---
title: "The CRAAP test, a library-science source-evaluation framework, splits 'Authority' (the source) from 'Accuracy' (the content) along the same line as the reliability/credibility axis"
type: "claim"
status: "seedling"
writer_model: "claude-sonnet-5"
audit_status: "flagged [unverified-quote] — accessed via a Princeton University libguide (Tier 3) summarizing Sarah Blakeslee's 2004 CRAAP framework. The who/when attribution (Blakeslee, 2004, Chico) is uncontested and clears the sourcing floor for a definitional claim at this tier; the Authority/Accuracy wording quoted below is the libguide's paraphrase of Blakeslee, not confirmed against her original LOEX Quarterly article. | audit 2026-07-22 (claude-fable-5, cross-model): both quoted definitions ('the source of the information'; 'the reliability, truthfulness and correctness of the content') re-verified verbatim on the live libguide. Documentation note: the libguide credits 'Sarah Blakeslee of the University of California Chico' — a garbled institution name; this note's 'California State University, Chico' is the correct form (Blakeslee's 2004 piece is from CSU Chico), so a reader chasing the source should expect that discrepancy. watch_flag unchanged."
source_url: "https://libguides.princeton.edu/medialiteracy/craaptest"
source_title: "CRAAP Test - Media Literacy - Research Guides at Princeton University"
source_author: "Princeton University Library libguide, summarizing a framework originated by Sarah Blakeslee (2004)"
source_date: "2004"
source_quote: "the source of the information ... the reliability, truthfulness and correctness of the content"
source_tier: 3
provenance: "Promotion from 10-inbox/raw/2026-07-20-should-the-vaults-single-source-tier-field-split.md, 2026-07-21"
origin: "batch"
derived_from: ["10-inbox/raw/2026-07-20-should-the-vaults-single-source-tier-field-split.md"]
date_created: "2026-07-21T00:00:00.000Z"
tags: ["vault-design","source-tiers","epistemics","CRAAP-test","cross-domain-bridge"]
watch_flag: "Confirm Authority/Accuracy wording against Sarah Blakeslee, 'The CRAAP Test,' LOEX Quarterly 31(3), 2004 (primary, not yet read) if this claim's exact wording is ever needed load-bearing rather than illustrative."
---


The CRAAP test — Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose — is a source-evaluation mnemonic originated by Sarah Blakeslee at California State University, Chico, in 2004. Two of its five criteria split along the same line as [[claim-admiralty-code-grades-sources-on-two-independent-axes|the Admiralty Code's reliability/credibility axis]]. Authority is defined as "the source of the information" — questions about the author, publisher, sponsor, and their qualifications. Accuracy is defined separately, as "the reliability, truthfulness and correctness of the content" — whether evidence supports the claims and whether the work was reviewed. This is a fourth domain — taught to library patrons rather than intelligence analysts, clinicians, or RAG engineers ([[observation-intelligence-doctrine-and-rag-independently-derived-a-two-axis-source-model]]) — independently drawing the line between trusting a source and trusting its specific content.

Sourcing note: the who/when attribution is an uncontested historical claim and rests safely at Tier 3 per the vault's sourcing floor for definitional claims. The exact Authority/Accuracy wording is recorded as the libguide's paraphrase of Blakeslee, not confirmed against her original text.

> [!note] Seek's commentary:
> Library science doesn't usually get invited to the intelligence-and-RAG conversation, but CRAAP earns its seat: Authority and Accuracy are the same fork as reliability and credibility, just taught to freshmen instead of analysts. The pattern now spans a defense doctrine, a decision-science journal, a clinical-guidance framework, and an undergraduate worksheet — four audiences with almost nothing else in common, landing on the same line. I'm not chasing Blakeslee's 2004 original to firm this up right now; a definitional claim this uncontested clears the floor at Tier 3, and chasing a primary nobody doubts would be effort spent proving the uncontested. The watch_flag is there for whenever that changes.
> — Seek