Research Paper and Website

¶ … Social Policy Websites Using the CRAAP Method: Implications for Human Services Professionals

Human services professionals increasingly obtain information from the internet. Given the critical nature of the human services field, ensuring that information is correct, up-to-date, credible, and verifiable is crucial. The CRAAP tool (Currency, Reliability, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose) is a useful tool human services professionals may use to achieve this. In this paper, three policy-oriented websites were evaluated using the tool. The selected websites were Aclu.og, ProCon-org, and Vaccineresistancemovement.org. Scoring 11 points in total, ProCon.org was found to be the most useful website. Aclu.org scored slightly lower than ProCon.org, achieving a total score of 10 points. Though ProCon.org and Aclu.org have high scores, it would be prudent to confirm their information with other sources as they did not reach the score for an excellent source of information. Vaccineresistancemovement.org scored the least, with 6 points. This means that it would be inappropriate to cite information from the website in a research paper or academic project. Overall, human services professionals must ensure the information they use in the course of their work is accurate, current, and provable.

Evaluating Social Policy Websites Using the CRAAP Method: Implications for Human Services Professionals

In the line of their work, human service professionals rely on information from a variety of sources, including books, journal articles, agency publications, as well as the internet. The internet has particularly become a common source of information for human services professionals. Nonetheless, given the high possibility of information inaccuracy in the online environment, human services professionals must carefully evaluate the credibility of internet information. The CRAAP tool provides an appropriate framework for assessing the credibility of information obtained from websites. CRAAP is an acronym for currency, reliability, authority, accuracy, and purpose (Gettysburg College, 2016). As human services professionals deal with policy information relating to a wide range of issues affecting the public, this tool is important for ensuring that internet information is correct and reliable. The aim of this paper is to describe the CRAAP method and demonstrate its usefulness in analysing selected policy-oriented websites. First, a more detailed description of the CRAAP method is provided, clearly highlighting the scoring strategy used to evaluate the websites. Next, three policy-oriented websites are identified and analysed using the CRAAP tool, providing specific examples from each website. Finally, implications for human services professionals are provided.

CRAAP Method and Scoring Strategy

The CRAAP tool provides five criteria for evaluating website information: Currency, Reliability, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose (Gettysburg College, 2016). The criterion of currency means how up-to-date the information is. Policy information keeps on changing, hence the need for human service professionals to have current information. Reliability means how dependable, accurate, and error-free the information is. Reliability is also determined by the consistency of the information with other sources as well as the availability of links to sources of data. Determining the authority of the author is also important. This involves establishing whether the author's name is identifiable and what makes them an expert in the subject matter. It is crucial to establish the authority of not only the author, but also the organisation behind the information. In other words, who owns the website, and are they reputable? For human services professionals, reliability and authority are vital for avoiding misinforming the public. Finally, the criterion of purpose entails focusing on the content of the website, specifically assessing its motive, objectivity, conflict of interest, as well as bias. The human services field is concerned with a broad array of social issues, hence the need for locating objective and unbiased information.

Based on these criteria, the usefulness of a website can be determined by ranking the website on each criterion on a predefined scale. In this case, a scale of 0-3 was used, with 0 representing total lack of currency, reliability, authority, and purpose; and 3 representing sufficient or acceptable currency, reliability, authority, and purpose. Scores for the five criteria were then added to determine the overall score for each website. The maximum score a website can score is 15 points and the least is 0 points. The scoring strategy is summarised in the table below.

Criteria/Score

0

1

2

3

Currency

The date the site was created or updated has not been indicated

The date exceeds 3 years

The date is within the last 3 years

The date is less than 2 years

Reliability

Links to sources of the information not provided

Source of information provided in general, but no specific links

Links to sources are provided

Links to sources are provided. Information is consistent with other sources

Authority of author

Content suggests author is a student or not an expert

Author is not identified and credentials not provided

Author identified but credentials not provided

Credentials are provided and suggest the author is an expert

Authority of organisation

Website owned by an individual without affiliation to an institution

Domain name is. com,. org, or unknown

A reputable organisation (e.g. professional association or museum)

Government agency or domain is. edu

Purpose

Purpose is self-centred or excessive advertising

Purpose is to sell or promote something, or provide a biased opinion

Provides factual information. Unbalanced/ some bias.

Supports scholarly information. Balanced/unbiased coverage.

Total Score

Score for currency + Score for reliability + Score for authority of author + Score for authority of organisation + Score for purpose

NB: 12-15 points -- Excellent source for research

8-11 points -- Good source for a research paper or an academic project. Verification must be done with other sources.

4-7 points -- Useful for casual projects. Should not be cited for a research paper or project.

0.3 points -- Questionable source

Adapted from http://qakseclib.weebly.com/uploads/2/6/7/8/26787452/webeval.pdf

Website Analysis

The Vaccine Resistance Movement (http://vaccineresistancemovement.org/?page_id=9788)

The mission of the website is to rally the public against vaccines.

Criteria/Score

0

1

2

3

Currency

The date the site was created or updated has not been indicated

Reliability

Links to sources are provided (e.g. World Health Organisation [WHO] and United Nations.

Authority of author

Author identified but credentials not provided

Authority of organisation

Domain name is. org

Purpose

Purpose is to persuade (e.g. persuades the public to resist vaccines)

Total score

6 points

Pro-Con (http://www.procon.org/)

The mission of the website is to provide information relating to controversial issues such as gun control and immigration.

Criteria/Score

0

1

2

3

Currency

The date is less than 2 years (last updated in 2017)

Reliability

Links to sources are provided (e.g. journal articles and government agencies such Food and Drug Administration [FDA]).

Authority of author

Author identified but credentials not provided

Authority of organisation

Domain name is.org

Purpose

Information supports scholarly research, clearly providing balanced coverage (pros and cons) for every social issue.

Total score

11 points

ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/)

The mission of the website is to promote respect for individual rights and liberties as enshrined in the U.S. constitution.

Criteria/Score

0

1

2

3

Currency

The date is less than 2 years (last updated in 2017)

Reliability

Links to sources are provided (e.g. journal articles and government publications)

Authority of author

Author identified but credentials not provided

Authority of organisation

Domain name is. org