Back to Evaluation of Information Sources

Selection criteria for Internet information resources: a Poll of members of info-quality-l

On 8 May 1996 Alastair Smith posted the following query to info-quality-l.
What selection criteria do you use to decide which sources to include in web sites you maintain, or to use for answering queries?
This repeated a question asked of the www-vlib@www10.w3.org email group in May 95, responses summarised at http://coombs.anu.edu.au/SpecialProj/QLTY/QltyLinks.html
Contributors:
Tony Barry, Centre for Networked Information and Publishing/ Centre for Networked Access to Scholarly Information Australian National University Library.
  1. Are they useful to the target audience -
  2. Do they meet the collection depth level of the collection being built.
    You might only want a refernce level collection or you may wish to be comprehensive. Its a trade off between what the users might want and what resources you have to maintain it
  3. Is the site likely to be stable.
    A pointer to a page maintained by an undergraduate is less likely to be there in a year's time than one maintained by a national library for instance. [comment by Bran Muffin]
Margaret F. Riley, Internet Job Search/Recruiting Consultant.
  1. What is the authority of the person(s) or organization who created this site?
  2. How often is it updated?
  3. What is the information included, and how is it organized? Is the sequence logical and easy to follow?
  4. Is there a fee for use of this service?
  5. Is this site unique in the information and/or service offered?
  6. Does the site respond well?
[and responding to a comment on stability of sites by William Shaw:]
However, beyond stability is authority. What is the expertise of the students *or of any other person* maintaining this site? Have they demonstrated a significant professional or personal expertise in this subject area, or is it just something that they started putting together? One criteria that I like to use when looking at sites is the presence of evaluations and to determine the quality of the evaluation. It's one thing to just list a bunch of interrelated sites, but another to discuss why these were chosen (ie, collection assessment and development) and to impose guidelines on the collection so that users know what they will and will not find here.

I don't have the largest or most inclusive site for employment resources on the Internet, but I have the evaluated list with guidelines for what I will not include. Many users thank me for that piece of the information and value it much more as an aid to their own search.

Bran Muffin (ACTlab sysadmin), commenting on Tony Barry's view: 
> >3. Is the site likely to be  stable.
> >        A pointer to a page maintained by an undergraduate is
> >        less likely to be there in a years time than one maintained
> >        by a national library for instance.
It makes me sad & mad to see such blanket statements. I think it is that kind of attitude that allows Rupert Murdoch to drive the information dissimination stream, rather that the people who MAKE the news. "Oh, the Zapatistas won't be here next year, so let's ask Maurey Povitch what's up in Mexico." grrrr.

If you fear that an information source may dry up capriciosly, why not CONTACT the creator/maintainer, and ask that you be made the new caretaker should he fail in that capacity?

I would hope that as site maintainers that we woudln't short circuit the possibilities of this medium just to make things easier or more profitable.

[Comment by William Shaw]
Christine Conlon, Australian Centre for Independent Journalism University of Technology Sydney.
I'd like to caution against only selecting official sites - and those sites which have a lot of funding to hold them up. As a journalism researcher and developer of a Web site, my experience shows that most "official" sites can be like newspapers and public relations machines - which contain highly filtered and controlled information. The more grass roots and individually dedicated groups of Web gurus often provide access to information that is less filtered - often raw - and in my mind gets you closer to the truth of a story/subject. And this is the beauty of the internet - it lets others opinions and stories get out. I'd like to see that encouraged to prosper as a mechanism against market oriented news reportage, which at the end of the day is quite confined to its own interests.
William Shaw, Consulting Engineer, Electronic Systems Associates.
Keep in mind that these criteria being discussed are not criteria for limiting what is on the web, They are just criteria that need to be considered when planing ones own site/pages. Part of the freedom of the net is the freedom to reference the sites you wish to link to. If you don't want to become a proprietor of ex-student web-pages, and you don't want to have to monitor all your links that closely, then stability of a site is important to you.

Granted, the statement made by Tony regarding student pages ('A pointer to a page maintained by an undergraduate is less likely to be there in a years time than one maintained by a national library for instance') was just an example of stability. I know of many Students who have maintained a web site/web presence for over two and a half years now ... which is longer than most sites have existed. [comment by Margaret Riley]

Another thing to keep in mind is that students have limited space, and thus as their priorities change so does their web sites. Old pages have to be removed in order to make room for new ones to be created. Brian, as a University Laboratory Sysadmin, should be aware of the quotas usually applied to student accounts. I used to administer a lab of NeXTs when I was still in school, and one of the frequent issues was space.

The question to be asked here is weighing the value of the link against it's 'stability'. What is longevity when it comes to websites? 6 Months? 2 years?; How often do you intend to redo or rework your own site? What is the propose of your site?

Like Christine I see a fine line between credibility, stability, and usability.

A Quality site would know their target audience, and use criteria to limit the links to those criteria preferred by their target audience; keeping in mind some flexibility. A global search engine should not limit, but a academic historical society should.

James Vincett, Training Coordinator, Information Systems and Services, California Lutheran University

The following article appeared in College & Research Libraries News for March 1996. What follows is a summary. I strongly suggest you get your hands on the full article.

Pratt, Gregory F.(gregp@library.tmc.edu) et. al. "Guidelines for Internet resource selection." pg 134-135.

The authors note that an information resource does not have to meet ALL of the following criteria.

Criteria

  1. Quality and Content
    1. Credible source: peer-reviewed; from an organization with an established reputation; archived or indexed electronically.
    2. Demonstrated importance through availablity: linked by multiple internet sites; available in multiple forms (i.e. cd-rom, print).
    3. Comprehensive or unique: currency; broad AND deep coverage; full-text
    4. Content of Internet version is complete or fully meets client needs.
    5. Resource stays current through regular updates or demonstrates ongoing maintenance.
  2. Relevance (i.e. recommended by a respected review source)
  3. Ease of Use
    1. Logon sequences can be scripted or automated for clients.
    2. Search engine similar to other resources, or if unique, the information
    3. is "worth the trouble" of learning the new interface.
    4. Help files readily available
    5. Downtimes are infrequent and announced
  4. Reliability and Stability.
    1. Review the peak usage times for the resource
    2. Review the possibility of using a mirror site
    3. URL changes should be infrequent and announced
  5. Cost and copyright
    1. Subscription or access costs are reasonable and justifiable
    2. Simplicity in complying with restrictions on duplication or dissemination of information
  6. Hardware and software
    1. Gauge the need to use updated hardware or software.
CLU is currently reviewing websites for inclusion in a special "Internet Database." We use a "collection policy" based on the above criteria.
Bibliography of relevant material from Nicole J. Auer, Reference/Instruction Librarian, University of Wisconsin - Green Bay. This bibliography has been updated at http://www.uwgb.edu/~auern/crithink.htm.

Internet Sites

Useful Listservs

NETTRAIN            send email to listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu
                    subscribe NETTRAIN 

BESTWEB             send email to listserv@vm.ege.edu.tr
                    subscribe BESTWEB 

Info-Quality-L      send email to majordomo@coombs.anu.edu.au
                    subscribe info-quality-l 

Web4Lib             send email to listproc@library.berkeley.edu
                    subscribe web4lib 

BI-L                send email to listserv@bingvmb.cc.binghamton.edu
                    subscribe BI-L 

COLLIB-L            send email to listproc@willamette.edu
                    subscribe COLLIB-L 

Net-Happenings      send email to listserv@lists.internic.net
                    subscribe net-happenings

Libref-L            send email to listserv@listserv.kent.edu
                    subscribe libref-l
Back to Evaluation of Information Sources
Last modified 23 May 1996 by Alastair Smith