Can you tell good research from bad?
Earlier this year, we asked for your feedback on how you use Journalist’s Resource‘s free materials and how we can help you do better work. Our main goal is to improve the quality of news coverage by helping journalists find and use peer-reviewed research and other forms of high-quality evidence.
Your responses to our annual survey offered important insights into what you need and the work we need to do. You highlighted multiple barriers that limit reporters’ ability to access, interpret and incorporate academic studies into their stories. You also shared a variety of other information — for example, how well you think you can tell good research from bad — that gave us great ideas for new tip sheets, research summaries and other materials. Take a look at our survey results, some of which might surprise you.
While you’re at it, please check out several new resources we think you’ll want to know about. This week, Chloe Reichel summarized research on how journalists’ jobs affect their mental health. A recent article by Clark Merrefield examines Reconstruction-era violence against black politicians. Clark also teamed up with a reporter from The Burlington Free Press in Vermont on a project on rural school closures.
We hope you’ll find these new materials useful. And remember that we always enjoy hearing from you, so please reach out at any time with questions, ideas and other feedback.
Denise-Marie Ordway, managing editor of Journalist’s Resource
We surveyed reporters, journalism faculty and others in our audience to find out how we can help improve journalism. A few of the big takeaways: Some journalists have trouble recognizing flawed research and seldom mention academic findings in their stories. Your responses gave us ideas for new tip sheets, research roundups and training events.