 In this video, we're going to discuss two types of information that are at the heart of academic research, primary and secondary sources. The difference between these two types of information, as well as how they overlap, can be more complex than it would seem at first glance, and their usage varies widely based on discipline. First, let's talk about each type of source. Primary sources are the actual records left behind after an event, which can provide information about that event to others who weren't there. Primary sources get you as close as possible to experiencing something without actually being there yourself. For example, we did not train alongside astronaut Stephanie Wilson in 2009, but this photograph helps us to at least see a glimpse of what it would have been like. So primary sources are the records or evidence of activity in every sphere of life. They are created in close proximity to a specified time, event, or moment of creation. They are minimally processed or altered and they're fixed in time. Primary sources could be any format or really anything that could pass along information. This can include textual documents, audio or video recordings, images, interviews, actions, sets of actions, data, primary research articles, and much more. Here are some examples of primary source documents, keeping up with the space theme we've already established. While this article about robots and space exploration might not make a bit of sense to a non-scientist, what is important to note is that particularly in the sciences, articles can only be considered a primary source if there was an actual experiment conducted. Looking at this abstract, we notice that no matter how complex the article, if you can find evidence that they did something new, conducted an actual experiment, then you can be reasonably certain that this is a primary research article which will add to the body of human knowledge about robots and space. You may now be wondering what are secondary sources and how can you begin to recognize them? Secondary sources are made up of, based upon, or derived from, those primary sources we just learned about, and secondary sources tend to be more removed in time as a measure of distance, and the sources within are selected specifically for an audience, often with the author adding some form of analysis or wider context. Secondary sources can include biographies, histories, review articles, textbooks, really anything that couldn't exist without lots of primary sources as the basis. Here are some examples of secondary sources. This journal article, within the Journal of Popular Culture, relies on numerous primary and secondary sources in order to help readers consider the subject in new ways. Here's a closer look at one paragraph. Notice how many primary and secondary sources the author compiled in order to construct a new narrative. This review article in the Sciences would be considered a secondary source as well, due to the fact that it is a compilation of multiple studies rather than a new experiment of its own. There are lots of ways that primary and secondary sources could overlap. For example, this New York Times article from the day after the moon landing would have been considered a secondary source at the time, since it was written by journalists who relied on interviews and transcripts, both of which are primary sources in order to write their news articles, and they used grainy frames from the television broadcast as illustrations. But now that we are many decades removed from the first moon landing in 1969, these news articles are considered an important historical artifact. In the arts, the distinction between primary and secondary sources is a bit different than in other disciplines, due to a concept called the creative work. This works for literature and film as well. Let's use a pop culture reference as an example. This movie, The Martian, is a creative work, the combined effort of a director, crew, actors, screenwriters, and the finished film is already being studied and written about by scholars and journalists. But the movie was very closely based on this novel of the same title, written by Andy Weir. Does this make the film a secondary source in this case? It certainly is remixing information that already existed to make a new creation. Furthermore, both the novel and the film were based on lots of other sources, since the author Andy Weir did an immense amount of research looking at primary sources and even working out complex problems that he used when writing the book. NASA was consulted on the making of the film, which brought in the advice of experts with another wonderful example of primary sources. Despite all the primary sources that went into both the book and the film, each would still be considered a primary source. Each of these is a creative work, which stands on its own. So in this case, examples of secondary sources could be a film review, as shown here, or a review of the novel. Other secondary sources could include a non-fiction book, focusing on depictions of space in literature, or a scholarly article, which compares this film to the wider tradition of science fiction and film, or even the IMDb listing for this film online. So you can see how this whole primary secondary thing can become somewhat confusing if you let it. Keep in mind that primary sources and secondary sources work together, and what is defined as primary or secondary can really change based on context, or which discipline you're focusing on. And when in doubt, remember that you can always have a chat with the librarian.