Template:Tertiary source: Difference between revisions
Sources>WhatamIdoing Expand |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In | In [[scholarship]], '''tertiary source''' is a term used to describe a work which is a chiefly selection or compilation of other [[Primary source|primary]] and [[Secondary source|secondary sources]]<ref>See, e.g., University of Maryland Libraries (2001) [http://www.lib.umd.edu/guides/primary-sources.html#tertiary "Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Sources"]</ref><ref>See, e.g. [http://www.lib.odu.edu/libassist/tutorials/nursing/glossary.html Glossary, Using Information Resources]. ("Tertiary Source" may be defined as "reference material that synthesizes work already reported in primary or secondary sources".) </ref><ref>[http://www.library.jcu.edu.au/LibraryGuides/primsrcs.shtml "Library Guides: Primary, secondary and tertiary sources"]</ref>. The distinction between a secondary and tertiary source is relative<ref>[http://www.lib.umd.edu/guides/primary-sources.html Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Sources, UM Libraries]</ref><ref>[http://www.library.jcu.edu.au/LibraryGuides/primsrcs.shtml JCU - Primary, Secondary & Tertiary Sources]</ref>, whereas the difference between primary and secondary sources is more absolute in [[historiography]]. As a general rule, however, tertiary sources tend to be more focused on the identification of scholarly work than on the content itself. | ||
In some contexts | In some contexts instances of tertiary sources are [[bibliographies]], [[library catalog]]s, directories, reading lists and survey articles. [[Encyclopedia]]s and [[textbook]]s are examples of written materials that typically embrace both secondary and tertiary sources, presenting on the one hand commentary and analysis, while on the other attempting to provide a synoptic overview of the material available on the topic. | ||
The classification of a given source is subjective and contextual. For example, a modern encyclopedia might be generally considered a tertiary source, but an ancient encyclopedia is generally considered a primary source. The difference is because the modern encyclopedia is used as a source for information about a topic, and the ancient encyclopedia is understood as a source of information about the state of knowledge in the time period when the encyclopedia was written. However, even a modern encyclopedia is a primary source for some facts, such as the name of its publisher. | The classification of a given source is subjective and contextual. For example, a modern encyclopedia might be generally considered a tertiary source, but an ancient encyclopedia is generally considered a primary source. The difference is because the modern encyclopedia is used as a source for information about a topic, and the ancient encyclopedia is understood as a source of information about the state of knowledge in the time period when the encyclopedia was written. However, even a modern encyclopedia is a primary source for some facts, such as the name of its publisher. | ||
Revision as of 08:12, 4 December 2010
In scholarship, tertiary source is a term used to describe a work which is a chiefly selection or compilation of other primary and secondary sources[1][2][3]. The distinction between a secondary and tertiary source is relative[4][5], whereas the difference between primary and secondary sources is more absolute in historiography. As a general rule, however, tertiary sources tend to be more focused on the identification of scholarly work than on the content itself.
In some contexts instances of tertiary sources are bibliographies, library catalogs, directories, reading lists and survey articles. Encyclopedias and textbooks are examples of written materials that typically embrace both secondary and tertiary sources, presenting on the one hand commentary and analysis, while on the other attempting to provide a synoptic overview of the material available on the topic.
The classification of a given source is subjective and contextual. For example, a modern encyclopedia might be generally considered a tertiary source, but an ancient encyclopedia is generally considered a primary source. The difference is because the modern encyclopedia is used as a source for information about a topic, and the ancient encyclopedia is understood as a source of information about the state of knowledge in the time period when the encyclopedia was written. However, even a modern encyclopedia is a primary source for some facts, such as the name of its publisher.
A different definition is used by the UNISIST model in which secondary sources are understood as bibliographies, while tertiary sources are understood as synthesis of primary literature.
See also
Notes
de:Tertiärliteratur es:Fuente terciaria fi:Tertiäärilähde fr:Source tertiaire hu:Harmadlagos forrás id:Sumber tersier mk:Терцијарни извори на информации zh:三级文献
- ↑ See, e.g., University of Maryland Libraries (2001) "Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Sources"
- ↑ See, e.g. Glossary, Using Information Resources. ("Tertiary Source" may be defined as "reference material that synthesizes work already reported in primary or secondary sources".)
- ↑ "Library Guides: Primary, secondary and tertiary sources"
- ↑ Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Sources, UM Libraries
- ↑ JCU - Primary, Secondary & Tertiary Sources