Rethinking Authority and Bias: Modifying the CRAAP Test to Promote Critical Thinking about Marginalized Information

Abstract

Many information evaluation methods include values like objectivity and authority that imply that only traditional scholarly sources are acceptable for inclusion in scholarly work. Although this is often a desirable outcome, it can bias research to exclude groups traditionally disenfranchised from scholarship, such as Indigenous, racialized, queer, and disabled communities. The CRAAP test, originally created in 2004, is a commonly taught method of source evaluation. The acronym, standing for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose, is intended to guide readers in thinking through different aspects of what makes a source trustworthy. Twenty years after its creation, increased efforts to include a diversity of perspectives have soured some of the CRAAP criteria. Its conception of authority and requirements that sources be unbiased, objective, and impartial risks excluding certain groups and people from scholarship. This article presents a few simple modifications to the CRAAP test that provide a means to evaluate marginalized information and prevent its exclusion.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.