What is a popular source that would not be considered a scholarly source?

Newspapers are not scholarly sources, but some would not properly be termed popular, either. Every source must be questioned for its stake in the material. The New York Post is notoriously inflammatory, for instance, and also seems to love television shows broadcast on the Fox network (owned by the same company).

What sources are not considered scholarly?

Non scholarly sources inform and entertain the public (e.g. popular sources such as newspapers, magazines) or allow practitioners to share industry, practice, and production information (e.g. trade sources such as non-refereed journals published for people working in the teaching profession).

What is an example of a non academic source?

How is popular source different from scholarly source?

Popular sources such as magazines and newspapers do not typically go through the same review process as scholarly resources; in many cases, popular resources are reviewed by a single editor, who may or may not have expertise in the subject area.

Is YouTube a scholarly source?

Abstract. Since its inception, YouTube has been a source of entertainment and education. Everyday millions of videos are uploaded to this platform. Researchers have been using YouTube as a source of information in their research.

Study Help: Scholarly Sources Explained

Is Google a scholarly source?

"Google" should never be cited as a source. Rather, Google is a search engine designed to help find materials that are available on the internet. In general, Google should not be used to find academic sources, as most websites and documents are not of an academic nature.

Is Wikipedia a non scholarly source?

Wikipedia is not considered scholarly. Wikipedia acknowledges that its information is not properly vetted. The site has included hoaxes.

Is Rolling Stone a scholarly source?

Popular journals: written for a general audience rather than for professionals or scholars. Examples include The New Yorker, People, and Rolling Stone.

Is Britannica considered a scholarly source?

The online version of the Encyclopedia Britannica is a trusted source used by more than 4,755 universities worldwide, including Yale, Harvard and Oxford.

Is a book a popular or scholarly source?

Books usually count as academic sources, but it depends on what kind of book. Textbooks, encyclopedias, and books published for commercial audiences often do not count as academic.

What sources are not credible?

Blogs, facebook posts, or other self-authored sites. Research articles without citations. Materials published over 15 years ago or have theories that are out of date. Individual or business websites.

What are 10 examples of non academic writing?

Some examples of non academic texts are personal journal entries, memoirs, autobiographical writing, letters, E-mails, text messages, newspaper articles, journal writing, etc. Non academic Subjects are- physical education, music, art, and livelihood education.

Are websites a non academic source?

Popular magazines, blogs, social media posts, podcasts, and individual websites are a few examples of non-academic sources. Although they might offer helpful information, these sources might not go through the same rigorous peer-reviewing as academic sources.

How do you identify non scholarly articles?

How can I tell if a source is scholarly?

You can usually tell the difference because scholarly articles will have citations to their sources and a list of references. If the article does not have a reference list, you may want to think twice before using it as one of your scholarly sources. These reference lists will be at the very end of the article.

How do you identify scholarly sources and non scholarly sources?

The term scholarly typically means that the source has been “peer-reviewed,” which is a lengthy editing and review process performed by scholars in the field to check for quality and validity. To determine if your source has been peer-reviewed, you can investigate the journal in which the article was published.

Is it OK to cite Britannica?

In general, information in the Encyclopedia Brittanica should count as reasonably reliable general information. You must cite it if you quote directly, and probably should in any case at all questionable. (You need not for, say, the dates of the Civil War.)

Can I trust Britannica?

Britannica's content is among the most trusted in the world.

Is it OK to use Britannica as a source?

The Encyclopedia Britannica contains carefully edited articles on all major topics. It fits the ideal purpose of a reference work as a place to get started, or to refer back to as you read and write. The articles in Britannica are written by expert authors who are both identifiable and credible.

Is National Geographic a scholarly source?

Answered By: Reference Librarian. Jan 08, 2024 776

No. It does not meet the criteria for scholarly journals. National Geographic is a popular source written for the general public, not written by subject matter experts, and has not undergone a peer-review process.

What are examples of scholarly sources?

Scholarly sources can be either primary or secondary research. They can also come in many different formats. Books, articles, and websites can all be scholarly.

Are magazines credible sources?

Identify Journal Types

They also have the most references or citations. Popular magazines are not considered to be a very credible source type because there is no peer review, and there are very few citations.

Are non scholarly sources credible?

Generally, non-scholarly sources do not examine a topic with the level of detail and sophistication that your professor expects. They are not authoritative (the authors are often not academics). They are written to entertain and broadly inform, rather than to advance a field of study.

Is An encyclopedia a reliable source?

Encyclopedias are considered a scholarly source because the content is almost always written by scholars on the subject. However, the entries are not written for other scholars but for a general audience. Entries are reviewed by an editorial board, but they are not “peer-reviewed”.

Is it OK to cite Wikipedia?

As any other encyclopedias, content of Wikipedia is not original ideas or creation. It would not be fair to cite Wikipedia only for facts or finding appeared in the entry. On the other hand, if Wikipedia is used to identify the sources of the original content, it would be fair to give credits to Wikipedia.