Final answer:
The correct answer is option b. Wikipedia is not considered a reliable, scholarly source because it lacks peer-review and can be edited by anyone. Nora should focus on using peer-reviewed and authoritative platforms like Encyclopedia Britannica, Science.gov, and LexisNexis.
Step-by-step explanation:
Nora is seeking advice on identifying reliable, scholarly resources for her research project. A resource might not be considered scholarly or reliable if it is not peer-reviewed or does not come from a reputable, authoritative source. Of the given options, Wikipedia would not be considered a reliable, scholarly source. Although Wikipedia can provide a broad overview of a topic and may even have a comprehensive list of sources at the end of each article, it is a community-edited platform and lacks the rigorous peer review process that is characteristic of scholarly resources.
To ensure credibility, Nora should look towards resources like Encyclopedia Britannica, Science.gov, and LexisNexis. These platforms typically offer access to peer-reviewed articles, books, and reports that are considered second in authority only to peer-reviewed academic publications. Furthermore, credible nonacademic sources can be considered if they are from reputable newspapers or magazines, academic and professional journals, reputable websites, and government publications. Conducting a survey, an interview, or an experiment, may also provide primary research data which could be beneficial for Nora's project.