This paper demonstrates the application of the CRAAP test — a framework for assessing source currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose — to a specific source on police interrogation tactics and false confessions. The student evaluates Nesterak's (2014) article from The Psych Report, concluding that it meets the criteria of the CRAAP test despite not being a peer-reviewed study. The paper also reflects on the broader challenge of information and media literacy, including the prevalence of fake journals, misleading websites, and the ongoing critical thinking required to navigate academic research effectively.
The CRAAP test is a useful acronym designed to help people develop information literacy and media literacy. It asks the researcher to evaluate a source across five dimensions: currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose. This exercise applies the CRAAP test to a source related to a research question in criminal psychology — specifically, information on police interrogation tactics and false confessions.
Source evaluated: Nesterak, E. (2014). Coerced to confess. The Psych Report. 21 Oct, 2014.
1. Currency: The Nesterak (2014) source is approximately three years old, making it fairly current. Because the topic of false confessions and criminal justice is not as time-sensitive as, for example, research on an emerging technology, three years is considered sufficiently current for this research.
2. Relevance: The Nesterak (2014) source is directly related to the research topic on false confessions and police interrogation. Because it is written for a general audience, it may not carry the same weight as an experimental study; however, not all sources in a research project need to be experimental studies. It is also helpful to see how others are conceptualizing false confessions within a broader public discourse.
3. Authority: The author is also the editor of The Psych Report, the publication in which the article appears. This fact alone does not discredit the source. Although The Psych Report is not a peer-reviewed journal, it is a publication of a non-profit organization that disallows commercial advertising and functions essentially as a behavioral science magazine. In the article, the author interviews a professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, which is part of the City University of New York system and therefore a credible and reliable source of information. This article is not as strong a source as one appearing in a peer-reviewed journal with experimental evidence, but it is still authoritative.
4. Accuracy: This source is backed by a substantial list of references that substantiate the claims made. On this basis, it can be considered accurate.
5. Purpose: The purpose of this source is to inform and provide information to the reader. The intended audience is a general readership.
Overall, this source passes the CRAAP test. It is important to apply this method of evaluating sources because of the volume of unreliable material available on the internet. It often takes time and effort to investigate who the author is and what the publication represents. Many sources appear official, educational, or associated with an academic journal when they are not. Predatory and fake journals exist online, and it is important to research the publication itself as well as the evidence it presents.
This week has been productive, as I have grown more comfortable with the research process and with applying the CRAAP test to every source. I have gained insight into the effort required to be thorough in academic research, including verifying the sources of claims and seeking corroboration for evidence. I was surprised by the number of fake journals on the internet, and disappointed by those who place "PhD" after their name and expect that credential alone to confer credibility. Similarly, I was struck by how many websites attempt to appear official or scholarly without meeting the standards of either.
"Reflections on fake journals and lifelong media literacy"
You’re 83% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.