Analysis

27 June 2014 You have accumulated a body of "findings" about an issue you are investigating—or you have received one from another researcher. Have you streamlined a process for analyzing that material to identify its weaknesses, warts, and opportunities? Here's one that may help ...

17 June 2014 As researchers, we move from inquiry to conclusion in a four-step process. Below, we give you three of those steps. What do you think is missing? ...

6 June 2014 "Documents are liars," according to Lawrence of Arabia. Certainly, they can deceive us—even when the creator did not intend to be deceptive. So, how do we get within reasonable distance of reality, when we peer into the past through so many warped lenses? ...

30 January 2014 When analyzing sources, the first question we ask ourselves should be: “Is this an original or a derivative?” However, this basic question is just a starting point for our evaluation of reliability. Some material falls clearly into one extreme or the other, but many resources fall somewhere on a sliding scale between those extremes.

13 January 2014 As history researchers, we do not speculate. We test. We critically observe and carefully record. Then we weigh the accumulated evidence, analyzing the individual parts as well as the whole, without favoring any theory. Bias, ego, ideology, patronage, prejudice, pride, or shame cannot shape our decisions as we appraise our evidence. To do so is to warp reality and . . .