essay.docx

Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 2012

Evidence occupies a paramount position in any logical endeavor and research article is consensually considered a predominant site of such an endeavor. One interesting area of rhetoric which addresses the source and reliability of evidence is quality metadiscourse. In this qualitative study, quality metadiscourse strategies (i.e., evidentials, hedges, boosters and disclaimers) are examined to investigate their contribution to evidentiality in research articles. Through analyzing authentic examples taken from research articles, it is concluded that evidentials mark the source of evidence and the other strategies are employed to condition propositions proportionate to the strength of relevant evidence. In fact, this study helps to argue that reliability markers demonstrate the author-perceived distance of propositions from the impact range of evidence. Contrary to the broad definition of metadiscourse, the paper concludes that without appropriate types of markers, propositions could lo...

CM - casopis za upravljanje komuniciranjem, 2013

Building on Luhmann's theoretical concept of familiarity as a necessary precondition of trust, the study draws on qualitative interviews with young professionals on their crossmedia consumption; the analysis reveals that the respondents, as media users, establish an imagined author as part of the process of interpretation. The concept of the imagined author is developed theoretically using Genette's concept of paratext. It is thus the reader's realisation of the author that belongs to the text as a paratextual feature, and is clearly formed of three qualities perceived by the audience: the author's identity, expertise and reputation. The ability to establish these qualities in the author helps the users to place the imagined author within a broader context of previous experiences, establish familiarity with the text and therefore decide whether they will place trust in the text or not.

Modern Language Journal, 1993

Information Processing & Management, 2008

This article presents a unifying framework of credibility assessment in which credibility is characterized across a variety of media and resources with respect to diverse information seeking goals and tasks. The initial data were collected through information-activity diaries over a 10-day period from 24 undergraduate students at three different colleges. Based on 245 information seeking activities from the diaries, the authors conducted individual interviews with participants and analyzed the transcripts using a grounded theory analysis. Three distinct levels of credibility judgments emerged: construct, heuristics, and interaction. The construct level pertains to how a person constructs, conceptualizes, or defines credibility. The heuristics level involves general rules of thumb used to make judgments of credibility applicable to a variety of situations. Finally, the interaction level refers to credibility judgments based on content, peripheral source cues, and peripheral information object cues. In addition, context emerged as the social, relational and dynamic frames surrounding the information seeker and providing boundaries of credibility judgments. The implications of the framework in terms of its theoretical contribution to credibility research and practices are discussed.

Social Education, 2011

Credibility of Research processes, 2021

Research is an imperative area in not just the field of education but in other fields as well. It purifies the workings and the lives of the individuals. It primarily focuses upon improving quality and is a search for knowledge. It shows how to make provision of solutions to problems in a scientific and methodical manner. It is a systematic effort to acquire new knowledge in all disciplines. The main purpose of this research paper is to understand the significance of research in education. Educational research is termed as providing solutions to any educational problem. Therefore, this paper proposes to explore the concept of research, types, characteristics and the relevance of statistics in research relating to the representativeness or credibility of qualitative research findings.

Royal Society open science, 2018

The inferential inadequacies of statistical significance testing are now widely recognized. There is, however, no consensus on how to move research into a 'post < 0.05' era. We present a potential route forward via the Analysis of Credibility, a novel methodology that allows researchers to go beyond the simplistic dichotomy of significance testing and extract more insight from new findings. Using standard summary statistics, AnCred assesses the credibility of significant and non-significant findings on the basis of their evidential weight, and in the context of existing knowledge. The outcome is expressed in quantitative terms of direct relevance to the substantive research question, providing greater protection against misinterpretation. Worked examples are given to illustrate how AnCred extracts additional insight from the outcome of typical research study designs. Its ability to cast light on the use of -values, the interpretation of non-significant findings and the s...

HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 2017

2007

Information seeking is an important part of people's everyday lives. To obtain information, people use Web search engines, consult authorities, ask questions of friends, go to libraries, read newspapers, and watch television, among other methods. Through such activities, people continually make judgments about how useful information is to their particular needs, actively construct meaning, and form judgments about the relevance of the information to their goal based on various attributes or criteria. When people assess information, however, they may notice that the characteristics and value of some information are not always consistent. 2 That is, people may find texts that seem to be clearly written but are inaccurate, that are easy to obtain but out-of-date, that are current but not sufficiently comprehensive, and so on. In such cases, how do they make judgments about information? According to Wilson, people tend to ask whether they can believe what the text says or, if not, whether they can at least take it seriously. 3 Wilson thus notes that credibility is a chief aspect of information quality and states that what and who people believe to be credible constitutes the potential pool of "cognitive authorities," or those that influence people's thoughts because they are perceived as "worthy of belief." 4 Selecting credible information from among the various available resources is a challenge for anyone. The kinds of challenges may, however, differ for adults and for young people. For instance, adult information seekers are likely to select information when they think it is accurate, current, novel, objective, reliable, authoritative, trustworthy, understandable, wellwritten, comprehensive, easy to obtain, and on topic. 5 Young people, on the other hand, often mainly consider whether information is related to the topic and whether it is new, interesting, and convenient, while showing less interest in authority, the readability of the language, and recency. Moreover, most adults possessed knowledge of how to evaluate information in traditional print media before newer digital media, especially the Internet, were introduced. Consequently, they had to learn how to apply the old rules and criteria for evaluating information to the relatively newer digital media. 7 Their experiences differ from those of today's youth, who have used digital media since a very young age. Indeed, survey reports show that 20 percent of college students began using computers between the ages of 5 and 8, and by the time they reached 16-18 years, virtually all of today's college students were using computers. 8 Thus, today's college students represent the first generation to "grow up digital." 9 They have experienced life in which personal computers were commonplace from the time they were born, and where the Internet has been available since their elementary school years.

The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology, 2010

See also chapter 2.5 Eyewitness testimony, chapter 2.9 Investigative interviewing, chapter 2.23 Statement validity analysis, chapter 2.18 Polygraphy, chapter 4.3 Interpersonal deception detection, chapter 2.25 Vulnerable adults' capacity. Credibility can be broadly defined as a judgement concerning the quality and veracity of evidence. In a forensic context, credibility judgements are often of critical importance because of the frequency of disputed accounts. For example, a woman might say she was raped by a man who in turn says she is lying, or a shopkeeper may accuse a person of robbery and the claim made that it was a case of mistaken identity. In both these situations a credibility assessment needs to take into account whether an individual is being deliberately deceptive or the individual is indeed mistaken about some of the evidence he or she provides. Of course, it is possible for an individual to be both deceptive and mistaken. For example, a rape victim may try to give an honest account of the rape, which is generally accurate but has some errors, but then lie by saying she was abducted by the offender when she went with the offender voluntarily.