How the Scientific Method Invalidates “Fake News”

UNCG Author/Contributor (non-UNCG co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
Megan Carlton, Science Librarian and Assistant Professor (Creator)
Lea Leininger, Health Sciences Reference Librarian (Creator)
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG )
Web Site:

Abstract: This chapter examines the process of science and the ways that “breakthroughs” are sometimes inaccurately reported in the natural sciences. Scientific ideas are evaluated within the scientific community through an iterative process. They are rarely dependent on one key experiment. Errors in communication can occur at many points after the research has been completed. In evaluating science communication, seek independent confirmation of the information and seek the primary research report. Within a primary report of research, look for transparency about conflicts of interest, details about participants or population studied, and author discussion of weaknesses of the study.

Additional Information

Teaching About Fake News: Lessons Plans for Different Disciplines and Audiences (edited by Candice Benjes-Small, Carol Wittig, and Mary K. Oberlies). ACRL
Language: English
Date: 2021
information literacy, fake news, scientific method, scientific reporting

Email this document to