The phrase “do your research” has undergone a significant shift in meaning, evolving from a call to academic rigor to a battle cry for skepticism, often divorced from methodological understanding. This transformation, observed by educators and researchers, highlights a growing disconnect between the act of information gathering and the principles of credible inquiry.
For years, university instructors in fields like psychology have used the directive “do your research” to prepare students for the demands of academic study and, potentially, a career in research. Traditionally, this meant learning to conduct primary research – collecting and analyzing data – or, at a minimum, mastering the skills required for a thorough secondary review of existing literature. “There are right and wrong ways of doing it,” explains a recent blog post by a critical thinking instructor, “and so, not just anyone can do it.”
The instructor notes a distinction between simply “educating oneself” – reading to form an opinion – and genuine research, which necessitates a critical evaluation of sources, and methodologies. The latter, they argue, requires training and practice. This emphasis on methodological rigor aligns with observations from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP), which highlights undergraduate research opportunities as a crucial step in determining a career path in the field. The SPSP website lists numerous summer research programs at universities like Michigan, Boston College, and Yale, designed to provide hands-on experience in active psychology research laboratories.
However, the phrase “do your research” has increasingly been adopted by individuals lacking such training, often as a challenge to established expertise. The instructor observes this manifests in two primary forms: a demand for independent data collection and analysis – a task requiring years of dedicated study – or a suggestion that a cursory review of online sources constitutes sufficient investigation. This latter approach, often relying on platforms like YouTube, is dismissed as inadequate by the instructor, who stresses the importance of credible, peer-reviewed sources.
Dr. Dana Hirn Mueller, a legal psychology researcher at Concordia University, St. Paul, echoes this sentiment, noting that research experience makes students more competitive applicants and better-prepared professionals, even outside of academia. According to a report from CareersInPsychology.org, Mueller emphasizes that engaging in research forces students to learn more deeply about a topic, translating into valuable skills like data analysis, critical thinking, and communication.
The instructor acknowledges the value of skepticism but cautions against equating it with justification for unsupported opinions. They advocate for evaluating the credentials of experts and comparing their findings with those of other researchers in the field. The American Psychological Association (APA) also provides resources for undergraduate research opportunities and internships, including programs at the University of Maryland, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and the University of North Carolina.
the instructor argues that “doing your research” – in the sense of independently replicating expert analysis – is often infeasible for most individuals. They suggest that a more realistic and valuable approach is to “educate yourself” using credible sources, recognizing the limitations of one’s own expertise and relying on the research conducted by qualified professionals. The instructor concludes by stating that recommendations for “educating yourself” is always sound advice, but only if done from credible sources.
