi.sm in ..-.11'<1Ay life. Thus, ,,,. intend to answer • simpl1.
yet brply uMnsw11rod quntion: Wlat do narcissists do on• cla}- to-day basis?

Method
------------ -------- ---·-- ---· - - - -- - - ---- -- . --·. --- -- - - ------------------- ---- -- Goto. ~

Parttctponts

Participants ,..,re So unda...,.duate lludents at th. University ofTous at Austin (79 provided v.illd EAR
Describes dau), recruit..! mainly from introdu<:1011• p~bology counes ond by flyers in the psychol"I)' deparuiwnL
The sample wu 54% f11m•l1, and the ethnic oompos!tion of tho sample wu 65'6 Whito, 21'!,; Asian, 11'6
research
Latino, and 3!. of another ethnid •. Puticip>nts ranaed from 18 to 24 }'An old (M = 18.7, SD= 1,4).
methods, Participants were compens• . Dau from this sample ware also repo11td in Vari{! apd Mrbl
includes '2.wla), whore furth ' onnation an be found •bout th. atudy. 1

numerical
da ta. e NP! is• 40-item test of zweiulsm th&t la re\lllblo and well-validated <&:il;i n & Tony 1988}. The
itema 011 thu forood-.,hoice tut conuln p>ln of statemonts such•• "Sometimes I tell 1ood stori... (non-
nucwi.stic) ,·onus "E.vlll')'body W..1 to hur my lloriu" (rarclss!stlc). In our study, tho NP! a.shi'bittd
l,ood ..u.l,ility (a • .83), ~ - u In Llb.lu, "' also wcubted me&ns and rell•billtiu fur four ~..11
Oi.r.wnlm.w9.87J,

Authors are
,~~;,"i;:;;, ~1 !:.i;:, Sw,dud Deviations, G.11der-Diff1ron..,, and Reli&bllitiu
for ti .. NP! and NP! P•cat1
academics
who have
published
addmona l
research on
FCo/1V1butor lnfonnetlon
S. Hol......;.,~ ~ t o n Unlverrlty in SL LoulJ.
Simln, Vmn, Wuhlriatoo Uu!v1nlty In St. Louis.
this topic.

r
Mo.ttbiu ll )tahl, Unlvan!ty of Aruclna.

Includes
j it
~
l
Rtf.tf~nce~
1. Bae!< MD, 5<:hmulda SC, ~loff B. Why u o nudul,t., 10 cbonulna 11 flm si&ht? ~ tht
iw-~ lim·popula.rily llnk i t ..,-a ..,qualntanot. Journal of Por10n1lity and Soci1I P,yclioloi)·.
2010 ;98:J.32 - 145. [bbl1.tllJ
• · BawnN\a>' RP, Vohs m, Puudor DC. P•r •holo¥Y u th, , oiot\Ot of aelh e.,...-u i.ml 611111·
Go IO. l-,J

complete movonanla: Wbi!O\'or htpptno<I w •chul boh.vior'I p..,1ptcth•• • on Pt)'<holoaic.J s.,;.,,.._

reference /1st. 2.ll07;2 1396- 403.

124
•• Popular Sources
~ ' ,,,,,,,,,, .

~ Publish ed in
JU Hi

~
-
genera/-
The Persistent Myth of the Narcissistic MIiienniai interest
i\','1'1•· -:\ -t ill l,,1,h1111' 111,, ,~m, a, .-11°..,1,,,,,, .,1 Mi llc11111a ls, rvr 11 1hrni~h ~ periodical or

~
,,, id\'11,'1.' ,h,,\\' lhc, ··\· 11,,1 "'"' rn,,,-.: ~rll-:i1',n1h•d 1ha11 !heir prcdecc,~ors. website.
•r:-.,,, , 1 ,, rl'c;, 1 l NO\ t(I ,01, I
Catchy,

"'"'
provocative
A few months ago, the news went viral t 1· merican Psychiatric title; no
Association had classified "taking selfies" as a sign o a abstract.

>
up Face book and Twitter until it was revealed that the article was a .. v,M....- A uthor no t

'-9 \:Vhether it's Time's 2013 cover story "The Me , Me, Me Generation" or Kluger's
an academic
or 0th er
book , ti1e same statistics
· · are cite . 1narc1ss1sm.
· d as proo f of Mt.11enma . . sub1ect-ma tter
11(9 In UQQ.8.
study published in the Journal of Personality, San Diego State University
expert.
1

psychology professor Jean Twenge found that narcissistic behaviors among Academic
9 college students studied over a 27-year period had increased significantly from experts c,ted
the 1970s. A second study published in 2008 by the National Institutes of ~~~~~:nted.
~

•
'@I
I.ft Open in app [ Get started ]
~ IM.I ◄11t( -:---=-~:----:-;-----.---~~- =====~·_ Published on

~
The Millennial myth Medium, a
blogging
platform.

....-.. ti Alex Murrell ....

M ar 16, 201 8 • 12 m in read

Written by a
'--_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ design profes-
sional, no t an
academic.

--
------ Tone fit for a
~ _ general, non-
It seems that a day doesn't pass without another article specialist
audience.
hitting the headlines exposing the shortcomings of the I

-- Millennial generation. Most of them are nonsense. Even

Cites popular
the ones from reputable sources. For example, Time . - sources w ith-
believes that Millennials can't afford to buy houses
out using formal

--
documentation.

because they spend too much money on avocados. And

-- 125
126 R-le DOING RESEARCH

have extensive expertise in the subject. Even if 1 ff quirement,

citing scholarly sources often contributes to yo 'IUthority as a
writer, demonstrating that you are familiar with important research
and scholarship and that your own writing is informed by it.

HOW TO DETERMINE IF A SOURCE IS SCHOLARLY

There are several criteria to consider when determining whether or

not a source is scholarly or reflects the expertise you need. Ask these
questions of each of your sources:
• What kind of source is it? A book from a scholarly press? A journal
article? Scholarly sources present original academic research;
they are peer-reviewed, meaning they are evaluated by experts
in the discipline; and they are written largely for experts in the
field . They are usually published in academic journals or by uni-
versity or academically focused publishers. Popular sources, on
the other hand-such as online magazine articles, blog posts,
and news articles-usuall y report on the scholarship of others
and tend to simplify concepts and facts to make them under-
standable to nonspecialists.
• Who's the author? Scholarly sources are written by authors with
academic credentials (an advanced degree in the field in which
they are writing and a position at a university, for example);
popular sources are most often written by journalists or staff
writers. What's most important, though, is that the author has
some expertise on the topic being discussed.
• Who's the intended audience? Consider how much prior knowledge
readers are assumed to have. Are specialized terms defined? If
not, you can assume it's a scholarly work. Look as well at the
detail: scholarly sources describe methods and give considerable
detail, such as extensive analyses or numerical data; popular
sources give less detail, often in the form of anecdotes or simple
examples.
• Who's the publisher? Scholarly sources are published by academic
journals, university presses, and professional organizations such
as the Modern Language Association; popular sources come from
.... Using Popular Sites and Search Engine, R-tf 127

.... general interest publications such as Time or the Atlantic, trade

publishers such as Random House or HarperCollins, or online

....
platforms such as Medium .
• Does the source cite other academic studies and include formal docu-
mentation? Scholarly sources do; popular sources may link to
academic work in the text but generally do not list references .

.... Or they might provide references at the end but omit in-text
documentat ion.
• Is there an abstract? Scholarly journal articles often begin with

.... an abstract or summary of the article; popular magazine articles

may include a tag line giving some sense of what the article cov-
ers but less information than a formal summary.

..._
..
•-
i ll
ill
••
••
••
,.•