Translate into a different language

Saturday, February 04, 2017

10 things we wish we’d known earlier about research: Tips from Journalist’s Resource staff | Journalist's Resource

Journalist’s Resource staff says, "We love research. Early in our careers, however, we as individual journalists didn’t always appreciate the value of research or interpret it correctly." 

Photo: Pixabay

We did not always use the best study to make a point or fact-check a claim. Learn from our mistakes. Here are some things we wish we knew years ago.

1. Academic research is one of the best reporting tools around.
  • Reading studies early in the reporting process will give you a good general understanding of an issue. It also will help you ask better questions and understand the answers that sources give you.
  • Use it to hold public officials accountable. Oftentimes, policymakers try new things because they assume a certain change will prompt a certain result. (For example, mandating uniforms in public schools to improve student achievement.) A review of the research often will help you gauge whether such a change will or could provide the result a policymaker wants. Research also will tell you what has and has not worked in other locations and under similar circumstances.
  • Individual studies often offer ideas for other angles journalists might want to pursue.
2. General Google searches are not the best way to find good research.
3. Researchers generally are accessible and like to talk about their work.
  • We have found that researchers respond more quickly to email than phone calls. They also may share free copies of their work or tell you how to access them for free.
  • If you are confused by a data analysis and don’t have a strong background in statistics or research methods, reach out to someone who does. Many scholars are eager to help journalists describe their research findings correctly.
4. When something is described as “significant,” that doesn’t necessarily mean it is important or noteworthy.
  • Scholars often refer to their findings as being “significant” or “statistically significant” to indicate that a relationship they have discovered or a difference they have observed is not likely to be the result of chance or a sampling error. Determining whether something is “significant” or “statistically significant” is based on a mathematical analysis, not an opinion.
5. Correlation does not imply causation.
  • Often, studies determine there is a relationship between two or more variables. Just because one variable changes in the presence of a second variable does not mean the second variable caused the change. Never make assumptions about what a study says or does not say. If in doubt, contact the author.
 Read more...

Source: Journalist's Resource


If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my Email Updates!

0 comments: