In this qualitative study, 41 adolescents from Brazil and France were asked to conduct web-based searches for science-related information. Different search contexts and current socio-scientific issues were used in order to represent a variety of situations that adolescents are confronted with in their everyday life. Subsequently, they were interviewed about their individual searches. We sought to answer three questions: (a) What types of sources do Brazilian and French adolescents access in their searches? (b) Which evaluation criteria do they use to select the sources they access? (c) Do their source choices differ according to the search context? The results reveal that, regardless of search context, the participants demonstrated trust in news sources, and mistrust towards official sources, mostly as a function of the topic. Receiver-related criteria were particularly relevant for the Brazilian adolescents when selecting the sources, while the French participants based their choices more on parameters related to the content. Results suggest how previous knowledge and interest on the topic can influence teenagers’ choices.
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Understanding the infodemic and misinformation in the fight against COVID-19. Report, PAHO, Washington, DC, 13 April 2020.
2.
AndersonMJiangJ. Teens, social media and technology 2018. Report, Pew Research Center, Washington, DC, 31 May 2018, pp. 1673–1689.
3.
Mediametrie. Les jeunes et l’information. Report, Ministry of Culture, Paris, 27 July 2018.
4.
NIC.br. Survey on Internet use by children in Brazil: ICT Kids Online Brazil 2019. Report, Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 23 November 2020.
5.
KimK-SSinS-CJ. Selecting quality sources: bridging the gap between the perception and use of information sources. J Inf Sci2011; 37(2): 178–188.
6.
RowlandsINicholasDWilliamsP, et al. The Google generation: the information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Aslib Proc2008; 60: 290–310.
7.
VargasNJBMartínez PérezIF. Enseñanza de las Ciencias para ciudadanía em estudiantes de educación media a partir de cuestiones científicas. In: Atas do VIII Encontro Nacional de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências Campinas, Brazil, 5–9 December 2011.
8.
Macedo-RouetMPotockiAScharrerL, et al. How good is this page? Benefits and limits of prompting on adolescents’ evaluation of Web information quality. Read Res Quart2019; 54: 299–321.
9.
PaulJMacedo-RouetMRouetJF, et al. Why attend to source information when reading online? The perspective of ninth grade students from two different countries. Comput Educ2017; 113: 339–354.
10.
SavolainenR. Everyday life information seeking. In: ChalcraftA (ed.) Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed.Abingdon: Taylor & Francis, 2011, pp. 1780–1789.
11.
Macedo-RouetMTrópiaGCastilhosW, et al. Adolescents’ evaluation of online scientific information in daily life contexts: when sourcing matters. Int J Sci Educ2023; 13: 311–327.
12.
PellizzonRFPoblaciónDAGoldenbergS. Pesquisa na área da saúde: seleção das principais fontes para acesso à literatura científica. Acta Cir Bras2003; 18(6): 493–496.
13.
RiehSYDanielsonDR. Credibility: a multidisciplinary framework. In: CroninB (ed.) Annual review of information science and technology. 1st ed. Medford, NJ: Information Today, 2007, pp. 307–364.
14.
BråtenIStadtlerMSalmerónL. The role of sourcing in discourse comprehension. In: SchoberMFRappDNBrittMA (eds) Handbook of Discourse Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2018, pp. 141–168.
15.
SwartJ. Tactics of news literacy: how young people access, evaluate, and engage with news on social media. New Media Soc2021; 25: 505–521.
16.
RiehSY. Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec2002; 53(2): 145–161.
17.
DoyleCS. Information literacy in an information society: a concept for the information age. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse, 1994.
18.
GrizzleAWilsonCTuazonR, et al. Media and information literate citizens: think critically, click wisely! (Second edition of the UNESCO model media and information literacy curriculum for educators and learners). Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2021.
19.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. Report, OECD, Paris, 26 April 2019.
20.
KiiliCLaurinenLMarttunenM. Students evaluating Internet sources: from versatile evaluators to uncritical readers. J Educ Comput Res2008; 39(1): 75–95.
21.
NygrenTGuathM. Students evaluating and corroborating digital news. Scand J Educ Res2022; 66: 549–565.
22.
World Health Organization (WHO). Health for the world’s adolescents. Report, WHO, Geneva, 1 January 2014.
23.
MJMetzgerAJFlanagin. Psychological approaches to credibility assessment online. In: SundarSS (ed.) The handbook of the psychology of communication technology. 1st ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2015, pp. 445–466.
24.
SbaffiLRowleyJ. Trust and credibility in Web-based health information: a review and agenda for future research. J Med Internet Res2017; 19(6): e218.
25.
MassaraniLCastelfranchiYFagundesV, et al. O que os jovens brasileiros pensam da ciência e da tecnologia? Pesquisa realizada pelo Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Comunicação Pública da Ciência e Tecnologia. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Ed. Fiocruz, 2021, p. 225.
26.
MetzgerMJFlanaginAJMeddersRB. Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. J Commun2010; 60(3): 413–439.
27.
HilligossBRiehSY. Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Inform Process Manag2008; 44(4): 1467–1484.
28.
FoggBJSoohooCDanielsonD, et al. How do users evaluate the credibility of Web sites? A study with over 2,500 participants. In: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on designing for user experiences, San Francisco, CA, 6–7 June 2003, pp. 1–15. New York: ACM Press.
29.
PotockiADe PereyraGRosC, et al. The development of source evaluation skills during adolescence: exploring different levels of source processing and their relationships. Infanc Aprendiz2020; 43(1): 19–59.
30.
PérezAPotockiAStadtlerM, et al. Fostering teenagers’ assessment of information reliability: effects of a classroom intervention focused on critical source dimensions. Learn Instr2018; 58: 53–64.
31.
CoiroJCoscarelliCMaykelC, et al. Investigating criteria that seventh graders use to evaluate the quality of online information. J Adolesc Adult Lit2015; 59(3): 287–297.
32.
SalmerónLMacedo-RouetMRouetJF. Multiple viewpoints increase students’ attention to source features in social question and answer forum messages. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec2016; 67(10): 2404–2419.
33.
DecriemM. (2017). Les sciences somnambules ‘Pratiques informationnelles et contextes d’influences autour de la culture scientifique chez les jeunes’ [Master’s thesis, UniversitÅ Toulouse Jean-JaurÅs]. DANTE. https://dante.univ-tlse2.fr/s/fr/item/4402
34.
TraquinaN. Teorias do Jornalismo: porque as notícias são o que são, vol. 1. 2nd ed. Florianópolis, Brazil: Insular, 2005, p. 223.
35.
KobayashiK. Students’ consideration of source information during the reading of multiple texts and its effect on intertextual conflict resolution. Instr Sci2014; 42: 183–205.
GerjetsPKammererYWernerB. Measuring spontaneous and instructed evaluation processes during Web search: integrating concurrent thinking-aloud protocols and eye-tracking data. Learn Instr2011; 21: 220–231.
38.
SimonnotB. Être usager de l’information en ligne nécessite-t-il de nouvelles compétences? In: DinetJ (ed.) Usages, Usagers et Compétences Informationnelles au 21e Siècle. Paris: Hermes Lavoisier, 2008, pp. 21–39.
39.
WatsonC. An exploratory study of secondary students’ judgments of the relevance and reliability of information. J Assoc Inf Sci Tech2014; 65(7): 1385–1408.
40.
GuineeKEagletonMBHallTE. Adolescents’ Internet search strategies: drawing upon familiar cognitive paradigms when accessing electronic information sources. J Educ Comput Res2003; 29(3): 363–374.
41.
Van DijkTA. News, discourse, and ideology. In: Wahl-JorgensenKHanitzschT (eds) The handbook of journalism studies. New York: Routledge, 2008, pp. 191–204.
De SimoneCBattistiARuggeriA. Differential impact of web habits and active navigation on adolescents’ online learning. Comput Hum Behav Rep2022; 8: 100246.
44.
SchmidtHKRothgangelMGrubeD. Prior knowledge in recalling arguments in bioethical dilemmas. Front Psychol2015; 6: 1292.
45.
European Commission. Joint communication to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: action plan against disinformation. Report, European Commission, Brussels, 5 December 2018.
46.
EcclesJSRoeserRW. Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. J Res Adolescence2011; 21(1): 225–241.
47.
VerhoevenMPoorthuisAMGVolmanM. The role of school in adolescents’ identity development. A literature review. Educ Psychol Rev2019; 31: 35–63.
48.
HöchstötterNLewandowskiD. What users see – structures in search engine results pages. Inform Sciences2009; 179(12): 1796–1812.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
