The 10 webpages below are linked throughout the article. Underneath each link, I provided information on why I believe each source to be credible, using guidelines from "Criteria to Evaluate the Credibility of WWW Resources."
1) "Olfactory detection of human bladder cancer by dogs: proof of principle study"
- This is a government website. The authors names and roles are clearly stated, and their positions align with the content—proving they're an authority on the topic. The article is associated to "PMC, a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM)" (National Center for Biotechnology Information). The study is from 2004, and there is a complete list of works cited.
- This is a government website. The authors names are clearly stated. The article is associated to PubMed, which "comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books" (National Center for Biotechnology Information). The study is from 2010-2011, and additional resources are available.
- This is a commercial website. The authors names are clearly stated. The article is associated to "Applied Animal Behaviour Science, the official journal of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE)" (Elsevier Inc.) The abstract is from 2004.
- This is a government website. The authors names are clearly stated. The article is associated to PubMed, which "comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books" (National Center for Biotechnology Information). The study is from 2006, and additional resources are available.
- This is a government website. The authors names are clearly stated. The article is associated to PubMed, which "comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books" (National Center for Biotechnology Information). The study is from 2010-2011, and additional resources are available.
- This is a commercial website from the Well section of The New York Times online. The author's name is clearly stated, and she links to various sources to support her claims, including government studies. The article was published in 2009.
- This is a government website. The authors names are clearly stated. The article is associated to PubMed, which "comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books" (National Center for Biotechnology Information). The study is from 2008, and additional resources are available.
- This is an organization's website, associated to the American Urological Association (AUA). The press release cites the study from which the authors gathered information, and there is contact info at the beginning of the piece. It was published this year, in May of 2014.
- This is a government website. The authors names are clearly stated. The article is associated to PubMed, which "comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books" (National Center for Biotechnology Information). The study is from this year (2014), and additional resources are available.
- This links to an educational website which provides details on a specific professor, including his education, research interests, selected publications, CV file, and more. The page notes copyright from this year (2014) by The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. The webpage provides contact information for the professor, as well as the University of Pennsylvania Department of Physics & Astronomy.
All of the sources above are very detailed, and the authors don't seem to be biased. Almost all of them are professional domains, including .gov, .edu, and .org. The oldest source is from 10 years ago (2004), but many of them are fairly recent.
In "Training Dogs to Sniff Out Cancer," Krisch presents both sides of the debate with sources to back up each. His tone is very matter-of-fact, not persuasive or manipulative.
In "Training Dogs to Sniff Out Cancer," Krisch presents both sides of the debate with sources to back up each. His tone is very matter-of-fact, not persuasive or manipulative.
Potential Impact of Unrestricted Web-Publishing Via Mass Media (as it relates to this article)
If "Training Dogs to Sniff Out Cancer" proves to be fabricated or exaggerated, the consequences wouldn't be severe. However, it would certainly anger a lot of people — as this would mean the author gave the general public false hope. If dogs could sniff out cancer (specifically ovarian) — aiding in the production of nanotechnology sensors — people could be diagnosed sooner, resulting in a greater chance of survival. Ovarian cancers frightens the general public, as it's a "silent killer" without a cure (Dr. Otto, as cited by Krisch). Since many individuals either have cancer or know someone with it, there's a lot of emotion tied to this topic.
News should be factual, credible, and clear, regardless of where it's published—in a paper newspaper or online.
Resources
Applied Animal Behaviour Science (2014). Elsevier Inc. Retrieved from http://www.appliedanimalbehaviour.com/
Krisch, J. (2014). Training Dogs to Sniff Out Cancer. The New York Times Online. Retrieved from http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/training-dogs-to-sniff-out-cancer/
Montecino, V. (1998). Criteria to Evaluate the Credibility of WWW Resources. Retrieved from http://mason.gmu.edu/~montecin/web-eval-sites.htm
PMC. National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
PubMed. National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
If "Training Dogs to Sniff Out Cancer" proves to be fabricated or exaggerated, the consequences wouldn't be severe. However, it would certainly anger a lot of people — as this would mean the author gave the general public false hope. If dogs could sniff out cancer (specifically ovarian) — aiding in the production of nanotechnology sensors — people could be diagnosed sooner, resulting in a greater chance of survival. Ovarian cancers frightens the general public, as it's a "silent killer" without a cure (Dr. Otto, as cited by Krisch). Since many individuals either have cancer or know someone with it, there's a lot of emotion tied to this topic.
News should be factual, credible, and clear, regardless of where it's published—in a paper newspaper or online.
Resources
Applied Animal Behaviour Science (2014). Elsevier Inc. Retrieved from http://www.appliedanimalbehaviour.com/
Krisch, J. (2014). Training Dogs to Sniff Out Cancer. The New York Times Online. Retrieved from http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/10/training-dogs-to-sniff-out-cancer/
Montecino, V. (1998). Criteria to Evaluate the Credibility of WWW Resources. Retrieved from http://mason.gmu.edu/~montecin/web-eval-sites.htm
PMC. National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
PubMed. National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
Hi Shannon!
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you statement that “news should be factual, credible, and clear, regardless of where it's published—in a paper newspaper or online.” When it comes to any information, especially something as serious as cancer, readers deserve to have the most accurate and truthful information possible. Such important health related issues need to be the most researched topics and written by the most credible authors because they can have life-changing and even life-threatening effects.
Hi Kelli,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your positive feedback!