 |
|
This diagram illustrates the relationship between reality, evidence, and research.
"X" represents the object or "process" in reality, present or past, which we are researching. "X" is "mute" -- we cannot perceive or study it directly. We have to "make" it yield up "primary sources," or "evidence" -- things we can study. These primary sources are represented here by circles marked E1 (for "piece of Evidence number 1"), E2, E3.
The works of skilled researchers who have studied primary source evidence are represented by the squares S1, S2, S3, and so on. Only works in which primary sources are studied are "secondary sources", or works of research.
If a person does not examine primary sources, then their resulting work is NOT a work of research. Unless you are studying primary sources, you are not doing research.
PRIMARY SOURCES are always incomplete or partial; always subject to error. This "level" of bias and error can be reduced, but can never be absolutely eliminated. This "level" of bias and error is represented by the line separating "X" from the Primary Sources.
SECONDARY SOURCES represent an interpretation of Primary Source evidence. Different researchers can and do interpret the same primary source evidence differently. Additional primary source evidence can be discovered. Evidence once thought to be "primary" can be discovered not to be "primary" after all. Some researchers study some primary sources, while others may study or locate different ones. Researchers can use different research methods; have different biases; use somewhat different methods. Therefore, secondary sources can and do disagree with one another.
Reading secondary sources is not research. Only the study of primary sources is research. But secondary sources are very important in locating primary sources, and giving us examples of research methods to learn from.
Writers of encyclopedia articles and college-level textbooks may do secondary research on some specific topics, but will mainly rely upon reading secondary sources. They cannot possibly study all the primary sources in a broad field. Therefore, college-level textbooks and encyclopedia articles are NOT secondary sources. They are useful only for the beginning stages of your work. They can guide you to a preliminary bibliography of secondary sources. But reading them is not doing research.
Writers of high-school level textbooks and popularizations may rely upon some secondary sources, but will probably also use interviews, college-level texts, and reference works like encyclopedias. These works are even further removed from "X" -- another "level" away from the subject of research. They add another "level" of bias and error, while getting no closer to the "X", or thing being researched, itself. They are useful only for the very beginning of your work. Reading them is not research. Avoid this kind of material.
http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/fc/1aryn2arysources.html | furrg@mail.montclair.edu | created 5 Feb 99