In the end, the journal found just eight serious errors, such as general misunderstandings of vital concepts, in the articles. Of those, four came from each site. They did, however, discover a series of factual errors, omissions or misleading statements. All told, Wikipedia had 162 such problems, while Britannica had 123. That averages out to 2.92 mistakes per article for Britannica and 3.86 for Wikipedia. (Terdiman, 2005)What surprised me the most about this information is that the Britannica had so many inaccuracies per article at all. I’ve always assumed an encyclopedia was a failsafe place to research anything. That being said, Britannica officials were less than impressed with the study. Terdiman points out the following quote from Dale Hoiberg, Britannica editor in chief:
"We've asked them a number of questions about the process they used," Hoiberg said. "They said in (their article) that the inaccuracies included errors, omissions and misleading statements. But there's no indication of how many of each. So we're very eager to look at that and explore it because we take it very seriously." (Terdiman, 2005)Although interesting, this doesn’t exactly give me confidence in either resource. So, when presented with the problem of whether or not to use Wikipedia for answers, where do I go for direction? Well, funny enough -- Wikipedia. They have an extensive set of pages that discuss their editorial oversight and control and best practices when using it for research. I recommend reading both (and watch the goofy video on the first link). My personal preference is to now use Wikipedia as a starting point for getting answers. I’ll let the references/citations at the bottom of each article guide me to truth and cite those sources instead.
Works Cited
Terdiman, D. (2005, December 15). Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica. Retrieved August 27, 2010, from CNET News: http://news.cnet.com/Study-Wikipedia-as-accurate-as-Britannica/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
9 comments:
Wikipedia is not a reliable place for answers as any person can get on there and change the defition at any time
I use Wikipedia a lot to get a general idea about what I am researching. Once I feel somewhat comfortable with my results, my 2nd step is to find another reputable source that supports the Wikipedia information. Note that I usually attain other reputable sources through Wikipedia.
Great article!
Wikipedia can be a starting point for someone to find out what research is out there. I would look at the information and try to exam it more for reliablity, accuracy and meaninful information.
As a first year college student, I am well aware of the dangers of the possible inaccuracies of Wikipedia. This is something that was drilled into me by my girlfriend as she told me to never use it in my research. This blog states that the data from one specific study suggests that the Britannica encyclopedia has many errors also. Based on this article, I would challenge the validity of this study until I could see how the study was conducted.
Brian
While it is believed the information in Wikipedia may not be reliable, I feel that since it is open to anyone, the users themselves can correct any inaccuracies.
You made an interesting observation: Britannica has many inaccuracies as well. Universities often frown upon Wikipedia as a source. I was most surprised when reading The Last Lecture, by Randy Pausch, how much a Carnegie Mellon professor favored Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. On the other hand research suggests that Google is making us "dumber" as a society since we now depend on various opinions more than well documented research.
You also mentioned young people using Google to answer sexually based questions. This could be a societal issue where young people either don't feel comfortable asking their parents or doctors these types of questions (like a faux pas) or maybe the medical system simply doesn't have the resources.
Like many of the other people who commented I am also a little afraid of Wikipedia, as I can't be sure if the resource is reliable or not. I think it is like most of the internet though, you have to critically think through what you are reading and check your facts. I know at least for myself, I may use Wikipedia as a "springboard" for research, but never as the backbone for my research.
I use Wikipedia often, but I do not take the information I read there as the gospel. I use Wikipedia as a way to form questions about a certain topic in order to expand my web searching resources. This way I can pinpoint what information I want to confirm! I will say,; however, that most of the time the information posted on wikipedia is pretty accurate. I can only recall a few times when it was completely wrong.
While it is true that we should be skeptical of this source, it is also true that we should be as skeptical of any single choice. Do the research, cross over to multiple resources, then develop an opinion.
Post a Comment