Critical Skills: Fact-checking

Overview

Fact-checking refers to the analysis of purported facts to ensure that they are factual, meaning that they are accurate, reliable, up-to-date, and fair. Fact-checking is an important part of research in everyday life, academic settings, and countless professional fields. Researchers use the process of fact-checking to cull usable information from information that should be avoided.

Modern technology and communications have created much more information than has ever existed and have made this information more easily accessible than ever before. People of all walks of life can use online resources, books, publications, television, radio, and other sources to potentially access billions of items of information.

Much of this information can be classified as either fact or opinion. A fact is information that can be proven true. It may be well-documented, verified by experiments, or able to be measured. Some basic facts are that sixteen ounces equal one pound and World War I ended in 1918. Alternately, an opinion is a person’s belief, which cannot be verified in factually. For example, many people hold the opinion that summer is more pleasant than winter, but there is no way to definitively prove this.

Researchers generally seek facts to use in their work. Facts can help to prove a researcher’s thesis statement, provide supporting details, or build support for a cause. In most cases, researchers can differentiate facts from opinions. However, not all information that is presented as factual is what it purports to be. Careful researchers must approach questionable facts with care and apply a method of analyzing their veracity and value. Only true facts that pass examination should be used.

Inexperienced researchers may accept the information they find at face value, meaning that they assume it is factual, fair, timely, and accurate. This may open the researchers to being deceived and unknowingly passing along misleading or inaccurate data. For this reason, skepticism is a great benefit to researchers. Skepticism refers to an inclination to doubt or question what one is told, rather than automatically accepting it.

Similarly, critical-thinking skills are a must for strong fact-checking. Researchers cannot safely abandon their own prior knowledge, experiences, and reasoning skills when they approach a new source. Rather, they must be willing to think carefully about the new information they encounter and challenge it if they feel it may not be reliable. They must also be able to retain sound reasoning even in emotionally charged situations and keep an open mind even when faced with data that seems to contradict their own beliefs.

Core Skills & Competencies

The process of fact-checking may start at the very beginning of a research project. Researchers can save time by selecting sources that are likely to be valid, thus reducing the amount of questionable information that will have to be examined later. Several criteria can help researchers determine whether a source of information is likely to be useful or dubious and should be approached cautiously or bypassed altogether.

One of the first criterion to consider is the source of the information being analyzed. In the digital age, practically anybody can claim to be an expert and publish any type of claims or purported facts with ease. Determining who is truly qualified and who is merely pretending to be can help to separate worthy and unworthy sources of information. The identity of the information’s creator as well as its host, such as a website, can provide important clues as to the information’s value.

Generally, researchers should seek out the most authoritative sources available. That means looking for the work of acknowledged experts in a field. Experts may have extensive personal experience with the topic being researched and credentials such as degrees, awards, or prior publications. People merely pretending to be experts may have no real substantive background in the topic or experience in another field with little relevance to the one in question. For example, a physician might be highly credentialed to discuss human health but may have no knowledge at all of American history or political trends.

Another reason to be careful with sources is that many creators and hosts take sides on various issues. They may present accurate facts but are also likely to use skewed information or perspectives to help support their own side or belittle opposing sides. This is an example of biased information, or information that is manipulated in some way to benefit the person who is presenting it. For example, a website known to support a particular political figure may overemphasize the positive deeds of that politician or overlook the good works of candidates from other parties.

Another major criterion that may be checked early in research is the date when the information was created or published. Most sources, whether in print or online, give some indication of the age of their material. In general, researchers seeking the most factual material should look for the most up-to-date sources available. Older sources may contain information that was perfectly acceptable when it was published but has since become out-of-date or obsolete.

For instance, a book about airplanes published in 1920 might boast about new models capable of reaching speeds of 100 miles per hour. A book on the subject from the 2020s, however, would include updated information about aircraft that can travel at more than 2,000 miles per hour. Both books are accurate for their time, but the newer book is more relevant to modern research. Similarly, older books may use scientific theories or cultural mores that have since been revised or replaced. These tomes may still be of significant historical value but would not likely be the best choice for up-to-date insights.

Choosing the best available sources of information generally makes subsequent fact-checking less challenging. However, even high-quality sources may contain questionable material, and careful researchers must remain alert to this possibility. Some content creators with hidden agendas might be able to subtly manipulate facts to support their own beliefs in ways that are not immediately evident. Even normally upstanding sources may present incorrect information because of simple human error. In these cases, researchers must remain vigilant and view each item of information as potentially uncertain.

Researchers have many defenses against hard-to-find inaccuracies. One defense is simple intuition: If a claim seems hard to believe, it may indeed be wrong. Researchers coming across claims that seem outlandish should pause to check other sources. Authors may cite their own sources of information, which researchers can double-check. Researchers may also consult other sources on the same topic, looking for confirmation for or against the unlikely-sounding claim. Some online research experts recommend keeping multiple browser windows open at the same time; the researcher uses one window for the main source, and other windows to search for more information about individual claims. This is called “lateral reading” and is used to examine questionable claims.

Research & Theory

The sheer quantity of information available to people has increased at an unprecedented rate in modern times. While this may be seen as a triumph of human innovation, it also poses serious risks because a significant proportion of this information is inaccurate, misleading, or downright malicious.

Hot-button social issues and bitter partisan politics have contributed to a sharp rise in rhetoric that is meant to favor one position and attack other positions. At the same time, the increasing use of social media and twenty-four-hour news stations has reduced many arguments to hashtags and soundbites intended to stir up emotions rather than appeal to reason.

By the 2020s, impassioned debates have questioned the very nature of truth in the modern world. The idea of “fake news,” or purposely misleading claims promoted as facts but meant only to praise allies or slander opponents, has caused widespread disillusionment with the media and information industries. In some cases, it has caused people to stop trying to expand their thinking or search for accurate facts.

To stabilize this situation, many organizations have founded fact-checking services, such as Factcheck.org, Politifact, and Snopes. These sites are meant to be fair, nonpartisan tools for researching claims and purported facts to determine whether they are to be believed. FactCheck.org, a service provided by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, offers a wide variety of fact-checks in many areas of media. These include “SciCheck,” evaluating science-based claims; sections dedicated to Internet rumors and Facebook memes; and an analysis of political ads and the special-interest groups behind them.

Bibliography

“Fact Checking and Digital Responsibility.” Utah State Board of Education, 2022, www.schools.utah.gov/ulead/factchecking. Accessed 21 June 2022.

“Fact Checking.” RMIT University, 23 Aug. 2021, rmit.libguides.com/factchecking/medialiteracy. Accessed 21 June 2022.

“Fake News: Develop Your Fact-Checking Skills: Fact Checking.” Benedictine University, 8 Apr. 2022, researchguides.ben.edu/c.php?g=608230&p=4219925. Accessed 21 June 2022.

“Fake News: Develop Your Fact-Checking Skills: Tips & Tricks.” Benedictine University, 8 Apr. 2022, researchguides.ben.edu/c.php?g=608230&p=4378839. Accessed 21 June 2022.

“Knowledge Is Power: Fighting Misinformation, Disinformation, and Junk News.” Washington University in St. Louis University Libraries, 11 Jan. 2022, libguides.wustl.edu/evaluate‗news/checker. Accessed 21 June 2022.

“Media Literacy and Fact Checking.” Wright State University, 8 June 2022, guides.libraries.wright.edu/factcheck. Accessed 21 June 2022.

Upson, Matt. “News/Media Literacy and Fact-Checking: Fact-Checking.” Edmon Low Library / Oklahoma State University, 2022, info.library.okstate.edu/newsliteracy. Accessed 21 June 2022.