Research Methodology

Research Methodology

This skill provides guidance for conducting thorough, high-quality web research and generating well-structured academic-style reports.

Core Research Process

Phase 1: Define Research Scope

Before searching, clarify the research parameters:

1. Identify the core question - What specific information is needed?
2. Determine scope boundaries - What aspects are in/out of scope?
3. Establish depth requirements - Surface overview or deep dive?
4. Identify key terms - What search terms will yield relevant results?

Ask clarifying questions when the topic is broad or ambiguous:

• "What specific aspect of [topic] interests you most?"
• "Are you looking for recent developments or historical context?"
• "Should I focus on any particular region or industry?"

Phase 2: Gather Sources

Target 10+ diverse sources for thorough research:

Source Diversity Goals:

• Official documentation and primary sources
• Academic or research publications
• Industry expert perspectives
• News and current developments
• Multiple viewpoints on controversial topics

Search Strategy:

1. Start with broad searches to map the landscape
2. Refine with specific queries for depth
3. Follow citations and references from quality sources
4. Search for counterarguments and alternative perspectives

Phase 3: Evaluate Source Credibility

Apply the CRAAP test to each source:

Criterion	Questions to Ask
Currency	When was it published? Is timeliness important for this topic?
Relevance	Does it address the research question directly?
Authority	Who is the author? What are their credentials?
Accuracy	Is the information supported by evidence? Can it be verified?
Purpose	Why does this source exist? Is there bias?

Red Flags:

• No author or publication date
• Sensational headlines or claims
• No citations or sources
• Single-source information on contested topics
• Clear commercial or political agenda without disclosure

Green Flags:

• Peer-reviewed or editorially reviewed
• Clear author credentials
• Citations to primary sources
• Balanced presentation of multiple perspectives
• Recent updates or corrections noted

Phase 4: Synthesize Information

Organize findings thematically rather than source-by-source:

1. Identify themes - Group related information across sources
2. Note consensus - What do multiple sources agree on?
3. Flag disagreements - Where do sources conflict? Why?
4. Extract key insights - What are the most important findings?
5. Identify gaps - What questions remain unanswered?

Phase 5: Generate Report

Structure reports in academic format for clarity and credibility.

Academic Report Structure

1. Abstract (100-200 words)

Concise summary of the entire report:

• Research question or topic
• Key methodology (sources consulted)
• Main findings (2-3 sentences)
• Primary conclusion

2. Introduction

Set context for the research:

• Background on the topic
• Why this research matters
• Scope and limitations
• Brief outline of what follows

3. Findings (Organized by Theme)

Present discoveries organized thematically:

• Use clear section headings
• Lead with most important findings
• Include specific data and quotes with citations
• Note where sources agree or disagree
• Present multiple perspectives on contested topics

4. Conclusion

Synthesize and reflect:

• Key takeaways (3-5 main points)
• Implications of findings
• Remaining questions or areas for further research
• Recommendations if applicable

5. References

List all sources consulted:

• Use consistent citation format
• Include URLs for web sources
• Note access dates for online content
• Group by type if helpful (academic, news, official)

Citation Best Practices

Always attribute information to sources:

Inline Citations:

According to [Source Name](URL), finding here.
Research from [Organization](URL) indicates that...

Reference Section Format:

## References

1. [Article Title](URL) - Author/Organization, Date
2. [Report Name](URL) - Publisher, Date

When to Cite:

• Direct quotes (always)
• Specific statistics or data
• Unique findings or claims
• Controversial statements
• Information not common knowledge

Research Quality Standards

Thoroughness Checklist

• Consulted 10+ sources
• Included diverse source types
• Searched for opposing viewpoints
• Verified key claims across sources
• Noted limitations and gaps

Report Quality Checklist

• Clear, specific abstract
• Logical organization by theme
• All claims properly cited
• Sources evaluated for credibility
• Balanced presentation of perspectives
• Complete reference list with URLs

File Organization

Save research to ./reports/ directory:

Naming Convention:

./reports/YYYY-MM-DD-topic-name.md
./reports/2024-03-15-ai-trends.md
./reports/2024-03-15-renewable-energy-analysis.md

Report Structure: See references/template-guide.md for selection guidance. Templates available:

• references/templates/academic.md - Standard Academic Report (comprehensive)
• references/templates/executive-summary.md - Executive Summary (decision-focused)
• references/templates/comparative-analysis.md - Comparative Analysis (evaluating options)
• references/templates/literature-review.md - Literature Review (academic survey)
• references/templates/quick-report.md - Quick Report (rapid research)
• references/templates/technical-implementation.md - Technical Implementation Guide (library/tool selection)

Additional Resources

Reference Files

For detailed guidance, consult:

• references/source-evaluation.md - Extended CRAAP criteria and source assessment techniques
• references/template-guide.md - Template selection guide
• references/templates/ - Individual template files

Use these references when deeper guidance is needed on source evaluation or report formatting.