Evaluating a potential resource to determine whether or not the material presents evidence of a bias or agenda on the part of the author is important, because information that is not presented objectively may be skewed in favor of a particular point-of-view, position, or ideology. A resource that is biased or written in support of an agenda may contain misinformation, ignore or misrepresent facts, or present information--such as statistics or quotations--out of context in a manner that negates their value as source material. Researchers should understand that evidence of bias or agenda may not be obvious from just a simple reading of the resource in question.
The terms bias and agenda each have multiple definitions. For the purposes of evaluating academic research and resources, the most applicable definitions for these terms are as follows.
bi·as Noun /ˈbīəs/ 1 Judgment unfairly influenced by subjective opinion when the situation calls for reliance on objective fact.
a·gen·da Noun /əˈjendə/ 1 A goal or intention consciously or unconsciously concealed, usually to gain the advantage of surprise.
Source: Reitz, J.M. (n.d.) Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science.
Confirmation Bias: When you only pay attention to resources that support your opinion. Often people don't even realize they are filtering out other opinions and facts. To avoid confirmation bias, get your information from a variety of sources. Look at both "pro" and "con" arguments.
People are often unaware or unconcerned with their bias confirming what they already believe.
The DIFFICULT part of critical thinking is - to look at the alternative possibilities - with the same open mind you use when you read something that agrees with you.
Researchers looking for evidence of bias or agenda should consider a variety of questions, including:
It is important to remember that all resources have the potential to exhibit a bias or agenda, regardless of format (i.e., book, article, web site) or who is responsible for writing, publishing, or funding the work. Researchers should be prepared to look at all materials with a degree of skepticism and evaluate the entirety of an item's contents before using it as source material.
The Non-Critical Thinker
"It's true if I/we believe it's true"
"It's true if it supports my argument."
The Critical Thinker
"I/we want to believe it, but it may be wrong."
"My own biases make me believe some things are true that are not."
"It may not support my argument, but it makes me think and is worth considering."
first person point-of-view that personalizes comments with words like "I" or We"
superlatives, such as "always," "never," "must"
belief statements that include "I believe" or "I think"
inflammatory language designed to anger or excite.
judgment statements that attack rather than report
solution suggestions using words like "could," should," "must"