Evaluation of Sources - 150 pts

Researchers crafting a reliable and relevant research project must always carefully evaluate information before
they decide to use it. In this assignment, then, you will utilize your information literacy skills in order to locate
and critique a variety of sources that may be applicable to your Bibliographic Essay.

 In particular, you will examine a total of six sources that fall into the each of the following categories; you
can use the sources you have found already just evaluate them with the criteria below.

 Scholarly Articles- 2
 Websites- 2
 Book- 1
 Social Media of your choice -1

 *Please try to include sources in the formats listed above.  I know that some of you have topics where that will
be an issue just shoot me an email if that is the case.  For example, you might not have any books for your
topic.*

After locating your sources, compose an APA or MLA citation for each source. Next, evaluate each source
based on the criteria listed below.  I have provided questions to consider for each criterion but you don't need to
answer every question for every criterion.  Please provide at least 3 sentences for each criterion.

1. RELEVANCY:  Does the source relate to your topic and how? Does it support or refute your topic.  Keep in
mind that it might not match every point you make but instead may support one or two parts of you research
question very well.  Also, if you have several articles that already provide the same information then it may be
redundant and not a good source. You might also scan the article or book and looking at the introduction,
abstract, table of contents, conclusion for information that will support your topic.  We do this scanning without
even thinking about it especially with books. 

2. ACCURACY: Do you detect any biases, unsupported claims, dubious support, or faulty reasoning in this
source? If so, provide specific examples and explain how they affect the value of the source. What information
does the author give as support? Where does the data come from?  Are there citations and references to where
data came from? Is the information presented as fact or opinion?  Is the information written free of errors?

3. CURRENCY: Is the source up-to-date (no more than five years old)? How, if at all, does the age of the
source affect its relevancy? Explain. Is there evidence of newly added or updated information in the topic? If
the information is dated is it still relevant.  

4. AUTHORITY: Does the author have the experience and/or credentials necessary to be considered an
authority on the subject?  Where do they work?  What qualifies the author to write about the topic? What
organization published the article? Explain.

5. PURPOSE: - What is the purpose of the article? To inform, persuade, sell or entertain? Is the article
presented from multiple points of view? Does the author omit important facts or data? Is the information clearly
presented? Who is the intended audience?

6. RATING: On a scale of 1-5, where 1 means “poor” and 5 means “excellent”, how would you rate the overall
quality of this source? Briefly outline the rationale behind your rating.
Example of formatting for the assignment:

Source 1 – Scholarly Article

Ceci, M. W., & Kumar, V. K. (2016). A correlational study of creativity, happiness,
motivation, and stress from creative pursuits. Journal of Happiness Studies: An
Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 17(2), 609–626. https://doi-
org.emporiastate.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9615-y
1. Relevancy: This source links together creativity and happiness. However, it also touches on creative pursuits.
Happiness and life satisfaction and success are the two effects of creativity that I am most interested in studying
so the article seems wholly relevant to my research.
2. Accuracy: The study is purely correlational which does not give me the most concrete information on the topic.
It is also possible that the authors of the article have bias towards creative individuals or certain measures of
creativity such as self-assessments. The source seems decently unbiased but a little more delving into the
authors could shed more light on that.
3. Currency: This source is from 2016. This is not within five years but for measures of creativity and happiness,
things that have always been present, it seems totally alright to me. However, this does not account to changes
in the workspace or social climate since the pandemic so some of the data may be different if it were recollected
today.
4. Authority: Kumar has a marketing and business background and the second author I was unable to find
information on Michael Ceci. Because of this the authority for the source is called into question, at least in my
mind. The Journal of Happiness Studies is a peer reviewed journal but I did not get a clear answer on the article
submission process. It seems it may be possible to pay to have articles processed and published.
5. Purpose: The article set out to inform about creative capacity and personality traits that correlated with it. The
findings are clearly presented and does not seem to omit data or interpret anything with intent. The intended
audience is likely psychology or business students, anyone working in an industrial/organizational field.
6. Rating: I would rate this source a 3. The findings are great, and the purpose of the source is easily defined and it
does its job. I do however question its authority.
Source 2 – Book
P., S. M. E. (2017). Authentic happiness using the new positive psychology to realize.
your potential for lasting fulfillment. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Citation

1. Relevancy: This book by Dr. Seligman talks about keys to happiness and its relationship to a relatively new field
of psychology called “positive psychology”. There are quite a few parts of the book that talk about creativity as
an effect of being happy and creativity as a cause for satisfaction or achievement. The book as a whole may not
be completely relevant, that being that positive psychology does not have a direct link with creativity. But other
sources link happiness and life satisfaction with creativity, and this book outlines the effects of that relationship.
2. Accuracy: The book is largely written from Dr. Seligman’s point of view and has many anecdotal moments and
stories from his life. Because of this frame that the book is written in it does not have hard data the way that my
scholarly articles do. It does however, have real world applications and information.
3. Currency: The book was written in 2002. This is actually a decently long time ago using the timeline of modern
psychology as a reference frame. However, the real world applications are largely universal and center around
activities we almost all encounter in our lives and certain archetypes of people or mindsets that we encounter.
4. Authority: Martin Seligman is a highly respected psychologist in the field. He was also an APA president, which
he talks about in the book. Dr. Seligman is also regarded as one of the pioneers of positive psychology.
5. Purpose: The purpose of the book is to entertain but also to inform about the burgeoning field of psychology. I
would say that Dr. Seligman does a fantastic job of this, it is one of the only books that I have ever used in a
course that I have read thoroughly.
6. Rating: I rate this source a 4 on the 1-5 scale. The book is amazing, the purpose, authority, and accuracy of it are
all great for my purpose. However, the currency and relevance are not perfect. I would prefer this book written
again after the popularization of the internet and social media. It is also not a source that focuses specifically on
creativity but more the causes and effects of it.
Source 3 – Website
Boyles, M. (2022, January 25). The importance of creativity in business: HBS Online.
Business Insights Blog. Retrieved March 12, 2023, from
https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/importance-of-creativity-in-business

1. Relevancy: This is possibly the most direct source I found outside of databases. Creativity in business is a
common study in industrial/organizational psychology. There are also strong correlations between job security
and job/life satisfaction.
2. Accuracy: The article has some interesting takes. It talks about the two worlds of business and how those two
connect and are impacted by creativity in the workplace. More importantly it states that creativity is an in-
demand skill in many industries.
3. Currency: This was written in 2022 which makes it my most recent source. This is important for a business article
in my opinion because the way that firms were ran during the pandemic changed dramatically.
4. Authority: I did not find much information on Michael Boyles as an author but he has written other similar
articles for the Harvard Business School. The Harvard Business School itself, however, has a reputation and
authority for simply being a Harvard program.
5. Purpose: The purpose of the website is to inform people on the importance of creativity in employment and its
use in different fields.
6. Rating: I rate this source a 3. It has some relevance and is current, but I am not sure how to directly tie it in with
the rest of my research.
Source 4 – Scholarly Article
Tan, C. S., Chin, X. Y., Chng, S. T., Lee, J., & Ooi, C. S. (2022). Perceived Social
Support Increases Creativity: Experimental Evidence. International journal of
environmental research and public health, 19(18), 11841.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811841
1. Relevancy: This article is more geared towards the causes of creativity from a nurture perspective. There is a sort
of intuitive argument to make for creativity coming genetically but it is harder to figure out what in our
environment facilitates creativity. This source seemed vital to me as I continued my research.
2. Accuracy: The correlations that the study find speak for themselves. The authors of the study also have written
other articles that I looked through on similar topics. It seems that the data is reliable and that there is some
findings happening that are relevant to the field.
3. Currency: This is a 2022 article which increases its reliability to me. It also validates my thinking that this is an
important line of research.
4. Authority: Because these authors are doing a lot of work in the field and being published in peer reviewed
journals their authority is unquestionable. Chee-Seng Tan specializes in creativity and well-being which lends
more authority to their research.
5. Purpose: The purpose of the study is to inform people (and maybe businesses) about the positive benefits to
supporting creative pursuits. It also sets up a framework for a causal relationship between creativity and social
support where there previously was just inferential or correlation.
6. Rating: I rate this source a 5. It seems to hold up on all pillars of viable research.
Source 5 – Website
Ritchie, D. (2022, August 16). The importance of creativity in the workplace.
Entrepreneur. Retrieved March 12, 2023, from
https://www.entrepreneur.com/growth-strategies/the-importance-of-creativity-in-
the-workplace/433525
1. Relevancy: This source is incredibly similar to the Harvard Business School source. It talks about many of the
same things. However, it takes feels like it takes more of a salesman approach. It has interesting things to say
but is more geared towards people looking for jobs or to be an entrepreneur.
2. Accuracy: There are many things in the article that are just seem to be claimed with no basis. Then other things
are quoted and properly sourced. It is not a bad article or poorly written (thought it has some glaring typos) but
it is not something I would typically use if I was writing an essay.
3. Currency: This was written in 2022 and references modern business executives.
4. Authority: While the article is written from a place of authority, the message is delivered very informally. Deanna
Ritchie has an English Literature degree and writes many articles. She definitely has some knowhow but the
website seemed very informal.
5. Purpose: The purpose of the article is to inform people that are looking to start their own businesses or move up
in their work. It has some information that seems valuable and that is backed up by research. Other points made
are supported by anecdotes.
6. Rating: Given that the Harvard Business School article is written on similar material but carries more weight to
me, I give this source a 1.
Source 6 – Social Media
YouTube. (2007, January 6). Do schools kill creativity? | sir Ken Robinson. YouTube.
Retrieved March 12, 2023, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=iG9CE55wbtY
1. Relevancy: This speech talks more about the environment that facilitates creativity, building upon the book on
positive psychology. Sir Ken Robinson talks on the squandering of the potential in children. The speech is laden
with comedy but tells a very serious message about a future that we are unable to know for certain.
2. Accuracy: Most of the beginning of the speech is stories and jokes that lead up to the content. This makes me
think that because of the medium of the speech (TED talk) there is some pressure to appeal to a wider audience
than you may normally speak to. I feel that there may be a more concise and objective version of the speech
that was given.
3. Currency: The talk was given in June of 2006, making it a little bit dated. However, the school system and the
nature of children have not changed much. The expected output of public education has not really changed, nor
its intended purpose.
4. Authority: Sir Ken Robinson is a well respected author, speaker, and entertainer in the field of entertainment. He
has been writing on education for decades and has a deep understanding of education, intelligence, and
creativity. He seems to have authority to speak on the topic of creativity and the educational systems of the
world.
5. Purpose: The purpose of the talk is to inform people of the shortcomings of the educational system. The talk is
also meant to be entertaining but eye-opening. The talk considers stories and viewpoints of many people and
explains everything well.
6. Rating: This source is a 4 out of 5 for me. It is great and I can connect it with some other sources but it does not
contain much data cited research (as speeches tend to do). So on its own it is not perfect but if I were to conduct
some research along the lines of what Ken is talking about I would probably turn this source into an entire essay.

Citation Examples

Citation of a website MLA 8

The author’s name White, Lori. “The Newest Fad in People Helping People:
The title of the article or page Little Free Pantries.” Upworthy, Cloud Tiger Media, 3 Aug.
The title of the website 2016,
*The name of the publisher www.upworthy.com/the-newest-fad-in-people-helping-
The date the page or site was published people-little-free-pantries?g=2&c=hpstream.
 The URL

*Notes:
On the publisher:
Only include the name of the publisher when it
differs from the name of the website.

Citation of a book MLA 7

Last, First M. Book Title. City of Publication: Publisher, James, Henry. The Ambassadors. Rockville: Serenity,
Year Published. Print. 2009. Print.

Ebook accessed in database

Lichter, S. Robert, and Stanley Rothman. Environmental
Last, First M. Book Title. City: Publisher, Year Published. Cancer-A Political Disease?. New Haven, CT: Yale UP,
Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed. 1999. eBook Collection. Web. 1 Apr. 2013.

Citation of Social Media MLA 7

Last name, First name (Username). “Tweet Message.” Timberlake, Justin (jtimberlake). “USA! USA!!.” 16 June
Date posted, Time Posted. Tweet. 2014, 8:05 PM. Tweet.