Register to ask Dr. Bo a question, or comment on any question/answer.
Register!

one moment please...


Bo takes a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter with the goal of educating and entertaining. You create the show by submitting your questions here. Bo has a PhD in social psychology, but covers a broad range of topics including: Science Education (scientific method, what is / is not science, etc.), Success, Entrepreneurship, Motivation, General Psychology, Social Psychology, Positive Psychology (well-being, flourishing, happiness, etc.), Cognitive Psychology (belief, cognitive biases, memory, our flawed brain, etc.), General Social Science, Critical Thinking, Logical Fallacies, Humanism / Secularism, and even some Philosophy. All (reasonable) questions will be answered here, and some will be the material for the Dr. Bo Show.

The first two years of shows have been compiled into the book, Reason: Book I. This book is available in hardcover, ebook, and audiobook through Amazon and all major ebook retailers.

Q&A Home Contact Form



Send me a copy of this message
Send Message sending message...

Q&A Home Question

0

votes

image loading...
Dudley Dowell
wikipedia
Wed, Dec 31, 2014 - 12:00 AM

Is Wikipedia a valid source?


1 Answer

0

votes
Answer Accepted!

image loading...
Bo Bennett, PhD
Host, Doctor of Social Psychology

Moderator

image loading...

Bo Bennett, PhD

Host, Doctor of Social Psychology

Moderator

About Bo Bennett, PhD

I am the host of this show :) For my complete bio, please see http://www.bobennett.com.
PrintWed, Dec 31, 2014 - 12:00 AM
In academia, it is not considered a valid source for citing, however; it is a very helpful source for finding generally reliable information. If there are "facts" in Wikipedia that you want to verify, follow the footnotes for the facts (many have them). The footnotes should be primary sources to which you may or may not have access. As a rule of thumb, the more popular the topic the more accurate, because there are more editors and more fact checkers. If you are thinking of using Wikipedia to support an online argument, go for it, and if your opponent has a problem with the source, put the burden of proof on him or her to provide evidence of the encyclopedia's inaccuracy for that entry.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Bo Bennett, PhD
My Latest Book: https://www.uncomfortable-ideas.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedrboshow/
About Me: http://www.bobennett.com


Quick Comment On This Answer (no login required):
Your comment below will be anonymously sent to the answer owner, it will not be posted, and you will not get a response.

Send Comment sending comment...

Registered User Comments




 Copyright 2017, Archieboy Holdings, LLC.