Questions to ask about a number with no source

A striking number with no source deserves a pause before anyone repeats it. Figures like this often travel through social posts, speeches and forwarded messages, and the original context drops away along the way. Without a source you cannot check the definition, the date or the method, so the number should be treated as unverified until you have answers. That does not make it false. It means you do not yet know enough to rely on it.

A handful of questions usually settles most cases. None of them requires specialist knowledge, and many of the answers can be found with a few minutes of searching. The six below follow a rough order: first trace where the number came from, then test what it means, and finally judge why it is being shared.

Where did the number come from?

Start by searching for the exact figure in quotation marks. The earliest result that gives the number with a named origin is the most useful lead. If the number is attributed to a report, check that the report actually contains it, because posts sometimes credit documents that say something different or nothing about the topic. If the trail ends at another post or an unnamed "study," the number has no evidence behind it yet.

Watch for chains of citation. A number may pass from a report to an article, from the article to a post, and from the post to a comment, and the detail that mattered tends to drop out at each step. Going back to the first publication is the only reliable way to see what was actually measured. If the earliest version you can find is a projection, an estimate or a figure from an announcement, note that status as well, because early figures are often revised.

What exactly was counted?

Find the definition behind the number. A figure described as cases, victims or people affected may use categories that differ from everyday meaning. Ask whether the number counts events, people, households or dollars, and whether any groups were excluded. A figure that sounds like a count of people may turn out to be a count of reports or records. Without a definition, two people can repeat the same figure and mean different things by it.

Words that sound precise often are not. Terms such as affected, involved and linked can describe very different groups, and a single post may move between them without warning. When a figure uses one of these terms, ask for the exact group it counts, and check whether the same term is applied consistently across the post.

When was it measured?

Ask what period the figure covers. A number can be accurate for one year and misleading for another, and figures measured at one time are sometimes repeated later as if they still applied. Check whether the number refers to a single day, a month, a year or a running total since a starting point. Running totals grow every year even when the rate underneath is flat, so a rising total on its own says little. The same caution applies to periods of different length. A figure for a full year set beside one for a single quarter is not a like-for-like comparison, and a claim that a total rose without matching the periods can mislead even when both numbers are correct.

Who or what was in the sample?

If the number came from a survey, test or sample, ask who was included and how they were chosen. A figure from a group of volunteers who answered online is different evidence from one drawn at random from the whole population, and both differ from a figure drawn from people already in a particular situation. Ask how many people or cases the figure rests on, because small numbers swing widely, and whether any groups were left out.

What is it being compared with?

A number often means something only against a baseline. Ask what the figure is being compared with and whether that comparison is fair. A large percentage rise from a very low base can still be a small change in absolute terms, and a falling figure can look like progress when the earlier period was unusually high. If the post offers no comparison at all, it may be missing the context needed to judge whether the number is high, low or ordinary.

Why is it being shared?

The final question concerns purpose. A number shared to make the reader angry, afraid or certain is often shared because it works that way, not because anyone checked it. Notice whether the post asks you to act immediately, whether it pushes one conclusion without showing alternatives, and whether it promotes a product, a candidate or a cause. None of these signs proves the number is wrong, but each one is a reason to hold it at arm's length until the other questions have answers.

If the answers are missing or unclear, the safest practice is to leave the number out of your own reasoning, and to say so if you pass it along. If you find the source, the definition and the period, you can judge the figure on its merits. A few minutes of checking usually shows whether a number deserves a place in what you believe or repeat. A number that survives these questions is not thereby proven. It is simply better supported than a number with no trail at all, and it still deserves to be read alongside other evidence on the same question.