Research Guides: Phil 100: Knowledge &amp; Reality (Spring 2023): Assessing Sources (Activity)

Questions to Ask

Who is the author?
- Do they have an agenda
- Are they an expert?
Where was it published?
- Is it peer reviewed?
When was it published?
What is the argument?
Why was it created/written?
Is it trustworthy?
Is this source well-cited?

What IS peer review?

Peer review grows out of the 18th century Republic of Letters and the Royal Society, in which papers were submitted & reviewed by scholars before presentation and publication.

Now peer review is a process by which academic work is evaluated and improved before publication.

An article or book is submitted for review to an editor, who then sends it to 2 or 3 external reviewers, who in turn provide feedback and comments. They return the piece to the editor with notes, who then sends it back to the author. This process may repeat. This process improves the quality of a work, but also means publication takes Years after the work is written.

Possible signs of peer review

Is the article in an academic journal?
- If it's a book, was it published by a University press?
Does the database list the article as peer reviewed?
Are the citations, a bibliography, and/or a literature review?

Scholarly VS Peer Reviewed

What is a "Scholarly" source? Is it the same as a peer reviewed source?

Short Answer:

A scholarly source is material produced by experts, but may not have gone through the peer review process.

Example:

Philosophy Talk This link opens in a new window
Philosophy Talk is a weekly, one-hour radio program that challenges listeners to question their assumptions and to think about things in new ways. The hosts' down-to-earth and no-nonsense approach brings the richness of philosophic thought to everyday subjects. Topics are lofty (Truth, Beauty, Justice), arresting (Terrorism, Intelligent Design, Climate Change), and engaging (Baseball, Love, Happiness). Philosophy Talk is produced by KALW on behalf of Stanford University, as part of its Humanities Outreach Initiative. Unlimited access to the complete Philosophy Talk radio archive. The archive features 500 episodes on a enormous range of interdisciplinary topics that support course curricula. Contains all Philosophy Talk episodes aired since the program's debut in 2004.

Scholarly sources may be very helpful in providing background information or in helping shape your understanding of a topic, but they are not the same weight as a peer reviewed source.

Compare these Sources

Sadigh, M. (2020). Restoration of Academic Identity: On Truth and Responsibility. Academic Questions, 33(4), 608–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-020-09927-1
The article presents the discussion on human life promoting creativity, intellectuality, and social growth. Topics include playing a decisive role in mastering the challenges of life for the betterment of humanity as well as its communities; and having shortsightedness and self-centeredness showing devastating personal as well as societal implications.
Davids, N. (2021). Academic freedom and the fallacy of a post-truth era. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 53(11), 1183–1193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2021.1917363
The belief that we are living in a post-truth age raises a number of complex, paradoxical questions. Does it suggest, for example, that truth no longer matters? Or, that the idea of truth no longer exists? The university, of course, has long been associated with the interests of truth – not only in searching for truth, but in telling the truth. This is made evident in its emphasis on logic, rationality, deliberation, debate, reason, contemplation, reflection and academic freedom. Truth, and its ensuing perspectives, perceptions, agreements and conflicts, are what makes a university what it is. As such, the university is as enmeshed in versions of truth, as it is in versions of power – which serves only to confirm the necessity for a continuous interrogation of these truths, and hence, power. In principle, academic freedom infers that both members of staff and students at universities have the right to engage in intellectual engagement and debate, without fear of censorship. In practice, however, when we take stock of academic freedom in spaces of higher education, we see growing patterns of shutting down, and closing off, rather than opening up. The interest of this article, therefore, is to consider how the university can remain discursively open to that which is new, unfamiliar and unpopular, while simultaneously, doing no harm – either to itself or its students.

Questions:

Who are the authors? Are they experts?
Are the works peer-reviewed? How can you tell?
Who is the publisher?
What can you learn about the journal itself?
How widely cited are these articles (hint: search the titles in Google Scholar)?
Which is the better source?
Are both sources equally useful? Are both useful?