Verlinden’s Tests of Evidence
When creating an argument or analyzing an argument, the presence of evidence is not enough: One must analyze the strength and validity of the evidence. Whenever you look at any piece of evidence or citation, consider the following six areas when evaluating a source (Verlinden, 2005):
Source Credibility
– Does source have the appropriate background?
– Does the source have the required knowledge?
– Does the source have sufficient expertise?
Source Bias
-Does the source represent a particular interest or perspective?
-Does the source claim objectivity?
-Does the source have preconceived ideas that may color their judgment?
-What “invisible” biases might exist (how does culture or upbringing influence it)?
Recency
-Does the evidence come from the appropriate time period?
Internal Consistency
-Are there any contradictory statements in the source?
Completeness
-Is enough information provided?
-Does the original source provide some background information?
Corroboration (a.k.a. external consistency)
-Do other qualified sources agree with the evidence?
Source: Verlinden, J. (2005) Critical Thinking and Everyday Argument. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth
The CRAAP Test
The CRAAP test is a handy acronym you can use to evaluate websites or other sources:
-Currency: Similar to the recency test from Verlinden, is the source current (where appropriate)
-Relevance: How closely tied to your subject is this source? Is it tangential or not?
-Authority: Is the source qualified to speak/write on this topic? (similar to “source credibility” from Verlinden)
-Accuracy: How reliable and truthful is this information? (This combines internal and external consistency from Verlinden)
-Purpose: Why does this source exist in the first place? What’s the motivation behind it?
