Skip to Main Content

Research 101: Evaluating Information on the Internet: Timeliness

Find out how to avoid a catastrophe when you engage with a web site!

When looking at any source of information, looking at when it was written and published can give you a clue as to the timeliness of the information. Is it appropriate for your needs? Is it still current? Depending on the information you seek, you may need a very current source of information--something written or published very recently. In other cases, the information may still be valid and thus serve you well.

Getting Something That's Timely or Current - What You Can Do

checkmarkDouble-check the date on the web page - When was this information written? Last updated?

checkmark Check to see if the ideas or data are timeless, outdated, or soon-to-be-outdated.

checkmark Determine how current the information needs to be for your needs.

 

Face looking down and smilingGetting Something Timely or Current: What to Look For

checkmarkLook for a date published or a "last updated" date near the top after the page header or at the bottom of the page.

checkmarkLook at the publication dates of the sources cited. How old are the sources cited at the end of the text? Is the author drawing conclusions based on old information?

checkmarkAsk yourself, is the content something that I could find updated somewhere else? 

Take the Challenge!

Take a look at this article from Psychology Today. 

Then answer the questions below about its timeliness. Then click on each quesetion to compare your answers with ours.

The date this web page was last updated appears near the bottom of the page.

When this tutorial was created, the date on that web page was 9/30/2017

One of the sources cited has a publication date of 2010. That is seven years older than the publication date of the article itself and therefore the author might be drawing conclusions based on old information.

The other source has no date, but with a quick google search we realize the 5th edition is the most current edition.

The article does present decent information on the topic and thus might be a good starting point. However, based on an examination of its timeliness, we find the following:

  • The fact that this was put online in 2017
  • The older year (2010) of the second cited source of only two sources in the article
  • The possibility of newer information available on the subject

So with these three concerns about the article's timeliness, you may need to look elsewhere for more current information.