8th Grade ELA Quiz: Gather Information And Assess Credibility

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Gather Information And Assess Credibility, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for 8th Grade ELA.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

Question 1

1. A) NASA Climate website article, updated 2024, credited to NASA scientists (.gov) (correct answer)
2. B) Personal blog post (no author credentials) claiming “heat waves are a hoax,” posted 2017
3. C) Social media thread summarizing a TV segment, no links to data, posted 2025
4. D) Advertisement from an air conditioner company explaining why summers feel hotter, no citations

Explanation: This question tests gathering relevant information from multiple print and digital sources using effective search terms, assessing source credibility and accuracy (authority, publication type, currency, bias), quoting or paraphrasing data and conclusions properly (with citation), avoiding plagiarism (attributing all source material), and following standard citation format (MLA or APA simplified for 8th grade). When researching climate change and heat waves, you need scientific evidence from credible sources with expertise, recent data, and no commercial bias - the NASA Climate website (.gov domain) is written by climate scientists, updated in 2024, and provides government-verified scientific data. For example, a NASA article would include peer-reviewed research, temperature data, and citations to scientific studies, making it ideal for academic research on climate topics. Option A is correct because NASA is a government scientific agency with climate experts, the .gov domain indicates official government information, and the 2024 update ensures current data. The incorrect options fail credibility tests: B is a personal blog with no credentials and outdated information plus bias ("hoax"), C is social media without original data or citations, and D is a commercial source with potential bias to sell products and no scientific citations. When gathering information, always check the source's authority (who wrote it), currency (when published/updated), accuracy (verifiable data), and purpose (why it was created) to determine credibility.

Question 2

1. Use the influencer video as the main source because it is the most recent and easiest to understand, use the CDC webpage for background definitions, and skip the journal article since its technical language makes it too hard to quote accurately
2. Use the CDC webpage and the peer-reviewed journal article as primary evidence, use the print book for background definitions, and mention the influencer video only as an example of misinformation (correct answer)
3. Use only the print book because online sources can be edited by anyone, use the influencer video for a modern student perspective, and avoid the CDC webpage and journal article since digital sources cannot be trusted
4. Use all four sources equally as primary evidence because gathering the largest number of sources automatically makes a report more accurate, and treat the influencer video as reliable as the journal article

Explanation: The strongest plan builds its main evidence on the sources with real authority: the CDC webpage, which is a government health agency updated in 2024, and the peer-reviewed journal article, which experts checked before publication. It uses the pediatrician-authored book for background and correctly treats the influencer video as an example of misinformation rather than throwing it away, since a claim with no listed sources is itself worth discussing. The plan that leans on the influencer video is wrong because “recent” and “easy” do not equal credible, and dropping the journal article for being technical discards your best evidence. The plan that uses only the print book is wrong because rejecting all digital sources is a misconception—credible digital sources like the CDC and peer-reviewed research exist. The plan that uses everything equally is wrong because the number of sources does not create accuracy; treating an unsourced video as equal to peer-reviewed research ignores credibility entirely. Good research means judging each source individually and using the most authoritative ones for your main claims.

Question 3

1. "solar energy" OR (renewable AND power) OR homes OR savings OR bills OR utility (general topic terms combined broadly)
2. "solar panel" AND residential AND ("cost savings" OR "electricity bill") AND efficiency (correct answer)
3. "green technology" AND environment AND (climate OR sustainability) AND benefits (focused on ecological impact terms)
4. solar panel residential 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 comparison calculator government database reviews

Explanation: The best search combines the exact phrase "solar panel" with residential and links cost savings or electricity bill and efficiency using AND and OR operators. This targets every key idea in your research question at once, so results focus tightly on home solar and money saved. The choice stacking broad topic words like renewable, homes, savings, and utility with OR keeps the search too general—OR widens results instead of narrowing them, so you would still get millions of loose hits. The choice built around green technology, environment, climate, and sustainability is well-structured but aims at the wrong topic: it searches ecological impact, not the household electricity costs your question asks about. The choice piling up many years, comparison, calculator, and database has relevant words but no quotation marks or operators to connect ideas, so a search engine reads it as a jumble and returns confusing or empty results. Strong search terms name the specific concepts from your question and use operators correctly to combine them—matching the topic AND joining the ideas both matter.

Question 4

1. NOAA. “Marine Debris: Plastics.” noaa.gov. 2023. https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/marine-debris.
2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “Marine Debris: Plastics.” NOAA, 2023, https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/marine-debris. (correct answer)
3. “Marine Debris: Plastics.” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2023. https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/marine-debris.
4. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2023). Marine Debris: Plastics. Retrieved from https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/ocean-coasts/marine-debris.

Explanation: The best entry names the full organization first, puts the page title in quotation marks, gives the website name, then the year, then the URL, using commas to link the pieces and a period at the end: “National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. ‘Marine Debris: Plastics.’ NOAA, 2023, https://…marine-debris.” The commas and order match simplified MLA style. The entry starting with “NOAA.” uses only the abbreviation instead of the full organization name, and it separates every element with periods instead of MLA’s commas. The entry that begins with the title in quotation marks leaves the organization out of the author position, so the source is no longer alphabetized or credited correctly. The last entry uses APA style—putting the year in parentheses after the author, dropping the quotation marks around the title, and adding “Retrieved from”—which are not MLA conventions. Because all four now end with a period, you must judge the order, punctuation, and full author name rather than any one visual clue.

Question 5

1. Fairly credible, because the confident, dramatic title signals the writer knows the subject well and is not afraid to take a strong position on it.
2. Credible enough to use, because it lives on a .com website and covers a current topic that many teens today care about and talk about.
3. Less credible, because the author is unknown, it is outdated for a fast-changing topic, it seems designed to sell something, and it offers no evidence that can be checked. (correct answer)
4. Highly credible, because the many ads and the online course it sells show that a large audience trusts this site and keeps coming back to it.

Explanation: The best judgment is that this source is less credible, and for several reasons at once. No author is listed, so you cannot check anyone's expertise. The 2012 date is too old for a topic that changes quickly. The pop-up ads and the course for sale suggest the goal is to make money, not to inform. And with no links, data, or references, you cannot verify a single claim. Together, these are strong red flags. The choice that trusts the confident, dramatic title is wrong: a bold title shows the writer's attitude, not their knowledge or accuracy. The choice that accepts it because it is a .com on a current topic is wrong too: a web address ending and a popular subject say nothing about whether the information is true or supported. The choice that treats many ads and an online course as signs of trust has it backward: heavy advertising and sales pitches point to a commercial motive, which is a reason for caution, not confidence. To judge a source well, look for a named author, a recent date, checkable evidence, and no hidden sales agenda.

Question 6

1. “Zebra mussels were first found in the Great Lakes in the late 1980s after arriving in ballast water.”
2. “The Great Lakes contain about 20% of the world’s surface freshwater.”
3. “Zebra mussels filter large amounts of water, which can reduce plankton available for native species and change the food web.” (correct answer)
4. “Mussels are a type of bivalve that can be found in both saltwater and freshwater habitats.”

Explanation: This question tests gathering relevant information from multiple print and digital sources using effective search terms, assessing source credibility and accuracy (authority, publication type, currency, bias), quoting or paraphrasing data and conclusions properly (with citation), avoiding plagiarism (attributing all source material), and following standard citation format (MLA or APA simplified for 8th grade). Choice C provides the most relevant information because it directly addresses how zebra mussels affect Great Lakes ecosystems by explaining their impact on the food web through filtering water and reducing plankton for native species. This note contains specific cause-and-effect information that answers the "how" in the research question about ecosystem effects. While the other notes provide context or background information, only choice C explains the actual ecological impact that is central to the research question. The correct answer demonstrates effective information gathering by identifying content that directly addresses the research focus on ecosystem effects. The incorrect options show common relevance mistakes: choice A provides historical context but not current effects, choice B offers general Great Lakes information unrelated to zebra mussels, and choice D gives broad mussel classification without specific Great Lakes ecosystem impacts. When gathering information for research, students should evaluate each source or note by asking whether it directly helps answer their specific research question, prioritizing information that addresses the key concepts and relationships in their inquiry.

Question 7

1. No, because it is common knowledge that teens like to stay up late
2. Yes, because the student used an idea from a source without giving credit (correct answer)
3. No, because the student changed the wording and did not copy exact sentences
4. Yes, but only if the student also copied pictures or graphs from the AAP website

Explanation: This question tests gathering relevant information from multiple print and digital sources using effective search terms, assessing source credibility and accuracy (authority, publication type, currency, bias), quoting or paraphrasing data and conclusions properly (with citation), avoiding plagiarism (attributing all source material), and following standard citation format (MLA or APA simplified for 8th grade). Choice B correctly identifies this as plagiarism because the student used specific information from a source (the AAP article about teen sleep patterns) without providing any attribution, even though the wording was changed. Plagiarism includes using someone else's ideas, not just their exact words, without giving credit through proper citation. The fact that the student paraphrased rather than quoted directly does not excuse the lack of attribution - both direct quotes and paraphrases require citations to avoid plagiarism. The correct answer recognizes that using source material without credit violates academic integrity, regardless of whether the words were changed. The incorrect options reflect common misconceptions: choice A wrongly assumes general topics don't need citations, choice C mistakenly believes paraphrasing eliminates the need for attribution, and choice D incorrectly limits plagiarism to visual materials. To avoid plagiarism, students must cite all information that comes from sources, whether quoted directly or paraphrased, unless it is truly common knowledge (facts known by most people without needing to look them up).

Question 8

1. The process is strong because the first Google result is usually the most accurate.
2. The process is weak because it relies on only one source and does not check credibility; they should use multiple sources (for example, a medical organization website, a peer-reviewed study, and a recent news report) and compare information. (correct answer)
3. The process is strong because blogs are more honest than scientific sources.
4. The process is fine as long as they copy the blog’s sentences exactly so the information stays “accurate.”

Explanation: This question tests gathering relevant information from multiple print and digital sources using effective search terms, assessing source credibility and accuracy (authority, publication type, currency, bias), quoting or paraphrasing data and conclusions properly (with citation), avoiding plagiarism (attributing all source material), and following standard citation format (MLA or APA simplified for 8th grade). The classmate's research process relies on a single source found through position in search results rather than credibility assessment - using only one source, especially an outdated blog post from an unknown author without supporting evidence, fails to meet basic research standards for gathering information from multiple sources and assessing credibility. Strong research requires consulting multiple source types such as medical organization websites (.org), peer-reviewed studies from academic databases, and recent news reports from established media outlets to compare information and identify consensus or debates in the field. The correct answer (B) identifies the fundamental weaknesses in using a single, uncredked source and provides specific examples of better source types that would strengthen the research. The incorrect options misunderstand research quality: option A incorrectly assumes search result ranking equals accuracy, option C wrongly claims blogs are more honest than scientific sources, and option D confuses exact copying with accuracy while promoting plagiarism. To conduct effective research, students should use multiple sources (aim for at least 3-5), vary source types to get different perspectives, check each source's credibility before using it, compare information across sources to verify accuracy, and look for recent sources on topics that change rapidly. This comprehensive approach ensures well-supported, credible research that can withstand scrutiny.

Question 9

1. About 30 to 40 percent of the U.S. food supply is wasted each year. (Lee 18)
2. Jamie Lee says that “About 30 to 40 percent of the U.S. food supply is wasted each year” (Lee 18). (correct answer)
3. “About 30 to 40 percent of the U.S. food supply is wasted each year” (Jamie 2022).
4. “About 30 to 40 percent of the U.S. food supply is wasted each year.” (Science Weekly)

Explanation: This question tests gathering relevant information from multiple print and digital sources using effective search terms, assessing source credibility and accuracy (authority, publication type, currency, bias), quoting or paraphrasing data and conclusions properly (with citation), avoiding plagiarism (attributing all source material), and following standard citation format (MLA or APA simplified for 8th grade). Choice B correctly demonstrates how to incorporate a direct quote with proper attribution and citation: it introduces the quote with the author's name (Jamie Lee), uses quotation marks around the exact words from the source, and includes a proper parenthetical citation with the author's last name and page number (Lee 18). This format gives credit to the original author, clearly indicates which words are quoted, and provides the information needed to find the source. The correct answer shows the proper integration of quoted material with appropriate MLA citation format for 8th grade. The incorrect options demonstrate common citation errors: choice A presents the quote as the student's own words without quotation marks (plagiarism), choice C uses the author's first name instead of last name in the citation, and choice D cites the magazine title instead of the author. When using direct quotes, students must use quotation marks around the exact words, provide attribution through an introduction or parenthetical citation with the author's last name and page number, and ensure the quote is integrated smoothly into their own sentence structure.

Question 10

1. Not credible, because it uses a technical title and cites so many studies that an average reader could not verify the claims themselves
2. Credible, because it comes from a public health authority, has a qualified author, is current, and links to supporting evidence (correct answer)
3. Not credible, because it explains its own limitations, which shows the author is unsure and does not fully trust the research
4. Credible, because it appears near the top of a search and shares the popular view most other websites report about wildfires

Explanation: The best judgment is that the source is credible because it meets several reliability tests at once: it is published by a public health authority (a .gov site), written by an author with relevant expertise (a researcher with an MPH), updated recently in 2024, and it links to supporting studies. Together these signals show authority, currency, and transparency, with no product sales to suggest bias. The option that calls it not credible because the topic is technical and cites many studies is wrong—citing sources and using accurate terms strengthens credibility rather than weakening it. The option that treats the explained limitations as a weakness misreads a strength; honest writers note limits to show objectivity, not doubt. The option that judges it credible for ranking high in a search and matching popular opinion uses the wrong test—search rank and popularity do not prove accuracy, so you must still evaluate the source itself. Only one choice evaluates the source using sound criteria instead of a mistaken one.

Question 11

1. “Zebra mussels filter large amounts of water, which can reduce plankton and change the food web.” (correct answer)
2. “Boating and summer vacations have made the Great Lakes a popular travel destination for tourists.”
3. “Freshwater mussels are harvested and eaten as a seafood delicacy in many countries worldwide.”
4. “The very first lighthouse along the Great Lakes shoreline was built sometime in the early 1800s.”

Explanation: The research question asks about the ecological effects of invasive zebra mussels on the Great Lakes. The note about zebra mussels filtering water and reducing plankton is the best choice because it directly explains how these mussels disrupt the food web—exactly the kind of ecological impact the question targets. The note about boating and summer vacations describes the region's tourism appeal, not any effect on the ecosystem, so it is off-topic. The note about freshwater mussels being harvested as seafood discusses how people eat mussels, not how the invasive species harms the environment—it also confuses zebra mussels with edible species. The note about the first Great Lakes lighthouse gives regional history unrelated to zebra mussels or their ecological effects. When taking research notes, always check each fact against your research question and keep only information that helps answer it, even when other facts seem interesting.

Question 12

1. Use only the first website that appears on Google because it is probably the best.
2. Use a documentary, a clothing company’s marketing page, and an anonymous blog, and treat them all as equally reliable.
3. Use a library book about consumer culture (print), a government environmental agency report (.gov), and a peer-reviewed journal article; check dates, author credentials, and possible bias before using information. (correct answer)
4. Use only social media posts from people who thrift, because they have real-life experience.

Explanation: This question tests gathering relevant information from multiple print and digital sources using effective search terms, assessing source credibility and accuracy (authority, publication type, currency, bias), quoting or paraphrasing data and conclusions properly (with citation), avoiding plagiarism (attributing all source material), and following standard citation format (MLA or APA simplified for 8th grade). Effective research combines multiple credible sources from both print and digital formats while actively checking each source's authority, currency, and potential bias - using a library book, government report, and peer-reviewed article provides diverse perspectives from verified experts. For example, the library book might provide historical context on consumer culture, the .gov report would have textile waste statistics, and the journal article could analyze environmental impacts, creating a comprehensive research foundation. Option C is correct because it uses varied, credible sources (academic book, government data, peer-reviewed research) and explicitly mentions checking dates, credentials, and bias before using information. The incorrect options show poor research practices: A relies on search engine ranking instead of credibility, B treats biased commercial sources as equal to objective ones, and D limits research to anecdotal social media posts without expert analysis. When gathering information, diversify your sources across print and digital formats, verify credibility through author expertise and publication type, and always check for potential bias based on who created the source and why.

Question 13

1. NOAA. “Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide.” NOAA Climate.gov, 2023, https://www.climate.gov/. Accessed today.
2. NOAA. “Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide.” NOAA Climate.gov, 2023, https://www.climate.gov/. (correct answer)
3. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide.” 2023, https://www.climate.gov/.
4. NOAA Climate.gov. “Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide.” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2023, https://www.climate.gov/.

Explanation: A simplified MLA entry for a digital source lists the author or organization, then the page title in quotation marks, then the website name, the year, and the full URL, in that order. The best entry begins with the organization (NOAA), gives the exact page title in quotes, names the website (NOAA Climate.gov), the year, and the URL—everything a reader needs to find the page, with nothing extra. The entry that ends with “Accessed today” tacks on a vague access note instead of a real date, which adds clutter that this simplified format does not call for. Another entry drops the website name entirely, so a reader loses information needed to identify where the page lives. The last entry reverses two key elements—it puts the website name first and the organization in the website’s slot—so the pieces are in the wrong order. Only the entry that keeps every element in the correct MLA order, with no missing or misplaced parts, is complete and correct.

Question 14

1. Systems that recommend content often prioritize posts that generate strong reactions, which can unintentionally amplify misleading material (University Research Center).
2. Recommendation algorithms sometimes boost posts that get intense responses, and this can accidentally help misinformation spread (University Research Center). (correct answer)
3. Recommendation systems sometimes highlight posts that get intense responses, and this can accidentally help false information spread widely online.
4. Online algorithms tend to recommend attention-grabbing content, which sometimes causes inaccurate posts to reach far more people (University Research Center).

Explanation: A good paraphrase changes both the wording and the sentence structure while keeping the original meaning, and it credits the source. The best answer replaces "prioritize" with "boost," "strong reactions" with "intense responses," and "unintentionally amplify misleading posts" with "accidentally help misinformation spread," then adds the citation. It restructures the sentence and keeps the full meaning. The choice about systems that recommend content only swaps a few words ("posts" for "content," "material" for "posts") but keeps almost the same phrasing and structure as the original—that is too close to the source, so it counts as plagiarism even with a citation. The choice about false information spreading widely online rephrases the idea well but leaves off the required citation, so it fails to credit the source. The choice about attention-grabbing content changes the wording but drops the key detail that the amplified posts are misleading or false; "inaccurate posts" is close, yet by focusing on reach rather than misinformation it shifts the original meaning, so it is not the most accurate paraphrase. Remember: read the original, set it aside, write the idea in your own words and structure, check the meaning matches, and always include a citation.

Question 15

1. Whether the site links to sources and looks professional, since a well-organized page shows the writer put effort into the information
2. Whether the source was published or updated recently and provides data you can check against other records (correct answer)
3. Whether the article explains the topic in a lively, engaging way that keeps you reading and holds your interest
4. Whether the author’s conclusions match what you already believe about how wildfires affect nearby cities

Explanation: The best choice focuses on how current the information is and whether you can confirm its data elsewhere. Because wildfire seasons change every year, a recently published or updated source gives you today’s reality, and verifiable data lets you cross-check numbers against sources like EPA air-quality monitors. That combination is what makes a source both accurate and useful here. Judging a source by whether it links to sources and looks professional is tempting, but a polished, organized page can still be outdated or contain claims you cannot verify—appearance is not accuracy. Choosing a source because it explains the topic in a lively, engaging way rewards style over substance; engaging writing can still be wrong or old. Picking a source whose conclusions match what you already believe is confirmation bias: agreeing with you says nothing about whether the data is current or correct. Only recency plus verifiable data directly answers whether the information you gather is trustworthy for a fast-changing topic.

Question 16

1. (“Saving Water at Home” 14)
2. (Lopez 14) (correct answer)
3. (Lopez, 2021)
4. (Lopez, Science World 14)

Explanation: A simplified MLA in-text citation for a print source needs just the author's last name and the page number, with no comma between them: (Lopez 14). This lets a reader find both the source in your works cited list and the exact spot the fact came from. The choice with the article title in quotation marks and a page number gives the wrong locator: MLA uses a title only when there is no known author, and here Maria Lopez is credited. The choice pairing Lopez with the year 2021 follows APA style, which uses author and year, not the author-and-page style MLA requires for print sources. The choice adding the magazine name Science World includes information that belongs in the works cited entry, not the in-text citation, so it is cluttered and nonstandard. Keep MLA in-text citations short: last name plus page number.

Question 17

1. A seafood magazine article reporting that mussel populations in the Great Lakes have grown large enough to supply commercial harvesting for restaurants across the region.
2. A state environmental agency report explaining that zebra mussels filter large amounts of plankton, which can reduce food available for native species and change water clarity. (correct answer)
3. A tourism board study describing how clearer water near Lake Michigan beaches has attracted more summer swimmers and boaters to the shoreline in recent years.
4. A local news feature covering how a rowing club adjusted its equipment after mussels built up on the hulls of boats stored along the Great Lakes.

Explanation: The research question asks how zebra mussels affect the ecosystem, so the best evidence must explain their ecological impact. The state environmental agency report does exactly that: it shows a specific mechanism—filtering plankton that native species depend on and altering water clarity—from a credible, authoritative source. That direct link between the mussels and ecosystem changes is what makes it strong evidence. The seafood magazine article notes that mussel populations are large, but it focuses on commercial harvesting for restaurants, not on how the mussels change the ecosystem. The tourism study mentions clearer water, which is a real side effect, yet it treats that clearness as a benefit for swimmers and boaters instead of examining the ecological cause or consequences. The rowing feature involves mussels on the Great Lakes but only discusses buildup on boat hulls, an inconvenience for people—not an effect on native species or the food web. Each of these touches the topic but answers a different question than the one being researched, so only the agency report belongs as evidence.

Question 18

1. renewable energy AND science AND technology Midwest homes
2. “solar panel” residential cost effectiveness Midwest (correct answer)
3. home electricity power savings efficiency comparison guide
4. solar 2024 payback incentives calculator installer reviews warranty

Explanation: The strongest search combines the exact technology as a phrase (“solar panel”), the setting (residential), the main concern (cost effectiveness), and the region (Midwest). This is specific enough to filter out unrelated results but still open enough to find several credible articles that compare perspectives. The choice linking renewable energy with science and technology is still too broad—it pulls in all kinds of energy and science topics rather than the cost question you actually care about. The choice built around home electricity, power, and savings never names solar panels at all, so it wanders off-topic and returns general utility-bill advice. The choice packed with terms like payback, incentives, calculator, installer reviews, and warranty is too narrow: piling on that many exact words tends to surface shopping tools and sales pages instead of research sources, and can accidentally exclude good articles that don't use every word. To search efficiently, pull the key ideas straight from your question, quote exact phrases, and add a location when it matters—then adjust wider or narrower only if needed.

Question 19

1. It is effective because one person's personal story usually captures the topic more accurately than research studies do, so extra sources are unnecessary.
2. It is effective because using a single source keeps the project focused and avoids the confusion that comes from comparing conflicting information.
3. It is not effective because it relies on only one type of source; the student should gather information from several credible sources and compare their evidence. (correct answer)
4. It is effective as long as the TikTok video has many likes and comments, which show that other people found the information trustworthy and useful.

Explanation: The best choice recognizes that one TikTok video is a single anecdote, and good research about a complex topic requires gathering several credible sources and comparing what their evidence shows. That gives you a balanced, reliable picture instead of one person's experience. The option claiming a personal story is usually more accurate than research studies is wrong because a single anecdote cannot be checked or generalized the way systematic research can. The option that praises using one source to stay focused and avoid conflicting information is wrong because comparing sources is how you verify facts and understand complexity—conflict is useful, not something to dodge. The option that treats many likes and comments as proof of trustworthiness is wrong because popularity measures engagement, not accuracy or expertise; a widely shared video can still be inaccurate. Only comparing multiple credible sources lets you judge authority, evidence, and bias, so that evaluation is the strongest.

Question 20

1. Source 2 is likely more credible because it is newer (2024), and current information usually reflects the most accurate and up-to-date research on the topic.
2. Both sources may be equally credible because each one has a public website and each one directly discusses teenagers, which suggests they meet similar standards.
3. Source 1 is likely more credible because it comes from medical experts and a professional organization; Source 2 may be biased because it sells a product and offers no evidence. (correct answer)
4. Source 2 may be more credible because it disagrees with Source 1, and a source that challenges expert opinion is often showing that it is independent and unbiased.

Explanation: To judge credibility, ask who created the source, what expertise they have, and whether they might benefit from their claims. The most credible choice recognizes that Source 1 comes from pediatric experts and a professional organization that bases recommendations on research, while Source 2 sells supplements (a financial motive) and gives no supporting studies—so it may be biased. The choice claiming the newer source must be more accurate is wrong because a recent publication date does not guarantee expertise or evidence; currency is only one factor. The choice saying both are equally credible fails because simply having a website and mentioning teens says nothing about authority, evidence, or bias—two very different kinds of sources are being treated as the same. The choice praising Source 2 for disagreeing with experts is wrong because conflict with an authority is not proof of independence; a seller with a product to promote has a clear reason to disagree. Only the answer that weighs expertise, evidence, and motive correctly assesses both sources.