THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE INTERNET

The Body of Knowledge and the Internet

by JR

I’’ll admit it-since I have started graduate school I have not physically handled one journal to find my research. How many people in class have? I’ve gone to the library to look for books but I have yet to actually crack a spine on a journal like this one or this one. I won’t ask for a show of hands to see if I am the only one who hasn’t but I would bet I am not alone.

Connecting to the body of knowledge begins with connecting my computer to the Internet. Like many others in class I also use Google, Google Scholar, and LORA for my research. Part of my development as a researcher has been in refining my Article1st, and EBSCO keyword selection. I use Google and Google Scholar because the search functions generally yield better results than the libraries databases. What has this done to my ability as a researcher if I haven't dug through dusty tomes of knowledge in the back of the library?

I wanted to bring up another idea that is related to key word search for journal articles. I believe that it was in Conceptual Issues class that we talked about journals and conferences and the perceived notion that some journals and conferences have more prestige than others. What happens to this idea of prestige and credibility when a generation or two of researchers have grown used to research by key word rather than journal?

In Conceptual Issues class we also talked about journals vs. conferences. I have seen that the debate of which is a more desirable method to connect to the body of knowledge depends on the field of study. In JMC, getting published in a journal is the goal of many researchers and conferences hold sort of a 2^nd tier status in the body of knowledge. In my work with RISE, which is concerned with underrepresented minority students in engineering education, conferences are the goal for researchers and journal articles generally fall into the lower tier. The best explanation that I have been given for this preference is that education conferences are looking for ideas, practices, and theory that can be directly tested or implemented in an educational setting .

For my topic, advergaming, I have used journals that are found in a traditional print version as well as online only journals. The Journal of Interactive Advertising was founded in 2000 and is an online refereed journal that is open to submissions and is free to access. This is a different model than the online sites of many print-based journals that require a pay per download or subscription to access. Like many others in class, after Google has done its work, I switch over to LORA to find an appropriate database to find the article since I have already paid (through my school tuition) to access the journal and download the research for free. Is free the way of the future?

Having access to online journals and print journals available online I believe is beneficial to the development to the body of knowledge. Being able to tap into the work of the field anywhere, anytime makes it that much easier for people to enter the academic conversation in a way that was not previously possible.

P.S. play this Indiana Jones-inspired advergame from Legos-it is harder than it seems (check out the Lego-skulls in background!)

Adding to the JMC body of knowledge

Adding to the JMC body of knowledge--Deb Wallevand

The "body of knowledge" is ubiquitous. The "body of knowledge" is broad. The first daunting step to take when conducting research in such a way that it connects to the "body of knowledge" in journalism and mass communication is identifying what is missing or lacking in the existing literature. Research is finding out what you do not already know. No one knows everything, but everybody knows something. By writing a literature review, the researcher can convey to the reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. Reviewing the field allows the researcher to build on the platform of existing knowledge ad ideas. Additionally, this process is important because it demonstrates that the researcher is not re-inventing the wheel (doing research that has already been done).

A literature review is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries. A good literature review requires the following attributes: the ability to conduct exhaustive bibliographic searches, the ability to organize the collected data meaningfully, describe, critique and relate each source to the subject of the research, present the organized literature logically, and last, but not least, to correctly cite all sources mentioned.

It is necessary to consult a wide range of information sources in the process of connecting to the "body of knowledge." Some of these sources include, but are not limited to scholarly journals, books, newspapers, standards, statistics, maps, and government legislation. For example, I utilize Google Scholar quite a bit to find articles regarding women's sports and the media. Not only does this allow me to find articles, but it shows me how many times a certain article has been cited. This in turn tells me if that piece of academia is considered important by those scholars who contribute to "the body of knowledge."

There are cons to doing research because it carries with it an inherent danger to those who are close minded or comfortable in their preconceptions. There are people, including researchers, who reject anything that contradicts, or at least doesn't support, their views of the world. Research may show that what you already know is incorrect. This is a hard thing to accept.

On the other hand, the pros of this process of conducting research certainly outweigh the cons. As I mentioned earlier, a literature review shows where the new research fits into the existing body of knowledge. It justifies the research. The body of knowledge is ever-evolving and it is kind of exciting to think about the fact that your work will help shape the field and the direction that it is headed. Your research may help refine, refocus or even change the field.