User:Binky1110/my way vs the wikipedia way

As psychology students and future psychologists, a lot of research must be done as we learn about various sub fields within psychology as well as fields that psychology may have some form of connection with. Thus, knowing how to do thorough, efficient, and effective research is important as we learn and gather new information. Doing research can have different policies depending on for what or who the research is being done for. There may be techniques that should be done for one type of research that shouldn't be done for another, and vice versa. Research techniques that Dr. Ashton has taught and the policies put forth by Wikipedia on psychological research both present some similar important points on how we should go about doing research, along with some important ways that are different between the two.

Dr, Ashton's teachings of research have a number of steps and important things that need to be accounted for. The first major technique proposed by Dr. Ashton when approaching research is knowing how to navigate the schools data base. Knowing how to access the database on and off campus is important so that we can conduct research wherever, whenever. It is also important that we know how to get the database to show us articles that we are interested in. This is done by entering the right key words, narrowing the search down using the right dates, and using terms like "AND", "OR", and "NOT" to include or not include specific things that we are looking for. Likewise, when doing research most times we need to find multiple articles on the same topic. Dr. Ashton suggests that it is a good idea to use the technique of looking backwards and looking forwards. With these techniques we can find different articles that may have cited the first article that caught our eye or we can look at the reference list of that article to find articles that were published before that article that may be on the same topic. It is also important when creating a research proposal to read articles and pinpoint what that studies limitations were or what those researchers ideas were on extensions to that study or in that area of study. Finding limitations in the methodology of different studies can aid in coming up with your own topic of research. It is also important for us to be able to differentiate between the different types of articles. This can be done by knowing what to look for, also known as heuristics, in the different types of articles that make them obvious. For example, peer reviewed articles usually state that it is a review of a previously done study as well as looking at the abstract page of the article and looking at the publication type. It is also important for us to be able to identify and differentiate between a research article, Literature Review, Meta-Analysis, and Theoretical Review. Knowing the major differences between these types of articles can help is find specific types of articles that we need when conducting our own research as well as knowing what type of article we are reading if we have to review any given article. Dr. Ashton requires that we use research articles

To speak on the policies of Wikipedia and psychological research, first and foremost they recommend making sure that a source is reliable. When researching, using unreliable sources can lead to us putting false or biased information out there, which is something Wikipedia emphasizes on not doing. Likewise, Wikipedia also suggests that we simply research with the intent to state what others have found or said, not to pick a side or make connections between the numerous findings. The purpose of research to Wikipedia is to gather all the information that is out there about a topic whether they have the same views or different views. Wikipedia also suggests that the easiest way to avoid plagiarism is to always cite what we find in our research. It is better this way so that we can avoid close paraphrasing. Wikipedia also requires that MEDRS are used. These are Medical Reliable Sources that are used when doing research on topics in the medical field and in psychology. Using MEDRS ensures that any statements made pertaining to medical or psychological topics are cited using a reliable source in that field. It is also recommended that we use secondary sources rather than primary sources because using primary sources may introduce bias. It makes the articles on Wikipedia more notable when the person writing the sources being used isn't in a position where they have to prove something or take a side.

Similarly between the two, both Dr. Ashton and Wikipedia suggest that we use the schools database when conducting research. by using the database, we know that the sources we are reading and taking information from are reliable and have references for any information that is included in their work. Likewise, both Dr. Ashton and Wikipedia agree that our main goal in doing research is to gather information, not to make any justifications. They also make the point that we should know what kind of sources we are reading and using, whether it is a peer reviewed article or even a literature review. On the contrary, Wikipedia is big on keeping out biases and personal views, and Dr. Ashton doesn't mention that because some writing that is done in psychology may require that we take a side or find information that is only for or against a topic. Wikipedia and Dr. Ashton also agree that we should use peer reviewed, or secondary, sources so that we know how accurate, as well as reliable, the information is.

Overall, both approaches in research according to Dr. Ashton and Wikipedia are very useful and important to keep in mind when doing different types of research. Dr. Ashton's approach to doing research pin points a lot of techniques that helps when you are looking for something specific or narrowing down to a specific area or topic. On the other hand, Wikipedia's technique is mainly about being unbiased, not taking a stance, and making sure to include all reliable information that is out there about that topic. Granted, some types of research may not require every recommendation, but it is always good to have knowledge on how to conduct research well in both situations.

Feedback
Your writing and analysis was much improved. However, you are not "getting it." Try reading the page for evidence-based research. That page is not that great but two "see also" pages are much better. 15:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)