Skip to main content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

You can still access the UC Berkeley Library’s services and resources during the closure. Here’s how.

ESPM 106 American Wildlife: Management and Policy in the 21st Century: Evaluating What You Find

Research resources for ESPM 106

Critically Evaluating What You Find

What is evidence?
All research is (potentially) "evidence" and there are no "perfect" studies. 
Critically evaluating what you read will help any unearth biases or methodological shortcomings that may be present.

Is there an agenda (bias)?
It's doubtful that any study is without some kind of bias, either in the study design, or in the author's pre-existing beliefs. How bias in methodology was controlled and the significance of bias in any particular study is what's relevant. 

Things to consider:

  • The question being addressed: What kind of research gets funded?
  • Publication bias: Research that shows no effect tends not to get published
  • Conflict of interest, author affiliation, source(s) of funding: Does the researcher (or the funder) have a vested interest in the outcome?
  • Documentation and assumptions: Are all stated "facts" referenced?
  • Peer review: Is the article peer-reviewed? Does it matter?
  • Authority: Does the researcher have the knowledge to work in this area?

Who pays for science? Does it matter?  (There is evidence that it does matter)
Research is generally funded by:

  • Government
  • Industry/trade groups
  • Private foundations/associations

» Take a look at a few citations (.doc) on these topics

Quick Guide

When you encounter any kind of source, consider:

  1. Authority - Who is the author? What is their point of view? 
  2. Purpose - Why was the source created? Who is the intended audience?
  3. Publication & format - Where was it published? In what medium?
  4. Relevance - How is it relevant to your research? What is its scope?
  5. Date of publication - When was it written? Has it been updated?
  6. Documentation - Did they cite their sources? Who did they cite?