is britannica a reliable source for a research paper

• August 26, 2024 | MBFC’s Daily Vetted Fact Checks for 08/26/2024
• August 25, 2024 | MBFC’s Daily Vetted Fact Checks for 08/25/2024 (Weekend Edition)
• August 24, 2024 | MBFC’s Weekly Media Literacy Quiz Covering the Week of Aug 18th – Aug 24th
• August 24, 2024 | MBFC’s Daily Vetted Fact Checks for 08/24/2024 (Weekend Edition)
• August 23, 2024 | (Fact Check) Final Day of Democratic National Convention – Kamala Harris Speech

Encyclopedia Britannica – Bias and Credibility

PRO-SCIENCE

These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence-based through the use of credible scientific sourcing.  Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased, and does not use emotional words. These sources also respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field and strive to publish peer-reviewed science. Some sources in this category may have a slight political bias but adhere to scientific principles. See all Pro-Science sources.

• Overall, we rate Encyclopedia Britannica a Least Biased, Pro-Science source.

Detailed Report

Bias Rating: LEAST PRO-SCIENCE Factual Reporting: HIGH Country: USA MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE Media Type: Website Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

Founded in 1768, The Encyclopedia Britannica is a general knowledge English-language encyclopedia. It is written by about 100 full-time editors and more than 4,000 contributors, including 110 Nobel Prize winners and five American presidents. The 2010 version of the 15th edition, which spans 32 volumes and 32,640 pages, was the last printed edition; digital content and distribution have continued since then.

Read our profile on the United States government and media.

Funded by / Ownership

The publisher is Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. , and revenue is generated through advertising and subscription fees.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Encyclopedia Britannica provides an enormous amount of information covering history, science, technology, and more. The website is set up with a search bar at the top of the screen to search for the topic you are interested in. The homepage also features articles with minimal bias, such as this: Do Plants Feel Pain ?  This article is properly sourced, and in case you are interested, plants do not feel pain because they do not have pain receptors. Thanks, Britannica!

Regarding bias, Forbes did an analysis that showed Britannica is less biased than Wikipedia.

Failed Fact Checks

• None in the Last 5 years

Overall, we rate Encyclopedia Britannica a Least Biased, Pro-Science source. (D. Van Zandt 6/17/2019) Updated (06/14/2024)

Source: https://www.britannica.com/

Last Updated on June 14, 2024 by Media Bias Fact Check

Do you appreciate our work? Please consider one of the following ways to sustain us.

MBFC Ad-Free 

MBFC Donation

Crypto Donation

Left vs. Right Bias: How we rate the bias of media sources

Explore Similar Sources:

• Encyclopedia Dramatica – Bias and Credibility

Support our mission - ad-free browsing & exclusive content. If you value our work, consider becoming a member.

New membership plans available.

Every contribution counts

Never see this message again

Is Britannica A Reliable Source: Meaning, Attributes, Impact & Cons

The debate on whether Britannica is a reliable source of information has been going on for as long as the encyclopedia has been around. 

Regardless of which side of the fence you stand on, one thing is sure: Britannica is an interesting read. 

So what do you think? Is Britannica a reliable resource, or is it nothing more than a glorified encyclopedia? Find out in this article.

What is Britannica?

It’s one of the most respected sources in the world and has been used by scholars and students for decades. 

What are the attributes of a reliable source of information?

A reliable source is a news organization, publication, or Web site that you can rely on for accuracy and impartiality. 

1. Based on factual evidence

A reliable source of information must have a basis. The information must be genuine and derived from observations or facts. 

2. Up-to-date

When it comes to staying informed, nothing is more important than having a reliable source of information. 

The Internet is constantly changing, and so is the news. It’s important to update a website or resource as quickly as possible to stay ahead of the curve. 

This is also one of the reasons why news agencies, blogs, and websites make more money when they have the most recent stories or news.

3. Accurate and relevant

If a source of information is inaccurate or irrelevant, it can cause confusion and the inability to make sound decisions. 

The last thing you need is unreliable information clouding your judgment. That’s why having a reliable source of information at your fingertips is essential. 

4. Authoritative

Without an authoritative source of information, you’re flying blind. You might think you’re getting expert advice from your Facebook friends or a popular blog, but you may learn the wrong things and make the wrong choices. 

There’s a reason why experts always recommend authoritative sources. You can rely on them to give you the truth, no matter how difficult it might be to hear. 

5. High standard of quality

It’s more important than ever to have a reliable source of information. We live in a world where fake news can have serious consequences. 

The truth is, there’s no substitute for reliable, fact-based information. That’s why it’s so important that the source of our information is high quality. 

And it should be trustworthy, so we can feel confident that what we’re reading is true.

Is Britannica a reliable source of information?

Britannica has been a trusted resource for students and scholars since its earliest days. With over  200 years of publishing experience, it is one of the world’s oldest and most respected encyclopedias. 

But can Britannica be trusted when it comes to the accuracy of its content? Considering the attributes of a reliable source of information, Britannica is a trusted source of information. 

Remember that Britannica is a trusted source of information, but it’s not the only source. There are many other reliable sources of information that you can use to make informed decisions. 

As a researcher, you should use multiple sources of information to maximize the accuracy of your decisions.

What is the impact of Britannica on education?

It is often used as a reference source by students and teachers alike. Britannica has thousands of articles about everything from ancient civilizations to computer science and biology. 

Britannica also has lots of information about different countries worldwide so that you can learn about your own country’s history, culture, and other countries.

Cons of Britannica

Is britannica as good as wikipedia.

Wikipedia is a great resource, but it has more errors when compared to Britannica. 

Can the encyclopedia Britannica be used as a source for college papers?

You cannot use the Encyclopedia Britannica for college papers.

How does Britannica make money?

Is britannica peer-reviewed.

Britannica is a world-class, peer-reviewed general encyclopedia trusted by scholars and professionals everywhere.

Is the encyclopedia Britannica a scholarly source?

No . Britannica is reference material.

Final Thoughts 

There are many different opinions about whether Britannica is a reliable source of information. 

Some people argue that it is a reliable source of information, while others argue that it is not. 

Britannica is no doubt a valuable resource. The articles’ quality and usefulness make them invaluable resources for students and researchers.

The need for a reliable source is important for a researcher or an online course creator looking for sources that will be helpful to them.

You may also like:

Why do waiters get paid so little [+ how to make more money], navigating workplace norms: can you email a resignation letter, difference between roles and responsibilities, does suspension mean termination, moral claim: definition, significance, contemporary issues, & challenges, why can’t you flush the toilet after a drug test.

English: Encyclopedia Britannica vs. Wikipedia

• About TCNJ Library
• Find Articles: Core Databases
• Find Articles: English Related
• Primary Source Discovery
• Primary Sources Online
• What are Primary Sources?
• Reference: Start Here
• Reference: Literary VOICES
• Choose a Topic / Review the Literature

Encyclopedia Britannica vs. Wikipedia

• For English Faculty

Almost every student, faculty member, and librarian knows from experience how valuable Wikipedia can actually be when looking for quick background information about almost any topic. But what are the differences between Wikipedia and the traditional, scholarly reference works listed and described on the Reference Shelf tab of this guide? In this box I flesh out some of those differences (and similarities) within the context of one of the greatest reference works of all time: Encyclopedia Britannica .

The Encyclopedia Britannica contains carefully edited articles on all major topics. It fits the ideal purpose of a reference work as a place to get started, or to refer back to as you read and write. The articles in Britannica are written by expert authors who are both identifiable and credible. Many articles provide references to books and other sources about the topic covered. Articles are edited for length, the goal being to provide students (and other researchers) with sufficient background information without overwhelming them.

Undergraduates are rarely permitted to cite encyclopedia articles. Ask your professor if you plan to do so. The reason for this prohibition has to do with the function of reference works. Encyclopedias are best suited to providing background information rather than in-depth analysis or novel perspective. The "conversation" among literary scholars and historians—or academics in any other discipline for that matter—does not occur within the pages or pixels of encyclopedia articles.

Wikipedia is " written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world" and relies on the collective wisdom of its volunteers to get the facts right and to balance the opinions expressed. Wikipedia, of course, can be very useful as a starting point for many topics, especially obscure ones or those with passing or popular interest not well covered in scholarly reference works. Wikipedia articles often reflect the enthusiasm of their anonymous contributor(s) for the subject. Articles are sometimes too detailed , making it difficult for the uninitiated to identify key takeaways. Another downside of Wikipedia is that articles sometimes paper over unflattering or unpleasant but important facts about a topic near and dear to the contributors' hearts. Struggles sometimes break out behind the scenes as contributors compete with one another to create narratives that, even if technically accurate, might leave readers with partial or even false impressions. In other words, Wikipedia articles, even when written on topics ostensibly uncontroversial, are easily politicized. Wikipedia slants more often than Britannica to the left of the political spectrum .

As with other reference works, most faculty instruct students not to cite Wikipedia. But some go further, advising students not to consult Wikipedia as a background source. Prohibitions of this nature, fairly uncommon nowadays, typically result from the volunteer approach to editing taken by Wikipedia, which can be unreliable . In order to be safe, think of Wikipedia as the first stop on a research road trip. Move on from Wikipedia to edited, scholarly encyclopedias and other reference works.

An interesting compromise between traditional encyclopedias and Wikipedia is Citizendium , a project that continues to limp along but has unfortunately not gained much traction. Most academic work on Wikipedia has focused on making it more like a scholarly reference source through the interventions of undergraduate and graduate students, librarians, and disciplinary faculty.

Acknowledgement : This page was inspired by Rick Lezenby , a librarian affiliated with Temple University Libraries. I have substantially altered and expanded on Rick's original text.

Humanities Librarian

• << Previous: Choose a Topic / Review the Literature
• Next: For English Faculty >>
• Last Updated: Aug 23, 2024 10:42 AM
• URL: https://libguides.tcnj.edu/english

Home > Blog > Tips for Online Students > The Ultimate Student Guide To Finding Credible Sources

Tips for Online Students , Tips for Students

The Ultimate Student Guide To Finding Credible Sources

Updated: June 19, 2024

Published: January 1, 2020

When it comes to writing a research paper, it’s crucial that you use credible sources to make sure that the information you are stating is actually true. Knowing the difference between credible sources and unreliable sources doesn’t always come so easily with endless information flooding the internet. Thankfully, there are some simple tips that you can use to ensure that you are always using credible sources for research.

What is a Research Paper?

A research paper is a piece of academic writing that uses original research on a specific topic. There are many different types of research papers, ranging from a high school term paper to a master’s thesis or doctoral dissertation.

Photo by  Wallace Chuck  from  Pexels

How to start a search for sources, 1. start simple.

If you’re wondering how to find sources for a research paper, the easiest and best way to start is simple! Just try browsing through some common search engines to see what you find.

2. Cross Wikipedia off

Wikipedia, although it’s a massive pool of information, should always be avoided when writing a research paper since it allows the public to edit information. Sites such as these often run the risk of lacking accuracy, and is not one of the most credible sources for research.

3. Yes to scholarly databases

Scholarly databases are your best friend when it comes to finding credible sources for research. Online scholarly databases that can be trusted and are known to provide useful information for students include LexisNexis and EBSCO.

4. Newspapers and magazines

Although sometimes biased, newspapers and magazines can also be a great place to find information about current events.

5. The library

While the library seems to be the most obvious place to find information, somehow it’s often forgotten when it comes to research in the modern age. Don’t forget how useful it can truly be!

Types of Credible Sources for Research

1. what are some credible websites.

Many online sources do not necessarily contain information that is correct or has been checked. That’s why it’s of utmost importance to make sure that you’re using the right websites for your research, with government and educational websites generally being the most reliable.

Credible sources for research include: science.gov, The World Factbook, US Census Bureau, UK Statistics, and Encyclopedia Britannica.

2. What are some credible journal articles?

When it comes to journal articles, determining how credible they are comes much easier than other sources. This is generally due to the fact that many of these websites will include valuable information such as how many times the article has been cited, and if its been peer reviewed.

Some great examples of reliable websites for journal articles include Google Scholar, Oxford Academic, Microsoft Academic, Cornell University Library, and SAGE Publishing.

If you are ever not sure how to find credible sources, then there’s the CRAAP test, which takes into account the Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy and Purpose of the article. Take all of these factors into consideration before using a source and determining whether or not it’s credible enough. Even if it takes more time, you’ll be saving yourself tons of time in the long run by not using unreliable sources.

Photo by  Canva Studio  from  Pexels

3. what are some credible news sources.

When it comes to news articles, more caution must be taken since it’s hard to know which sources are truly reliable and unbiased. The CRAAP test is also useful in this type of article for research.

A few examples of credible news sources include The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Washington Post.

The Credibility of a Source

As you search for your research information, you will surely come across the question of how to find credible sources for a research paper. Here are some criteria to focus on to ensure that you only use the most credible of sources.

1. What’s the depth of it?

Always look at the depth of an article, not just the written content. See how long the article is, and if it contains the necessary information such as an abstract, a reference list, and documented data.

2. Who is reading it?

When judging the credibility of an article, it’s important to always ask yourself who the target audience of the article is. Sometimes, sources have a specific goal in mind and it can create certain biases.

3. What’s the goal?

Just as you should do with the audience, also ask yourself what the article is trying to achieve. What is their ultimate goal and how are they persuading you of that?

4. Who wrote it?

Always ask yourself who wrote the article and how reputable they are in the specific field. Look at what other published works they have as well.

5. Can it be trusted?

Overall, it’s key to ask yourself how reputable the source is. What kind of website is it published on? Look at the big picture.

6. Is it relevant to now?

Look at the date of the article, or about the specific things they are mentioning in the article. If it’s from a few years ago, it’s probably not too relevant to your current research.

7. Can it be proven?

While an article may sound incredibly convincing, many people have a way with words and persuasion. Stop and ask yourself whether or not what they are claiming can actually be proven.

Photo by  bruce mars  from  Pexels

How to evaluate source credibility.

By using unreliable sources in your research, it can discredit your status, which is why it’s incredibly important to make sure that any information you are using is up-to-date and accurate.

Here’s how to find credible sources.

1. What is a credible source?

Generally, materials that have been published within the past 10 years are considered to be credible sources for research. Another important factor to consider is the author — if they are well known and respected in their specific fields, that’s also generally a sign that the article is credible. Educational and government-run websites (.gov, .edu) tend to also be a safe source to use, as well as academic databases. Google Scholar is also a no-fail source for reliable information.

2. What is a potentially unreliable source?

Anything that is out of date, meaning it’s been published more than 10 years ago should be avoided. Materials published on social media platforms such as Facebook or personal blogs don’t tend to be the most credible. Always make sure that an article contains proper citations and that the website you are using ends in .com or .org.

Free Resources For Learning

There are many free resources for research available known as open educational resources . They are licensed for free use, with the intention of teaching. They can be determined as credible sources for research if they have a Creative Common license, and if the author has proven to be an expert in their field. Always make sure that the content you are using contains no biases.

Sites For Scholarly Research

When performing scholarly research, it’s extra important to make sure that your sources are credible. Government-run research is considered credible, but beware of any political sites. University and educational websites also tend to be reliable, but still take everything you read with a grain of salt. Company websites also tend to be reliable, although their ultimate goal is usually to promote a product. Organizations which are .org websites can be professional and reliable, however, sometimes they also have their own interests.

Which Sites Can Be Relied On

The internet has no shortage of information out there. That’s why you’ll need these handy tips to determine which to use, and how to distinguish through the vast choices without feeling overwhelmed.

List of Credible Research Sources to Consider

1. government entities.

These websites tend to be reliable since they are highly regulated. Examples include the CIA World Factbook and the United States Justice Statistics.

2. Research Think Tanks

Examples of reliable research think tanks include Rand Corporation, Pew Research Center and The Milken Institute.

3. Academic Libraries and Databases

ProQuest, Scopus, and Jstor are great examples of academic libraries and databases that can be trusted.

4. Professional Standards Organizations

The American Bar Association and The American Psychological Association (APA) are highly credible sources when it comes to professional standards.

How to Write a Research Paper: Step-by-Step

Now that you’re an expert on finding credible sources for research, you’re ready to go! But how do you even start to write a research paper? Don’t worry, we’ve got you covered.

For starters, it’s important to get clear instructions from your professor on what they want. The next step is to start brainstorming ideas for a topic of research. Once you’ve decided and feel confident about it, you’re ready to create your outline and plan out the goal of your research paper.

Befriend your librarian and start to search for quality and credible sources through a variety of means. Make sure you understand your topic from top to bottom before you start writing.  As you write, be sure to always keep things factual, and that you finalize your thesis statement throughout your paper — not just at the end. That’s what’s going to guide your writing. Be sure to always keep format in mind, never forget to cite your sources, and to never skip those edits and final checks.

Now you are ready to write a high-quality, fact-driven research paper that’s sure to impress your professors.

In this article

At UoPeople, our blog writers are thinkers, researchers, and experts dedicated to curating articles relevant to our mission: making higher education accessible to everyone. Read More

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

First edition

Second edition.

• Third edition
• Fourth edition
• Fifth edition
• Sixth edition
• Supplement to the fourth, fifth, and sixth editions
• Seventh edition
• Eighth edition
• Ninth edition
• Tenth edition
• Eleventh edition
• Twelfth edition
• Thirteenth edition
• Fourteenth edition
• Corporate change
• Fifteenth edition
• Britannica in the digital era

Encyclopædia Britannica

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Internet Archive - Encyclopaedia Britannica
• CNN - Why Encyclopedia Britannica mattered
• Table Of Contents

Encyclopædia Britannica , the oldest English-language general encyclopaedia . The Encyclopædia Britannica was first published in 1768, when it began to appear in Edinburgh , Scotland .

Since its founding, the Encyclopædia Britannica has relied upon both outside experts and its own editors with various subject-area proficiencies to write its entries. Those entries are then fact-checked, edited, and copyedited by Britannica editors, a process intended to ensure that the articles meet Britannica’s long-held standards for readability and accuracy. Moreover, that same team of editors regularly revise and update existing articles to reflect new developments in those realms of knowledge.

The following account sketches the development of the Encyclopædia Britannica from its Scottish beginnings to its established position as a major English-language work of reference with editorial offices in Chicago and thousands of contributors worldwide .

The first edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica was published and printed in Edinburgh for the engraver Andrew Bell and the printer Colin Macfarquhar by “a society of gentlemen in Scotland” and was sold by Macfarquhar at his printing office on Nicolson Street. On December 10, 1768, the Caledonian Mercury and the Edinburgh Evening Courant carried an advertisement announcing that “ This day is published ” the edition’s first part; it further pledged that the encyclopædia would provide “ Accurate Definitions and Explanations , of all the Terms as they occur in the Order of the Alphabet.” The work was issued in parts from December 1768 to 1771 with double-columned pages. The parts were bound in three stout quarto volumes of some 2,500 pages, with 160 copperplate engravings by Bell, and dated 1771. The title page begins as follows: “Encyclopædia Britannica; OR, A DICTIONARY OF ARTS and SCIENCES, COMPILED UPON A NEW PLAN.” The work could not compete in bulk with the 68 volumes of Johann Heinrich Zedler’s Universal Lexicon or with the French Encyclopédie , whose 17 volumes of text had recently been completed. But it did challenge comparison with all previous dictionaries of arts and sciences, large or small, because of its new plan.

Earlier encyclopaedias—save for Denis de Coëtlogon’s An Universal History of Arts and Sciences (1745)—had not given systematic instruction on major subjects at all, either because they aimed at dealing with such subjects in a more general way (as in the Encyclopédie ) or because articles on such subjects used their space chiefly in explanations of the technical terms involved (as in Ephraim Chambers ’s Cyclopaedia ). Further, in the latter case, the reader wishing merely to learn the meaning of a technical term had to search through a long article before he could find the information he wanted. The “new plan” of the Encyclopædia Britannica consisted of including “ treatises ” on the arts (i.e., practical arts) and sciences in the same alphabetical series as short articles on technical terms and other subjects, with plentiful cross references from the one type of entry to the other. It was thus intended to satisfy two kinds of readers simultaneously: those wishing to study a subject seriously, who would work their way through the treatises; and those in search of quick reference material, who could instantly turn to what they wanted in its alphabetical order.

There were more than 40 “treatises” in the first edition, indicated by crossheads (i.e., titles printed across the top of the page). Some of them, such as “Anatomy” at 165 pages, covered their subjects at much greater length than, as well as in different ways from, their counterparts in the Encyclopédie , though the shortest, “Alligation” and “Watch and Clock Work,” were only 2 pages long. A few of the articles without crossheads, such as “Money” at 15 pages and “Mahometans” at 17 pages, exceeded in length some of the treatises . “Smoke,” at 7 pages, instructed the mason on chimney making so that smoky rooms might be avoided. The vast majority of the other articles, however, were only a few lines long, some being hardly more than definitions. There were entries on cities, countries, and rivers and other geographical subjects, but there were no biographies.

Inserted after the preface in the first volume was a two-page list of the publications used in compiling the work. Thus “Bleaching” was extracted, paragraph after paragraph with only minor editorial changes and a few omissions, from Francis Home, Experiments on Bleaching (1756); “Bookkeeping” similarly from John Mair, Book-keeping Methodiz’d , 2nd ed. (1741); and “Law,” which dealt only with Scottish law , from John Erskine, Principles of the Law of Scotland: In the Order of Sir George Mackenzie’s Institutions of that Law , 3rd ed. rev. (1764). Two books reprinted almost without change were John Bartlet, The Gentleman Farrier’s Repository , 5th ed. rev. (1764), in “Farriery”; and John Trydell, Two Essays on the Theory and Practice of Music (1766), in “Musick.”

For some articles, however, such as “Aether” and “Abridgement,” new content was written by William Smellie (1740–95), an Edinburgh printer hired to undertake “15 capital sciences,” to “write up the subdivisions and detached parts of these conform to your plan [sic] and likewise to prepare the whole work for the press.” This (quoted from a letter to Smellie from Bell) implies that the new plan was Smellie’s idea. This inference is supported by Smellie’s biographer, Robert Kerr, who claimed that Smellie devised the plan and wrote or compiled all the chief articles and recorded how he used to say jocularly that he “had made a dictionary of arts and sciences with a pair of scissors.” Later Smellie became Secretary and Superintendent of Natural History and keeper of the museum of the Society of Scottish Antiquaries.

Smellie is generally known as the editor of the first edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica , though the biographer of James Tytler claims that Tytler edited both the first and second editions and suggested the idea of such a work to Macfarquhar. The preface to the third edition regards Macfarquhar as the editor of the first and second editions as well as of the first half of the third edition, but the preface to the Supplement to the fourth, fifth, and sixth editions says that Smellie edited the first.

The first edition was reprinted in London, with slight variants on the title page and a different preface, by Edward and Charles Dilly in 1773 and by John Donaldson in 1775.

The second edition was a much more ambitious work in both length and scope. It was “a dictionary of Arts, Sciences, &c.,” running to 10 volumes of some 9,000 pages. These appeared in parts from June 1777 to September 1784, though the dates on the title pages are 1778–83. The last part of the 10th volume was a supplement that brought the work up to date and corrected errors. There were more treatises than in the first edition, and many new articles, as well as previous articles much increased in length. The plates, again by Bell, numbered 340 (300 according to the edition’s title page).

The scope of the second edition was enlarged by the inclusion of biographical articles, by the expansion of geographical articles to become history articles, and in general by the insertion of “Various Detached Parts of Knowledge” (as the title page put it). Further, the treatises were in many cases lengthened by covering not only the practice of the subject concerned but also its history, where ascertainable, and its theory. The second edition thus went beyond the accepted scope of a dictionary of arts and sciences, which was why Smellie, who objected to the biographical material, refused to be its editor. The work was undertaken by James Tytler (1745–1804), a brilliant but penniless polymath described by the Scottish poet Robert Burns as “an obscure, tippling, but extraordinary body,” who was later outlawed for printing a seditious handbill and died at Salem, Mass.

The second edition was a revision, though a much enlarged one, of the first, on the same new plan, with some of the treatises reprinted, such as “Geometry”; others enlarged, such as “Commerce,” with a historical section, and “Law,” with a general section and an English section added to the original wholly Scottish article; and others replaced, such as “Gardening,” which was descriptively treated in the second edition, whereas in the first it was only instructional. There were treatises on new subjects such as “Drawing” (5 pages), “Dyeing” (5 pages), “Gunnery” (37 pages), “History” (39 pages), “Legerdemain” (11 pages), “Magnetism” (7 pages), “Oratory” (100 pages), “Painting” (32.5 pages), “Poetry,” treated comprehensively as “the art of expressing our thoughts by fiction” (189.5 pages), and “War” (135.5 pages). Both “Medicine” (35 pages) and “Optics” (163 pages), which were treated under the three heads of history, theory, and practice, have indexes attached; the new treatise “Pharmacy” (127 pages) also had an index.

As in the first edition, some of the ordinary articles exceeded some of the treatises in length. The most notable example was “Scotland” (184.5 pages), which covered Scottish history up to the union with the crown of England in 1603 (“Britain,” at 80 pages, continued the story) and gave a general account of the country. “England” had 71 pages of history up to 1603 and 3 pages on New England , and “Rome” had 135, whereas “America” (20 pages) discussed only geography and American Indians. There was an article of just more than 16 pages titled “Blind,” which dealt with educating the blind and cited amazing achievements by certain blind persons. (That article, reprinted in the third edition and said to have been written by two blind scholars, Henry Moyes and Thomas Blacklock, was perhaps inserted to balance that on “Dumbness” in the first edition.) The supplement in the 10th volume included 25 pages on “Air,” with a detailed description of the recent experiments with balloons in France in 1783 and instructions for making such balloons, an art Tytler attempted unsuccessfully in 1784.

At the end of the last volume, more than four pages listed the chief publications used in compiling the second edition, and the preface pointed out how much more expensive it would be to buy them all than to buy the encyclopaedia. In addition, the title page stated that material had also been drawn from “…the Transactions , Journals, and Memoirs, of Learned Societies, Both at Home and Abroad; the MS Lectures of Eminent Professors on Different Sciences; and a Variety of Original Materials, Furnished by an Extensive Correspondence.” It seems that most of the compiling, writing, and editing was done by Tytler.

Reference Resources

• Best Bets search!
• Why use encyclopedias?
• Why use specialized dictionaries?
• Why use factbooks or almanacs?
• Get started with legal research
• Citation manuals

Get library help

• Make an Appointment
• Call 217 581-6072
• Hours Calendar

Librarians from the Research Engagement and Scholarship  (RES) department are here to help.

Contact an RES Librarian: David Bell Steve Brantley Kirstin Duffin Michele McDaniel Amy Odwarka

Encyclopedias - Background Information

Gale, Springer, Sage and Ebsco refer to the publisher or platform. Gale and Ebsco are the broadest, Springer is more scientifically focused and Sage has more in the Social Sciences.

​To find encyclopedias on your topic, either print or online, type in a subject, i.e. dreams, followed by the word encyclopedias:

Search Books, Videos and More in the library catalog

• << Previous: Best Bets search!
• Next: Why use specialized dictionaries? >>
• Last Updated: Aug 23, 2024 1:46 PM
• URL: https://eiu.libguides.com/reference

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Can I use an Encyclopedia as a reference in an essay?

I am writing a paper that is about another culture. I need to include references about the culture in my paper. Is an encyclopedia an acceptable source for general information about the culture (communication, nutrition, holidays, religion?)

• writing-style
• online-resource
• liberal-arts-colleges

• 2 Are you writing the paper for credit in a course? If so, then the person grading your paper would be the one to ask. –  JRN Commented Apr 16, 2020 at 3:30

Yes, but, it mightn't be the best source.

For instance, Britannica* has an entry on Coronavirus, as do many other encyclopedias. They probably aren't the most authoritative though. A better reference could be sought, e.g., the World Health Organization. The same is true for other topics, such as culture.

An encyclopedia may give you what you need, but other sources might be more authoritative/better.

* The first encyclopedia produced by a Google search.

• 1 As an addendum: if this encyclopedia's name is Wikipedia, the reader might have a bad impression. –  user111388 Commented Apr 16, 2020 at 7:34
• @user111388 Indeed: I was using encyclopedia in the traditional sense. –  user2768 Commented Apr 16, 2020 at 7:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged citations writing writing-style online-resource liberal-arts-colleges ..

• Featured on Meta
• Bringing clarity to status tag usage on meta sites
• We've made changes to our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy - July 2024
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process

Hot Network Questions

• Walk or Drive to school?
• Reusing own code at work without losing licence
• Is having negative voltages on a MOSFET gate a good idea?
• Does the Greek used in 1 Peter 3:7 properly translate as “weaker” and in what way might that be applied?
• Why an Out Parameter can be left unassigned in .NET 6 but not .NET 8 (CS0177)?
• Are quantum states like the W, Bell, GHZ, and Dicke state actually used in quantum computing research?
• Variable usage in arithmetic expansions
• How would you say a couple of letters (as in mail) if they're not necessarily letters?
• How to volunteer as a temporary research assistant?
• Using Thin Lens Equation to find how far 1972 Blue Marble photo was taken
• How would increasing atomic bond strength affect nuclear physics?
• Could someone tell me what this part of an A320 is called in English?
• What was I thinking when I made this grid?
• Historical U.S. political party "realignments"?
• about flag changes in 16-bit calculations on the MC6800
• How could Bangladesh protect itself from Indian dams and barrages?
• Integral concerning the floor function
• What to do when 2 light switches are too far apart for the light switch cover plate?
• I'm trying to remember a novel about an asteroid threatening to destroy the earth. I remember seeing the phrase "SHIVA IS COMING" on the cover
• What explanations can be offered for the extreme see-sawing in Montana's senate race polling?
• How do I save chemical equations as an SVG so I can paste them into MS Word?
• Passport Carry in Taiwan
• How much payload could the falcon 9 send to geostationary orbit?
• My visit is for two weeks but my host bought insurance for two months is it okay

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Gigascience
• v.8(12); 2019 Dec

Wikipedia: Why is the common knowledge resource still neglected by academics?

Dariusz jemielniak.

Kozminski University, Management in Networked and Digital Societies (MINDS) department, Jagiellonska 59, 03301 Warszawa, Poland

Associated Data

Wikipedia is by far the largest online encyclopedia, and the number of errors it contains is on par with the professional sources even in specialized topics such as biology or medicine. Yet, the academic world is still treating it with great skepticism because of the types of inaccuracies present there, the widespread plagiarism from Wikipedia, and historic biases, as well as jealousy regarding the loss of the knowledge dissemination monopoly. This article argues that it is high time not only to acknowledge Wikipedia's quality but also to start actively promoting its use and development in academia.

In 2005, Nature published a study describing Wikipedia as going “head to head” with Britannica [ 1 ]. While the claim was disputed by Britannica, since then Wikipedia has grown 6-fold in the number of articles; is >85 times the size of 120-volume Encyclopedia Britannica , measured by word count; and has substantially improved its quality.

Admittedly, standards of quality are shaped by peer-to-peer local language communities and vary widely among Wikipedia projects, and also between articles within languages [ 2 ]. Yet, the quality of Wikipedia articles is very high [ 3 ]. This is true even in many specialized topics, such as anatomy, biology, or medicine, where Wikipedia is as accurate as the professional sources [ 4–6 ], even though sometimes it does not score high on readability.

Yet, Wikipedia is still treated with suspicion by the professoriate and sneered at in academic circles [ 7 ]. This is especially disturbing, as academics are best positioned to shape Wikipedia [ 8 ], because of their expertise, as well as because of their access to students, who can improve Wikipedia for coursework under their supervision. Thus, it may be worthwhile to consider the reasons for scholars’ reluctance to openly use, recommend, and incorporate Wikipedia into coursework.

Some of the reasons for these reservations may be legitimate. Although Wikipedia has a similar number of errors to professional and peer-reviewed sources [ 4–6 ], the types of inaccuracies on Wikipedia are different. They may involve replacing the content of an article with nonsense, or someone's name with a slur. There is no question that such vandalism damages the perception of the quality of Wikipedia as a whole. Still, Wikipedia takes vandalism seriously and constantly develops new methods of combating malicious edits, including, e.g., machine learning algorithms, as well as human patrolling. The sorts of vandalism that pass through may misinform the readers but are overall quite rare, especially in popular articles. More importantly, most vandalism is easily spotted and as such is harmful mainly to the image of Wikipedia as a trustworthy source, and does not actually misinform the readers.

Another reason for academia's dislike of Wikipedia may be its association with plagiarism. Students are notorious for copying from Wikipedia. However, this is clearly an unfortunate testimony to its quality and should not be held against Wikipedia, just as it should not be held against any other plagiarized academic resource. On a side note, Wikipedia has iron-clad copyright policies and treats plagiarism more seriously than regular media.

Some other reasons may be related to a historic bias, a perception of Wikipedia as not rigorous enough, or underestimation of the ability of amateurs to disseminate knowledge in a robust way. As scholars, we should be able to confront and eliminate such biases once we are presented with evidence, and many studies show that Wikipedia delivers high-quality output in practice, even if in theory it may seem impossible. Wikipedia simply is a living testament to Linus's Law: “given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow,” and the more edited articles are actually more accurate. It may be surprising and strange, but the results speak for themselves. Over time Wikipedia's quality has improved substantially, and yet it is still perceived in a static and dated way, as from the time of its inception.

Some professors dislike it when students cite Wikipedia. While no encyclopedia should be the only source in academic-level essays, it should be emphasized that our primary duty is to report and accurately refer to all sources that were actually used, with no exceptions. Academic honesty and transparency are crucial for scholarly work, and it is difficult to understand why citing specifically Wikipedia is taboo.

Yet, the most important reason for animosity towards Wikipedia may be that it challenges the existing institutional hierarchy of knowledge distribution and is much more successful in reaching the public than academic publications. We, the professors, were the only ones legitimized to disseminate academic knowledge. Now, we have to compete with a product of anonymous amateurs, which has a readership much wider than any of us could ever dream of. In fact, Wikipedia systematically compensates for the lack of credentials by heavy emphasis on reliable sources. It is a paradox: Wikipedia is one of the 10 most popular websites in the world according to TopSites, and by most measures it is the most widely read knowledge repository on Earth, but still it is often treated as not worth academic attention.

We need to change this. Writing a Wikipedia article is a perfect academic assignment for students. It requires finding reliable, verifiable sources, synthesizing their content, writing an encyclopedic entry: a true paragon of scholarly effort and transferable information literacy skills. Moreover, it makes the professor's life so much easier because a new article is often checked for plagiarism and commented on by members of the community. However, I believe there are even more important reasons for students and scholars to appreciate Wikipedia. Billions of people do not have access to free knowledge. We are the 1% in terms of knowledge access privilege; developing Wikipedia, the common good of humanity, is our moral obligation. The fact that Wikipedia development makes our coursework easier is only a nice bonus.

Conclusions

There are already initiatives in computational biology or genetics aimed at developing Wikipedia articles from these topics by scholars [ 9 ]. GeneWiki project, established to transfer information about relationships and functions of all human genes from scientific resources to Wikipedia, already contains 10,000 distinct gene pages, viewed >50 million times per year [ 10 ]. Nevertheless, Wikipedia development is not yet routinely considered as valuable in tenure reviews, and Wikipedia article writing is not yet a mainstream coursework assignment in colleges. It is high time to make that happen. In 2019 Wikipedia turned 18, so maybe academics should start treating it as an adult.

Competing interests

The author is a member of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

Author's information

D.J. is Professor and Head of the Management in Networked and Digital Societies (MINDS) department at Kozminski University, associate faculty at Berkman-Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, and fellow at MIT Center for Collective Intelligence. He serves on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. In 2014 he published Common Knowledge? An Ethnography of Wikipedia (Stanford University Press).

Working on this article was possible thanks to grant No. PPN/BEK/2018/1/00009 from the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange.

Supplementary Material

Giz139_giga-d-19-00332_original_submission, giz139_giga-d-19-00332_revision_1, giz139_response_to_reviewer_comments_original_submission, giz139_reviewer_1_report_original_submission.

Thomas Shafee -- 10/18/2019 Reviewed

giz139_Supplemental_Files

Q. Are encyclopedias good sources for essays?

• 6 Academic Sources
• 3 Accessibility
• 22 Borrowing
• 17 Catalogue
• 3 Citation Management
• 10 Collections
• 7 Computers
• 3 Contact Information
• 9 Copyright
• 11 Course Reserves
• 12 Databases
• 4 Fines & Fees
• 3 Graduate Students
• 1 Group Study Rooms
• 1 Institutional Repository
• 9 Instructors/University Employees
• 6 InterLibrary Loan (ILL)
• 10 Journals
• 14 Library Accounts
• 9 Locations
• 2 Microfilm
• 4 Open Access
• 2 Partner Libraries
• 10 Passwords
• 28 Policies
• 2 Primary Sources
• 13 Printing, Photocopying, and Scanning
• 3 Publishing
• 28 Research
• 2 Returning
• 5 Scholar Strike
• 5 Scholarly Communication
• 6 Special Borrowers
• 7 Technology
• 29 Terminology
• 8 WinnSpace

Answered By: Desk Reference Last Updated: May 30, 2022

Encyclopedias are great as sources of background information. This makes them excellent places to begin your research on a given topic, but certainly not the only place you would look for information. Most university professors will want you to use academic sources in your essays and research papers, so using an encyclopedia as a source might lead them to believe you haven't done very extensive searching and reading on your topic. 

Any time you use an external source, whether it's a research article, a website, a tweet, or an encyclopedia article, you'll need to cite it. So, if you have used information from an encyclopedia, you must provide a citation and reference. But know that your professor likely expects you to expand your research beyond that.

For more advice on assessing the quality of sources, check out our guide to finding scholarly sources .

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 24 No 6

Comments (1)

• thank you! helped me a lot in my assignments. by Marie on Oct 12, 2021

Related Topics

Reference Desk

University of Winnipeg Library

P 204-786-9815 E [email protected]

library.uwinnipeg.ca

•   [email protected]
• Shapiro Library
• SNHU Library Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ: What kind of source is an encyclopedia? Is it considered “scholarly”?

• 7 Academic Integrity & Plagiarism
• 61 Academic Support, Writing Help, & Presentation Help
• 28 Access/Remote Access
• 7 Accessibility
• 8 Building/Facilities
• 6 Career/Job Information
• 25 Catalog/Print Books
• 25 Circulation
• 134 Citing Sources
• 14 Copyright
• 306 Databases
• 23 Directions/Location
• 18 Faculty Resources/Needs
• 7 Hours/Contacts
• 2 Innovation Lab & Makerspace/3D Printing
• 25 Interlibrary Loan
• 43 IT/Computer/Printing Support
• 3 Library Instruction
• 37 Library Technology Help
• 6 Multimedia
• 16 Online Programs
• 20 Periodicals
• 24 Policies
• 8 RefWorks/Citation Managers
• 4 Research Guides (LibGuides)
• 213 Research Help
• 22 University Services

Last Updated: Jun 27, 2023 Views: 55854

An encyclopedia is reference material and a tertiary source. A tertiary source is a distillation and collection of primary and secondary sources.  A tertiary source is good place to get an overview of a subject.

Other examples of tertiary sources:

• chronologies
• directories

Encyclopedias are considered a scholarly source because the content is almost always written by scholars on the subject. However, the entries are not written for other scholars but for a general audience. Entries are reviewed by an editorial board, but they are not “ peer-reviewed ”. Most professors that ask for scholarly sources are looking for articles from academic, peer-reviewed journals. Using this definition, encyclopedia articles do not qualify. For assistance finding scholarly articles from academic, peer-reviewed journals, please contact a librarian.

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 18 No 9

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) are a self-serve option for users to search and find answers to their questions. 

Use the search box above to type your question to search for an answer or browse existing FAQs by group, topic, etc.

Tell Me More

Link to Question Form

More assistance.

Submit a Question

Related FAQs

Get the Reddit app

Current AMA: Antisemitism, U.S.A.

The Portal for Public History. Please read the rules before participating, as we remove all comments which break the rules. Answers must be in-depth and comprehensive, or they will be removed.

Is it ok to cite an encyclopedia to show the basic facts or traditional narrative of an event?

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

Affiliate 💸

Get started free

Literature Review

11 Best Research Rabbit Alternatives For Effective Research

Discover 11 top alternatives to Research Rabbit that streamline your research process and boost productivity. Explore the best tools today.

Aug 25, 2024

You write a fantastic paper. You examine a trending topic, gather data from a variety of sources, and express the information with clarity, originality, and precision. If only the actual research process were as easy as writing the paper. Unfortunately, that’s often not the case. The literature search, the process of finding and collecting existing research on your topic, can be tedious, time-consuming, and frustrating, especially when uncovering relevant studies to support your thesis.  The good news? Research Rabbit can make literature searches a breeze. This guide will explore why you should consider using this free tool to write efficient research papers, get excellent study material with AI, and even make the process fun.  Otio's AI research and writing partner can help you achieve your goals, like writing efficient research papers and getting unique study material with AI. This important tool streamlines the research process so you can uncover relevant studies quickly and focus on what matters, producing a stellar paper. 

Table Of Contents

What is researchrabbit, is research rabbit reliable, how much does research rabbit ai cost, key features of research rabbit, pros and cons of research rabbit, supercharge your researching ability with otio — try otio for free today.

Research Rabbit is a free online tool for mapping literature based on citations. This tool quickly visualizes connections between research interests to find related articles and authors. Research Rabbit is similar to Spotify in style, suggesting related research based on your preferences. In this case, it helps you find research that is similar to what you are studying. 

The tool claims to be developing a product that will make each research process step more accessible and more effective. That's probably why the service and all of its features are free. Users are encouraged to make donations to assist the service's development, and the company even acknowledges its devoted supporters directly on its website, building a closer and warmer interaction with its audience.

Related Reading

• Systematic Review Vs Meta Analysis • Impact Evaluation • How To Critique A Research Article • How To Synthesize Sources • Annotation Techniques • Skimming And Scanning • Types Of Literature Reviews • Literature Review Table • Literature Review Matrix • How To Increase Reading Speed And Comprehension • How To Read Research Papers • How To Summarize A Research Paper • Literature Gap

Research Rabbit: Is It the Right Academic Search Tool for You? 

You might be wondering whether Research Rabbit is reliable. It’s a legitimate platform for finding academic journals and papers, primarily through its connections to Semantic Scholar and PubMed. However, it struggles with ease of use and additional features. 

Using Research Rabbit is safe. It’s designed for academic research and connects users to reputable databases without compromising security. Research Rabbit is trustworthy for its essential services, such as searching academic databases. Yet, its effectiveness and efficiency might not meet everyone’s standards.   

Research Rabbit: Features, Pros, and Cons 

Research Rabbit’s main features include creating connections based on a single academic paper, visualizing the relationships between those papers, and generating a “bunny” or graph based on this information. The platform is primarily focused on helping users find research papers and journals in a visually appealing way. 

The pros of using Research Rabbit include its unique approach to finding academic literature, its ability to help users discover related works, and its free-to-use model. On the other hand, the cons include its clunky user interface, limited features, and reliance on other platforms for academic data.

Research Rabbit is completely free for researchers .  The free version offers an array of features geared towards simplifying your citation quest in literature reviews, such as the automatic discovery of relevant papers related to your topic of interest, an optimized search process that reduces the time spent in switching between search modes and databases, and efficient planning and execution of essays or minor projects. 

The tool's current pricing model is designed to support its mission-first team's objective of empowering researchers and advancing human knowledge without charging for it. Instead of a Premium pricing model like specific other tools, Research Rabbit is funded by donations and possibly other forms of revenue not specified on the site.

A Super Cool Citation-Based Literature Mapping Tool  

Research Rabbit is an online tool that helps researchers save time by searching for relevant academic literature based on a 'seed paper' concept. You can type in one or more research papers, and Research Rabbit will find more relevant papers. This citation-based literature mapping tool helps you discover relevant literature without starting from scratch.  

An Innovative Searching System That Works  

Research Rabbit’s innovative searching system eliminates the need to switch between various databases and searching modes. This makes the research process faster and more efficient. Instead of starting over every time you change your search criteria, Research Rabbit organizes papers by similarity, allowing you to dig deeper into relevant literature without losing your place.  

A Mission-First Team  

The team behind Research Rabbit is devoted to the cause of advancing human knowledge. They are committed to offering free access for researchers, now and forever.  

Continuous Tech Development  

Research Rabbit is continuously developing its technology to support and empower researchers. Using the site lets you stay updated with the latest technology that helps you find relevant literature faster.  

Optimized Keyword Search  

Research Rabbit features an optimized keyword search to help you navigate the site and find relevant information. You can enter your keyword to pull up the papers you need quickly.  

Free Access – No Hidden Costs  

Research Rabbit is entirely free to use. Researchers can access the site without any hidden costs.  

Copyrighted Content For Intellectual Property Protection  

All content on Research Rabbit is copyrighted, ensuring intellectual property protection.

1. Explore Otio: An All-in-One Research Workspace 

Otio streamlines the often cumbersome research and writing process for students and researchers. With Otio , you can collect diverse data sources, extract critical information, and create draft outputs easily and quickly. The AI-assisted tool helps write research papers faster, too. 

2. Zotero: A Free Open-Access Research Assistant 

Zotero (pronounced "zoh-TAIR-oh") is an open-access, easy-to-use reference management tool that serves as your personal research assistant and helps you collect, organize, cite, and share your research sources. 

The software allows you to save references from library catalogs, research databases, and the web; add extensive files, including PDFs, images, audio and video files, and snapshots of web pages; write annotations and attach them to citations; and create bibliographies using most major citation styles. 

All features come with the free version, and all software upgrades are free.

Fairly easy to learn 

Collaborative group libraries

Add citations with one click using Zotero Connector

Import citations to Microsoft Word, Google Docs, and LibreOffice with plugins 

Requires desktop/laptop application to use all features

Only 300 MB of free cloud storage

No first-party mobile app for Android

No professional customer support services

Free with paid storage.

3. Qiqqa: A Research and Reference Manager 

Qiqqa is a free research and reference manager. It allows you to search for, read, and annotate PDFs. The software also allows you to review your work, write up, and create bibliographies instantly. 

Free with Premium at $6.67 and Premium + at $41.67 

Libraries are useful

Copying to other PCs is reasonably easy with the backup function

Free and open-sourced 

You can analyze your literature with this software 

A few bugs arise regularly. 

No cloud functionality. 

The duplicate finder is weak and only based on the references, not the document, which is not helpful. 

4. RefWorks: A Citation Management Tool 

RefWorks is a citation management tool that UC Library subscribes to through ProQuest, an academic publisher that also provides us with a sizable number of the databases we subscribe to. 

Many databases include direct exporting features to it.

Good tech support. 

Metadata may need to be cleaned up.

The platform can be unstable. 

Pricing 

5. mybib: a new citation generator .

MyBib is a brand-new, free tool that creates accurate citations that you can copy and paste directly into your academic papers and assignments. It has over 9,000 different citation styles, including APA 6, APA 7, Chicago, Harvard, and MLA 8, and can be used to prepare web pages, books, journals, PDFs, and 30 other sources. 

Even your school-specific styles are available on MyBib. Alternatively, you can add the produced citations to your bibliography and use them later. They can be instantly printed, exported into other citation managers like Mendeley or Zotero, or kept in your Google Drive. Auto Citation of books, journals, web pages, and videos is one of the unique features. 

You can also share your work with others, work on projects with a team, and organize citations into projects and folders. Your structured bibliography/works cited page is available for download, printing, copying, emailing, and export. You can store it in your Google Drive and add the Chrome extension for one-click internet citing. MyBib features no adverts and is entirely free to use. 

My Bib is free of charge 

The service offers citations in more than 7,000 citation styles 

You can export your references in Microsoft Word and BibTex 

The website provides tools and tips to make the creation of references easier. 

The MyBib citation generators contain multiple flaws, including in the most straightforward cases, the erroneous indication of page range for books in APA, the incorrect indication of the first edition number, or the incorrect indication of page range in Chicago Style, among other errors. 

The MyBib generator does not allow correct citation of some basic source types, such as a volume included in a multivolume edition. 

There are no popular source types such as preprint or archival document 

6. JabRef: An Open Source Bibliography Manager 

JabRef is the real open-source bibliography reference manager. It uses BibTeX as its native format. It is an excellent editor for BibTeX files, allowing you to perform several actions when dealing with such data. 

Straightforward to use and does not require much experience to get results 

Enables linking PDF files 

Enables structuring/classifying papers in a tree of keywords/concepts 

Not a collaborative tool 

It is difficult to find answers to specific problems if they arise 

Bibliographies may not appear if specific packages are loaded at the same time on LaTeX 

7. Citationsy: An Online Citation Manager 

Citationsy software is a platform used to manage citation data in the cloud. Create citations, organize your references, and export your bibliography in 9,000 styles like APA citation, Harvard citation, MLA, DIN, Chicago, and more. Collaborate with your team and share projects to get feedback from people, as well as export files for Word, Apple Pages, RTF, EndNote, BibTeX, RefWorks, or CSL. Professionals and small and medium companies can use the software. 

Monthly $9.99/month for students $4.99/month 

Includes student plan 

Has collaboration tools 

Difficult to use 

8. Paperpile: A Simple Reference Management Tool 

Paperpile is a clean and straightforward reference management tool for the web. Sync your library to all your devices, and read and annotate like on paper on your iPad, iPhone, or Android device. You can also cite your papers in Google Docs and Microsoft Word. 

Academic plan at $2.99/month; Business plan at $9.99/month 

I love the Chrome extension and the “add to paper pile” button. 

Customer support is fantastic, unlike other free apps.

I enjoy the easy-to-use interface and editing capacity. 

I also like the ease with which I can add papers/documents to the program. 

I love that the interface is simple and clean, that I can easily access the website on any device, and that I can read or look up my references. 

Terrific software for compiling reference papers. 

Good for collaboration. 

My biggest complaint is that you need help searching for the papers' text. 

The main issue is organizing citations because users cannot upload a paper directly into a folder, so there is a risk of misplacing it. 

It is difficult to troubleshoot why the format is incorrect. 

The annotation feature could be more evident. 

9. Turnitin: A Plagiarism Checker 

Turnitin's machine learning algorithm understands what elements of the paper should be excluded from submission and dynamically removes them from the Similarity Report. Users don't need to specify a specific bibliography section of their paper; they do it for you. 

Turnitin will look for standard in-line citation methods using our machine learning algorithm and remove them from the Similarity Report. Both the citation and associated text will be excluded. Anything inside the quotes will be filtered out of the Similarity Report for quoted text. For unquoted citations, the associated sentence will be filtered. 

$3/student annually 

Studies in PDS recognize Turnitin as a tool that saves time, deters plagiarism, and promotes ethical writing. 

Moreover, these studies have also concluded that teachers can save time by cross-referencing students’ submissions with cited and uncited portions of their works. 

The system helps students be more careful about citations rather than just copying and pasting any information they find. 

Turnitin needs more available databases of works, articles, and journals. 

The system may not cross-reference some parts that students may plagiarize because the sources still need to be added to the databases. 

Turnitin is also very expensive. 

10. iThenticate: A Plagiarism Checker for Researchers 

iThenticate software designed by Turnitin is an online plagiarism checker explicitly built for researchers, academic institutions, and publishers. This tool can identify the similarities in the written content compared to other online sources and top-specified journals. It helps users publish rich quality content as per their requirements. iThenticate software comprises tools to select and upload documents to compare the content document for attribution and plagiarism. 

It quickly reviews the results of unattributed sources, text, and matched content. This tool supports file upload in several formats, including PDF, DOC, and DOCX. Documents can also be uploaded as a compressed zip file or a single file for larger uploads. In addition, this software provides collaborative tools to help researchers share the documents with other project shareholders. 

Overall, iThenticate is the ideal software for comparing a document to a vast database. It is a pro for checking imitative content and offers detailed plagiarism summaries. It further checks the document for grammatical or spelling errors. iThenticate offers a one-time license and follows a quotation-based pricing strategy. 

Single at $125, Multiple at $300 

Acceptable plagiarism detection quality results 

Is it possible to scan large files 

Costly 

Limited services 

11. EndNote: Reference Management Software 

EndNote is reference management software that helps you save time, stay organized, collaborate with colleagues, and ultimately, get published. You can focus on what matters most: your ideas. EndNote is compatible with both Windows and Mac computers. EndNote also offers training and support and provides short video tutorials. 

Copes well with a very large library 

A large number of citation styles 

iPad and iPhone App 

Not compatible with Linux 

Limited upgrades and resources with the free version 

It is not as user-friendly, not able to save webpage snapshots, and is complex to learn 

Endnote Basic: Free, Endnote Paid: $125 license

• Literature Search Template • ChatGPT Prompts For Research • How To Find Gaps In Research • Research Journal Example • How To Find Limitations Of A Study • How To Do A Literature Search • Research Concept Map • Meta-Analysis Methods • How To Identify Bias In A Source • Search Strategies For Research • Literature Search Template • How To Read A Research Paper Quickly • How To Evaluate An Article • ChatGPT Summarize Paper • How To Take Notes For A Research Paper

The Good Stuff: What Are the Benefits of Using Research Rabbit? 

Research Rabbit uses artificial intelligence to help researchers save time and improve the quality of their research. As researchers embark on their literature reviews, they can quickly locate and analyze relevant papers before moving on to the writing stage. The tool also helps narrow their searches to find the most appropriate sources for their work. Research Rabbit allows researchers to visualize papers and discover author networks using interactive graphs.  

Instead of sifting through endless lists of articles, Research Rabbit creates a visual map of the connections between your chosen papers and offers insights into authors and their collaborative networks. The tool provides personalized digests of the latest papers related to the user's collections. As you use Research Rabbit to find and organize studies, it continually learns your preferences to provide the most relevant and timely information to help with your research. 

Research Rabbit is accessible for researchers forever. There’s no catch. You can use this unique tool's features without paying a dime. It supports citation management and article summarization. Research Rabbit helps you keep track of your sources and their citations so you can focus on writing your paper instead of getting lost in the weeds. 

The Not So Good: What Are the Drawbacks of Research Rabbit? 

Research Rabbit may not cover all the relevant sources or databases for a specific research topic. Even though this tool offers a unique way to organize and visualize academic literature, it may not include everything you need for your research. 

Like other AI tools, Research Rabbit has limitations. It may not be able to handle complex or ambiguous queries or provide accurate summaries of long or technical papers. It’s best to use it for straightforward queries to discover connections between research bodies. Research Rabbit may not be compatible with some citation styles or formats. 

If you have specific requirements for your references, double-check to ensure this tool meets your needs before relying on it. It may need more user reviews or feedback to evaluate its reliability or usability. Research Rabbit is a newer tool that hasn’t been around long enough to generate much user data. It may need more customization or personalization options for users' preferences or needs. While Research Rabbit tailors your experience based on your activity, it doesn’t allow for much user control over the tool's appearance or its features. 

Let Otio be your AI research and writing partner — try Otio for free today !

At first, research can feel exciting. You get to explore a new topic, investigate what others have said, and discover exciting facts to help you formulate your theories and craft your storyline. But as you collect sources and take notes, the process can quickly turn tedious and overwhelming. 

Before you know it, you’re stuck in a cycle of endlessly sifting through research papers without making real progress on your writing. This is the dreaded research cycle, which can be incredibly frustrating for academics and students. 

• Sharly AI Alternatives • AI For Summarizing Research Papers • Literature Review Tools • How To Identify Theoretical Framework In An Article • Graduate School Reading • Research Tools • AI For Academic Research • Research Paper Organizer • Best AI Tools For Research • Zotero Alternatives • Zotero Vs Endnote • ChatGPT For Research Papers • ChatGPT Literature Review • Mendeley Alternative • Unriddle AI Alternatives • Literature Matrix Generator • Research Assistant • Research Tools • Research Graphic Organizer • Good Websites for Research • Research Summary • How to Summarize a Research Article • Best AI for Research • Research Paper Graphic Organizer • Can You Use "We" in a Research Paper • AI in Research

Aug 28, 2024

22 Good Websites For Research Papers and Academic Articles

Aug 27, 2024

5 Best Research Graphic Organizer Templates For Researchers

Join over 50,000 researchers changing the way they read & write

Chrome Extension

© 2024 Frontdoor Labs Ltd.

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

Refund Policy

Join thousands of other scholars and researchers

Try Otio Free

© 2023 Frontdoor Labs Ltd.