Things to consider when analysing sources
We need to determine if a source is accurate, relevant, authentic, reliable and representative before we
decide if we can use it.
Accurate
Evidence is accurate if it is factual. To define that, we ask:
■ Is this evidence corroborated? That is, do several sources have the same facts?
■ Does other evidence contradict this source? If so, why do you trust this one, and not the other?
■ Is opinion presented as fact?
If you have a newspaper article in which a parliament official is quoted as having said that the
economy is thriving, and this can be confirmed in Hansard, the official transcript of Parliament’s
proceedings, the report is an accurate source about what he said, even if the economy seems to be
wavering. It may not even be what he really thinks; he might be talking up the economy, hoping to
avoid a further downturn. Be precise when you are commenting on accuracy.
■ Is there evidence of bias and/or prejudice? A speaker or writer may be biased in favour of, or
biased against something; likewise he or she may be prejudiced for or against something. Any of
these may make the account less accurate than it should be by leaving out important information.
■ Is there evidence of exaggeration?
■ Was the person who produced the source an eyewitness, or was the report based on hearsay or
rumour?
Relevant
Your essay and assignments will have strict word limits. You cannot afford to include something which is
factual and attention-grabbing, but not relevant to the particular inquiry. If it does not help to answer the
question, it is not relevant.
Authentic
Photographs
Photos can be altered by cropping (slicing out part of the picture), retouching, or stitching photos
together in a collage. These techniques were used before PhotoShop was developed but are more
common now. Look at where they were published to judge their authenticity.
Text
■ Texts may be changed for legitimate reasons, such as translation from one language to another.
The translator may however, change the meaning of the text, accidentally or intentionally, by
choosing a word or phrase that misrepresents the intent in the original. You are not expected to
learn German during the exam so you can correct the errors, however you should acknowledge
the possibility of a mistake by noting the source is a translation.
Holland Park State High School
Analysing Sources
Dec 2013
■ In some cases, words may have changed meaning over time (An 18th Century mouse and a 21st
Century mouse may mean two completely different things.)
■ In some sources, words or complete paragraphs may be absent. A text should have an ellipse
[. . .] to show were material has been omitted, and this should not alter the original intent. [E.g.
the Bible tells us “Thou shalt …kill”] if the text doesn’t seem to follow logically, question the
authenticity of the source.
Reliable
If a source is reliable, we can, without checking it extensively against other sources, depend upon its
accuracy. Published academic books are reliable because the author’s reputation is at risk and he or she
will want to be meticulous in presenting the findings. These will be referenced and a bibliography provided.
Publishers will generally send the manuscript to other experts in the field to check its reliability before they
decide to publish it. An editor and a proof-reader will check the pages before it goes to press. After
publication, other specialists will read and write reviews of the book (peer review) and search for and find
any faults with the author’s methods and findings.
Contrast that process with a uni student putting his assignment up on a website. There will be no expert
review, no proof-reading. It may turn out that after time consuming investigating, the website is reliable;
however your time would have been better spent searching through a good textbook or specialist history
book.
Somewhere in between are all the other sources you will be dealing with in this course. Some questions
that might help you analyse the reliability of a source are:
■ What was the purpose?
■ Who was the intended audience?
o
o
o
o
Public speech; it will be scrutinised, experts will see it; opponents will hear it, etc.
Speeches made in Parliament cannot be used in any court actions.
Personal journal or diary may be more honest as the writer doesn’t think anyone will read it,
or it may be more emotional, private gripes, blowing off steam, totally irresponsible.
Newspapers have been called the ‘rough draft of history’. They may contain inaccuracies
due to the pressure to get the paper out on time; a later edition or the next day’s paper
may have amendments and later still, letters to the editor may point out mistakes.
■ How spontaneous and emotional does the source seem? How researched, how well planned and
how rational?
■ Where did the author/speaker get the information from?
o
Hearsay, rumours and unattributed sources reduce the reliability of the source – urban
myths thrive.
Representative
A source is considered representative if it accords with the most of the other sources dealing with the time
and topic, and if it presents the majority view. However, history has been told from the standpoint of
‘dead white males’ because for much of the time they were fundamentally the only ones who were given
Holland Park State High School
Analysing Sources
Dec 2013
an education and became wealthy enough to have the leisure to write books and articles. In recent times
an attempt has been made to redress this imbalance by recognizing and publishing the viewpoints of
marginalised peoples – ethnic minorities, women, or working classes, for example.
Some sources have lasted because they had outrageous views which made popular reading at the time.
Currently, there is a group of “historians” who deny that the Holocaust ever happened. They are white
males, but not representative even of other white males.
Identify the standpoint of the speaker or writer of the source by reading and understanding the reference
information and then re-stating it in your own words.
Examples of sources that are often the most credible:
■ Official government websites
■ Institutional sites that represent universities, regulatory agencies, governing bodies, and respected
organisations with specific expertise (e.g., the Mayo Clinic)
■ Peer-reviewed journals
■ Reputable news sources
Examples of sources that are often less credible:
■ Blogs
■ Web forums
■ Individual or business websites
■ Materials published by an entity that may have an ulterior motive
Factors to consider
Less reliable
Possibly reliable
Most reliable
Type of source
Unfamiliar website
Published material
Official websites,
institution sites,
academic journals
Author’s background
Uncredited
Educated on topic
Expert in the field
Date published
None
Out dated
Recently revised
Depth of review
Controversial reviews
Good public response;
general approval
Peer-reviewed by
reliable sources
Sources cited
None
Credible sources
Citations referencing
other well-cited works
Objectivity
Clearly biased
Sponsored source
Balanced, neutral
Holland Park State High School
Analysing Sources
Dec 2013