| name | information-evaluation |
| description | Evaluating online information for credibility, accuracy, and context. Covers the SIFT method (Stop, Investigate, Find, Trace), lateral reading, reverse image search, primary source verification, and common misinformation tactics. Use when assessing the trustworthiness of a web page, article, video, social media post, or any digital claim before relying on it or sharing it. |
| type | skill |
| category | digital-literacy |
| status | stable |
| origin | tibsfox |
| modified | false |
| first_seen | "2026-04-12T00:00:00.000Z" |
| first_path | examples/skills/digital-literacy/information-evaluation/SKILL.md |
| superseded_by | null |
Information Evaluation
Information evaluation is the discipline of deciding whether a piece of online information deserves your belief, your share, or your further attention. On the open web there is no gatekeeper: anyone can publish, anyone can amplify, and anything can look professional. The practical question is never "is this true?" in the abstract but "how much weight should I put on this before I act?" This skill catalogs the evaluation techniques that produce reliable answers quickly, grounded in the work of Mike Caulfield (SIFT), Sam Wineburg and Sarah McGrew (lateral reading), and the fact-checking community.
Agent affinity: rheingold (crap detection, net smart), palfrey (source analysis), noble (algorithmic framing of what you find)
Concept IDs: diglit-source-credibility, diglit-fact-checking, diglit-misinformation-tactics, diglit-search-strategies
The SIFT Method
Mike Caulfield's SIFT method is the most important evaluation framework taught in undergraduate information literacy courses. It is designed to take 30-90 seconds per claim, which is the only time budget most users actually have.
| Step | Action | What it replaces |
|---|
| Stop | Recognize the claim and pause before reacting or sharing | Reflexive engagement |
| Investigate | Check who is making the claim and their track record | Trusting the surface presentation |
| Find | Look for better coverage of the same claim | Reading only the first result |
| Trace | Trace claims, quotes, and media back to their original context | Accepting mediated or stripped versions |
Stop
The first move is not analysis -- it is a pause. Your emotional reaction to a headline or image is evidence about you, not about the claim. If a post makes you furious, delighted, or indignant, that is precisely when you should slow down. Strong emotion is the signature of content optimized to spread, and optimization for spread is not the same as optimization for truth.
Practical gesture: Before engaging, ask "do I know enough about this source to evaluate this claim right now?" If no, you proceed to Investigate. If yes, you proceed to Find.
Investigate the source
Do not trust a source because its site looks professional. Modern web templates make any blog look like a newspaper. Instead, ask what others say about this source.
The lateral reading move. Open a new tab. Search the source's name (not the content of the article). Read what independent sources say about them. Wikipedia, MediaBiasFactCheck, NewsGuard, and established fact-checking organizations are better starting points than the source's own About page.
