Scientific news article analysis

Goal: To develop skills to determine the credibility of a news article about a scientific issue.
Steps:
1. Choose a written news piece (article, blog, etc.) on a specific scientific result or claim.
Don’t pick a conspiracy theory–the goal here is to analyze how the article reports on a
scientific claim.
2. Analyze the source using the checklist below. Detailed info on each criterion is on the
separate handout.
3. Make a judgment as to the credibility of the source.
4. Complete the reflection question.
Fill out the table with the information on your source.
The scientific result/claim described
in article:
Headline of the article
The URL for source
The checklist and text is taken from the Information Sources Authenticity Checklist (ISAC),
developed by Ulrike Lahaise, Georgia State University–Perimeter College
All items in the checklist tables below are explained in detail following the table. While working
through the checklist with any article, post, blog, vlog, etc., or claim, be aware of your own biases.
The most common ones are: 1) Confirmation bias: the desire to believe or disbelieve in something
distorts our interpretations and leads us to seek evidence to confirm our bias while we ignore
evidence that disproves it; 2) Bias blind spot: the unawareness of our own bias which makes biased
conclusions appear objective and impartial to us.
As a rule of thumb: the greater your emotional reaction to an article, the more urgent the need to
account for any underlying biases. Here are a couple of simple ways to minimize the effect of biases
when getting information from any source: 1) look for a variety of sources reporting about the issue
of interest that are independent from each other; 2) Compare your own interpretations with those of
several sufficiently impartial experts.
The checklist items are phrased as statements that are true for criteria applying to fake news/bad
information. The more criteria that are true, the more likely that the source is fake or contains
misleading information.
1
Author/Website Analysis
Ratings: “X” if true; “-” if not, “N/A” if
not applicable
Your
rating
Evidence from article/your research
1 Domain
A Page is a personal website or
blog
B Page has an odd title and/or
domain name
C URL ends with “lo”, “.co”, or
odd ending
2 About Us
A Bad Google/Wikipedia review
B Info on authors is missing or
bad
C Author is a blogger
D Contact email is personal
(yahoo, gmail, etc.)
E Site has a disclaimer/is a
satirical website
F Site has no “About us”,
“Contact us”, author info
3 Sources
A In-article links are missing or
sketchy
B Quotes/facts/details are not
authentic
C No sources/only low-quality
sources are included
D Images are taken out of
context and/or altered
4 Writing
A Contains ALL CAPS,
spelling/grammar errors, etc.
B Uses hyperbolic, emotionally
charged language
5 Layout
A Bad visual layout
B Bad navigational functionality
Total # of X’s (out of 17)
2
Information/Claim Analysis
Ratings: “X” if true; “-” if not, “N/A” if
not applicable
Your
rating
Evidence from source/your research
1 Fact-checking
A Site has low ratings on
fact-checking sites
B Info disagrees with
official/expert sources
C Sources are not
cited/cannot be verified
2 Cross-referencing A Info doesn’t agree with
other news sources
3 Timing
A No date is given in
article
B Article is inaccurate b/c
it is late-breaking
4 Biases
A Article has very
positive/negative
language
B Article is one-sided, not
neutral or objective
C Article does not
present alternative
viewpoints/sources
Total # of X’s (out of 9)
3
Now use the results of your analysis to evaluate the credibility of your source. Would you
call it “fake news” or not? Why? There is no one “right” answer–what I’m looking for is
the quality of your justification. Use specifics from the checklist in your discussion. Also
consider the additional points discussed in class (GLAD, etc.).
Evaluation of source:
Now that you’ve completed this analysis, reflect on the experience. What was difficult
about this assignment? What did you learn from it? How will it make you a wiser
consumer of information in the future? Don’t just give broad, vague statements–be as
specific as possible

The post Scientific news article analysis first appeared on COMPLIANT PAPERS.