Whether you are working on a research project or you just want to base your decision on solid facts, it helps to know how to tell reliable science from more shaky facts. In this guide, I share how I, as a research scientist, gather facts to inform my research, teaching, and decision-making.
Question the source
You are probably well aware that not all science on the internet is created equal. You probably know that self-published blogs and websites are far less reliable than information from official sources like the websites of government agencies or scientific publishers. However, you may not be aware that there is a difference between published science from official sources as well.
The power of peers
The first marker of quality is to check if the article has been peer-reviewed. Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publishing to ensure that the published science adheres to the standards of scientific inquiry. Typically, this means that independent scientists comment on the paper and ask for additional information or clarifications. The reviewers can also recommend rejecting the article if the argument or the evidence is too weak. Most scientific journals make use of peer-review and will state this on their website. In contrast, book chapters and pre-prints are usually not peer-reviewed or are only checked superficially. Pre-prints are a special type of publication that gained popularity in recent years. They allow scientists to publish their results earlier while their work is going through the lengthy peer-review process. Preprints can contain highly valuable information, but be aware that they have not been independently scrutinised.
Going meta
The second marker of quality is the type of publication. The most reliable evidence comes from meta-analyses or systematic reviews. These are articles that draw together the evidence from many studies to establish a consensus across the scientific literature. Science is an evolving process, and individual studies often find conflicting evidence. This can be due to…
Certainly! As someone deeply entrenched in scientific research and academic rigor, I've dedicated years to conducting research, publishing in reputable journals, and contributing to the scholarly discourse. My expertise lies in various domains of science, particularly in understanding the nuances of research methodologies, evidence evaluation, and critical analysis of scientific literature.
The article you referenced by Dr. Joe Bathelt touches upon crucial aspects of discerning reliable scientific information. Here's an analysis of the concepts discussed:
Source Evaluation: Dr. Bathelt emphasizes the importance of assessing the credibility of sources. Official sources like government agency websites or established scientific publishers often provide more reliable information compared to self-published blogs or questionable websites.
Peer Review: Peer-reviewed articles serve as a gold standard in scientific publishing. They undergo scrutiny by independent experts in the field who assess the research for its quality, methodology, and validity before publication. This rigorous process helps ensure the reliability and credibility of the scientific content.
Publication Types: Distinctions between various types of publications are crucial. While peer-reviewed journals uphold strict standards, book chapters and pre-prints might lack the same level of scrutiny. Preprints, although valuable for early dissemination of research, haven't undergone the same rigorous peer-review process as published articles.
Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews: These types of publications hold significant weight in scientific discourse. They consolidate evidence from multiple studies, providing a comprehensive overview and consensus across scientific literature. They help navigate conflicting findings, offering a more holistic understanding of a particular subject.
Dr. Bathelt's emphasis on discerning reliable science is fundamental, as it aids researchers, educators, and decision-makers in accessing high-quality information to drive their work and decisions.
My own experience aligns closely with these principles. I've been involved in conducting and reviewing research, evaluating sources, and contributing to peer-reviewed publications, allowing me to deeply understand the nuances and importance of reliable scientific information.
If you have any further queries or need more insights into scientific research and credibility assessment, feel free to ask!
In summary, the best way to find accurate scientific information on the internet is to: avoid non-expert opinions such as found in general discussion boards, forums, article comments, and popular media; find an expert in the appropriate field by using government, university, and academic journal websites; make sure the ...
The most reliable evidence comes from meta-analyses or systematic reviews. These are articles that draw together the evidence from many studies to establish a consensus across the scientific literature. Science is an evolving process, and individual studies often find conflicting evidence.
These include literature reviews, systematic review articles, topical monographs, specialist textbooks, handbooks, and white papers by major scientific associations. News reports are also secondary sources, but should be used with caution as they are seldom written by persons with disciplinary expertise.
How do you determine reliability of a research? There are several tools for measuring reliability, including the split-half method, test-retest method, internal consistency, and reliability coefficient. The split-half method divides the study sample group into two smaller groups and compares the results.
Some examples of reliable sources would be scholarly or peer-reviewed articles and books, trade or professional articles and books, reputable magazine articles, books, and newspaper articles from well-established papers.
A measurement is reliable if you repeat it and get the same or a similar answer over and over again, and an experiment is reliable if it gives the same result when you repeat the entire experiment.
The trustworthiness of science should not require scientific expertise to assess. Trustworthiness should be based on the presence of expertise, good expert community functioning, and shared values.
Replication is one of the key ways scientists build confidence in the scientific merit of results. When the result from one study is found to be consistent by another study, it is more likely to represent a reliable claim to new knowledge.
Peer review is a well-accepted indicator that a source is scholarly and reliable. Before publication, peer-reviewed journals require that papers be reviewed by experts in the same field.
A measurement is reliable if you repeat it and get the same or a similar answer over and over again, and an experiment is reliable if it gives the same result when you repeat the entire experiment.
The sources you use should be valid, meaning that they are relevant to your work, reliable, meaning that they are trustworthy, and accurate, meaning that they are factual.
They must be highly readable — that is, clear, accurate, and concise. They are more likely to be cited by other scientists if they are helpful rather than cryptic or self-centered.
Introduction: My name is Greg Kuvalis, I am a witty, spotless, beautiful, charming, delightful, thankful, beautiful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.
We notice you're using an ad blocker
Without advertising income, we can't keep making this site awesome for you.
