Detecting Bias - Determining Reliability - B.H.S. History Mr. Hart (2024)

Detecting Bias

Assessing a Source’s Reliability

It should be clear that historians have to be extremely careful when using sources, whether primary or secondary. They cannot afford to accept that everything a source tells them is completely reliable and true. People exaggerate. People tell lies. People have opinions that others may not share. People make mistakes.

So, what can we, as historians, do to minimize the risk of drawing inaccurate conclusions from sources? There are a number of questions we need to ask in order to determine just how reliable a source is and to evaluate its provenance. For example:

• Who wrote it?
• When was it written?
• What is the context?
• Who was the intended audience?
• Why was it written? What was the author’s motive?
• What does it actually say?
• How does what it says compare with our own subject knowledge and with what other sources say?

HELPING WITH RELIABILITY QUESTIONS

You should be aware that a reliability question requires you to think about what weight can be placed on a source. It tests how far you understand how the historian evaluates the reliability of evidence before using it. The following points might be helpful in guiding you toward determining reliability:

• The first key points historians want to check about a source is whether the source is based on accurate knowledge and understanding. To do this, they might check whether the author was there at the time, whether the author was involved in the event, whether the author understood the overall context.
• Secondly, historians need to think about whether the person producing the source would be likely to give a full and accurate account. To do this the historian might think about whether the author has a reason to be very positive or to avoid telling the whole truth.
• The historian also needs to think about whether the situation being described is typical, because a source can be a reliable account of an individual situation, but it can be misleading to think that everyone had the same experiences.

Key ideas to remember when evaluating a source are:

• The nature of the source. A photograph shows a particular moment but it can be staged or deliberately taken from a specific angle in order to create an impression. A drawing will also reflect the knowledge and attitude of the artist.
• The origins of a source (who produced it and when) can give some clues about whether the source is likely to contain accurate information.
• The purpose of a source can give clues about whether the author might want to hide some information, or might be afraid to be critical, or might want to be rewarded.

It is always important that students think about each individual source and don’t make assumptions based on generalities. For example, not all newspapers sensationalize and not all bankers are rich.

• It is wrong to say that a source is reliable just because it comes from the time of the event. If that were true, then everything written in every newspaper would be true.
• It is wrong to say that a source is reliable because it was written by someone who was involved in the event. Someone could be involved in a car accident and tell lies rather than admit that they caused it.
• It is wrong to say that a source from an historian cannot be accurate because the historian wasn’t there at the time. The historian would have researched a wide range of sources and evaluated them for reliability before putting the evidence together and reaching a conclusion.

A table such as the one below may help you plan their answers to reliability questions. In this scenario you would be determining which source is more reliable.

In summary, you should:

• Avoid generalized statements such as ‘the camera never lies’ and ‘all cartoons exaggerate’.
• Use evidence from the source(s) to back up their comments on nature, origins and/or purpose.
• Make sure they have addressed some aspect of each source.
• Make use of their own knowledge of the author/situation/events mentioned in order to consider whether the source is reliable.

Helping with Reliability Questions

You should be aware that a reliability question requires you to think about what weight can be placed on a source. It tests how far you understand how the historian evaluates the reliability of evidence before using it. The following points might be helpful in guiding you toward determining reliability:

• The first key points historians want to check about a source is whether the source is based on accurate knowledge and understanding. To do this, they might check whether the author was there at the time, whether the author was involved in the event, whether the author understood the overall context.
• Secondly, historians need to think about whether the person producing the source would be likely to give a full and accurate account. To do this the historian might think about whether the author has a reason to be very positive or to avoid telling the whole truth.
• The historian also needs to think about whether the situation being described is typical, because a source can be a reliable account of an individual situation, but it can be misleading to think that everyone had the same experiences.

Key ideas to remember when evaluating a source are:

• The nature of the source. A photograph shows a particular moment but it can be staged or deliberately taken from a specific angle in order to create an impression. A drawing will also reflect the knowledge and attitude of the artist.
• The origins of a source (who produced it and when) can give some clues about whether the source is likely to contain accurate information.
• The purpose of a source can give clues about whether the author might want to hide some information, or might be afraid to be critical, or might want to be rewarded.

It is always important that students think about each individual source and don’t make assumptions based on generalities. For example, not all newspapers sensationalize and not all bankers are rich.

• It is wrong to say that a source is reliable just because it comes from the time of the event. If that were true, then everything written in every newspaper would be true.
• It is wrong to say that a source is reliable because it was written by someone who was involved in the event. Someone could be involved in a car accident and tell lies rather than admit that they caused it.
• It is wrong to say that a source from an historian cannot be accurate because the historian wasn’t there at the time. The historian would have researched a wide range of sources and evaluated them for reliability before putting the evidence together and reaching a conclusion.

A table such as the one below may help you plan their answers to reliability questions. In this scenario you would be determining which source is more reliable.

In summary, you should:

• Avoid generalized statements such as ‘the camera never lies’ and ‘all cartoons exaggerate’.
• Use evidence from the source(s) to back up their comments on nature, origins and/or purpose.
• Make sure they have addressed some aspect of each source.
• Make use of their own knowledge of the author/situation/events mentioned in order to consider whether the source is reliable.