Identifying Outdated Research Notions by

Unnecessary Limitations

2024-09-26 16:05:18 UTC

That peer-reviewed journal articles are the ONLY authoritative sources

students

2024-09-26 16:13:06 UTC

students are completely naive about research

Date limitations

hedreenr1 — 2024-09-26 16:13:11 UTC

Health sciences should ONLY use research published in the last 5 years

Unrealistic expectations

nwacclibraryinfolit — 2024-09-26 16:13:14 UTC

Students think everything is a website. They don't even recognize "medium"

wikipedia

2024-09-26 16:13:23 UTC

is completely unreliable

URL endings

2024-09-26 16:13:24 UTC

.com is "bad" .org is "good"

That government sources are always credible--we've seen omissions of facts for political reasons.

2024-09-26 16:13:24 UTC

Website Domains

2024-09-26 16:13:27 UTC

That .org websites are somehow more reliable than .com ones.

print>digital

2024-09-26 16:13:32 UTC

That a print resource is automatically better than a born-digital source.

2024-09-26 16:13:37 UTC

Wikipedia can't be used as a starting point for research

.org .gov .edu

2024-09-26 16:13:41 UTC

some domains better than others

Number or Resourses

2024-09-26 16:13:43 UTC

In order to prove your point, you have to use a certain number of scholarly (only) resources.

2024-09-26 16:13:47 UTC

Peer-reviewed is always best

2024-09-26 16:13:51 UTC

Many instructors tell their students to use only peer-reviewed articles even when their topics are not suited to scholarly sources.

Wikipedia

2024-09-26 16:13:52 UTC

That you should never look at Wikipedia! I've done some great research by starting with Wikipedia for the broad picture

library only subscription resources

2024-09-26 16:13:53 UTC

There are a lot of good resources outside the library's subscription databases. Students need to know how to find them.

Never use wikipedia or Google scholar

2024-09-26 16:13:59 UTC

Authorities must be academics

2024-09-26 16:14:01 UTC

Thinking about who is considered an authority especially when it comes to things like Indigenous knowledge and other ways of knowing

2024-09-26 16:14:03 UTC

".org or .gov is more reliable than .com"

no web sources!

2024-09-26 16:14:06 UTC

domain

2024-09-26 16:14:07 UTC

.edu is okay, .com is bad, etc.

A Checklist of Sources

2024-09-26 16:14:08 UTC

"You must find: one article, one book, etc."

Wikipedia

2024-09-26 16:14:13 UTC

Wikipedia should never be utilized for research (great for looking at citations, beginning research, etc.)

It's always best to use the most recently-published sources on any topic.

2024-09-26 16:14:15 UTC

Scholalrly articles are always reliable and trustworthy

salvelibrarian — 2024-09-26 16:14:17 UTC

primary resources better than secondary sources

greyae — 2024-09-26 16:14:18 UTC

OA Resources are not as good as traditionally published sources

2024-09-26 16:14:21 UTC

There is a belief that OA sources are not as authoritative; in reality the publisher's methods don't matter.

value of google scholar

2024-09-26 16:14:25 UTC

Lived experience

nwacclibraryinfolit — 2024-09-26 16:14:25 UTC

Lived experience has no place in the scholarly conversation

library resources

2024-09-26 16:14:30 UTC

Anything from the library is credible

"Good" and "Bad" Sources

2024-09-26 16:14:46 UTC

That there are criteria that carte blanche determine the 'goodness' of a source

2024-09-26 16:15:09 UTC

Don't use google scholar

Videos/Music/Written Word

2024-09-26 16:15:20 UTC

Sources can't be non-written.

That research is straightforward

2024-09-26 16:15:31 UTC

Teaching the ups and downs (emotions) of research. Has intersections with equity issues

Only keyword searches yield good results

rcarey40 — 2024-09-26 16:16:01 UTC

if you can't find information it must be a bad topic; research takes time and money, and is not accessible to everyone, the publishing process can gate-keep

2024-09-26 16:16:03 UTC

Newspapers

2024-09-26 16:16:11 UTC

Newspapers seem to be ignored in research though it is a great primary document

Resource dates

2024-09-26 16:16:53 UTC

No resources published more than twenty years ago are useful or viable for research purposes.

Publisher/author vs. Process

2024-09-26 16:17:58 UTC

Recognizing the publisher/author or the process how the info is retrieved and presented -Io

Only U.S. research

2024-09-26 16:18:20 UTC

Students are sometimes not allowed to use research done in other countries as it is seen as irrelevant or of lesser quality.

Every topic has peer-reviewed research

hedreenr1 — 2024-09-26 16:31:40 UTC

Research & publication take time. Not everything has been studied, especially very recent things!

CRAAP Test

2024-10-02 16:12:50 UTC

Citation count

2024-10-02 16:13:15 UTC

Highly cited = high quality

Newspapers

2024-10-02 16:13:18 UTC

Newspapers are unreliable as they are not scholarly sources.

quantitative research is "better" than qualitative research

2024-10-02 16:13:38 UTC

Starting with a thesis

2024-10-02 16:13:44 UTC

It shocks me how many professors ask their students to have a thesis statement before they do any research.

Peer review automatically means quality

2024-10-02 16:13:46 UTC

There are "good" and "bad" sources.

2024-10-02 16:13:59 UTC

Sources are useful and appropriate for your research or not.

Only scholarly articles are "good enough"

2024-10-02 16:14:06 UTC

Sometimes a website or online content might be more applicable

All books are credible, scholarly, etc. in the library

2024-10-02 16:14:27 UTC

That librarians can help you find the right answer (as compared to Google)

2024-10-02 16:15:08 UTC

Good research may lead to more questions that answers. There may never be a right answer! Librarians do not always have the magic sauce, and Google is not a bad place as long as you know its limitations and how to use it correctly (and ask the right questions).

List of journals

2024-10-02 16:15:09 UTC

I still have professors who ask me to "teach students to find articles in xyz journals" and provide a list of 3-5 titles. Who still does research this way?

Never use A.I.

2024-10-02 16:15:17 UTC

Snobbery toward certain sources, especially Wikipedia.

avaldry1 — 2024-10-02 16:15:25 UTC

Your search results will always match someone else's.

2024-10-02 16:16:45 UTC

Even if every student uses the same search prompt in the same database, not every person is going to have the same materials listed in the search; ie "search this term, it's always the first article that pops up". No. Just no. That's not how algorithms work.

Journal Impact Factors

2024-10-02 16:17:57 UTC

can be misleading and may not accurately reflect the quality or a journal, so not the best method to evaluate sources