The sources you select for your research serve as a foundation. Consequently, your list of references can enhance or undermine the quality of your own research project. To prepare for your visit to the library, go through the information provided on this web page and consider the questions in the worksheet below.
Referring to the worksheet above, Evaluating the Foundations of Your Research, answer the following six questions. Bring your responses to these six questions with you to the library.
1. Why are references useful to scholarly research?
2. Provide three characteristics scholarly information sources share that indicate they are intended for scholars or similar experts.
3. What kind of credential might an author or editor have to demonstrate that they are qualified to speak with scholarly authority on a CDIS topic?
4. Find the website for Plural Publishing. You should find language representing themselves as a credible publisher of scholarly information. Copy and paste this language and provide the URL(s) that contain this language.
5. Find the website for the South African Journal of Communication Disorders. You should find language representing themselves as a credible publisher of scholarly information. Copy and paste this language and provide the URL(s) that contain this language.
6. Would you add a source to your list of references if you had questions or concerns about its scholarliness or credibility as a scholarly source? Why or why not?
In addition to evaluating sources according to CRAAP Test criteria, consider the following which are used by communicative disorder professionals when evaluating evidence.
Independent confirmation and converging evidence. How much support is evident from other studies? How might areas of disagreement in other studies detract from overall supporting evidence? How rigorously researched were these supporting documents?
Experimental control. How were research elements managed and controlled by the research design? Was a (control) group used for comparison? Were participants randomly assigned between the control and treatment groups?
Avoidance of subjectivity and bias. How were subjectivity and bias removed or reduced by the research design? Were participants, researchers, and other involved parties removed from practices that might influence data collection or measurements? Were parties blinded or masked from activities that may be influenced by bias?
Effect sizes and confidence intervals. Was statistical analysis used to measure differences when comparing one thing to another? Were confidence intervals calculated and provided as part of the study?
Relevance and feasibility. In terms of relevance and feasibility, how pertinent is this study to its own stated aims and the overall purposes of communicative studies?