Q2) in the learning portfolio, Wikipedia is not accepted as a credible resource for academic assignments. What do you think is the reason Wikipedia is not accepted?
In order to create decent academic assignments, we are told to look for more scholar-like resources when searching on the web (e.g. journal articles) for assignments, so a website like Wikipedia is not accepted for use. While Wikipedia pretty much puts encyclopaedias out of business, the main factor of this is because the pages can be written and/ or edited by anyone on the internet; and thus is not a credible resource. It’s like a big internet database written by users of the internet for users of the internet. It’s because of this that parts of Wikipedia articles may have bias or untruthful content, which explained by Fogg (2003), websites that convey qualities of trustworthiness and expertise will attract more people and be seen as more credible, especially when the website is viewed as unbiased, knowledgable and have direct contact to the posts or sites’ writer (Fogg, 2003).
Wikipedia has a reputation of having fake information or biased opinions edited into the website, and so while it can be a good place to scan through to get an idea of what you’re researching, for academic assignments it’s better to look for research where there are high levels of expertise on the given topic.
Fogg, B. J. (2003). Credibility and the World Wide Web. In Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do (pp. 122‐125). Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Fogg, B. J. (2003). Credibility and the World Wide Web. In Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do (pp. 147‐181). Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.