1 / 11

Is Chocolate Really Good for You? Understanding Authority in Health Information

This resource examines the credibility of health information, specifically focusing on chocolate's health benefits. It discusses how to evaluate the authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency, and coverage of sources. Learn how to discern reliable information from biased or misleading content by analyzing the qualifications of authors, the purpose of the publication, and the freshness of the information. Use these criteria to make informed decisions about dietary claims and understand what makes a source trustworthy in the context of health and nutrition.

bebe
Télécharger la présentation

Is Chocolate Really Good for You? Understanding Authority in Health Information

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IS CHOCOLATE REALLY GOOD FOR YOU?Source Authority:How Smart is your Information? Cate Hagarty School Library Media Specialist Spring, 2008

  2. Do Now: How do you judge the authority of any resource you have? 1. Would you trust a study sponsored by Phillip Morris (cigarette company) to tell you about the health effects of nicotine? 2. Would you trust a lawyer to fix your car? 3. Would you trust a retired doctor to treat you for avian flu? 4. Would you trust a MySpace page to tell you which presidential candidate to support?

  3. You can judge a website or an article from the internet by evaluating: • Authority- Who wrote it? • Accuracy- Is it right? • Objectivity- Is there bias? • Currency- Is it fresh information? • Coverage- Is it the information you need?

  4. Authority • Who wrote this article or page? Is he or she a qualified expert? Is this person reliable, connected to an institution? • Can you contact him or her? • Who is the webmaster?

  5. Accuracy • Is the information reliable and error-free? • What is the domain of the document? (.gov, .com, .edu, .org, .uk, .es, .au) • Is there an editor? • Was it ever a printed document?

  6. Objectivity • What is the purpose of the website? • Is there any advertising on the page? • Are there any other clues about the author’s bias?

  7. Currency • Is the publication date available? • When was the page last updated? • Are there dead links?

  8. Coverage • Where did this information come from? • What is the tone of the text? Is it conversational or scientific? • Does the site give you the whole story? • Is it APPROPRIATE for YOU and your research question?

  9. Discovery Channel Why is this site reliable?

  10. My Diet FriendsWhy is this site less reliable?

  11. Works Consulted • Beck, S. Evaluation criteria from “The good, the bad, and the ugly: Or why it’s a good idea to evaluate web sources.” Retrieved 30 March 2008 from http://lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/evalcrit.html • Kapoun, J. "Teaching undergrads WEB evaluation: A guide for library instruction." C&RL News (July/August 1998): 522-523. Retrieved 30 March 2008 from http://www.library.cornell/edu/olinuris/ref/webcrit.html • Nesi, O. (2008). Is that website any good? • IS 281 Joseph B Cavallaro. (2008). Retrieved 31 March 2008 from http://library.nycenet.edu/common/welcome.jsp;jsessionid=0ccf11b0645689ff5604d3df4c37ef91?site=2740

More Related