Many answerers NEVER cite a single source; why?

Question

...and then they are VOTED the most correct answer- give me a break!

Am I the only one that witnesses so many people answer the question and never ever cite a single source or reference? When they do it is often times wikipedia (many of its articles lack a single source or reference)

Many people also plagiarize (steal someone's work without proper attribution). Also, people that practice the NO SOURCE answer will never graduate from college.

Learn young and get in the habit of QUOTING RELIABLE SOURCES AND REFERENCES (8

You know what I would love to see? Your answer can NOT be posted until you quote your source!

Answer 1

(I wrote this yesterday but forgot to post it, so sorry if it doesn't take proper account of Rabbit's fine answer.)

As the answers so far have suggested, people have different reasons for not citing sources. Some are not able to, some are too lazy to, others truly lack the time. But I'm also sure there are quite capable of doing so but do not simply because they have t different view of the nature of
Yahoo!Answers.

I think there are other things going on as well, things the participants may not realize (or may not have stopped to think about).


General observation: many of those who have answered so far don't appear to have read the question, and a number have fallen prey to common logical fallacies (esp. of the 'infomal' type). I do not mean to say that everyone who says things like "I knew the answer without looking it up" is acting illogically or inappropriately... but these mistakes do explain SOME of what's going on, and this method provided a convenient way to organize my thoughts!

1) Fallacy of "hasty generalization"

Some point out that is is not ALWAYS necessary to cite sources to point out a fact or make a point. True. But since the question asks why some NEVER cite sources for their answers, I assume the asker understands that there are times, perhaps many, when a solid answer does not need to be sourced. But that does NOT explain why someone would NEVER give a source


2) Fallacy of "appeal to authority" ? (or "I don't need no stinkin' sources!")

Another common answer seems to boil down to "I'm an expert in the field so I don't need to look up the answer... or I know so MUCH that I can't be bothered to track down the source that lays out the specific information or evidence that would support what I'm writing."

My thoughts on that:

a) First, how do we KNOW you're an expert? should we simply accept your word that so-and-so said, wrote or did such-and-such, without ANY specifics? And does your general expertise in a rather large field PROVE that your answer on ANY question is reliable?

(I try hard NOT to emphasize my credentials, even --or especially-- when they have a direct bearing on the question. I would rather attempt to lay out the facts and my reasoning in a way that gives people a chance to FOLLOW my thoughts and, I hope, come to the same conclusion, or at least understand how *I* got there!)

Related to this -- some refuse to cite wikipedia, because 'so many articles in it are unreliable or don't list any sources'. Yet you expect us to just accept YOUR word without any sources ??

Frankly, I think the complete dismissal of ALL wikipedia links is silly, especially on the basis of the site being "uneven". Sure, there are very poor wiki articles, and some that have poor sources, or none. But there are many others which are quite well-done and useful, which nicely summarize lists of information, and provide good links to primary documents and good secondary discussions, etc. So, if you know the field and cannot easily find another source to point people to for futher information, why not at least check out the wikipedia article(s) related to your topic and SEE if they are good ones?

(One big caveat here. I have seen EXCELLENT wikipedia articles destroyed, even suddenly replaced by a person or group that swept in with their own odd POV, esp. if it's an area where some feelings run high.)

b) Even if your information is correct, won't people learn more if they have the opportunity to actually LOOK at the original sources or good secondary treatments or them?


3) The "petitio principi" argument? (=circular argument or "begging the question", assuming the thing to be proved)

Then there's the argument "it's common knowledge" or "they could easily find the info by a web search". Maybe so (or rather, frequently so!). But if that's how you feel about the specific question, I wonder why you're bothering to answer it? Also, if it's that easy, and you know how to do it, would it take that much effort to select and list a link that nicely lays out these facts?

As a matter of fact, MANY "common knowledge" answers are based on truisms or assumptions. But three are all too many things that "everyone knows" that simply aren't so, or at least are grossly simplified! I do find it odd to read people's explanations of what the Emancipation Proclamation said and did who give no evidence of having read it (or 'them', that is the 'preliminary' and 'final' versions). Here's an example of something SHORT and fairly easy to find links to. So why do so few bother to either link to it, quote it or point to any of its specifics?


4) A specific case of #1 -- implying that because SOME questions can't or shouldn't be sourced, that this applies to ALL

Some say, "many questions are a matter of opinion, so how do you source that?" Of course, if the question is a pure question of 'matter of taste', e.g., 'what's your favorite color?' it may not make any sense to expect sources. But if someone asks for an EVALUATION question (e.g., "Who was the best general/president...?") that asks for an opinion based on your understanding of FACTS, and sourcing these might be appropriate. Even when asking something more "personal", like "Who is YOUR favorite president?" most people want, or would appreciate, REASONS. And on occasion these might be helped by adding a source.


Part of the complaint, it seems, is the giving of "best answer" to those who don't provide solid evidence (esp. sources). That's a fair criticism of things that go on here. It might be fine to lay out your answer without sources, but if someone responds to that with a reasoned and (well!-)SOURCED answer, that ought to be taken seriously, perhaps given more weight that the un-sourced answer. Or maybe people should at least CHECK OUT the sources a bit before choosing a "best answer".

_________________________________

One final thought -- I find it a bit ironic that this question if being asked by someone who provides NO personal info or email links, and has hidden all their questions and answers in this new "private network"! There may be good reasons for that... but in general I think one of the ways people can figure out whether your answer is worth taking seriously (or is even your OWN) is by being able to look at OTHER things you've written.

Answer 2

Hello,

I'll tell you why since sometimes I quote sources and sometimes not. I got a degree from university so I am well aware of these rules.

If you are doing academic research or quoting from an article whilst trying to give proof on an idea, then it is necessary. On the other hand if the question is just common general knowledge, there is no reason to quote a source.

For example, if I say there are theories out that Napoleon may have been gradually poisoned with arsenic then I'd have to come up with the sources like Mr. Weider, the papers by researchers in forensics who studied his hair and did the analysis on his remains and perhaps quote or site sources who said certain members of his staff on St. Helena did it over time. If I quote their statements directly, I cite the author.

On the other hand if I say Pearl Harbour was bombed Dec. 7, 1941, Lincoln was assassinated by an Actor called Booth at the Ford theatre, nearly half the American population is unhappy with the war in Iraq and James Watt invented the steam engine, Aristotle died a year before the library of Alexandria was built, or the Japanese commited atrocities in 1937 in Nanking, then then I see no reason to quote a sources.

If every question, many of them simple had to be researched and cited like a theisis, I can imagine that very few people would respond to these forums.


Regards,

Michael Kelly

Answer 3

Some things are answered off-the-cuff, just for the two points. I've done a few of those myself.

Some things are answered out of personal study and experience. I've done a few of those myself.

Some things are clearly common knowledge for those who have been around the block a few times, and from the questions some who ask, haven't. I've done a few of those myself.

Some things are exactly what you refer to, they need some source of reference, particularly when there is more than potential answer to be arrived at. I've done more than a few of those--and know what? I've had detailed, documented answers, even giving them a quote and page number, and still were not given the correct designation because some cute answer or some answer of convenience to the asker's point of view was preferred.

Keep preaching the message, it will help some of these kids.

Answer 4

Well, when you have read thousands of books you often remember the information but not the source. Although I personally possess about three thousand books on medieval history, I have read many others besides, (I'm estimating at least 40-50,000) plus encyclopedia references, seminars, lectures, individual discussions.

If you want detailed information on a subject you need to do the research and reading yourself, not post a question on a site like this. References and source information are required when one publishes a text book or writes a thesis for a degree but if it was required on this site there would be very few answers supplied.

Often when people vote on an answer as being the best it is because they too are well-educated on a subject and agree with the content of the answer.

Answer 5

I personally try to only Answer Questions I Know the Answer too. Like My Profile says I am a History Buff. Because My Father had a Library at Home. So I read Allot of the Books he had. So History Information comes Easy To Me. When I have to Look something up I Source It Always! With the Myspace Category It is From Trial and Error! I put the Sources In That I Use. I try to give Step By Step Instructions in that Category to Make it Simple. But I Source Answers When I Look Them Up.

Answer 6

You know two plus two is four. You know your name. You know the president or the prime minister of your country. When somebody asks you such questions, you sure will be able to answer. But, what is the source? Did you know them all even as you are born? Now, can you please tell me who told you that two and two would make four, who told you that your name was N/A and which newspaper or a TV channel or some other source told you the name of the premier of your state?
Assuming you remember the name of the person who taught you that two twos were four, he cannot be the real source. He was told by some one and so on. Now tell me, when you say 2+2=4, what is your source?
It is really like this. When you know certain things, they are absorbed and retained in your mind. The source of such things is THE REAL YOU (OR N/A) and not anything else or anybody else.

Answer 7

Any set of history department guildelines will tell you if a piece of information is considered "common knowledge" it doesn't have to be cited. A statement is considered "common knowledge" if appears in more than one source.

Now, consider the kind of questions that people ask here. There are two general types. Opinion questions like "Was Hitler bad?" And questions that ask for specific fact. "What was the date of D-Day?" for example. Neither of these questions require citation according to university regulations. Sorry.

Finally, this is Yahoo! Answers, not a formal academic paper. If you think an internet message board is the proper venue through which good academic practices ought to be inculcated or otherwise instilled, I think you ought to give it a little more thought. Let's not pretend that we are what we are not. This is an informal forum. Let's act accordingly.

Answer 8

More often than not I don't cite sources. I answer questions baed on my general knowledge, and finding sources on the web to match it would be a waste of time. I dislike the sort of simple factual question that could have been answered with a google search in as little time as it takes to type the question, and usually don't answer those, even when I know the correct answer.

And by the way, I already have graduated from a very good college.

Answer 9

Your suggestion in the last sentence is an interesting one. It might be applicable for questions of fact, but many questions seek opinions and Yahoo! Answers' software would be hard put to discriminate between question types. Most askers don't really know whether their questions are requests for facts or opinions.

There are some answers that are common knowledge among the educated. They didn't need to do the research anew.

When I see a question that smacks of school assignment, I have taken to appending the following to any answer I might enter (including "Do your own schoolwork!"):

"BTW, be careful which answer to your question you cut and paste. It may be offered by someone who wants to trip you up because you're not doing your own work."

Answer 10

You sanctimonious prig! Most answers are actually the answerer's' own opinions (as are most of the questions asked in such a way as to show queries from personal experience!) How does one credit yourself (without bragging!) by listing yourself as a "reliable source"? Sometimes the only suitable reference should be "LIFE" . . . Wake up and smell the roses my friend, and stop being so critical of the good folks that really make life a bit more interesting that being "statistically correct" (as you seem to require them to be!) You might just learn something even from a fool, and might even enjoy doing so . . .
PS: I am an honored journalist with many an award for well researched articles published in numerous publications for more than 25 years, a trained and qualified Public Relations Practitioner and have an above average IQ. I read on average one book per week (mostly novels - but also biographies and non-fictional material - in excess of 500 pages in length) . . .\
P.PS: Hey guys - I think this is one of those askers who were to lazy to do their own research for a project or asignment, and splashed it on Yahoo! Answers to get "those fools who think they know all and keep on answering questions there" (as some have rereffered to us regular participants!) to do the job for him!! Mmmm - I suspect I am probably not far oof the mark - what do you guys think?

Answer 11

What if someone was told by their mother? Or by reading it in a magazine a long time ago? Posting a source here is inefficient mostly because it isn't always a genuine source. As for the plagiarizing, well, it answered your question, didn't it? Sources are fine for college papers, but here they are not always efficient. Besides, if you do not believe someone's answer, it is your duty to look up on that. After all, you did ask the question.