Sorting Truth From Fiction: Civic Online Reasoning

<div class="xblock xblock-public_view xblock-public_view-vertical" data-block-type="vertical" data-runtime-version="1" data-usage-id="block-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020+type@vertical+block@a67851ecc74c4b669699fc3ab7e54ae5" data-graded="False" data-runtime-class="LmsRuntime" data-course-id="course-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020" data-has-score="False" data-init="VerticalStudentView" data-request-token="7558fc1adbda11efb03c029b57e3cc89"> <h2 class="hd hd-2 unit-title">3.2.1 Introduction to Evaluating Evidence</h2> <div class="vert-mod"> <div class="vert vert-0" data-id="block-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020+type@html+block@65c1c77aa73b46ac96cf7b23198ecbb1"> <div class="xblock xblock-public_view xblock-public_view-html xmodule_display xmodule_HtmlBlock" data-block-type="html" data-runtime-version="1" data-usage-id="block-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020+type@html+block@65c1c77aa73b46ac96cf7b23198ecbb1" data-graded="False" data-runtime-class="LmsRuntime" data-course-id="course-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020" data-has-score="False" data-init="XBlockToXModuleShim" data-request-token="7558fc1adbda11efb03c029b57e3cc89"> <script type="json/xblock-args" class="xblock-json-init-args"> {"xmodule-type": "HTMLModule"} </script> If someone makes a claim online, they need to provide information from reliable sources to support their position. For example, a claim that cutting taxes will create more jobs should cite reliable sources, such as economic data from the federal government or research from reputable economists showing a causal link between the tax rate and job growth. But not all evidence is created equal, and not all online sources use evidence equally well. If a source provides no evidence at all to back up its claims, we should be suspicious immediately. Without evidence, we have no way to know if claims are true and thus no reason to believe that they are. We need evidence before we can believe what people say online, but just because someone appears to provide evidence doesn’t mean we can believe their claims. Many people are fooled by bogus evidence. Take, for example, these two articles. <img height="634" width="651" src="/assets/courseware/v1/2763901cd9a30bb60edf2cdee50d9462/asset-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020+type@asset+block/atlantic_science.png" alt="Atlantic Science article" /> <img height="522" width="761" src="/assets/courseware/v1/9aac46300f2e2fa83c5ed446b7c0d5e1/asset-v1:MITx+0.504x+3T2020+type@asset+block/atlantic_sponsored.png" alt="Atlantic sponsored post" /> Asked which of the two articles was a more reliable source for learning about policies to solve global climate change, just 11% of the 176 students who completed the task selected the article from the “Science” section and raised concerns about the potential conflict of interest when an oil company sponsors an article about climate change. <blockquote> Most (over 70% of all students) selected the sponsored content from Shell because they believed it contained more data and information. These students were heavily swayed by the graphics that accompanied Shell’s sponsored content: a stylized pie chart projecting percentages that different sources (coal, nuclear, renewables, natural gas, etc.) might contribute to help fuel the “larger, energy-hungry world of tomorrow.” As one of these students wrote, “I believe Article B is more reliable, because it’s easier to understand with the graph and seems more reliable because the chart shows facts right in front of you.” </blockquote> (This assessment analysis comes from Sarah McGrew et al.’s 2018 article, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00933104.2017.1416320?journalCode=utrs20" target="[object Object]">“Can Students Evaluate Online Sources? Learning from Assessments of Civic Online Reasoning,”</a> which was published in Theory & Research in Social Education.) Bad actors present evidence that misrepresents information or comes from dubious sources; they know that many readers won’t check the evidence they present carefully, so they are likely to get away with it. So, even when sources appear to provide evidence in support of their claims, it’s important to evaluate whether their evidence is reliable. In other words, we have to see if the source they cite is trustworthy. Evidence must also be relevant — which means that it directly supports the claim being made. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/07/06/eviction-moratoriums-starwood/" target="[object Object]">A July 2020 article</a> in the Washington Post reported, “Evictions are likely to skyrocket this summer as jobs remain scarce. Black renters will be hard hit.” It cited a credible economic think tank’s analysis of census bureau data: In response to a survey by the U.S. Census Bureau, about 44 percent and 41 percent of adult Latino and black renters, respectively, said they had no or slight confidence they could pay their rent next month or were likely to defer payment, according to an Urban Institute analysis of the data, which was collected between May 28 and June 9. About 21 percent of white renters felt the same. The evidence is both reliable (the data comes from the Census Bureau and analysis comes from the Urban Institute) and relevant (renters’ confidence in ability to pay rent reported by race/ethnicity). The article also cited eviction court case numbers, data analysis by a community group, transcription of an eviction court case, a statement by a Princeton University researcher who studies evictions, and more. Unfortunately, not everyone backs up their claims with reliable and relevant evidence, so we need to develop our ability to evaluate the evidence. It’s important to track down the sources that the author uses as evidence and evaluate them. Here is where you can use the skills you learned in Section 2 to evaluate the authority and perspective of the source. Does the person or organization that they cite have expertise in the subject they are discussing? If not, then this should undermine your trust in the evidence. And do they have a reason to lie or mislead others? If yes, we need to factor that into our evaluation of the evidence’s strength. Even if evidence is from a seemingly reliable source, it may not be relevant. Authors will sometimes cite otherwise reliable sources that don’t relate to their claims. They count on people assuming that the links provided are to reliable sources and that the author has accurately characterized them. But that is often not a safe assumption. For example, a site denying the realities of climate change might claim that a university research report shows that climate change is a hoax when, in fact, it concludes the opposite. It’s up to you to examine the linked sources to double check that they actually support their point. </div> </div> </div> </div>