What techniques can you use to evaluate evidence validity?

Evidence validity is the extent to which evidence supports or contradicts a claim, argument, or hypothesis. Evaluating evidence validity is a crucial skill for critical thinking, especially when making important decisions or solving complex problems. In this article, you will learn some techniques that can help you assess the quality, reliability, and relevance of evidence from various sources.

1 Source credibility

One of the first steps to evaluate evidence validity is to check the source of the evidence. Who produced the evidence, and what are their credentials, expertise, and reputation? Are they biased, motivated, or influenced by any factors that could affect their objectivity or accuracy? How do they cite or reference their sources of information? A credible source is one that is trustworthy, authoritative, and transparent, and that provides evidence that is consistent, verifiable, and up-to-date.

Add your perspective

Sundas Khan

Assistant Manager Business Development | Key Account Management | Quality Assurance & Process Documentation | Certified Trainer | Six Sigma | Project Management
Report contribution
Source credibility is one of the essential to evaluate the evidence. If youre source is unreliable it would nearly impossible to make someone else believed on you. For example, data to evalute health care servives will be more reliable if collected by the ministry of health department instead of anywhere else.

Like

2 Evidence type

Another technique to evaluate evidence validity is to identify the type of evidence and its level of certainty. Evidence can be classified into different categories, such as empirical, logical, anecdotal, testimonial, or analogical. Empirical evidence is based on observation, experimentation, or measurement, and it is usually the most reliable and objective type of evidence. Logical evidence is based on reasoning, deduction, or inference, and it can be valid or invalid depending on the soundness of the arguments. Anecdotal evidence is based on personal experience or stories, and it is usually the least reliable and subjective type of evidence. Testimonial evidence is based on the opinions or statements of experts or witnesses, and it can vary in reliability and credibility depending on the source. Analogical evidence is based on comparison or similarity between two situations or cases, and it can be useful or misleading depending on the relevance and strength of the analogy.

Add your perspective

Sundas Khan

Assistant Manager Business Development | Key Account Management | Quality Assurance & Process Documentation | Certified Trainer | Six Sigma | Project Management
Report contribution
After the source of information, the type of information is another important part of evidence evaluation. Inference based on reliable data will generate the more authentic result. Empirical data is the safest and well founded type of data especially to analysis or implement some conventions. You can't pass over the chances of human biasedness in case of any other type of data sourcing. If the evidence is based on some biased data it can be cancelled with out another thought.

Like

3 Evidence analysis

A third technique to evaluate evidence validity is to analyze the evidence and its relation to the claim, argument, or hypothesis. How does the evidence support or contradict the claim, argument, or hypothesis? How strong or weak is the evidence? How relevant or irrelevant is the evidence? How sufficient or insufficient is the evidence? How consistent or inconsistent is the evidence? How accurate or inaccurate is the evidence? How current or outdated is the evidence? To answer these questions, you need to examine the evidence carefully, critically, and objectively, and look for any errors, flaws, gaps, or biases that could affect its validity.

Add your perspective

Sundas Khan

Assistant Manager Business Development | Key Account Management | Quality Assurance & Process Documentation | Certified Trainer | Six Sigma | Project Management
Report contribution
Exactly, and this requires strong analytical skills. If your evidence based on data then your statistical skills must be well-formed to analyse that data. Critical thinking is essential to evalute the relevance of the given evidence.

Like

4 Evidence comparison

A fourth technique to evaluate evidence validity is to compare the evidence with other evidence from different sources, perspectives, or methods. How does the evidence compare or contrast with other evidence on the same topic or issue? How does the evidence agree or disagree with other evidence from different sources, perspectives, or methods? How does the evidence complement or contradict other evidence from different sources, perspectives, or methods? To answer these questions, you need to seek out and review multiple sources of evidence, and look for any similarities, differences, conflicts, or convergences that could affect its validity.

Add your perspective

5 Evidence synthesis

A fifth technique to evaluate evidence validity is to synthesize the evidence and draw conclusions or implications from it. What does the evidence mean or imply for the claim, argument, or hypothesis? What are the main points or findings of the evidence? What are the strengths or limitations of the evidence? What are the implications or recommendations of the evidence? To answer these questions, you need to integrate and summarize the evidence, and weigh the pros and cons of the evidence, and consider the consequences or implications of the evidence.

Add your perspective

Dr Ambrish Singh

Health Outcomes | COA | HEOR | Health Economics | PRO | Pharmacoepidemiology | Systematic Review | Meta-Analysis | HTA | RWE
Report contribution
Checking evidence validity may involve understanding where the data comes from and how well it's put together. One can start by looking at what experts or peers have to say about it. Then, you dig into any biases that might sneak in and how the study deals with them. Also, seeing how consistent the findings are compared to other similar studies is key. It's like taking a deep dive into where the info comes from, how it's made, and whether it lines up with what other studies are saying. This way, one can tell if the evidence is the real deal or not.

Like
Răzvan Percă

Psychologist | Trainer | Content Creator
Report contribution
Meta-analyses stand out as the most robust evidence syntheses. A meta-analysis involves a statistical analysis that combines and examines the results of multiple studies. Researchers can undertake this form of study when numerous previous studies have explored the same question. Nevertheless, bias may persist even in meta-analyses. This bias could arise if publications selectively accept positive results, if researchers employ incomplete searches during a literature review, or if their selection criteria result in the exclusion of certain studies.

Like

6 Evidence communication

A sixth technique to evaluate evidence validity is to communicate the evidence and its validity to others. How do you present or report the evidence and its validity to others? How do you explain or justify the evidence and its validity to others? How do you persuade or influence others with the evidence and its validity? To answer these questions, you need to use appropriate and effective methods, formats, and styles to communicate the evidence and its validity to others, and address any questions, objections, or feedback that others may have about the evidence and its validity.

Add your perspective

7 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?

Add your perspective

Răzvan Percă

Psychologist | Trainer | Content Creator
Report contribution
Utilize the technique known as "The CRAAP test": (C)urrency: Is the source up-to-date? (R)elevance: Does the source align with your research needs? (A)uthority: Where is the source published? Who is the author? Are they regarded as reputable and trustworthy in their field? (A)ccuracy: Is the source backed by evidence? Are the claims cited correctly? (P)urpose: What was the motive behind publishing this source?

Like

What techniques can you use to evaluate evidence validity?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1 Source credibility

2 Evidence type

3 Evidence analysis

4 Evidence comparison

5 Evidence synthesis

6 Evidence communication

7 Here’s what else to consider

Critical Thinking

Rate this article

Thanks for your feedback

More articles on Critical Thinking

More relevant reading

What techniques can you use to evaluate evidence validity?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1 Source credibility

2 Evidence type

3 Evidence analysis

4 Evidence comparison

5 Evidence synthesis

6 Evidence communication

7 Here’s what else to consider

Critical Thinking

Rate this article

Thanks for your feedback

Explore Other Skills