LibGuides: Research Basics: an open academic research skills course: Welcome
You're pretty good at searching here and there, but there's a lot more to academic research. This is why we put together this free, self-guided course!
Because three is the magic number (look it up!), the course is made up of three modules of three short lessons and three sets of practice quizzes. Try it try it try it!
Adding links here to methods for finding out things, because on the modern internet, actually finding out accurate information is now uniformly obfuscated by the relentless enshitification of search functions, proliferation of search engine optimised content mills, nation state level intentional misinformation and propaganda programs, and of course, these days, all the crap sources above are endlessly enriched by the output of generic Large Language Model plagiarism statistical bullshit engines, both image and text (And video and Bot and so forth).
Edit: there are now tools turning up to allow detection of fake citations common in LLM slop papers:
Large Language Models(LLMs) have become part of everyday academic and technical writing. But there is...
Finding academic and peer reviewed Journal Articles - they haven't quite fucked google scholar yet, so it's better than the enshittified google or bing or <insert enshittified search bar embed here> whatever.
Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. Search across a wide variety of disciplines and sources: ar
So I generally hit up Google Scholar for whatever subject, author name, paper title or similar that I've gleaned from whatever article or mention or wikpedia page sparked my interest. Often that gets me what I want, as there's often a link to a pdf of what I need within those search results. Yay.
If that doesn't work, then I start escalating, usually via the methodology here described at Logic of Science's blog:
The peer-reviewed literature is where scientists publish their research, and it is the source for scientific information. As a result, I spe
They wrote it down so I don't have to. Excellent. Although some of the links in there have degraded. So the main ones I'll put here:
PubMed® comprises more than 37 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations
Access 160+ million publications and connect with 25+ million researchers. Join for free and gain visibility by uploading your research.
And then there's the pirate nuclear option, Sci Hub. Because it makes the big publishers and corporates really angry, don't use sci hub from a work or academic 'net access environment. Also it necessarily moves around a lot, so I generally search up where is sci hub now, to avoid going to a link that's expired or may now be a honeypot/trap:
DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.
Also, look out for content mill generated fake journals. I usually check here:
The other thing that's getting harder is finding out whether an image is misattributed or just plain fake. So right click and save the image, and then go to images dot google dot com, which is nowhere near as good as it used to be, but still not entirely enshittified, and click on the wee camera icon to the right and upload the image, and look through the results. EDIT: Ok, these days I use Tineye, which is less enshittified than google images is now.
TinEye - Reverse Image Search and Recognition
What you find is _All_ the places that have posted that image, page after page of them. Scroll through - click on the ones that seem to be the oldest, check who's posting them. What you often find with viral outrage images is that they are _not_ what you think, especially if the image is a bit old, a bit bitrotted, or there's something else wrong - the clothing isn't right for the country/culture/time being outraged about, or something like that. Sometimes you find out that it's true, but most of the time you find out that it's wrong, that someone has just done a quick search for an image that roughly matches the outrage or the politics they want to push, added some outragey comments, and shared it, and enjoyed their flamey fire. I've been doing this for decades, ever since I started using a browser capable of image searching, mainly because I was outraged at people posting fake geology memes. But it works just as well on finding anything else.
And of course, if it's to a website, see if the wayback machine still has it cached:
Research is the cornerstone of any well-written non-fiction work. Whether you’re writing a biography, a historical analysis, a scientific report, or even a personal essay, research grounds your writing in truth and credibility. Unlike fiction, which relies on the imagination, non-fiction demands accuracy, facts, and a deep understanding of the subject matter. In this post, we’ll explore the…
cannot believe Caucasian is still used as a race category in the year two thousand and twenty actual four but I made a meme to help researchers, academics, and others who collect race data in the US remember:
Caucasian is a gross relic of 19th century race theory and derives from the belief that Noah's Ark landed in the Caucasus Mountains, as proven by the fact that women of the Caucasus were the most sexy of all
Stephen Olejnik ends his paper summarizing the methodological steps necessary in multivariate analysis of variance with this quote:
"...good research introduces at least as many questions as it answers."
For those of us currently doing psychological research, I thought this was an important point for us to keep in mind. We can only do so much in one paper, but what we leave for readers to uncover next is also of extreme importance, if not equally important to the results of the current study.
If any followers are looking for more statistical guidance, let me know. I am happy to provide resources for different methods commonly used across psychological research.
Citation:
Olejnik, S. (2010). Multivariate analysis of variance. The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences, 315-328.