You are writing a research paper about the latest discoveries in cancer treatment. Which of the following are “red flags”, or signs, that a source may NOT be valid or credible? Select all that apply.
The source is published on a personal blog.
The author does not have a background or education in the field.
The primary source is a scientific medical journal.
The author is a well-known member of the medical community.
The source is from the early 1900s.

For a research source to be valid it needs to pass credibility and for this, it is necessary that this source has scientific substantiation proven by a professional with academic training in that area, in this way it is perceived that a research source is not reliable if it comes from a personal blog, or a person with no academic background, or academic background in a different area.

In addition, science and technology change over the years. For this reason it is necessary that the search source be recent. A research source 100 years ago is not valid because it has been 100 years of evolution of science and things are very different now.

jkoyocku jkoyocku · Answer 2 · 2019-11-23T01:37:49+01:00

Answer:

Options One, Two, and Five are the correct answers.

Explanation:

Posting on a personal blog is not wrong by itself, but it could also mean that there are no standards for the evidence provided in the blog (it could come from just personal deductions or experiences), and it could also be provided as the one an only truth, turning it into a discardable source.

If the author does not have background or education on the field, he or she cannot talk about something that is very specialized, such as the latest discoveries in cancer treatment, due to the terminology or specific knowledge that is required to understand the complete picture, such as parts of the body or how cells work.

Finally, if the paper is looking for the latest discoveries, the early 1900s is the opposite from what is being required.