Information Overload, The Issues with Trusting Research Material.
October 09, 2024
Josh Nicholson & Research Solutions Marketing Team | Research Solutions
As a researcher, I've witnessed firsthand the incredible advancements made possible by scientific research. The Internet, life-saving vaccines, space telescopes, pasteurization, gene editing, and the smartphone in my pocket—all these breakthroughs stem from the tireless efforts of scientists worldwide.
While I'm in awe of research's potential, I am also well aware of its challenges, specifically how to deal with the overwhelming amount of new research (information overload) and how to discern what's trustworthy.
Information Overload & Trust in Research
The term "information overload" has been discussed since the 1960s, when researchers claimed they were "drowning in new research." If they were drowning then, now we're in the middle of the ocean in a 100-year storm! Compared to the sixties, the volume of papers published today is orders of magnitudes larger and much more complex.
In the biomedical field, where my research lives, more than 1 million papers flood into the PubMed database each year—that's about two papers per minute (1). How do I, as a researcher, stay current? And, more importantly, how do I know what to trust?
The Impact of Misinformation
The rise of fake news, conspiracy theories, and propaganda has become a major obstacle for scientific researchers. The resulting misinformation can be troubling as it could lead to a conflict of interest, poor quality research, and even dangerous public health actions. But what can be done to remedy this?
Avoiding Fake Science Amid Information Overload
As research leaders, it’s important for us to ensure that we’re not contributing to this problem. It’s our duty to make sure that the science we conduct is trustworthy and reliable.
1. Seek Out Reputable Sources
Before we even begin our research, it’s important to ensure that we’re seeking out reputable sources. Reputable sources have a track record of conducting rigorous research, and any information that they share can be trusted. Examples of reputable sources include universities, research institutions, and peer-reviewed articles or journals. By starting our research with a reputable source, we can be sure that we’re on the right path.
2. Check the Methodology
One of the key ways to avoid fake science is to check the methodology used in the research. The methodology should be transparent, and the study should be externally peer-reviewed. If the study doesn’t have a clear methodology, or if the methodology isn’t transparent, then it’s likely that the research isn’t genuine. It’s important to understand the methodology used in the research to ensure that the results are reliable.
3. Watch Out for Bias
Bias is one of the biggest culprits of fake science. Bias can be introduced when researchers have financial or personal motivations for conducting research in a certain way. It’s important to be aware of any potential biases in the study, and to conduct the research with an unbiased mindset. This will help to ensure that the results are unbiased and genuine.
4. Be Skeptical
Being skeptical is another key way to avoid fake science. A healthy dose of skepticism can help us to ask the right questions, and to ensure that we’re not accepting information blindly. It’s important to question any research that we come across, and to be critical of the results. By being skeptical, we’ll be able to identify any potential flaws in the research and ensure that it’s genuine.
5. Check The Consensus
Before we accept any research as genuine, it’s important to check the consensus. The consensus refers to the general agreement among people in the scientific community on a particular topic. If the research is deviating from the consensus, then it’s likely that the research is not genuine. It’s important to check the consensus to ensure that the research is in line with what the scientific community already knows.(3)
The Metrics Dilemma
Researchers generally rely upon various metrics to evaluate research. High Impact Factor journals, highly cited papers, impressive Altmetric scores — all proxies of qualities we use to assess better if we want to read, purchase, or cite an article. These attention-based metrics incentivize attention and, whether directly or indirectly, push our community to focus on producing neat narratives or stories that can be "pitched/sold" to an editor. This can potentially lead researchers to cut corners or to p-hack their way to meaningful statistics(2).
Given the enormous amounts of pressure on the researcher, and the metrics we use to evaluate research, it is no wonder many studies have found high rates of irreproducibility(4).
The Need for a New Approach
To keep up with research articles, we set up alerts and use various heuristics to help us assess if we want to read an article or not:
- Where it's published
- Who the authors are
- Their affiliations
- Key metrics like citation count, views, downloads, and social media shares
These proxies all help me sift through the literature, but this approach is very superficial and limited, specifically in terms of citation counts. Traditional citation indices don't tell me why documents are citing an article of interest. Are they supporting it? Criticizing it? I don't have time to go through dozens, or even hundreds, of documents to find out.
Introducing Smart Citations
To address these concerns and make research more reliable and understandable, I've been working on developing Smart Citations through Scite, which is now part of the Research Solutions family.
With Smart Citations, I can see not just a list of citing articles, but also excerpts from the full text of these documents. These "citation statements" are classified by a deep learning model as supporting, contrasting, or mentioning the cited work.
This approach gives me a richer context and a more nuanced view of research citations. It helps me establish more trust in findings because I can quickly see how independent groups interpret and build upon each other's work.
Looking to the Future
As a researcher, I believe it's crucial to acknowledge that all this vital work improves lives and has a significant societal impact. In an era where information overload threatens the integrity and efficiency of research, I'm grateful for tools like Smart Citations that not only simplify our search for knowledge, but also elevate the trustworthiness of the information we rely upon.
I'm proud to be part of the team at Research Solutions developing Scite technology. It represents a significant leap forward in understanding and building upon quality research. I encourage you to experience it for yourself and see how it can transform your engagement with academic and scientific literature.
About Research Solutions
Research Solutions is a Prenax partner that provide our customers with easy access to all the scholarly content they need.
References
- E. Landhuis, Scientific literature: Information overload. Nature 535, 457–458 (2016).
- M. L. Head, L. Holman, R. Lanfear, A. T. Kahn, M. D. Jennions, The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science. PLoS Biol 13, e1002106–null (2015).
- Research Solutions Blog
- C. G. Begley, J. P. A. Ioannidis, Reproducibility in Science. Circ Res 116, 116–126 (2015).
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and contributors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Prenax.
