Want this question answered?
It helps historians to remember to check other sources for facts.
some amount of bias
bias
Biased reports then to not accurately describe what actually happened. That can result in a history that does not reflect the truth.
To judge the accounts against each other to see if there is bias (Apex)
Historians would be wise to look for bias in a source because bias can influence the way the writer relayed the information. Sources free from bias are to be the most trusted.
Historians use the time and place rule because the source is deemed to be more reliable. The other rule historians use is the bias rule that says everyone will be biased in some way when recounting events.
Answer this question… check to see if the information in the source is confirmed by other sources.
It helps historians to remember to check other sources for facts.
Bias is not a secondary source. In terms of historical and academic research and writing, secondary sources are articles and books written by historians and other academics. Secondary sources can be biased based on when the source was written and the author.Ê
created by an educated expert and published in an academic journal is not influenced by a bias
Bias can be useful to historians by allowing them to learn about people's opinions and beliefs.
yes
A credible source will have accurate and up-to-date information, be written by an expert or someone with expertise in the field, cite their sources, and be free from bias or personal opinions.
Mainstream News media because journalists are trained to remove personal bias from articles
Historians need to be concerned about reports with bias because bias can distort the accuracy and objectivity of historical information. It can lead to incomplete or misleading interpretations of events, which can impact the overall understanding of the past. Historians strive to present a balanced and unbiased view of history to ensure the integrity of their research and analysis.
bias or primary