Need Help?
Introduction
When you find information online, you should apply a framework to critically evaluate it and determine if it is reliable and credible. The SIFT method from Michael Caulfield is a good one to use in all areas of source evaluation, including information found on social media.
S - STOP
The first step, Stop, reminds you to pause before accepting or sharing any piece of information. When you encounter a claim, resist the urge to immediately engage with it. Ask yourself: Do I know if this source is reliable? Am I familiar with the topic? By pausing, you create space to critically assess whether the information warrants further investigation or if it's something that can be disregarded as unreliable or irrelevant.
This is also the time to think about how confirmation bias might be affecting your impressions of sources. Confirmation bias is the tendency to believe information that supports your existing views while ignoring or dismissing contradictory evidence. This can lead you to trust unreliable sources simply because they align with your beliefs. Being aware of this bias helps you evaluate information more objectively and stay open to different perspectives.
Tip: Watch Out for Red Flags
As you stop and consider, check if there are any of these red flags present as to how the information is being presented. PDF version
Resources
I - Investigate the Source
Once you’ve paused, it's time to Investigate the Source. This means finding out more about the publisher or author of the information you’re consuming. Look for the credibility of the website or organization, and check if the author has the necessary qualifications or biases that may influence their viewpoint. A quick Google search or background check can help reveal if the source is trustworthy or has a specific agenda.
Lateral Reading
The most important way to investigate a source is by using lateral reading, which is going outside the source you have found. This typically involves using a search engine to look up a person, site or organization to learn about their credentials, agenda, and background.
Many Google search results have a three dot icon that will help you learn about a site.
Lateral reading is a powerful technique. In one study, Stanford researchers asked students, historians, and fact checkers to evaluate live websites:
Historians and students often fell victim to easily manipulated features of websites, such as official-looking logos and domain names. They read vertically, staying within a website to evaluate its reliability. In contrast, fact checkers read laterally, leaving a site after a quick scan and opening up new browser tabs in order to judge the credibility of the original site. Compared to the other groups, fact checkers arrived at more warranted conclusions in a fraction of the time.
F - Find Better Coverage
Find Better Coverage encourages you to cross-check the information by looking for other reputable sources that cover the same topic. Instead of relying on a single source, compare how the information is presented in different outlets, especially those known for their expertise and accuracy. Often, misinformation can be spotted when the claim appears unreliable or out of context compared to more authoritative sources.
Tip: Use Fact-Checking Sites
Fact-checking sites can help you research claims, images, and quotes to determine if they are true, false, or perhaps misattributed. Here are a few good fact-checking sites:
T - Trace Claims, Quotes and Media to Their Original Context
The final step, Trace Claims, Quotes and Media to Their Original Context, involves tracking the origins of the claims, quotes, or media back to their original source. This step is crucial because information can be misinterpreted or taken out of context, especially on social media. By tracing content to its original context—whether it’s a research study, a news article, or a video—you can verify whether the information has been accurately represented or distorted.
You can use reverse image search as a good way to confirm the authenticity or original context of an image. Information on that is located later in this guide.
Tip: Find the Original Study
Many news sites may sensationalize or misinterpret findings published in academic journals. It's always better to locate the original study and view the conclusions there to see if there are any limitations or caveats. Use Google Scholar to locate full-text articles and be sure to set up your library links to connect to Santa Fe College.
This news article over-simplifies the research. Looking at the original study, we can see a few caveats:
- "Pasta in the context of low-GI dietary patterns does not adversely affect adiposity and even reduces body weight and BMI compared with higher-GI dietary patterns."
- "The generalisability of our results is called into question for all body weight and adiposity outcomes, as the available trials only assessed pasta in the context of low-glycaemic index dietary patterns (none assessed the effect of pasta alone or in the context of other dietary patterns and most did not quantify the amount of pasta consumed)."
Resources
Tips for Social Media
Tip: Hover
Many social media sites will pop up information about a user if you hover over their username, or you can click to learn more.
In this example, the user appears to be a reporter from the Sacramento CBS affiliate. Be sure to use lateral reading to double-check this!
This example appears to be from a newspaper in Sweden, but that's a pretty small number of followers for an official news site. Let's check with some lateral reading.
What About Checkmarks?
Verified accounts with checkmarks can potentially help you determine if an account or user is who they say they are. However, Twitter/X now allows users to pay for checkmarks without any verification required.
YouTube provides a brief blurb if a user is a verified medical professional, such as in this video by Doctor Mike (the blue shaded area below the video):
