17 SIFT: Four Moves

We live in the information age. Information is everywhere. In fact, information overload is cited as a problem in which we are bombarded with so much information that we sometimes feel paralyzed and can’t make decisions. The person who is information literate, however, combats information overload by understanding what their information needs are, where to get useful information, and how to evaluate the reliability and validity of that information.

There are many sources for getting information. There are blogs, books, documentaries, scholarly articles, magazines, TV shows, social media platforms, and so on. Much of the information we encounter comes to us through online sources. Mike Caulfield, in Web Literacy for Student Fact Checkers. identifies four moves for evaluating these sources and the claims they make.

What people need most when confronted with a claim which may not be 100% true is things they can do to get closer to the truth. They need something Caulfield decided to call “moves.”

Moves accomplish intermediate goals in the fact-checking process.  They are associated with specific tactics. Here are the moves:

  • (S)top: Check your emotions. If a claim causes strong emotion — anger, glee, pride, vindication — and that emotion causes you to share a “fact” with others, STOP. You must fact-check this claim. In addition, if you get lost, or hit dead ends, or find yourself going down an increasingly confusing rabbit hole during your investigation, STOP. Back up and start over knowing what you know now. You’re likely to take a more informed path with different search terms and better decisions. In addition,
  • (I)nvestigate the source: Read what other people say about the source (publication, author, etc.). The truth is in the network.
  • (F)ind better coverage: Look around to see if someone else has already fact-checked the claim or provided a synthesis of research or provided coverage that gives more useful information about the claim or the context of the claim.
  • (T)race claims, quotes, and media back to the original context: Most web content is not original. Get to the original source to understand the trustworthiness of the information.

In general, you can try these moves in any order, and at each stage if you find success your work might be done.

When you first see a claim you want to share, STOP. Why do you want to share it? How do you know the claim is true?

Investigate the source. What do they say about themselves? Are they a satirical site like The Onion? If yes then you know the claim isn’t true. Do they call themselves a news site? What do other people say about the source? Are they known for printing true stories? How do you know? You need to spend some time finding out more about this source. Is it trustworthy? How do you know?  (Investigate the source).

When you first see a claim you want to check, one move might be to look to see if other sites have investigated the claim. Who are those other sites? Do they say the same thing as the source you originally found?  (Find better coverage).

If you can’t find better coverage on the claim, the real work begins. Try  to trace the claim to the source. If the claim is about research, can you find the journal it appeared in? If the claim is about an event, can you find the news publication in which it was originally reported? Where do the links in the story you’re reading lead to? (Trace claims, quotes, and media back to the original source).

If at any point you fail — if the source you find is not trustworthy, complex questions emerge, or the claim turns out to have multiple sub-claims — then you circle back, and start a new process. Rewrite the claim. Try a new search of fact-checking sites, or find an alternate source. (Stop).

We should say a bit more about strong emotion. Above all, it’s these claims that you must fact-check. This comic from The Oatmeal explains why we feel strong emotions when we encounter certain kinds of information.

Why? Because you’re already likely to check things you know are important to get right, and you’re predisposed to analyze things that put you an intellectual frame of mind. But things that make you angry or overjoyed, well… our record as humans are not good with these things.

Our normal inclination is to ignore verification needs when we strongly react to content, and researchers have found that content that causes strong emotions (both positive and negative) spreads the fastest through our social networks. Savvy activists and advocates utilize this flaw of ours, getting past our filters by posting material that goes straight to our heart.

Building new habits requires that we identify “pegs” on which to hang those habits. So use your emotions as a reminder — as a trigger for your fact-checking habit. If every time content you want to share makes you feel rage, or laughter, or ridicule, or, sorry to say, a heartwarming buzz — spend 30 seconds fact-checking  you’ll do pretty well.

This chapter was adapted from Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers by Mike Caulfield.

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Tackling Wicked Problems by Members of the TWP Community is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book