Evaluating Information in the Age of Information Overload

1
Evaluating Information in the Age of Information
Overload
2
Information Overload is real
You cannot believe everything you read in books
or on-line.
3
Print Resources

• Includes
• Books
• Encyclopedias
• Journals
• Newspapers
• Magazines
• They are edited
• They may be peer-reviewed.

4
Books have errors

• http//www.mbc.qld.edu.au/oxford/ouperror.html
• http//aima.eecs.berkeley.edu/errata.html

5
Wikipedia has errors

• It is a website created by anyone who wishes to
  contribute to it.
• It is edited only by those that read a selection.
  They may or may not know any more than the
  original author.

6
Wikipedia

• Because Wikipedia is an ongoing work to which, in
  principle, anybody can contribute, it differs
  from a paper-based reference source in important
  ways. In particular, older articles tend to be
  more comprehensive and balanced, while newer
  articles more frequently contain significant
  misinformation, unencyclopedic content, or
  vandalism. Users need to be aware of this to
  obtain valid information and avoid misinformation
  that has been recently added and not yet removed.
  However, unlike a paper reference source,
  Wikipedia is continually updated, with the
  creation or updating of articles on topical
  events within seconds, minutes, or hours, rather
  than months or years for printed encyclopedias.

7
Errors in Wikipedia vs. Enc. Brit.

• When 42 articles ranging in topic from
  Archimedes' principle to the thyroid gland from
  both publications were sent to experts for
  evaluation, a very interesting accuracy metric
  was generated. Eight serious errors these
  defined as misinterpretations of important
  concepts were found. Four in the proudly
  amateurishly produced Wikipedia four in the
  supposedly professionally produced Britannica.
• When the error category was expanded to include
  "factual errors, omissions, or misleading
  statements" 162 were found in Wikipedia and 123
  in the Britannica. That is roughly four per
  article for the upstart amateurs and three for
  the publication that has been around since 1768.

8
Simple Wikipedia

• http//simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

9
Featured Articles

• Quality AssessmentMany articles in Wikipedia are
  being assessed and graded. There exist its own
  project within Wikipedia that does nothing else
  than reviewing articles to grade them, upgrade
  them or downgrade them. There are 6 grade levels
  an article can have after an official assessment.
• Most relevant (highest quality) are articles in
  status featured article and good article.
  Those articles were scrutinized and verified the
  most and are also frequently reviewed to make
  sure that the article still meets the quality
  criteria and can keep its high grade.

10
6 criteria Every featured article must

• Well-written, comprehensive, factually accurate,
  neutral, stable
• Structured to have an intro, headings, and
  consistent citation styles
• Images used are royalty-free have captions or
  conform to non-free guide
• Stays on topic with adequate info, not too long.
• EVALUATED BY WIKIPEDIA TEAM AND GIVEN STAR
  IN UPPER RIGHT.

11
What about all the other WEB material?

• When we browse, we evaluate almost
  sub-consciously or do we believe everything we
  read?
• It is a continuum.

12
Continuum of belief

• Hopefully you are moving to the right!!!

Believes everything
Total Skeptic
But it is time consuming. It is why we avoid
Wikipedia. It is why we seek out good sources.
13
What should you look for?

• Author is clearly identified
• Author is an expert in this area
• Contact information is listed
• A reliable organization is connected to this web
  site
• Purpose of the web site is clear
• Site explains the topic thoroughly
• Information is easily read and understood

14
Checking for credibility

• Check the authors credibility or expertise by
  doing a Google search or a Wikipedia search
• Look for their credentials, where they studied,
  the field they studied
• If no author, Google check the organization that
  produced it.

15
And

• Site presents a balanced point of view, rather
  than pushing a particular perspective
• The point of view is fair
• Site does not contain advertising
• Date of creation/update is available
• The information is current
• All links work

16
And...

• Facts stated can be checked and confirmed using
  other sources
• Site is free of errors
• Site is easy to navigate

17
Is it or isnt it?

• Example
• http//www.freerice.com/
• Google (use links__URL____)
• www.alexa.com
• Domain Tools http//www.domaintools.com/

18
Evaluating an organizations credibility

• Look at the URL for clues about the organization
  (if it seems to be a UN site, is UN in the URL?)
• Use Domain tools to see the background of the
  producing or hosting group.
• Use links___URL____ to find out who links to the
  site.

19
Check the URLs for clues

• http hypertext transfer protocol//
• www world wide web(insertwebnamehere) just
  what it says...it directs the computer to the
  specific domain on the Internet. example Google.
  www.google.com.com, .gov, .net, .org, .edu,
  .whatever, the domain TYPE. .com business, like
  Wal-Mart or Sears. .org, usually a non-profit
  organization. .gov, that's the government .edu,
  that's for schools and such. .net, I think it's
  like a catch-all..
• COUNTRY CODE (two letter country code tells you
  where it was from)
• Any gibberish you see after the .com, that's
  directing the computer to the specific page
  within the domain. Think of it like an
  upside-down tree. The domain is the top, with all
  of the webpages housed within/below, and you can
  either link your way to them or direct type, if
  you have the actual page.
• The filetype .doc .pdf .ppt

20
Global Warming a Web Site Evaluation Assignment

• Consider the topic of the Global Warming. Take a
  brief look at all of the following five sites
• Global Warming
• Global Warming Hoax
• Earthquakes and Global Warming
• Journal of Geoclimatic Studies
• Global Warming

21
And these?

• http//www.preparingforemergencies.co.uk/index.htm
  (hoax)
• http//www.preparingforemergencies.gov.uk/ (real)
• http//www.malepregnancy.com/
• http//www.gatt.org or http//www.wto.org
• (for WTO)

22
Can you believe these photos?

• http//urbanlegends.about.com/library/blphoto-wtc.
  htm
• http//www.snopes.com/photos/arts/arts.asp

23
Art frauds

• http//www.faelschermuseum.com/index_english.htm

24
Hoaxes or not?

• Pregnancy test
• http//thepregnancytester.com/
• Genochoice
• http//genochoice.com/
• Boilerplate
• http//bigredhair.com/boilerplate/
• Bonsai Kitten
• http//www.shorty.com/bonsaikitten/
• Foot detox
• http//www.footbathdetox.com/
• Aluminum foil detector
• http//zapatopi.net/afdb/
• Pets or Food
• http//petsorfood.com/
• Clones
• http//www.d-b.net/dti/

25
Laocoon
26
Art a Web Site Evaluation Assignment

• Consider the topic of the Laocoon sculpture. Take
  a brief look at all of the following five sites,
  and then select two to evaluate more thoroughly.
• NationMaster
• The Best Artists
• iDC ROME
• World Science
• Ultimate Art History
• Which site is the best to use for information on
  this topic? Why?