Verlinden’s Exams of Evidence
When creating an argument or analyzing an argument, the presence of evidence is not sufficient: One should analyze the power and validity of the evidence. Everytime you have a look at any piece of evidence or quotation, take into account the following six areas when evaluating a supply (Verlinden, 2005):
Supply Credibility
– Does supply have the applicable background?
– Does the supply have the required data?
– Does the supply have adequate experience?
Supply Bias
-Does the supply signify a selected curiosity or perspective?
-Does the supply declare objectivity?
-Does the supply have preconceived concepts that will coloration their judgment?
-What “invisible” biases may exist (how does tradition or upbringing affect it)?
Recency
-Does the evidence come from the applicable time interval?
Inner Consistency
-Are there any contradictory statements in the supply?
Completeness
-Is sufficient info supplied?
-Does the authentic supply present some background info?
Corroboration (a.ok.a. exterior consistency)
-Do different certified sources agree with the evidence?
Supply: Verlinden, J. (2005) Important Pondering and On a regular basis Argument. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth
The CRAAP Take a look at
The CRAAP take a look at is a helpful acronym you should utilize to judge web sites or different sources:
-Forex: Just like the recency take a look at from Verlinden, is the supply present (the place applicable)
-Relevance: How carefully tied to your topic is this supply? Is it tangential or not?
-Authority: Is the supply certified to talk/write on this matter? (just like “supply credibility” from Verlinden)
-Accuracy: How dependable and truthful is this info? (This combines inner and exterior consistency from Verlinden)
-Goal: Why does this supply exist in the first place? What’s the motivation behind it?
