Have you ever wondered why your instructors make such a big deal about finding credible sources to use in your papers? Information resources reflect their creators' expertise and credibility, and they are evaluated based on the information need and the context in which the information will be used.

In this lesson, you will learn about how authority is constructed and contextual and how the authority you seek changes based on the purpose of your research.

Authority-A type of influence recognized or exerted within a community.

Different questions require different answers and sources of information. You wouldn't ask your dad about the molecular structure of caffeine (unless he's an organic chemist) just like you wouldn't ask your chemistry professor about the latest barista job opening on campus. The same is true when you are conducting research, regardless of whether it's for a class assignment or for a personal or professional interest.

You want to consult the authority who will best answer your question or support your argument.

Authority is contextual because your information need will influence what level of authority you need to answer your question. Watch the video below to learn more.

Authority is also constructed because different communities may have varying ideas about what is considered authoritative. Within communities and fields, a range of perspectives, differences of opinion, and disagreements may exist. You need to choose the authority that best answers your question or helps solve your problem.

For example, researchers employed at a university who are studying the health effects of smoking may consider university-produced studies more authoritative than industry studies.

The tobacco company researchers may be looking for a result that shows smoking is less harmful to people. University researchers, on the other hand, may be looking for the general effects of smoking on people over time, and they may examine the results in a less biased manner.

Sometimes the most authoritative voices in a given community are not the loudest or those voices are missing altogether.

For example, because of historical and systemic problems, such as racism and sexism, fewer voices of women and people of color are represented among subject experts in the hard sciences, which affects the overall conversation in that field. Moreover, a range of perspectives, differences of opinion, and disagreements can exist even within individual communities and fields of study.

Look for varying perspectives and voices that may be marginalized or even absent from mainstream sources of authority so that you can consider the issue from multiple angles. This is essential to enriching your knowledge, generating new ideas, and engaging critically and thoughtfully in the communities with whom you interact. Reading varying perspectives can also better prepare you to relate your ideas to or distinguish them from the ideas of others.

You now know that authority is constructed and contextual because a community determines what it considers authoritative in a given situation. You can use this knowledge to more clearly determine which authority might be helpful for your question, and you can recognize that some voices might not be present in an otherwise authoritative community.

Even when you've found sources that are appropriately authoritative for your purpose, evaluating the authority of a specific source can still be challenging. Examining the following characteristics of sources can help you make an assessment:

Use the criteria and strategies below to identify authoritative sources that are most applicable to your investigation. You won't know if a source you find is truly authoritative until you take the time to evaluate it.