The previous post was all about looking for big names in your field. Now lets talk about the next step, creating what I like to call " the state of the field" document, because you need to identify knowledge gaps and most effective ways to fill them.
Open up your favorite text editing software and write down all of the statements you can make about your field of study.
Right: X is Y when Z, or X is observed in nature often, or X and Y are observed together.
Wrong: wording your statements as a hypothesis. Your purpose here is to state what is known, not propose testable questions ( don't despair, that comes later).
Your list should be part observation and part established facts. After you do this it is time to pull together papers that substantiate each of the statements you just wrote down. Each statement should have a bunch of citations under it. Each citation should have two to three sentences that describe the major result. Here I also like to add a touch of visual organization. Simple tabs will do, just like the example bellow.
X is observed in nature.
J.D. Haldane and P.F.Chang 1943
- First to describe mechanism for X using infectious bacteria. Propose
constrains on X.
S.T.Strauss et al. 2000
- Models X as a function of Y. Equations that describe X through time are
proposed. Documents X in ocean and terrestrial ecosystems.
Above are just a few examples, but I am trying to highlight some important points here. As you see, I chose a paper that first describes a phenomenon, the earlier the better, and a paper that shows that it is widespread in nature ( means it's important). Key is to populate this document with examples of your favorite scientific " thing" and it's description. During this process you may find that papers that you originally chose to support statement A, do a better job supporting statement B. This is great. This is the purpose of the document, to organize your thinking about the field.
Along the way you will also find that some of the statement will need rewriting. A very important thing here is honesty. You must, must, must be honest with yourself. If there is statement that you really like but can not find papers that support it, do not fall into the trap of saying "well this paper kind of supports it". "Kind of" is your worst enemy. Also do not get upset that you were wrong. If you can not find support for something, then it may be a good hypothesis to investigate. This is the second useful part of the document, it makes you see the holes.
Initially this will be the only document you need. However as your knowledge of the literature expands, and you dive further into the murky depth of scientific inquiry, this document will naturally split. Some of the original statements ( now likely refined) will form one of your projects, the rest will be better for another. Eventually you will end up with one of these documents for each project you do, and every time they will help you focus your ideas. Plus these documents make a great repository of citations for your papers.
This is very interesting because I've been trying to do the same thing for sexual selection theory, for the exact same reasons you describe: I have a really hard time coming up with research questions. My advisor insists that things be phrased in terms of questions, and good for her, but I don't tend to think that way. I mean that I should, but I'm not good at it yet ;)
ReplyDeleteI think the task is similar for theory but theory does a different thing than experiment does; also theory has different ways of finding "support." This led me to an operator-based theory of how theory works (a theory theory). It was just for me when I started, but it could turn into a philosophy of science.