Research Methodology
This skill provides guidance for conducting thorough, high-quality web research and generating well-structured academic-style reports.
Core Research Process
Phase 1: Define Research Scope
Before searching, clarify the research parameters:
- •Identify the core question - What specific information is needed?
- •Determine scope boundaries - What aspects are in/out of scope?
- •Establish depth requirements - Surface overview or deep dive?
- •Identify key terms - What search terms will yield relevant results?
Ask clarifying questions when the topic is broad or ambiguous:
- •"What specific aspect of [topic] interests you most?"
- •"Are you looking for recent developments or historical context?"
- •"Should I focus on any particular region or industry?"
Phase 2: Gather Sources
Target 10+ diverse sources for thorough research:
Source Diversity Goals:
- •Official documentation and primary sources
- •Academic or research publications
- •Industry expert perspectives
- •News and current developments
- •Multiple viewpoints on controversial topics
Search Strategy:
- •Start with broad searches to map the landscape
- •Refine with specific queries for depth
- •Follow citations and references from quality sources
- •Search for counterarguments and alternative perspectives
Phase 3: Evaluate Source Credibility
Apply the CRAAP test to each source:
| Criterion | Questions to Ask |
|---|---|
| Currency | When was it published? Is timeliness important for this topic? |
| Relevance | Does it address the research question directly? |
| Authority | Who is the author? What are their credentials? |
| Accuracy | Is the information supported by evidence? Can it be verified? |
| Purpose | Why does this source exist? Is there bias? |
Red Flags:
- •No author or publication date
- •Sensational headlines or claims
- •No citations or sources
- •Single-source information on contested topics
- •Clear commercial or political agenda without disclosure
Green Flags:
- •Peer-reviewed or editorially reviewed
- •Clear author credentials
- •Citations to primary sources
- •Balanced presentation of multiple perspectives
- •Recent updates or corrections noted
Phase 4: Synthesize Information
Organize findings thematically rather than source-by-source:
- •Identify themes - Group related information across sources
- •Note consensus - What do multiple sources agree on?
- •Flag disagreements - Where do sources conflict? Why?
- •Extract key insights - What are the most important findings?
- •Identify gaps - What questions remain unanswered?
Phase 5: Generate Report
Structure reports in academic format for clarity and credibility.
Academic Report Structure
1. Abstract (100-200 words)
Concise summary of the entire report:
- •Research question or topic
- •Key methodology (sources consulted)
- •Main findings (2-3 sentences)
- •Primary conclusion
2. Introduction
Set context for the research:
- •Background on the topic
- •Why this research matters
- •Scope and limitations
- •Brief outline of what follows
3. Findings (Organized by Theme)
Present discoveries organized thematically:
- •Use clear section headings
- •Lead with most important findings
- •Include specific data and quotes with citations
- •Note where sources agree or disagree
- •Present multiple perspectives on contested topics
4. Conclusion
Synthesize and reflect:
- •Key takeaways (3-5 main points)
- •Implications of findings
- •Remaining questions or areas for further research
- •Recommendations if applicable
5. References
List all sources consulted:
- •Use consistent citation format
- •Include URLs for web sources
- •Note access dates for online content
- •Group by type if helpful (academic, news, official)
Citation Best Practices
Always attribute information to sources:
Inline Citations:
According to [Source Name](URL), finding here. Research from [Organization](URL) indicates that...
Reference Section Format:
## References 1. [Article Title](URL) - Author/Organization, Date 2. [Report Name](URL) - Publisher, Date
When to Cite:
- •Direct quotes (always)
- •Specific statistics or data
- •Unique findings or claims
- •Controversial statements
- •Information not common knowledge
Research Quality Standards
Thoroughness Checklist
- • Consulted 10+ sources
- • Included diverse source types
- • Searched for opposing viewpoints
- • Verified key claims across sources
- • Noted limitations and gaps
Report Quality Checklist
- • Clear, specific abstract
- • Logical organization by theme
- • All claims properly cited
- • Sources evaluated for credibility
- • Balanced presentation of perspectives
- • Complete reference list with URLs
File Organization
Save research to ./reports/ directory:
Naming Convention:
./reports/YYYY-MM-DD-topic-name.md ./reports/2024-03-15-ai-trends.md ./reports/2024-03-15-renewable-energy-analysis.md
Report Structure: See references/template-guide.md for selection guidance. Templates available:
- •
references/templates/academic.md- Standard Academic Report (comprehensive) - •
references/templates/executive-summary.md- Executive Summary (decision-focused) - •
references/templates/comparative-analysis.md- Comparative Analysis (evaluating options) - •
references/templates/literature-review.md- Literature Review (academic survey) - •
references/templates/quick-report.md- Quick Report (rapid research) - •
references/templates/technical-implementation.md- Technical Implementation Guide (library/tool selection)
Additional Resources
Reference Files
For detailed guidance, consult:
- •
references/source-evaluation.md- Extended CRAAP criteria and source assessment techniques - •
references/template-guide.md- Template selection guide - •
references/templates/- Individual template files
Use these references when deeper guidance is needed on source evaluation or report formatting.