PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2 CRAAP Test & Library Worksheet

Name

Capella University

PSYC-FPX2002 The Skillful Psychology Student

Prof. Name

Date

PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2: CRAAP Test and Library Worksheet

Evaluating the credibility of information is essential for producing accurate, evidence-based academic work. The CRAAP Test helps students assess online sources by examining currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose. For PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2, the selected internet source received a total score of 29 out of 50, indicating that it did not meet the acceptable threshold established for this evaluation. In comparison, a scholarly research article retrieved through the Capella University Library offered a stronger foundation for academic research because it was published in Frontiers in Psychology. This assessment demonstrates how systematic source evaluation helps students distinguish between general online information and credible scholarly evidence.

Part 1: Evaluating an Internet Source Using the CRAAP Test

The CRAAP Test is a widely used framework for evaluating the credibility and suitability of information sources. It consists of five criteria: Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. Each criterion examines a different aspect of source quality, helping students determine whether information is appropriate for university-level assignments.

For this assessment, each category was rated on a scale of 1 to 10, with higher scores indicating stronger performance. The resulting scores provided a structured way to identify the selected source’s strengths and weaknesses.

Currency: Is the Information Up to Date?

Currency refers to the publication date of a source and whether its content has been reviewed or updated recently. This factor is important in psychology because research findings, professional practices, and theoretical perspectives may change as new evidence becomes available.

The selected internet article was published more than five years ago, and the webpage did not indicate that it had been updated during the previous six months. Several external links were also broken or outdated, making it more difficult to verify some of the supporting information.

Based on these limitations, the source received a currency score of 5 out of 10. Although older information may still provide useful background knowledge, the lack of recent updates reduces its suitability for research that requires current evidence.

Relevance: Does the Source Address the Research Topic?

Relevance measures how closely a source relates to a research question, whether it addresses the intended subject, and whether its content is appropriate for the reader’s academic level.

The selected article was reasonably related to the research topic and presented information at an intermediate level suitable for undergraduate students. Other sources were also considered before the article was selected, allowing its usefulness to be assessed in comparison with alternative materials.

The source received a relevance score of 7 out of 10. Its content was understandable and sufficiently connected to the subject. However, it did not provide the depth of analysis or research evidence generally expected from a scholarly journal article.

Authority: Who Created and Published the Information?

Authority concerns the qualifications of the author and the credibility of the organization responsible for publishing a source. Relevant academic credentials, professional experience, institutional affiliations, and previous scholarly publications can help establish an author’s expertise.

The selected article identified its author and publisher. The author’s academic qualifications and previous scholarly work supported their subject knowledge, while the website’s .edu domain indicated an association with an educational institution.

Based on these characteristics, the source received an authority score of 10 out of 10. This score reflects its identifiable authorship, relevant expertise, and educational affiliation. However, authority alone does not guarantee that every statement is accurate, current, or free from bias.

Accuracy: Is the Information Supported by Evidence?

Accuracy refers to whether a source presents information correctly, provides verifiable evidence, and avoids significant factual errors. Reliable academic sources typically include clear references, supporting documentation, and information that readers can independently confirm.

The selected article included references and links to supporting material, but some sources were difficult to verify. Minor spelling and typographical errors were also present. Although the overall tone was relatively neutral, certain statements appeared to reflect the author’s perspective rather than being consistently supported by evidence.

The source received an accuracy score of 5 out of 10. More complete documentation, stronger evidence, and thorough editorial review would improve its reliability for academic use.

Purpose: Why Was the Information Published?

Purpose examines the reason a source was created and whether its primary goal is to inform, educate, persuade, entertain, or promote a particular viewpoint. Understanding the author’s purpose helps readers recognize potential bias and distinguish evidence-based information from opinion.

The selected article appeared to provide information but also promoted particular ideas and included opinion-based commentary. Some aspects of its presentation suggested ideological, institutional, or personal perspectives that could influence how the information was interpreted.

Consequently, the source received a purpose score of 2 out of 10. This low rating indicates that readers should exercise caution when using the article to support academic arguments, especially when more objective and evidence-based alternatives are available.

Overall CRAAP Test Score and Interpretation

The five categories produced the following results:

CRAAP Test Category	Score
Currency	5/10
Relevance	7/10
Authority	10/10
Accuracy	5/10
Purpose	2/10
Total	29/50

The scoring scale used in this assessment classifies sources as follows:

• 45–50: Excellent

• 40–44: Good

• 35–39: Average

• 30–34: Borderline acceptable

• Below 30: Not acceptable

PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2 CRAAP Test & Library Worksheet

The selected internet source received 29 out of 50, placing it below the acceptable threshold according to this scale. Its strongest characteristic was authority, while its weakest area was purpose. Limited currency and concerns about accuracy further reduced its overall suitability.

These results demonstrate why students should not rely solely on an author’s qualifications or a website’s professional appearance when determining credibility. A source may be published by an identifiable author with relevant expertise but still contain outdated information, incomplete evidence, or potential bias.

For university-level assignments, this source should not be used as a primary academic reference without additional verification. Peer-reviewed research articles and other credible scholarly materials are generally more appropriate when developing evidence-based academic arguments.

Part 2: Evaluating a Scholarly Source From the Capella University Library

To identify a stronger academic source, a research article was located through the Capella University Library using the Summon database. The selected article, written by Lin, Wang, and Yueh (2022), was published in Frontiers in Psychology.

The article, titled Learning Information Ethical Decision Making With a Simulation Game, explores how simulation-based learning can support students’ ethical decision-making related to information use and management. Its focus on a defined research question, scholarly publication, and educational application makes it a useful source to examine for academic research.

Scholarly Article Information

The article’s bibliographic information is provided below:

Article title: Learning information ethical decision making with a simulation game

Authors: W. Lin, J. Wang, and H. Yueh

Publication year: 2022

Journal: Frontiers in Psychology

Volume and article number: Volume 13, Article 933298

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933298

The article was accessed through the Capella University Library. Its publication in a scholarly journal provides a stronger academic starting point than a general internet article, although the research methods, findings, limitations, and relevance to a particular assignment should still be evaluated.

Purpose of the Scholarly Article

Lin et al. (2022) investigated the use of simulation games to support ethical decision-making concerning information management. The study focused on helping students understand how ethical principles apply to situations involving information use.

The simulation presented learners with scenarios in which they could consider ethical questions and make decisions within a structured learning environment. Rather than relying exclusively on theoretical explanations, this approach allowed students to engage with practical situations and consider the possible consequences of their choices.

Simulation-based learning can provide an interactive way to connect academic concepts with realistic challenges. By engaging with scenarios, students may have opportunities to develop critical thinking, recognize ethical concerns, and reflect on the reasoning behind their decisions.

For students studying psychology and related disciplines, this topic also highlights the importance of responsible information use, ethical judgment, and evidence-based decision-making.

Authors’ Conclusions and Educational Implications

Lin et al. (2022) examined the educational value of using a simulation game to teach information ethics. Their research supports considering interactive learning activities as a way to help students engage with ethical concepts and apply them to decision-making scenarios.

Simulation-based instruction can offer learners opportunities to explore different choices, consider consequences, and reflect on ethical responsibilities in a controlled environment. These activities may complement traditional teaching methods by encouraging active participation rather than passive information consumption.

The broader educational implication is that ethical decision-making involves more than memorizing rules. Students must also learn how to interpret situations, evaluate available information, and consider the consequences of their actions.

When discussing the study in an academic assignment, students should connect these implications to the article’s actual methods and reported findings rather than making claims that extend beyond the evidence presented by the researchers.

Why the Scholarly Article Is More Appropriate for Academic Research

The scholarly article provides several advantages for academic research. Its publication in a scientific journal, identifiable authorship, and formal research focus make it a more suitable starting point for evidence-based discussion than a general webpage with outdated links and questions about objectivity.

The article also provides a specific research topic that readers can examine in greater detail. Students can review the full text to understand the research design, evidence, conclusions, and limitations before deciding how to use the findings in an assignment.

However, scholarly publication should not be treated as an automatic guarantee of quality. Students should still evaluate the article’s research methods, relevance, transparency, and limitations. Combining these checks with the CRAAP Test supports more informed decisions about which sources deserve to be included in academic work.

APA 7th Edition Citation for the Scholarly Article

The correct in-text citation for the selected article is (Lin et al., 2022). When the authors are mentioned directly in a sentence, the citation can be written as Lin et al. (2022).

The reference entry is:

Lin, W., Wang, J., & Yueh, H. (2022). Learning information ethical decision making with a simulation game. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 933298. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933298

Using APA 7th edition formatting helps readers identify the original research and locate the publication. Accurate citations also acknowledge the researchers’ contributions and allow readers to verify the evidence supporting an academic argument.

Time Management Reflection

Completing the CRAAP Test and library worksheet required more time than initially anticipated. Evaluating the credibility of an internet source, comparing its strengths and weaknesses, locating a scholarly article, and reviewing the research all required careful attention.

This experience demonstrated that effective academic writing begins with a well-organized research process. Selecting sources without evaluating their credibility can create additional work later, particularly when information must be verified or replaced before an assignment can be completed.

To improve time management during future assignments, an additional hour will be scheduled each evening specifically for reading and reviewing research materials. Setting aside dedicated research time should make it easier to identify appropriate sources, understand the evidence, and organize information before beginning the writing process.

Separating research from writing may also improve concentration and reduce unnecessary delays. By reviewing source credibility early, it becomes easier to build an assignment around reliable evidence instead of revising the work after discovering that a source is unsuitable.

Why Is the CRAAP Test Important for Students?

The CRAAP Test provides students with a systematic method for evaluating information before using it in academic assignments. In an online environment where information is widely available, a professional-looking webpage or a high search-engine ranking does not necessarily indicate that a source is trustworthy.

The five criteria help students assess different dimensions of credibility. Currency identifies whether information is sufficiently up to date, relevance establishes its connection to the research question, authority examines the author’s expertise, accuracy considers the supporting evidence, and purpose identifies potential bias or persuasive intent.

Using this framework can improve research quality by helping students identify unreliable sources, choose stronger references, and develop better-supported arguments. It also encourages critical thinking because students must examine not only what a source says but also who created it, why it was published, and whether its claims can be verified.

For PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2, comparing a general internet source with a scholarly article demonstrates how structured evaluation can guide academic research decisions. The process reinforces the importance of selecting sources based on evidence and credibility rather than convenience alone.

Frequently Asked Questions About PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2

What is the CRAAP Test in academic research?

The CRAAP Test is a source-evaluation framework used to determine whether information is appropriate for academic research. It examines five criteria: Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. Students can use these criteria to identify outdated information, unsupported claims, potential bias, and other concerns that may affect a source’s credibility.

What does CRAAP stand for?

CRAAP stands for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. Each category evaluates a different characteristic of a source, helping students make more informed decisions about whether to use it in an academic assignment.

What is a good CRAAP Test score?

The appropriate score depends on the scoring scale used by the instructor or assignment. In this assessment, a score of 45–50 is considered excellent, while a score below 30 is classified as not acceptable. These ranges are specific to the scale provided for this evaluation and should not be treated as a universal standard for every CRAAP Test.

Why did the internet source receive a CRAAP score of 29 out of 50?

The source received 29 out of 50 because it had limitations in currency, accuracy, and purpose. Although its authority score was strong and its relevance was reasonably good, outdated links, limited evidence verification, and opinion-based commentary reduced its overall credibility for academic use.

Why is authority important when evaluating an online source?

Authority helps readers determine whether the author or publishing organization has the expertise needed to discuss a topic accurately. Academic qualifications, professional experience, institutional affiliations, and relevant publications can support an author’s credibility. However, authority should be considered alongside accuracy, currency, relevance, and purpose.

Why are peer-reviewed articles useful for university assignments?

Peer-reviewed articles are generally useful because they undergo evaluation by experts in the relevant field before publication. They often provide research methods, supporting evidence, references, and detailed findings that help students develop evidence-based arguments. Nevertheless, students should still evaluate each article’s quality, limitations, and relevance to the assignment.

Which scholarly article was used in PSYC FPX 2002 Assessment 2?

The selected article was Learning Information Ethical Decision Making With a Simulation Game, written by Lin, Wang, and Yueh and published in Frontiers in Psychology in 2022. It examines simulation-based learning in the context of ethical decision-making related to information management.

What is the main focus of Lin et al. (2022)?

Lin et al. (2022) examined how a simulation game can be used to teach information ethics and support ethical decision-making. The study focuses on interactive learning experiences that allow students to engage with ethical scenarios and consider their decisions within a structured environment.

How does the CRAAP Test improve research quality?

The CRAAP Test improves research quality by encouraging students to verify information before citing it. Evaluating the source’s publication date, relevance, authorship, supporting evidence, and purpose helps students avoid relying on information that is outdated, poorly supported, or potentially biased.

How can students manage research time more effectively?

Students can improve research time management by scheduling dedicated reading sessions, identifying research questions early, and evaluating sources before beginning the writing process. Keeping research and writing sessions organized can reduce unnecessary revisions and make academic assignments easier to complete.

References

California State University, Chico. (n.d.). Evaluating information: Applying the CRAAP test. Meriam Library. https://library.csuchico.edu/

Lin, W., Wang, J., & Yueh, H. (2022). Learning information ethical decision making with a simulation game. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 933298. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933298