6 Ways to Conduct Accurate Research
I’m always complaining about the lack of work put into a lot of web content. Thanks to low-paying jobs and people who can’t really write or conduct research applying for these gigs, we’re faced with an overwhelming amount of poorly written, factually incorrect web content. When I suggested people stop Googling and rehashing content for their research I was met with a flood of angry "can you make a better suggestion?" type emails. Why yes, yes I can.
I realize if you’re making a couple of dollars to write a piece of content, you can’t be expected to put your all into it. Indeed I would just make up something off the top of my head for that price. But then, I wouldn’t write for two bucks.
If you’re being paid accordingly for your efforts, it should stand to reason you’re making some effort and that means taking the time to thoroughly research your topic. I realize it’s much easier to punch a few words into a search engine and rewrite what you find, but that’s just adding to the problem. Try some of these suggestions for article research.
- Visit the library. The library is a wonderful resource for research. Back in the day, long before the Internet, most writers, reporters and journalists would spend hours at the library poring over research materials. Nothing’s changed, the library is still a great place to find everything you need.
- Books, magazines, and periodicals. All of these can be found, of course, at the library. You can also purchase back issues of newspapers and magazines and some newspapers will give you free access to their microfiche.
- Public records - Your county courthouse has property deeds, birth and death certificates, info regarding court cases and more.
- People - If you really want to know about a specific topic, interview experts in the field.
- The Internet - I know. I already complained about the Internet. Still, if you take the time to weed through the crap, you’ll find some gems. The most reliable sites end in .edu, .gov and .org. This doesn’t mean that because they end in .org or .edu they’re accurate. Use your best judgement.
- The Government - The Government is very helpful and will send you free literature for many subjects.
How do you conduct your research? If you use the Internet how do you know what you’re reading isn’t factually incorrect or just the same old rehashed content?
Further reading:
- Evaluating Internet Research Sources
- Identifying Accurate Internet Resource Sources for Nutrition, Food Safety and Health Demonstrations
- Guide to Healthy Web Surfing
- Evaluating Information Found on the Internet
- Evaluating Internet Information
Posted
on
Tuesday, January 29th, 2008 at 10:27 pm under
If I need a jump-start on research, I use Wikipedia, but ONLY for the links section - sometimes, the writers have credible sources. The only way I would ever use Google for sources is Google Scholar. Other than that, I get snobbish and hit the primary sources or conduct my own research (like, interviewing people).
January 29th, 2008 at 10:37 pmReally great and important topic! And I’m going to address my reply from the consumer perspective (not as a writer). I’m so disheartened by the amount of garbage on the web that I’ve recently been doubting the need for personal Internet access. I’m literally nauseated by the number of websites whose sole purpose is to exist for ad clicks. The amount of time we spend online between me and my husband is probably like a lot of households-tons. Yet, I’m willing to give it all up to not clutter my vision by stumbling upon garbage articles and garbage websites.
Hopefully, I haven’t contributed greatly to the problem by writing web content, although I don’t think I really have. I’ve specifically limited my web content writing to topics I’ve been long familiar with so that when I’m writing, I could write from memory- like when I write about dance, I can do that fairly easily since I’ve danced my entire lifetime.
To address your initial concerns- I personally don’t think a person who googles and paraphrases can be called a writer.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:51 pmSince December 2006, when I decided to go back to college, I’ve have access to the University’s online library and to the library at the University where my exams are proctored. That’s expanded research materials beyond what’s available at my town’s [way too small] library.
I also found that lot of the health and human services offices have a reference library open to the public. So, being a bloodhound in your community (county, nearby city or wherever) is really helpful.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:53 pmAs far as evaluating the quality of web resources, that judgment is almost hardwired into me
In fact, I spent the better half of one entire semester in grad school learning how to evaluate the quality of websites, the credentials of the authors, etc. It seemed redundant at the time, although I think it’s probably more relevant now than at the time considering the huge increase in “content sites.” And, of course, I’m hoping most “writers” have the ability to do that. But I think the problem I’ve seen you mention on other boards is the ability of the reader to do that. Yeah, I really wish the WWW wasn’t like the Wild, Wild West.
January 29th, 2008 at 10:58 pmoh boy, then/than. you know the drill
i made a mistake, now I have to point it out so the others reading don’t think i didn’t know that i made a mistake, lol.
ah, yeah. i’m thinking something like 90% of the web is cluttered with junk. who knows it might even be higher.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:02 pmThe majority of my research comes from books, journals, interviews, and occasionally personal experience. Sometimes I use online sources that I consider reliable, but I tend to double check those also. I want to make sure that what I’m writing about is accurate.
January 29th, 2008 at 11:09 pmIt completely depends on the research, but I do find Google really useful. a) I get an idea of the body of information available, b) I can familiarize myself with industry terms, c) an idea of the authorities in a field, and d) I can find a broad range of sites (commercial, hobby, education) with information on a topic. Google is a jumping off point, of course, and I get really annoyed when I call a librarian, explaining where I am in the search process, and the first thing they do is use Google.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:02 amI do a lot of my research online, but I try to use half a dozen or more sources, and bring something new to every article. I also like to use things like EBSCO and NetLibrary to get traditional sources online
The timing of this post is pretty funny, Deb, because I actually wrote a similar post a few days ago:
http://www.katharineswan.com/2008/01/research-resources.html
January 30th, 2008 at 12:45 am@Katharine - Great minds think alike? Great post on your blog! It’s nice to see others feel the same way.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:23 amI find that being a journalist has helped me to know where to look and how to integrate interviews into my content.
I hear you on the content with no substance, though, D:)
January 30th, 2008 at 1:24 amAt the risk of starting yet another damned argument on this blog, I’m going to offer my thoughts on what I see happening now:
People will divide into two groups: the magazine writers and the web content writers.
People will face off, with the magazine writers trashing the web content writers trashing the magazine writers.
Everyone will assume that the Internet is a glut of crap because of the web content writers.
Your post is a great one and suggests alternative places to look for information besides the Internet itself. I commend that.
But honestly? I just hope it doesn’t bring down the reputation of web content writers one more notch. We’re already struggling to prove that there are *GOOD* web content writers who offer just as much quality in their work as the magazine writers.
Poor writers happen in ALL fields. Not just on the ‘net.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:48 am@James - You’re absolutely right!And I’m not saying all web content writers provide inaccurate garbage. Magazines and newspapers tend to have editors and fact checkers on staff and won’t stand for the false or regurgitated.
Most places paying for cheap web content (and I did stress cheap web content in my post) don’t have anyone in place to verify facts, and don’t pay enough to justify extensive research.
I know there are plenty of good web content writers. I primarily write web content myself!
I apologize if I insulted anyone.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:54 am@ Deb - No apologies necessary from you. You’re very careful and respectful at all times, and I appreciate that more than you know. It’s a couple of comments that flew by already that have my ire up. (But what else is new? lol)
You’re absolutely right, too - CHEAP places don’t care about fact-checking. I won’t argue with that. I just want everyone to keep in mind that it’s not always the web content buyers who cut corners.
January 30th, 2008 at 2:04 amTo address your initial concerns- I personally don’t think a person who googles and paraphrases can be called a writer.
I consider the above statement to be a very broad generalization, but Sharon is entitled to her opinion. Google is a starting-off point, just as going to the library is another starting off point. You can find crappy books at the library just as you can find crappy websites on the Internet. Just because a person chooses to use Google, he or she isn’t a writer? The problem isn’t with any particular search engine. The problem lies with how a writer chooses to use the resources that a search engine provides.
By the way, I’m not a web content writer, but Wikipedia in any form is a big no-no to my major client. It’s a crappy website, but that doesn’t make the entire Internet crappy. Plus, in this day and age of immediate information, some magazines can become outdated very quickly.
January 30th, 2008 at 3:31 amRegarding Wikipedia, I tried to quote it in a newspaper column I turned in recently, and was told that the newspaper didn’t allow its writers to use Wikipedia as a source. I guess in some instances, it’s too hard to verify where the article writer actually got all the information. So beware, because some mediums do frown upon using Wikipedia for research. It’s best to just check out the links provided instead, as another poster stated above.
January 30th, 2008 at 3:49 amEvery library system I’ve ever used has subscribed to Proquest, Lexis, or whatever. And every library system I’ve ever used lets you have remote access to their subscriptions if you prove you have a library card.
So…magazine and news articles, archived back years and years and years, from the comfort of your own home. And they’re free!
Your mileage may vary if you live in a different part of the world but I’ve had plenty of luck in MN, PA, and VA. Otherwise, see if a local college (or your alma mater) will let you pay a fee for access to their subscriptions.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:01 amAndrea, I probably should have been more clear in my post. A person who ONLY googles and paraphrases isn’t writing, which is what Deb seemed to be referring to: those who for whatever reason simply google, paraphrase, submit, and move on.
On one message board, I’ve encountered a “writer” who couldn’t understand that she was being accused of plagiarism when she “rearranged” the exact same tips using slightly different wording and added a few sentences. Obviously, there’s incompetence (or even malice) in every field: you know the psycho doctor or nurse who decides to put some lethal amount of medicine in a patient’s IV, etc.
But it’s a bit sad that someone who uses the label “writer” doesn’t understand what plagiarism is: sad for the profession, and even sad for the individual.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:02 am@ Sharon - Now that’s a writer I don’t call a writer. I agree. Down with rewriting and plagiarism.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:08 am“We’re already struggling to prove that there are *GOOD* web content writers who offer just as much quality in their work as the magazine writers.
Poor writers happen in ALL fields. Not just on the ‘net.”
Absolutely agreed! In fact, I stopped reading one of my formerly favorite magazines because I got so sick of seeing that every expert quoted was from Colorado, as were most of the writers. It didn’t look like the writers went to any great lengths to get expert quotes from anyone who wasn’t simply convenient for them. And this was a nationally-distributed magazine, but it seemed like they just simply walked around the block got a few quotes along the way.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:09 amI use Profnet, which Deb wrote about earlier, to find “experts.” But even then I ask them nicely what makes them an expert. I also use Google, usually Google News, for background research to find sources that may not come via profnet. Then there are associations for nearly everything, many which have good resources.
If writing on a particular area where I know a college or university has the experts (like University of Chicago for business), I’ll go that route, too.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:54 amAs a history writer who has developed articles for both the web and non-web venues, this is an important topic. I rarely write an article without a visit to the library. I often jump-start my research with a quick look around the web. It’s a great place to find newspaper archives, as well as books related to your topic and sometimes it even helps to level set where you might want to go with your article. Then it’s off to the library to research the details. It works every time!
January 30th, 2008 at 5:34 am“We’re already struggling to prove that there are *GOOD* web content writers who offer just as much quality in their work as the magazine writers.
Poor writers happen in ALL fields. Not just on the ‘net.”
Good call, James! There’s a newspaper in my hometown that is so poorly written, that I can’t bring myself to read it.
January 30th, 2008 at 5:45 am@ RLD - Hehehe… I always get a kick out of picking out mistakes from my local newspaper.
January 30th, 2008 at 5:49 amI live in a very rural area and if it wasn’t for the Internet I would be frequently driving 40 minutes into the library and 40 minutes back to do research. And at today’s gas prices - there goes my fee!
So I jump start things on Google, primarily for sources such as associations, newsletters, magazines, experts, etc. Another place I search on the internet is Amazon to see what books and other media are being produced around the topic and how recently. If I find a few books that fit my research, I can then go to the library online and request those books and have them delivered to our little local library only 2 miles from my house! That and my phone saves on a lot of mileage.
January 30th, 2008 at 5:59 pm“Obviously, there’s incompetence (or even malice) in every field: you know the psycho doctor or nurse who decides to put some lethal amount of medicine in a patient’s IV, etc”
Are we sure that bad writing/plagarism/paraprasing/lazyness is as bad as murder?
January 30th, 2008 at 6:38 pm@ Lara - maybe not to that extreme, but bad writing can have serious effects. Take a look at some of the content out there on the Internet. It promotes unhealthy practices (like quack diets) or questionable means of attaining success. People take action on what they read, many times, and that can be very dangerous.
Consider this: A person takes medication X for depression. He or she really wants relief from an issue, and some article promotes using product Y - without stating the potential risks or while offering inaccurate information from a questionable resource.
The person consumes both X and Y, and suffers a heart attack because the medication conflicted.
I go to extremes, but it can and does happen. Frequently.
January 30th, 2008 at 6:45 pmI do understand. Perhaps being a nurse as well as a writer who has certainly had lives in my hands I took that comment to heart.
January 30th, 2008 at 9:01 pmWith regards to Wikipedia, writers (for respected venues) can’t cite Wikipedia as a reference (and shouldn’t be permitted to). However, check with your children’s schools as many (including my own) are allowed to cite Wikipedia in research papers. Does that mean they soon will be permitted to in college? And then professionally?
January 30th, 2008 at 10:06 pmI subscribe to a lot of research houses in my field and they send me summaries of their newly launched reports ( some of the US-based ones are the IDC, Portico and Commtouch.)
If something in the summary interests me, I ask nicely for a specific portion of the report.
They have all been happy to give me sections of the report for free, and to arrange telephonic interviews with the report writer if I need something clarified.
I also interview experts ( mostly by phone, so location doesn’t matter).
I’ve also identified a number of institutions, whether non-profit, government or academic, which I track. I regularly check their web sites for new reports and media statements.
This gives me story ideas and jumpstarts my research process.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:43 pmThere have been times when I have found Wikipedia helpful, when I needed more info or was stuck/coming up empty. It is loaded with info I can then research independently and from reliable sources (dates, locations, names, events). Usually, the info from Wikipedia has been related in some way to the topic - so I had a lead as to where to find more, and reliable, information. Any research I get from the internet I make sure is coming from a reliable source (.gov, .org, etc) and I try to verify from at least 2 other sources. I try to ensure that all three are not just the same thing regurgitated, but independent pieces that all verified the same general info. Did that make sense?
Speaking of regurgitation, how often do YOU (anyone) check to see if your content has been stolen or ’spun’ and reposted online? Frankly, I am bothered by the fact someone can take your original work, rewrite a few words and then its not considered a copyright violation or plagiarism (I’ve been told).
If its the same info with only a few words replaced or a line or two taken out or added, it sure feels like plagiarism to me.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:45 pmI’m a check and double check kind of researcher. Google is great, there are many times it has provided wonderful results for my research but if I’m say, looking up a quote but can’t remember who said it or exactly what it said, I’ll browse until I find what I think it is, then double check that with a search specifically for that phrasing or that person.
If the quote and credit is accurate there will be a huge number of results coming back from the specific search term. If it is wrong there will be a very small number of results.
I also remind myself that, “just because it appears in print doesn’t mean it’s right”. Even the Webster’s dictionary gets it wrong from time to time, that’s one of the reasons it gets revised frequently. Text books, proofs, reference guides, etc. are all capable of making errors.
Thus, check and double check. Don’t depend on ANY single source.
January 31st, 2008 at 8:01 pm