Alex Hasty

Database: Capital Punishment. (2014). In Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia
(p. 1). World Book,, Chicago.
Location:
1.
Write down the title and URL of the article you are evaluating. What does the
domain (.com, .org, .gov, etc.) tell you about the information?
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.lib.ottawa.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=24&sid=3d3ce31b-9b5e-46ac87b9-e528afbc2f9a
%40sessionmgr4005&hid=4209&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=C
A037400&db=funk
Capital Punishment. The domain of this article tells me that it is very credible as it is
from an academic database.
Authority:
2.
Who is the author and is she/he an authority on the subject? How can you
tell?
This article was taken from the New World Encyclopedia so it does not seem to have
an author. I still feel as though it has authority however, as encyclopedias are
normally a pretty reliable source for factual information.
Accuracy:
3.
Are there spelling, grammatical, or citation errors? If so, how do they impact
credibility?
There was no errors that I could find. If there were errors, there could be a slight
loss of credibility, but because there were none that I could find, I would say it has
probably been peer reviewed by scholars and is credible.
4.

Is a bibliography provided so that you may verify the information? If statistics

or quotes are used, is it clear who the sources are for those materials? Does
the website provide links to related sources?
As this is a page from an encyclopedia, there is no bibliography. But there is in fact some quotes
throughout the article, all of which it is clearly states where or who that quote came from.
Objectivity:
5.
Is the websites content primarily factual or argumentative? Do you detect
any biases, or is information presented in an evenhanded manner? Give an
example.
This is simply a factual article without any bias. It is simply informing people of the
death penalty and
where it stands today

6.

Are there graphics or images, including advertisements, in the article that are
used to influence the user? If so, give an example and explain its
significance.
There are none.
Currency:
7.
Is there a date listed for the last update? Are the links current? What do
these aspects tell you about the website?
The last update was 2014. This tells me that the links are very current and is likely very accurate
information since it was posted less than a year ago.
Content:
8.
Are the purposes of the website and article clear? Explain.
The purpose is very clear. The purpose of the article is to inform readers about the
death penalty, when it
is used, and where it stands today.
9.

Is the article scholarly, general interest, or popular in nature? Discuss how the
nature of the information might or might not work in the context of an
academic paper.
This is a scholarly article, but could be approaching general interest. It outlines the
laws and regulations
of todays policies on the death penalty. For the most part I would say it is scholarly,
but the argument
could be made for it to be general interest. This paper will definitely work for my
academic paper. It is
credible, it goes into depth on the subject, and it outlines many different ideas
about capital punishment,
which is perfect for my essay.
Other:
10.
On a scale of 1-5 with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, rate the (a)
applicability and (b) credibility of
the information. Explain your ratings.
I give this article a 5.
a) This source is extremely applicable to many aspects of my essay and will
be extremely useful
b) Because it is from an encyclopedia, I feel as though it is likely a very
reliable source and was likely peer reviewed by experts in the subject.

Database: Burgason, K., & Pazzani, L. (2014). The Death Penalty: A Multi-level Analysis of
Public Opinion. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(4), 818-838.
Retrieved
September 22, 2015, from SOCindex.
Location:
1.
Write down the title and URL of the article you are evaluating. What does the
domain (.com, .org, .gov, etc.) tell you about the information?
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.lib.ottawa.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=52&sid=3d3ce31b-9b5e-46ac87b9-e528afbc2f9a
%40sessionmgr4005&hid=4209&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=9
9239036&db=sih
Because this is from a database and is .edu, it is usually safe to say that the source
is credible and written by a scholar.
Authority:
2.
Who is the author and is she/he an authority on the subject? How can you
tell?
The authors are Kyle Burgason and Lynn Pazzani. Both of the authors have
credentials in criminology and appear to be professors at universities. I would say
that they have a lot of authority on the subject.
Accuracy:
3.
Are there spelling, grammatical, or citation errors? If so, how do they impact
credibility?
I did not find any errors in how they did things in this article. If there were errors,
that could show a lack of credibility.
4.

Is a bibliography provided so that you may verify the information? If statistics

or quotes are used, is it clear who the sources are for those materials? Does
the website provide links to related sources?
There is a large amount of references for this article. It is very clear where they got
all of the information
that they presented for the topic. It is always clear where they got the information
from and it provides
links for some of the references.
Objectivity:
5.
Is the websites content primarily factual or argumentative? Do you detect
any biases, or is information presented in an evenhanded manner? Give an
example.
This is primarily factual information without any biases. It outlines the research they
conducted
describing the public opinion of the death penalty
6.

Are there graphics or images, including advertisements, in the article that are
used to influence the user? If so, give an example and explain its
significance.

They use charts and tables to show the public opinions of whether or not males or
females are more likely
to be accepting of the death penalty.
Currency:
7.
Is there a date listed for the last update? Are the links current? What do
these aspects tell you about the website?
This was posted in June of 2014, this shows that the content is very accurate and up
to date. It is unlikely that the public opinion has drastically changed in the last year.

Content:
8.
Are the purposes of the website and article clear? Explain.
The purpose of the article are very clear, it is simply to inform readers of the public
opinion of the death
penalty.
9.

Is the article scholarly, general interest, or popular in nature? Discuss how the
nature of the information might or might not work in the context of an
academic paper.
This could be a scholarly article. Usually only someone who is researching this topic
would be the one
reading it, it isn't just for the general public.
Other:
10.
On a scale of 1-5 with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, rate the (a)
applicability and (b) credibility of
the information. Explain your ratings.
a) 5, This will be extremely applicable to my essay. I have a whole section I
plan on talking about public opinion of the death penalty. This will be extremely
useful.
b) 5, this is a scholarly article with the correct credentials to be talking about
this subject.

Book: Banner, S. (2002). The death penalty: An American history. Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University Press.
1. Who is the primary audience for this source? How does the information meet the
expectations of that particular audience? Does this source fit your particular needs as a
researcher? This is a history book and is likely just for scholars reading. This source
meets the needs of scholars because it provides a detailed history of the death penalty. It
fits my needs because I have a whole section regarding the history of the death penalty;
methods, crimes, justice, etc.
2. How, if at all, does the content of this source apply to your research project? Explain in
detail. It fits my needs because I have a whole section regarding the history of the death
penalty; methods, crimes, justice, etc.
3. Do you detect any biases, unsupported claims, dubious support, or faulty reasoning in this
source? If so, provide specific examples and explain how they affect the value of the
source. If not, discuss one or two exemplary instances of scholarship that you found in
the source. There are a couple of instances where it seems as though the author is making
unsupported claims. Throughout the book, he will use words like most of the people in
America without providing any sort of proof as to where he got that statistic. However,
he also provides great insight into American history with the death penalty dating back to
the 17th century when the first settlers came to America from Britain. He explains the
laws of Britain at the time that continued to be used in America.
4. What do the notes, bibliography, or works cited tell you about the source? Examine
aspects such as the currency of material, accuracy of citations and the thoroughness of
research. The bibliography was pretty long with plenty of sources including Woodrow
Wilson Scholars Association. This tells me that this source is pretty credible and good to
use in my essay.
5. Is the source up-to-date (no more than five years old)? How, if at all, does the age of the
source affect its relevancy? Explain in detail. This is from 2002, but this does not matter
because history is history. As far as I know, history from the 17th century hasn't changed
in the last 13 years. It still relevant to my subject.
6. Does the author have the experience and/or credentials necessary to be considered an
authority on the subject? Explain in detail. The author of this book is a legal historian and
a Professor of Law at UCLA. I would say he has more than enough credentials to be
writing about this topic.
7. What role does the publication or press play in this area of research? I think book was
released simply as an informative piece with no other motives.
8. What impact has this source had on other scholarship? Consider factors such as its
originality, the number of times it has been cited, and any reviews of it. Reviews of this
book were all positive. The book was even posted on Harvards website.
9. What implications do you imagine this source will have for future research? Explain in
detail. I think this book will always be used as a reference as time goes on. History will
not change and this book outlines the full aspects of the death penalty in America. As this
issue becomes more and more prominent in the future, this book will be useful.
10. On a scale of 1-5, where 1 means poor and 5 means excellent, how would you rate
the overall quality of this source? Briefly outline the rationale behind your rating. This

book absolutely ranks as a 5 for my essay purpose. The author has all the credentials
needed and the book is very popular and even used and praised by Harvard.

Web: CNN Staff. (2014, September 8). Death penalty facts that may surprise you.
Retrieved September 23, 2015.
1. Who is the primary audience for this source? How does the information meet the
expectations of that particular audience? Does this source fit your particular needs as a
researcher? This is a site for the general audience interested in the death penalty in
American states. It meets the needs of that audience and my needs as a researcher by
providing table and graphs showing the numbers of death penalties in each state.
2. How, if at all, does the content of this source apply to your research project? Explain in
detail. This source applies to my research project in that it gives real number statistics
that I will be able to use in my United States death penalty section of my paper.
3. Do you detect any biases, unsupported claims, dubious support, or faulty reasoning in this
source? If so, provide specific examples and explain how they affect the value of the
source. If not, discuss one or two exemplary instances of scholarship that you found in
the source. This does not have any biases or unsupported claims, it simply states
statistics. However, it shows that it came from the Death Penalty Information Center,
which I would say is very credible.
4. What do the notes, bibliography, or works cited tell you about the source? Examine
aspects such as the currency of material, accuracy of citations and the thoroughness of
research. This data came from the Death Penalty Information Center. This means that all
of the data is likely very accurate.
5. Is the source up-to-date (no more than five years old)? How, if at all, does the age of the
source affect its relevancy? Explain in detail. This article came out in 2014, meaning that
this information is very close to being completely up to date. It is still very relevant.
6. Does the author have the experience and/or credentials necessary to be considered an
authority on the subject? Explain in detail. CNN is well known for accurate information,
the authors were the CNN Staff so it is likely very credible.
7. What role does the publication or press play in this area of research? The role that this
publication plays is just to provide the public with the data regarding the number of death
penalties executed as of 2014.
8. What impact has this source had on other scholarship? Consider factors such as its
originality, the number of times it has been cited, and any reviews of it. This, being on
CNN, will likely be cited frequently because of the popularity of the site.
9. What implications do you imagine this source will have for future research? Explain in
detail. This site will give future researchers insight into what things were like in 2014 as
far as number of death penalties.
10. On a scale of 1-5, where 1 means poor and 5 means excellent, how would you rate
the overall quality of this source? Briefly outline the rationale behind your rating. This
site gets a 4 from me. It is a great source with lots of tables and statistics regarding the
death penalty. It will be very useful to me there just isnt much text involved with the
article.

Web: Reggio, M. (1997). History of the Death Penalty. Retrieved September 24, 2015.

Location:
1.
Write down the title and URL of the article you are evaluating. What does the
domain (.com, .org, .gov, etc.) tell you about the information?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/execution/readings/history.html
the .org gives some credibility to topic. If it were .com I would be a little more
worried, but PBS is pretty reliable
Authority:
2.
Who is the author and is she/he an authority on the subject? How can you
tell?
The author is Michael Reggio, I have no idea if he has authority on the subject. This
was reprinted from an original document.
Accuracy:
3.
Are there spelling, grammatical, or citation errors? If so, how do they impact
credibility?
There are no errors that I could find.
4.

Is a bibliography provided so that you may verify the information? If statistics

or quotes are used, is it clear who the sources are for those materials? Does
the website provide links to related sources?
The bibliography is provided, it was reprinted from an article by someone else. This
article provides the original document that you can click on and see.
Objectivity:
5.
Is the websites content primarily factual or argumentative? Do you detect
any biases, or is information presented in an evenhanded manner? Give an
example.
The content was simply factual, it involved history and there were no biases. It
simply states the overall history of the death penalty and how it was used
over time.
6.

Are there graphics or images, including advertisements, in the article that are
used to influence the user? If so, give an example and explain its
significance.
There are none.
Currency:
7.
Is there a date listed for the last update? Are the links current? What do
these aspects tell you about the website?
The article does not state the last update. The link isn't current as it was written
nearly 20 years ago. This tells me that the article is not totally reliable, but because
it involves history, it is still credible. As long as no recent discoveries have
discredited this information.
Content:

8.
Are the purposes of the website and article clear? Explain.
The purpose is very clear. It is to inform readers about the history of the death
penalty. The website provides many different informational articles.
9.

Is the article scholarly, general interest, or popular in nature? Discuss how the
nature of the information might or might not work in the context of an
academic paper.
This would be a scholarly article. This information will work well within my academic
paper because it states much information about the history and usage of the
death penalty throughout the history of the entire world.
Other:
10.
On a scale of 1-5 with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, rate the (a)
applicability and (b) credibility of
the information. Explain your ratings.
a) 5, This information is very applicable to my project. I have a whole section
about History.
b) 4, I give it a four because it is not a scholarly database and little is known
about the author and the bibliography isn't very long.