Sourcebook source analysis

We haven’t posted much recently because we’ve all been hard at work on the COG sourcebook itself. Here’s a chance to show you what we’ve been up to.

I recently did a simple statistical analysis of the sources cited in several major sourcebooks to see how they stacked up against COG. Counting them up by categories (PhDs, major newspapers, advocacy organizations, etc), I could see a rough “credibility ratio” for different sourcebooks. The results? COG did very well indeed, coming out up next to Ethos and significantly higher than the Blue Book.

Here’s the explanation and data for COG and the Blue Book (large sample size, so it should be pretty accurate – click to expand if you can’t read it:)


And here’s Thesis, the Qualifier Quick Start, and Ethos (these are based on sample briefs, not the full product, so the accuracy is somewhat lower. Thesis in particular isn’t really accurate enough to get any meaningful data, as it has a relatively short sample brief without much diversity of sources. Ethos, however, is fairly accurate:)



One Response to Sourcebook source analysis

  1. […] statistical analysis of the quality of evidence in several major sourcebooks, which you can see over on the COGblog. The results? COG easily crushes the Blue Book and even beats the superb high-quality Ethos in some […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: