# data[].attributes.headline
Is this information clearly biased in one way or another? Why did the author or creator decide to share this information? Does this source present multiple points of view on the topic?Is the language used meant to evoke a strong, emotional response? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Is this information clearly biased in one way or another? Why did the author or creator decide to share this information? Does this source present multiple points of view on the topic?Is the language used meant to evoke a strong, emotional response? 

# data[].attributes.headline
Does the source contain any false information or errors? Does the source use reputable sources to support the claims made? Has the source gone through peer review? Are any research methods used well-designed and are conclusions from the research supported by the evidence? Does this source align with other sources that discuss this topic? Does the information seem complete, or are facts missing?

# data[].attributes.subject
Does the source contain any false information or errors? Does the source use reputable sources to support the claims made? Has the source gone through peer review? Are any research methods used well-designed and are conclusions from the research supported by the evidence? Does this source align with other sources that discuss this topic? Does the information seem complete, or are facts missing?

# data[].attributes.headline
What credentials related to the topic at hand does the author have? Does the author have any relevant affiliations with a respected university or organization? What can you find about the author online? Has the author published on this subject before? Is the publication reputable? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What credentials related to the topic at hand does the author have? Does the author have any relevant affiliations with a respected university or organization? What can you find about the author online? Has the author published on this subject before? Is the publication reputable? 

# data[].attributes.headline
What aspect of your research question(s) does this source answer? Is the intended audience appropriate for academic research? Does this source provide a new perspective or piece of information? Is this source too technical or too general? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What aspect of your research question(s) does this source answer? Is the intended audience appropriate for academic research? Does this source provide a new perspective or piece of information? Is this source too technical or too general? 

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the date of publication? Does the source use recent information? Are the references and/or links current? Does currency matter for this topic? Why or why not?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the date of publication? Does the source use recent information? Are the references and/or links current? Does currency matter for this topic? Why or why not?

# data[].attributes.body
As this topic deal with current events and modern conflicts as well as the fact that conflicts are ever evolving events, it is very important to have accurate, recent and reliable valuable information. The Global Conflict Tracker uses their primary sources to write their articles from within the last 5 years which is fairy current and also was last updated one day ago, overall, these sources can still present valuable data. Meanwhile, the Vision of Humanity uses sources from within the last 6-12 months indicating a very frequently updated source of information which is very important.

# data[].attributes.body
The vision for humanity uses reputable sources such as the institute for economic and peace which is a think tank, a institute that researches pressing concerns.
In fact all images used in the global peace index is from the IEP 2018~2019

# data[].attributes.body
It is vital that the source use up to date information as we're talking about current events, currency is naturally important. If not people could have the wrong perspective especially with the amount of fake news now

# data[].attributes.body
Both sources have been updated recently. The sources use information from 2019 and 2020. I could not find any references on either site other than the people who made the organization/website. Currency is important for this topic because conflicts are constantly getting resolved and popping up.

# data[].attributes.body
The global conflict tracker was last updated on April 20th, while the global piece index uses information from 2019. Therefore, both sources use relevant information. This matters because of the ever changing aspects of societies, meaning that countries could be finished with certain conflicts, or even start new ones any day.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it reaches the intended audience of academic research but I find it to America centric so they might want to widen the variety

# data[].attributes.body
This website clearly uses data from 2019. Therefore it is recent to the point where it acceptable to use a cite but it isn't new. Most of the data is from 2019 but some of the graphs we can see were published in 2018. So for this reason it is completely acceptable. Of course currency matters as if we are talking about how to stop conflicts that ended decades ago the point is lost. Also there tons of factors for instance economy at the time other wars at the time trade deals at the time. So if it is from a different time we must use information and data from that time.

# data[].attributes.body
They have a selection of experts ranging Senior fellow of national security studies to senior for women and forein policy

# data[].attributes.body
The most recent data the Global piece index uses is data from 2019. The Global conflict tracker was last updated on April 20 2020 (Written on top of the page).

# data[].attributes.body
The facts seem to be there but at some times you can see the opinion reeking through

# data[].attributes.body
The information doesn't seem to be biased and the language doesn't lead in any spectrum

# data[].attributes.body
The data was from last year(2019).

# data[].attributes.body
The website uses data from 2019, it is shown where it says "The GPI 2019 also includes new data on well being and perceptions of peacefulness." There are also ads or related news articles to the side that are also marked as 2019 data.

# data[].attributes.body
While currency is an important factor, it seems that the Global Conflict Tracker is a bit outdated, having its interactive map based in data from 2018, though it is a trustable website with good sources. I think a 2 year gap isn't that bad, and the website could still be used by other people for researches. The Global Peace Index has more recent information; it is based in 2019 data. That is more acceptable since we are still in the first semester of 2020, meaning there isn't any 100% accurate and trustable data for this year's data. A 1 year gap is better than a 2 year gap.

# data[].attributes.body
The global conflict tracker was updated recently, while the other website uses data from 2019. Although, both contains recent information.

# data[].attributes.body
This source uses recent information because the data collected is from 2019 . The currency does matter a lot for this topic because conflicts are really likely to change over time, therefore it's very important.

# data[].attributes.body
This website uses sources from 2019. This is because most of the sources are all updated and are said about 2019. This means the data collected are all new. Present resources are necessary due to having a trustworthy data.

# data[].attributes.body
Both sources have been updated recently but global conflict tracker has been updated in 2020 and global peace index has been updated in 2019

# data[].attributes.body
The last update time of the resource is April 20, 2019, which means that this is a new resource update.

# data[].attributes.body
The global peace index concerns 2019, and the global conflict tracker is updated frequently (last update on 4/20/2020). For the global peace index, the currency does not matter so much, because its updated year by year. But for the global conflict tracker, it does matter to be current, as the conflicts might change day by day.

# data[].attributes.body
The intended audience is appropriate for academic research because of the fact that it contains relevant information that could be used for research, as well as using appropriate language and data. Both sources provide different perspectives of conflict because CFR talks about conflicts that are occurring in the world, while vision of humanity talks about the absence of conflict and the peacefulness of a country, using the data from current researches.

# data[].attributes.body
The sources were uploaded recently and used data from 2019. Currency's important because we can know different perspectives from the past and to see how much the things have changed.

# data[].attributes.body
The global peace index uses information about past year such as from 2008 to 2019, they don't give information about the current time. But the global conflict tracker was recently updated on April 20, 2020(piece written on April 21, 2020), so it shows that the site is being updated quite frequently.

# data[].attributes.body
This source gives you everything you need including stats and background. Overall very nice source 10 out of 10 would recommend. I would suggest using other sources as this can be viewed more as an introduction to the topic and you could probably find a source specific to the topic.

# data[].attributes.body
Many of the information was published 2019, which is pretty recent therefore it is an acceptable source, although many of the graphs has data dating back to 2018, it is still acceptable, but of course it would better if more recent.

# data[].attributes.body
For people to learn, and know about global issues. Also use those information as a guide to global peace and development.

# data[].attributes.body
The Global Peace website has a meter of years ranging from 2008-2019 while the Global Conflict website has been update as recently as April 20th 2020. Currency is important for the Global Conflicts website but not so much for the Global peace website because with the Conflicts it shows what kind of conflict is happening in relatively peaceful countries.

# data[].attributes.body
The intended audience is mostly students and educated adults, which is appropriate for the topic. The data is general, and provides a neutral perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
The organizations which made these websites seem to be credible. There is no single author for either website. However, the global conflict tracker lists the staff who work at their organization.

# data[].attributes.body
The information on the sources seem accurate. I could not find any mistakes in their facts, and the information aligns with other sources on the same topic.

# data[].attributes.body
The authors aren't directly written in the sources. Although, the CFR, council on foreign relations is a nonprofit organization known for international affairs and foreign policies, giving them credibility to talk about the topic they have written about.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no clear bias on either website except that both websites are organizations whose goal is to solve conflicts. The language used mostly just states the facts. The sources present the facts from a neutral perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
They both provide answers to questions about global peace and conflict , with source topics varying from internal conflict to interstate conflict. The GCT is a very informative source with plenty of information concerning any country involved in a kind of conflict and the GPI is a more general source, basing the level of world peace on the status and data of each country. Both sources are appropriate and actually quite helpful for academic research. The sources provide a non-biased, statistical point of view on global peace and conflict.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a very broad source but of course gives very educational information that can be used well. On the other hand this source could focus on less topics and focus more on what they have with depth.

# data[].attributes.body
Although neither website mention the existence of a single author, GCT has a list of staff working for the organisation and the GPI is brought on by a Institute for Economics and Peace, a company working towards global peace with 6 offices around the world. Both sources seem credible.

# data[].attributes.body
There are no obvious/major errors in data accuracy in both sources, and both sources seem free of bias and opinions. CFR seem to have a significant history, being founded in 1921 after a group of diplomats, financiers, generals, and lawyers concluded that Americans needed to be better educated in world affair decision making after a Paris Peace Conference in 1919. Neither sources state where from and how their information is obtained but both seem credible and without fault.

# data[].attributes.body
The information shown in both sources do not show any sign of bias or unequal coverage of aspects, and provide detailed information on many global conflict events. Both source organisations' intend to promote world peace in creating these sources. The language used in both sources is entirely statistical and emotionless, and any empathy provoked would come from the readers' own opinions and views. The sources only show an analytical view on the topics presented.

# data[].attributes.body
The global Conflict Tracker was recently updated on April 20 so it shows that this website will probably update again. The Global Peace website has data only from 2008 to 2019.

# data[].attributes.body
The source is appropriate for the academic research because it gives appropriate information on the subject matter, they show realistic information and prove.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think credentials matter as long as the information can be backed up and proven to be true. However this website was created by a team an organisation. And they have their own institutes so this is clearly a credible team. Yes they are experts although it is unclear what their opinions are of this institute is bias or what not. We can learn about the authors education and background.

# data[].attributes.body
Each source has their main focus/topic, but at the same time both of them fit with the main topic of conflicts. These sources are good for students that are looking for quick and informative sources, and also adults that are always looking to keep on sink with the news.

# data[].attributes.body
Both sources are intended to students because both sources use appropriate information and it is very educational

# data[].attributes.body
The country on foreign relations has many conflicts that are happening all around the world and it gives background information for all the conflicts. The vision of humanity gives more information country by country through resources such as graphs. The country on foreign relation is good for researching into conflicts and finding out general information and the vision of humanity is better for statistics, graphs and relevant detailed information.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the author should have published this article with great confidence.

# data[].attributes.body
Neither websites have given the name of the authors, however they have credible information.

# data[].attributes.body
The first source is extremely relevant as it gives tons of information including graphs, statistics and background information to help catch everyone up to the current situation. The only thing is that this website covers all kinds of conflicts which is great for finding the conflict but to truly go in depth in your research I would recommend using an outside source to focus on the desired specific conflict. The second helps with the other perspective focusing on the lack of conflict helping to show the differences and similarities between countries with and without conflict, a combination of the two sources works the best as it helps to show all aspects of the world and helps to expand our understanding and our perception of the modern world. The use of multiple sources is recommended for this reason.

# data[].attributes.body
Both sources are very trustable and could be used for both small and big researches, though I would say checking other sources would be better for a project.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion the ranking is completely false and can not be backed up what so ever. This is mostly because they put china to be a more peaceful country than than the US also putting countries of Islam such as Saudi Arabia in the same territory as the united states. This source however is peered review probably by the people of the same institution which defeats the purpose but never the less is is reviewed. It does not align with other sources.

# data[].attributes.body
The vision of humanity source uses relevant and current research studies, reports, and data. This leads to the information in the source being accurate. The information in this source aligns with other studies on the topic of peaceful countries, and the information seems complete, especially due to the amount of information they include and the different years of data.

# data[].attributes.body
The sources give background and many other information. The intended audience should be educated people because it's academic.

# data[].attributes.body
Every source has its focus on each topic and has a wide variety of source which are all reliable. Therefore, it gives us new perspectives that are technical.

# data[].attributes.body
Both sources have useful information that could be used for research

# data[].attributes.body
The both websites are think tanks, the CFR  has over 5000 members including "government officials, scholars, lawyers, nonprofit professionals, journalists, educators, religious leaders, and business executives". They were founded in 1921 and have no reason to be partisan to any cause.

# data[].attributes.body
Both sources have information for academic research, including statistics and background about many conflicts but I think for a specific topic you should also research about that specifically.

# data[].attributes.body
The CFR is not biased in their information, due to the fact that they are only showing conflicts that are occurring in the world, rather than an opinion. Both sources are trying to provide relevant and accurate data/information for the public. Also, the vision of humanity source contains multiple factors for the final ranking of the countries, giving multiple points on the topic. The language used is to be serious and give accurate information.

# data[].attributes.body
The global conflict tracker shows only perspectives from the US, while the global peace index shows how peaceful each country is. For the academic research, the global peace one is appropriate, as they analyse the situation in a neutral point of view. And the global conflict tracker is less appropriate for academic research because they only use the US perspective. I think both sources does provide new information and perspectives as they both use up to date information.

# data[].attributes.body
There are very limited information about the author even though it shows the people that work for the organization. I can't say any credentials about the author because there are not enough informations to do so.

# data[].attributes.body
The global peace tracker was last updated April 20, 2020 and the Global Peace Index shows statistics from 2019, which shows sources are quite recent and the websites are active and current ones. Currency is highly important in these two topics because they talk about major current events that are happening in the world right now.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes this information is biased. This portrays china to be a peaceful country it also portrays Palestine and countries of Islam to be peaceful which clearly is not true. It does not there is only one view. The language is neutral

# data[].attributes.body
The information given on the Global Conflict side is geared for a more academic side as it shows conflicts that also affect America and the conflicts listed are all current events and if you click on the section below the map, you can find more details about the event. The information given on the Global Peace website, is also geared towards an academic audience as the information shown describes the map and gives data on why it could be the case.

# data[].attributes.body
I think both websites are credible. The CFR has a list of members that works at the organization and the website says that there are over 5000 members that include superior lawyers, journalists, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
Th Global Peace website is connected to the Institute of Economics and Peace (IEP) and the Global Conflict website is made by the Center of the Preventive Action (CPA) .CPA is and organization that aims to stop conflicts around the world that mainly effect the US interest.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the information for both sources are accurate.There are no errors that stand out in both websites and they include variety of informations such as statistics. Especially for the CFR it is clear that this website is made from many experts with high career.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think the information on the website is biased towards one another. The language used is to state facts and give information and it doesn't evoke a strong emotional response.

# data[].attributes.body
The author does not have any credential support however, the website is supported by an organization which is a credible organization.

# data[].attributes.body
There are no false information since the website is supporting every opinion or any information stated with evidence such as graphs.

# data[].attributes.body
The information stated in the website is not biased in one side. This is because this is not an opinion website. Yet, there are no biased opinions or facts stated that makes one side look weak.

# data[].attributes.body
As I am not an expert on the current situations and rankings of the global hostility and aggressiveness of countries, the data presented is very difficult to judge and so to me there are no obvious errors however I would not be able to spot any if there were any, apart from those that strayed form common sense. The information seems accurate and the data has some credible sources behind them however I would still have to do some further research to fully understand the specific topic at hand. We should take note that neither of the two cites defines or says that they are credible and so it is more difficult to understand how we can trust their information which could in the long term disrupt their reputation and make the website itself less credible.

# data[].attributes.body
Neither one of the two sources we looked at indicates any form of bias through the diction, vocabulary, tone of the author or even anything at all to sway the perspective of the audience to any location. The evidence and information is given from a neutral perspective and the only thing to note is that both websites are run by organizations who's goal is to increase and improve the world's resolutions for conflict.

# data[].attributes.body
Neither one of the websites has a single author, however, the organizations responsible for the distribution of information on these websites seem to be legitimate, credible sources of information that can be trusted however, they will have their own private agendas and further research must be done apart from looking at these websites to determine if they might have credible information. Also, the Global Conflict Tracker has a list of personnel and staff affiliated with this website whereas the G. P. I. does not.

# data[].attributes.body
The global peace index website can be trusted as they have lot of credentials according to a different website. I think both of the sources does have relevant affiliations with organisations. For the global peace index, they use international panel of peace experts to write the reports. And for the global conflict tracker, they also use experts on the subject they are talking on.

# data[].attributes.body
The Global Peace website says they are very factual based and only give updated news of global peace while the Global Conflict website is more in the interest of America.

# data[].attributes.body
Given that the global peace index is published by a trustable source and pear reviewed many times, I would not go through and look for mistakes and errors. But for the global conflict tracker, it’s written in perspectives from the US, so I couldn’t say they don’t have any errors at all, but as I looked through there weren’t any obvious mistakes.

# data[].attributes.body
Because the global conflict tracker shows perspectives from the US, and is established by authors related to the US, it’s highly likely that the source is biased. The global peace index has a more neutral point of view, so I think it can be said that it’s not biased.

# data[].attributes.body
This website is no false website as they are supporting facts and information backed up with evidence.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the websites are credible, and the sources have affiliations with organizations as people work on different websites.

# data[].attributes.body
This website is not a biased based website, this is because this website does not work on opinions.

# data[].attributes.body
The data and statistics gives the reader more information to reach the intended audience, one thing that they could to to reach a wider area of viewers is to make it all countries that are included n the website not just america.

# data[].attributes.body
The sources are accurate, it seems that there're no big mistakes and errors, and the information, data are current, there're many facts.

# data[].attributes.body
For me the facts are accurate because there are clear evidence in the source, however I don't see much in the opinion side and  I'm not going to say I 100% agree with what is said because I don't know who the author is and what's his message.

# data[].attributes.body
The websites are credible enough, they both have more than one author, they post what their company says, the website is credible based on the company that it works for, they give backup.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think there's information clearly biased in one way or another. The author shared the information with educated people like students. And I don't think the language used evokes a strong emotional response.

# data[].attributes.body
The website is not bias simply because it's based on facts. I think the author decided to create this to make people aware about the current conflicts.

# data[].attributes.body
I cannot say whether it is accurate because i do not have enough knowledge in that area. However, the websites can be reviewed with other news articles or websites.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no bias that i can see, so nobody is trying to persuade anyone. i think that the purpose of the website is to inform people and be used as a reliable rescource.