Techniques
Just as you might use a variety of sources in your knowledge building and creation, you will probably want to consider a variety of ways to see if those sources will help you. Below are a few strategies.
Vertical reading and Evaluation Strategies:
What is Vertical Reading?
Vertical reading involves examining the source itself and evaluating by reading it in-depth, analyzing the content, structure, and internal claims of the source itself. This often includes checking the author’s credentials, looking for citations, and understanding the arguments made within the document.
Techniques
BEAM: Good for scholarly journal articles, news, background (reference sources)
PICK: internet sources, news, journal articles, gray literature.
RADAR: news, journal articles, gray literature.
Lateral reading and Evaluation Strategies:
What is Lateral Reading?
Lateral reading involves evaluating a source by consulting and considering other sources, verifying facts, cross-checking information, and assessing the credibility of authors or organizations from an external perspective.
Lateral reading: Examining the source against other sources
Lateral Techniques
SIFT: Fact checking. Especially good for being a critical consumer of news and evaluating information found on the internet: numbers/stats/data, social media, web sites, and gray literature
Vertical or Lateral?
Both! You should always examine the source itself to see if it meets your needs, is relevant, etc. But you'll also want to look at the source alongside other sources. This also hold true for scholarly articles; while the scholarly article goes through a review process, that article cites other articles, it might build on an argument or refute it. That article is part of a larger "scholarly conversation" about a topic.
PICK by Ellen Carey is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Content adapted by Pam Morgan, 12/24
Graphic adapted from "Ways to Evaluate Sources" from the Tulane University Libraries.
You've done your search in a database and found a list of articles. Or you have some book titles to consider. You now have to decide whether or not these potential sources help you accomplish your purpose. One way to do that is to see how you might use those sources in your research paper.
The BEAM model below might be helpful. As you examine your results ask yourself, does this source fall into one (or more) of the categories below?
More Details
Background Sources
- Rely on them for information accepted as unquestionable fact
- Provide general information to explain a topic
- Sources to consider: books, encyclopedias (either general or subject-specific), articles.
Exhibit Sources
- Materials a writer is interpreting or analyzing
- Used to provide an example of or give evidence for a claim
- Sources to consider: Depending on your topic and discipline, scholarly books or articles, a film, novel, a data set, an interview, experimental results, a diary, letters, a work of art, etc.
Argument Sources
- Information from other authors you are agreeing with, disagreeing with, or building upon
- Citing them puts your research in the context of other scholarship on that topic--brings you into the conversation
- You use your exhibit sources as examples of why you agree with, disagree with, or want to add more to what was claimed in your argument sources
- Sources to consder: articles, books.
Method Sources
- Materials an author follows to determine how they are doing their research
- Sources to consider: Course readings, books, articles, Can include research procedures, theories
Graphic and List: Created by Pam Morgan, Central Library, August 2016
Citation
Adapted from Beeghly LIbrary, Heidelberg University: http://libguides.heidelberg.edu/eval/beam#s-lg-box-2260491
Additional Sources:
Meredith Farkas, Meredith. “Good for What? Teaching Sources for Sustainable Lifelong Information Literacy." Presentation, Association of College and Research Libraries, Portland, OR, March 25-28, 2015. http://www.slideshare.net/meredithfarkas/good-for-what
Rubick. Kate. 2014. "Flashlight: Using Bizup's BEAM to Illuminate the Rhetoric of Research." Presentation at Library Instruction West 2014. http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/liw_portland/Presentations/Material/10/
Rumble, Juliet, Carter. Toni and Noe, Nancy. 2015. "Teaching Students the 'How' and 'Why' of Source Evaluation: Pedagogies that Empower Communities of Learning and Scholarship." Presentation at 2015 LOEX Conference. http://www.loexconference.org/2015/presentations/rumblePresentation.pdf
Woodward, Kristin M. and Ganski, Kate L., “BEAM Lesson Plan” (2013). UWM Libraries Instructional Materials. Paper 1. http://dc.uwm.edu/lib_staff_files/1
BEAM originally developed by Joseph Bizup.
Bizup, Joseph. "BEAM: A Rhetorical Vocabulary for Teaching Research-Based Writing." Rhetoric Review 27, no. 1 (2008): 72-86. doi:10.1080/07350190701738858
These strategies will help you look beyond less important surface features of an information source (for example, how professional it looks or if it's a .org), and think more carefully about who is behind the source, what their purpose is, and how trustworthy and credible they are. The SIFT model (from Mike Caulfield) provides a framework for thinking critically about information:
Stop
Pause and ask yourself if you recognize the information source and if you know anything about the website or the claim's reputation.
If not, use the four moves (below) to learn more. If you start getting too overwhelmed during the other moves, pause and remember your original purpose.
Investigate
Take a minute to identify where this information comes from and to consider the creator's expertise and agenda. Is this source worth your time? Look at what others have said about the source to help with you these questions. (For example, a company that sells health food products is not the best source for information about health benefits/risks of consuming coconut oil. A research study funded by a pharmaceutical company is also suspect.)
Find Better Coverage
Sometimes it's less important to know about the source and more importance to assess their claim. Look for credible sources; compare information across sources and determine whether there appears to be a consensus.
Trace Claims to Original Source
Sometimes online information has been removed from its original context (for example, a news story is reported on in another online publication or an image is shared on Twitter). If needed trace the information back to the original source in order to recontextualize it.
modified from this source (Andrea Baer and Dan Kipnis, Rown University)
