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.

Conducting Research

Taylor Newcomb

Of course, before anything else is mentioned, quite possibly the greatest tool in conducting scholarly research is Google Scholar. This tool opens us up to hundreds, maybe even thousands, of relevant articles and books by the scholar we prefer. It is our shortcut to the body of knowledge, in that it helps us do it from home and at our leisure instead of dealing with the time and material constraints of libraries. For those of us who want to go beyond Google Scholar into the body of knowledge, there is Journal Storage which stores articles past five years ago. This site has been most helpful in tracking down books and articles by Bernays, whom is one of the foundations of my project. 

Once, there is that connection to the sites, the body of knowledge is just a click away. Knowing what has been done before is very important to research, because if we don't take the time to learn what others have said, then we are just wasting the time of others who will come after. The literature review, which is the manifestation of the body of knowledge, is key to showing others we have connected. It shows we have conducted the research by going through journals and articles to find that one article which explains it all. The body of knowledge is the foundation upon which the rest of our project/thesis rests, in the same manner as houses and buildings. 

The pros to conducting research into the body of knowledge could be wide ranging, but I will only stick to a few. The most important pro is that it might give us new avenues through which to peer. We may be pigeonholing ourselves to one item, but then one day, bam, we find an article that switches the light on for our project and lets us go a new, better way. This would have been impossible if we failed to conduct the research. Another pro is that we know the information. By researching the reading everything we can find, then we have a step up on people who fail to do it. A third, and for this section, final pro is that it gives us guidelines for conducting future research. We read what has been done and then from that figure out what needs to be researched next and how best it could be found. 

As for the cons, it is very time consuming. One can expect to lose hours conducting this research. We have outside lives, well most of us, that can't be pushed aside for the long time needed for research. Another con is that we may hit the end of our research trail. If we run out of items to find but still need more, then we may either have to change the point of our project or go insane. I faced this last semester when I ran out of items for sports crisis communication. There was just enough for that paper, but anything beyond that was impossible. A final, for this section, con is that the research may be leading us down the wrong path. We might not know it until too late, but we may have been following the wrong avenues and guidelines and ended up with a incomplete project and a defense deadline coming sooner than we want. 

Overall, the body of knowledge is something that is important to all. It gives us foundations and avenues with which to find our route. Without that research and body of knowledge, we would just be floating aimlessly in the ocean.