Search across guide titles, topics, keywords, and content throughout the Researcher's Field Guide.
Showing 1–25 of 860 results
A gap in journal articles is not necessarily a gap in existing evidence. Theses, reports, conference materials, and other grey literature may contain research that changes what you can legitimately claim is unknown.
Read Guide →A journal article needs enough literature searching to support its claims and position its contribution accurately, but not every article requires an exhaustive search. The appropriate depth depends on what the paper is trying to establish.
Read Guide →Important evidence does not always appear in academic journals. Learn where to find government reports, policy documents, official statistics, technical reports, and other nonjournal research and how to evaluate what you find.
Read Guide →Researchers, journals, and topics provide different routes to new research. Following topics usually gives the broadest coverage, while selected researchers and journals can add useful signals that topic searches may miss.
Read Guide →Regulatory documents can contain studies, outcomes, adverse-event data, and methodological detail that journal articles omit. Learn why these sources matter and when they are worth searching.
Read Guide →Technical reports can provide methodological and implementation detail that a journal article compresses or omits. More detail is useful, but it does not automatically make the report more rigorous.
Read Guide →Some organizations conduct substantial research but rarely publish it in academic journals. Finding their work requires searching organizations, repositories, websites, references, and research networks rather than relying only on bibliographic databases.
Read Guide →Relevant research does not cease to exist because its journal is absent from a major database. Journal websites, regional indexes, metadata services, repositories, citation trails, and targeted searching can help you locate it.
Read Guide →Local and internationally indexed journals may differ in visibility, audience, and external vetting, but those differences should not become shortcuts for judging individual studies. Evaluate journal practices and study quality separately.
Read Guide →A conference abstract and a later journal article may be two reports of the same underlying study. Learn how to recognize the connection, preserve useful information from both, and avoid counting one study twice.
Read Guide →Yes. Publication in a prestigious journal can be a useful signal about selectivity and scholarly attention, but it does not guarantee that an individual study is methodologically strong or that its conclusions are justified.
Read Guide →Your usual database may cover part of an unfamiliar discipline without covering it well. Learn how to identify the specialist databases and important publication venues that actually structure a field's literature.
Read Guide →Weak reporting makes local evidence harder to evaluate, but it does not prove that the underlying research was weak. Separate what was done from what was reported, identify what cannot be judged, seek additional information where possible, and limit conclusions accordingly.
Read Guide →Looking up reviews before buying a laptop and conducting a scientific study both involve seeking answers, but they operate under different standards. The key differences concern how questions are investigated, evidence is evaluated, and conclusions are justified.
Read Guide →Research is generally expected to contribute to knowledge, but that does not mean every study must discover something completely unprecedented. Novelty can arise through new evidence, contexts, explanations, tests, methods, interpretations, or clearer knowledge about the limits of existing claims.
Read Guide →Research does not have to pursue a completely new claim. Confirmatory and replication studies can make important contributions by testing whether existing findings withstand additional scrutiny, hold under new conditions, or require qualification.
Read Guide →Systematic research follows an organized and defensible process, while rigorous research applies appropriate methods with sufficient care to support credible conclusions. Neither requires one universal procedure.
Read Guide →Empirical research develops or evaluates knowledge through systematic engagement with observation or experience. It can be quantitative or qualitative, but not every legitimate form of scholarly research is empirical in the same sense.
Read Guide →Objectivity is an important research value, but it does not require researchers to become perspective-free observers. Strong research uses methodological safeguards, transparency, critical scrutiny, and, where appropriate, reflexivity to reduce or account for influences that could distort conclusions.
Read Guide →Market research and academic research can use many of the same systematic methods. Their main differences usually concern purpose, audience, constraints, dissemination, and how the resulting knowledge is expected to be used.
Read Guide →Student work can count as research when it systematically investigates a question and produces a defensible knowledge contribution. Whether a thesis, dissertation, or classroom project qualifies depends on what the student actually does, not simply on the academic label attached to the assignment.
Read Guide →Research does not become research only when a journal publishes it. Conducting a systematic investigation and communicating its findings are separate processes, although responsible dissemination is important for scrutiny and cumulative knowledge.
Read Guide →Research does not become rigorous simply by following the method most familiar in a discipline. Rigor depends more fundamentally on whether the research design fits the question and is conducted, analyzed, and reported according to appropriate standards.
Read Guide →A study does not have to produce a neat or decisive answer to be valuable. Well-designed research can clarify uncertainty, challenge assumptions, rule out possibilities, expose limitations, and show what evidence is still needed.
Read Guide →Sophisticated methods can strengthen research when the question genuinely requires them, but complexity is not evidence of scientific quality by itself. A method earns its place by improving the credibility of the evidence or inference.
Read Guide →