+42 People overuse the word "research.", amirite?

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Agreed. I feel like the general populus uses the term to mean "I looked up some information from existing books/videos/articles". Actual academic scholars tend to use the term to mean "Through intensive study, analysis and/or experimentation, I have added to the wealth of human knowledge something that was not known by anybody previously."

by Classic-Army2679 1 month ago

The problem is that the guy from Little Caesars can't tell the difference.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

it was probably just googled or read a book That's hardly research though.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

The first 5 hits on Google? Lol

by georgianaherman 1 month ago

Google is so ass anymore it's astonishing to me that one of the biggest tech companies somehow made one of the worst AI's and then forced it onto their platform.

by stefanjenkins 1 month ago

Make a better AI and sell it instead of complaining Google also has one of the best sort algorithms ever.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Wikipedia is supposed to be unbiased and scholarly. But your point stands.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

"Supposed to"

by Anonymous 1 month ago

By that logic a lot of books are not unbiased nor scholarly and a lot of papers are complete nonsense.

by Worried_Horror 1 month ago

Yes, they are. That's why "research" should involve reviewing more than one source. And I mean actually reviewing the source: reading them thoroughly and thinking through their strengths and weaknesses.

by Jeremylittel 1 month ago

I agree but that doesn't mean one should dismiss wikipedia as a source just because of that "supposed to" since then you would need to dismiss most sources of information unless you gather it yourself.

by Worried_Horror 1 month ago

Wikipedia is often "good enough." The problem comes when people think skimming it (or worse, listening to some YouTuber who skimmed it) makes them an expert.

by Jeremylittel 1 month ago

I'm all for wikipedia "research" if it involves chasing down the source links, and reading that material. That site is really good for showing you where all of their facts come from. You get the occasional dead link or listing of some university press book that you can't hope to track down, but it's a pretty cool setup for the most part.

by Exciting_Signal 1 month ago

yes. i'm a lecturer at university and I encourage "kids" to, if they don't know the concept or a certain theory, start at wiki (I'm sure they do it without me, but I think it's good for teachers say - it's ok) because it gives the basic understand, write out the most important people and concepts, so afterward they can go to the library and look up relevant books.

by Interesting_Put 1 month ago

Good tip. When I was a kid they said never ever ever use Wikipedia to research. And of course everyone did anyway, you just couldn't cite it. But it really is a great step 1. Just understand what it is and don't treat it as gospel. But you shouldn't really treat any single source as absolutely true anyway.

by bridgette87 1 month ago

Yet there's a reason you won't see it cited in any actual academic work.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Because its like 70% written by one man.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

No academic work should cite a tertiary source, which is what Wikipedia is. Similarly, while Encyclopedia Britannica has a "better reputation," you won't see it cited, either. Serious research involves reading the actual sources, not summaries of what those sources say.

by Jeremylittel 1 month ago

It was supposed to be but it isn't.

by lauren12 1 month ago

Idk this one feels pretentious. Their is no metric to define what researching means. You can say thats not enough research to form a hypothesis if you wanna be extra but if i type something into google by definition thats research. Its your fault if you assume anything beyond that. If you dont like what someone says ask for sources.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Even if you looked it up in one encyclopedia before the internet, that's still not research. It's ill defined but generally seems like multiple credible sources would be required to constitute research.

by Comfortable_Bit 1 month ago

I think to qualify as research you just need to have some sort of systematic approach to how you're collecting information so you can eliminate bias. Bare minimum I think you need to have more than a few diverse sources and you need to be able to cite them. If you make a claim based on your "research", you should at least be able to cite your sources so we all understand how you formed that claim.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I hate to be that guy, but typing something into Google is by definition not research. There are many different definitions, but most agree that there has to be thorough, systematic and detailed studying/inquiring for it to be research. Looking something up on Google is just that- looking something up. Research is more than just finding out existing knowledge, it is about the creation or application of knowledge in innovative ways, which takes time and systematic effort.

by Open-Ice 1 month ago

Even legitimate secondary research and literature reviews are absolutely GRUELING. It's such an intense grind. It's hard to explain that to someone who hasn't endured it and churned out something of genuinely decent quality. I kind of sound like Dwight Schrute when I talk about research vs "research" — "research standards are not a JOKE, Jim! Millions of academics suffer every year!"

by Odd_Tumbleweed424 1 month ago

There are many different definitions, but most agree that there has to be thorough, systematic and detailed studying/inquiring for it to be research. So there are many definitions, but most agree that they are not valid? That doesn't make any sense.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I get your point but you cant ignore one definition just to make it. By definition i can read a wiki entry and say i researched it its up to you to decide which definition of research im saying. Its the same as any other english word that has multiple definitions. You use context clues to figure it out.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

especially Maybe you should research the difference between especially and exclusively.

by Consistent-Bison3023 1 month ago

Let me just remove some of the options from this definition and see if that helps you. "Investigation aimed at the interpretation of facts". That's a google search.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

OP also left out the full definition from Webster's to prove their point. They are not an expert on research. LOL

by Anonymous 1 month ago

"Let me cherry pick the part of the definition that confirms my belief" ffty

by mcclureadell 1 month ago

"Studious inquiry or examination. Especially…". The first half of the definition is required. Anything following especially can technically be ignored but not the stuff before.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

The term "shallow investigation" or "I looked into It" is exactly what you're asking for

by mcclureadell 1 month ago

"Looked into it" works. Shallow investigation doesn't really though, there's no way to say that in a sentence that doesn't sound weird. "I shallowly investigated this issue" doesn't sound right haha

by Beginning-Speech 1 month ago

It would be too honest for the kind of person OP is talking about lol

by mcclureadell 1 month ago

The appropriate expression is you "looked something up." Even if we know what "people" mean when they say they "researched" something, it doesn't make their hijacking of the English language any less painful for people like me. And before you retort with a common "English is constantly evolving, that's the nature of language change" - WRONG. English foundations are set in stone, so the meaning of the word "research" ought to be respected.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

"Looked something up" to me has the connotation of a single fact. You can't just "look something up" when it has a more complex answer. And your last paragraph is just straight up incorrect. Language absolutely constantly changes and evolves. You would hardly be able to understand somebody speaking English just a few hundred years ago, language shifts and changes constantly. The foundations may be set in stone (kinda) but words and phrases still constantly change their meaning

by Beginning-Speech 1 month ago

English foundations are set in stone WRONG

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Clearly OP hasn't done their research, by either metric.

by peyton85 1 month ago

They should've looked up how the language works on Wikipedia.

by No_Heron_3843 1 month ago

that's some take, sounds like you should do some research yourself🤔 the irony

by Vonruedengudrun 1 month ago

You gonna hate it but the phrase you are thinking of is secondary research. Primary research is what you describe above. secondary research is just the gathering/summarize of knowledge usually from secondary sources think textbooks, articles etc. Still include the word research.

by Alert_Selection 1 month ago

But I love to make assertions and then tell people to do their own research when asked to back up my claims. That's called arguing in good faith! 😁

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I absolutely agree. What they really mean is they Googled it. 😆

by Anonymous 1 month ago

It means you listened to some podcasts.

by mabelle11 1 month ago

You should have done more research on this

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You're absolutely correct but you also sound utterly insufferable

by Anonymous 1 month ago

What word am I exposed to use? Acquired knowledge?

by hettingersusana 1 month ago

Thank you, a much better answer than OP.

by hettingersusana 1 month ago

You looked something up.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Yes but the term for this? Obviously that's how you'd describe it.

by hettingersusana 1 month ago

"Looked something up" implies I'm just spouting something I memorized. "Learned" seems more accurate because I actually understand it thoroughly.

by hettingersusana 1 month ago

If you "actually" understand something thoroughly (and I don't know how you couldn't without it being "actual"), then "learned" would be the proper word. Googling something and reading the first tidbit of information isn't the same as learning. Reading a concise and peer-reviewed article you find through Google is learning.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You sound like one of those people who's whole personality is "look at how intelligent I am!". You gotta chill with the assumption that every single person other than you just reads article headlines and tries to justify that as learning. You aren't special.

by hettingersusana 1 month ago

No, keep using research. OP is just a snob.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You summed up my annoyance with this whole thing, thank you! People are losing trust in scientists because they ‘do their own research'. I've had family ‘debunk' theories that have been accepted and used in my science for ages because they found one webpage that disagreed. When I try to explain that these theories have been formed over years and years of diligent research, they refute my point by claiming they researched it too and they found something else. Research is done by academics, but anyone could look into something, read up on something, even collect different types of information to come to conclusions- but that doesn't make it research.

by Open-Ice 1 month ago

I'm with you. Unless you've summarized your findings and cited your sources, you haven't done really done research.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I know what you mean. I feel the same is true for „trauma", which is being thrown around for every tiny bad thing that ever happend to a person. Maybe the should go and do some „research" on what a trauma actually is.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I have a phd in molecular biology. My evidence based, peer reviewed, published research data isn't the same as some crap you watched on youtube.

by Antique_Tip_9573 1 month ago

Well I'm about to advocate a pet theory based on no concrete evidence but....... In grade school in the US we would have little projects that were called research papers where we would look things up in some library books or the internet and then write a little five paragraph essay including nuggets of information from the sources we found. It was only later in life that I learned that this is not what serious adults mean by research. I wonder if this use of the term in earlier education causes confusion when people are confronted with higher levels of knowledge where they don't appreciate what "real" research is.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You are basically saying that the majority of people are scientifically illiterate.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

What do you suggest people call it if they search for information online and learn information from their search then?

by justen01 1 month ago

You looked something up. You googled something. You didn't research it. You're not an academic.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You're not an academic. So only academics can conduct research? I would like to see any reputable dictionary that supports this? The great thing is that no research is required. You could just "look it up". ;)

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Must really suck to realise all that money you wasted didn't elevate you above others, and you are just another indebted pleb like everyone else

by Kelsie63 1 month ago

You're projecting hard.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You cited Wikipedia lmao. No, English has firm roots and boundaries. Fundamental words like "research" ought not to have their meanings changed. The only agent bringing this "change" about seem to be internet NEETs and people with less than undergraduate education levels.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

A more appropriate way to say "changing and evolving" is "going backwards." If anything, English is de-evolving. To read any NYT bestseller vampire romance and compare it to the works of Lord Byron only proves my point.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

no, it doesn't. lord byron only sounds fancy because nobody talks like that any more. the reason for this is because language is always evolving. "going backwards" is your own prescriptivist opinion, which the linguistics community does not share.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

It's not about "sounding fancy." It's using English to its fullest. Knowing proper definitions of words is the first step in that. I'd wager most people who wrote/consume vampire romance novels have never cracked open a dictionary, let alone know what one is.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Fundamental words like "research" ought not to have their meanings changed. You are the one trying to change it genius. It is a word based in French that simply means "to look for".

by Anonymous 1 month ago

looking something up is not research

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Of course it is.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Assuming the education levels of strangers on the internet because they use a word properly but not how you would is just pretentious and annoying and says more about you than them.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I always find this phrase hilarious in English speaking part of internet exactly because I know people just meant they google a short summary from random site or watched random YouTuber and that's it. But somehow they feel an urge to call it a research.

by Initial_Sundae 1 month ago

Frankly, the meaning of the word is overly broad.

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I think people just want a nice straightforward noun that indicates looking into something without the implication of rigorous systematic research work but English doesn't really have one of those (and 'to look into' tends to involve having to restructure a sentence, which can suck especially for people who aren't native speakers).

by Anonymous 1 month ago

Wikipedia either has actual sources cited and can be confirmed or, I many cases has a notice saying citation needed. It is a good reference for most things as long as you do the legwork to verify it. I have some freinds and family that tell me they did research, it consists of listening to redpill podcasts that make absurd claims backed up by nothing. At least wiki has some kind of secondary proof most of the time.

by Key-Requirement 1 month ago

i dO My oWN REseaRcH

by Anonymous 1 month ago

I mean I would still consider that research Not good research But still research For example if you have say a college assignment to write an essay about something and you just read the Wikipedia page to write the essay You did technically do research You just didn't do very good research

by Sad-Pea-9405 1 month ago

Agreed. "Googling for something" is not the same as "research".

by Far-Two-638 1 month ago

How many people over use the word "research"? Have you even done your research on the matter?

by Anonymous 1 month ago

You're writing about people overusing the word research when the average person doesn't even understand basic reading. Let alone data or how to interpret it.

by Anonymous 1 month ago