3.0a More on Scholarly and Research Publications

If an author is relying on others' research, then they must identify that work just like you do (watch for footnotes or other references). If an author is reporting original research, then they have an obligation to describe their methodology, or how they went about collecting and analyzing data. If the author is presenting arguments of any kind, you will also want to consider the soundness of the logic and also any bias that the author has: whether the author considers any information that weakens or contradicts the argument, and whether the author fairly represents all sides.

The easiest way to judge expertise is to check the credentials of the author. Does the author have any relevant education? Does the author have any experience that would have allowed special access to information? Has the author published other books and articles on the subject? If so, you have reason to accept the author as an expert. Fortunately, many publications will give some indication of authors' credentials.

The first review of an author's work is a part of the editing process that any reputable publisher requires. The publisher's livelihood may be threatened if they publish false or misleading information, or even just sloppy research. So you will want to stick to reputable publishers. You will learn to identify these as you gain more experience.

Many sources are further reviewed after publication, or at least commented on by other authors. Such reviews and comments are valuable guides to good sources. Background sources that recommend titles can be a helpful means of review. Reference librarians can help you locate other review materials.