Types of Sources

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: R_S_E
  • Created on: 22-06-14 11:36
View mindmap
  • Types of secondary sources to use for secondary research (PART 1)
    • Textbooks
      • Might be out of date and therefore inaccurate
        • Check publication date and see if there are any updated versions
      • Should have combined the research of others = cross references = reliabile
      • Educational e.g. GCSE / A Level / Degree
      • Can omit things to make it suitable for the age it is designed for
        • Choose textbooks aimed at the highest level (A level and beyond)
      • Designed for education purposes so should be accurate
      • Only trying to inform not offer opinions (leaves that to student) so should b neutral = increased credibility
    • Academic Books
      • By historians or those with an interest in Alexander: could be ebooks or hard copies
      • Time consuming to read a lot
        • Use the index to search for key words e.g. mentions of Alexander the Great to find the necessary bits of information for some
        • Before reading make a list of what the book may be useful for and note down information while reading
        • If an ebook use the search function to find relevant bits
      • May be biased to the author's view point, for instance using the book to prove a theory they have = lessens the credibility as it may not be neutral
        • See if any other authors have sited the book - if they have it shows that it is respected = increases credibility
        • Use it in conjunction with other books so as to try and get a balanced view point
        • See if other historians agree, if they do it increases the credibility
      • The author should have a good reputation e.g. if their works have been sited in other academic journals = credible
      • Publishing company (if one is used) wouldn't allow complete rubbish to be published = reputation = crediblie
      • The author will have had a vested interest not to lie or distort the evidence as they wouldn't have wanted to damage their reputation = credible
        • Should have accurate information
          • They may have expertise in the field e.g. a PhD in Ancient History = credible
          • The author should have a good reputation e.g. if their works have been sited in other academic journals = credible
      • They may have expertise in the field e.g. a PhD in Ancient History = credible
    • Academic Journals
      • Writeen by professional historians  (or similar profession such as archaeology) and could include: hard copies, digital copies, blogs, in library archives
      • They'll have expertise in the field e.g. a PhD in Ancient History = credible
      • The author will have had a vested interest not to lie or distort the evidence as they wouldn't have wanted to damage their reputation = credible
      • The author should have a good reputation e.g. if their works have been sited in other academic journals = credible
        • All information should, therefore, be accurate and reliable
          • The author will have had a vested interest not to lie or distort the evidence as they wouldn't have wanted to damage their reputation = credible
          • They'll have expertise in the field e.g. a PhD in Ancient History = credible
      • Could be biased to one view point (their own) and want to persuade others to it = lessens the credibility
        • Use it in conjunction with a variety of other historians with different views
        • See if other sources/historians agree with them, if they do it increases the credibility of the journal
      • Could be difficult to understand - meant for a very high level
        • Take time when reading and don't move on until the last bit is understood - Google any words not understood
      • Likely have been peer reviewed which means means other academics have looked over it = likely to be reliable

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar All resources:

See all All resources »See all EPQ resources »