Thread by @DrPetra

Today’s #ResearchTip is opinions and ideas are interesting, but rigorous and scholarly practice requires you situate those ideas with existing research. It’s a skill many struggle with, so more in thread /1 #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #gradschool #HigherEd #MedEd #PhDChat

You may have experiences and perspectives you feel strongly about. Or see others discussing things you dis/agree with. Working in a university doesn’t magically make you more informed. Your ideas or observations need checking and exploring alongside research others have done /2

This doesn’t mean a cursory quick Google or looking in one academic search engine. It means identifying key words and search parameters and looking across disciplines. Then appraising, critiquing, reflecting and synthesising what you discover. How does it fit with your idea? /3

Btw this is a good time to mention that it’s rare nobody else has researched what you’re interested in (especially if what you’re interested in is provocative or contested). Also librarians are amazing and they can help if you’re unsure how to set up, run and maintain searches /4

Having explored other publications and sources your original opinion may shift or expand, or you may still hold it even if you know most of the evidence doesn’t support your views. You may find lots of conflicting evidence or information you’d never even considered /5

Reading carefully and critically avoids the trap of resisting anything that doesn’t stack up your opinion while contextualising what you’re finding so you can note what materials or publications may be flawed or unethical. What lies behind each artefact you locate? /6

You’ll build a case for supporting or rejecting or being utterly confused about your original idea which you can use when discussing with others engaged in similar processes. You may not agree with others. Or you may strongly agree yet from entirely different perspectives /7

Lots of the research you’ll find if you’re being appropriately thorough and skilled will be flawed and unreliable. And certain theories, philosophies, methodologies, perspectives and approaches will dominate, can be criticised, challenged, and alternative perspectives sought. /8

What you’re doing here is careful, rigorous, responsible, ethical and accountable. It’s painstaking, thorough, wide-ranging, time-consuming and often makes you feel exhausted and challenged. That initial reckon of yours should be tested to the limit. And documented all the way /9

Sounds hard? Yes, it is. You need training and practice. It’s a long way from having an opinion and requires you to put in the effort. To consider what evidence means, what you’re including or rejecting, who you’re bringing in or leaving out, whether conclusions help or harm /10

If you’re studying or working in academia you should be trained in this but I’ll pause for a second to go 😂😂😂 as I know many aren’t given this support (it’s particularly bad in medicine and STEM but a problem everywhere). Again, librarians are wonderful, training is good /11

Remember lit search teaching is often skewed towards quant, ignores Indigenous approaches, poorly understands diverse methodologies, and prioritises research and researchers from the Global North. So all that needs addressing as you explore and investigate your original idea /12

If you’re working or studying in an academic setting and have a strong view on something you should use the approaches above to check it thoroughly before making bold claims that may not be fair or accurate. Read and cite others but don’t demand they do searches for you /13

If you’re working or studying in academic settings you’re uniquely placed to access information. Debating people based on your reckon vs. their life’s research is poor practice. Especially since this happens so much more towards minoritised scholars and experts by experience /14