Today, I learned that when researching sources, it is also important to look at the author of the source. Looking at the author’s background can provide a new perspective to inspect and use the source because we can see the author’s relationship to the information he is giving us. We not only look at the credibility of a source in the process of picking our sources, we also look at the people who created them. The credibility of a scholarly source lies in the accuracy and truthfulness of the content, and the connection that the author has with the content. The author should have a strong connection to the publications that he creates because as an expert in that specific field of information, he is more knowledgeable and experienced. A source written by an expert who has study and practiced in the field would be better than a source written by the common person who only has common sense, general knowledge, of the field.
In evaluation of sources, I am still uncertain about whether the popularity of the source would have anything to do with its credibility. I don’t think it would be a huge factor in my choice of sources, because it improves on the source’s content itself, but I wonder if the number of times that it is cited is a reflection of how truthful it may seem.
Lorraine, I think you’re right to be skeptical of the idea that just because an article is cited a lot that must mean it is “truthful.” Instead, a highly cited publication should just be regarded as notable, something important and serious enough that other scholars feel they need to indicate they’ve read it and dealt with it in some way in their own publications. Notability and seriousness do not, of course, automatically equate with truth.