copy or digital file available to all participants. Even if you have memorized a particular piece of evidence, you cannot
present it without providing a print or electronic copy. Your opponents and the judge may ask to see your evidence—both to verify that you presented it accurately and to make sure that they understood the argument. Rather than feeling threatened by the request, be happy that your arguments are being care-fully considered and reviewed.
Sources of Evidence
Debaters use a wide variety of sources for evidence. While they still use print media, such as books, journals, and newspapers, contemporary debaters also utilize search engines, digital books, electronic archives, and online government sources. Electronic access to resources has improved the quality and specificity of debate evidence while creating a constant race to have the most up-to-date information. Consequently, debaters conduct research before the tournament and then update their arguments between rounds. Debaters most commonly use the following sources:
SEARCH ENGINES
When using sites such as Google or Bing, you should first focus on the terms used in the resolution and then incorporate syn-onyms into your search. While basic searches are productive, using specialized search engines will greatly improve and has-ten your research. For example, Google News is a simple tool for finding only the most recent data. Google Scholar is useful for finding articles from peer-reviewed sources.
JOURNAL DATABASES
Many libraries subscribe to databases that enable patrons to search a wide variety of peer-reviewed publications. When pre-paring for a tournament, debaters commonly use four databases:
Lexis/Nexis aggregates legal, news, and business publications.
Because it contains almost every newspaper in the world, debaters most commonly use Lexis/Nexis to update policy arguments. However, Lexis/Nexis also houses legal journals that are useful for Kritik arguments.
Project Muse is a collection of scholarly journals in the humanities and social sciences. Debaters frequently use this resource to prepare Kritik arguments.
JSTOR is an excellent source for humanities journals, includ-ing area studies, political science, and economics. Always use a date limit when researching on JSTOR. The database holds articles from the 1800s that are interesting but will not help your debate argument.
EBSCOhost is subdivided into 31 different databases. For debaters, the most useful subdivision is “Communication and Mass Media Complete,” which searches all debate-related articles and is a valuable resource for finding evidence that discusses the values, purpose, and effects of debate. “Aca-demic-Search Premier” is useful for general humanities and science articles, although its holdings overlap JSTOR.
Shrewd debaters do not limit themselves to these databases.
Your university may subscribe to hundreds of databases; we encourage you to investigate any that might be tied to your topic.
BOOKS
With increasing access to digital media, debaters less commonly use books to find evidence. This is a mistake! Finding evidence in books may take more time than searching electronically, but books often give a more nuanced understanding of the topic.
And, because fewer debaters research from books, evidence from these resources is less common and can provide unique ways of viewing the resolution.
Reading an entire book is not necessary to gather evidence.
First look at the table of contents to determine if one or two chapters would be helpful. Then read the opening and clos-ing paragraphs of those chapters. Only if these paragraphs look promising should you read the entire chapter. A different approach is to turn directly to the index and use the terms from your search engine research to find specific references. Finally, look at the footnotes and bibliography, which will point to rel-evant books, journal articles, and other materials.
THINK TANKS
Think tanks and policy institutes are organizations that conduct research and engage in advocacy on specific issues or policy areas.
These organizations, which distribute massive amounts of data, are excellent sources of quality evidence. Because think tanks are supported by organizations with specific political or cultural agendas however, be sure to understand not only the reports that they produce but also the group’s motivations for produc-ing them. Realizproduc-ing in the middle of a debate that your main evidence for an argument is biased by positions that contradict your other arguments can be very embarrassing. You can find think tanks and information about think tank biases by using search engines and examining the article’s references. From the
references, you will know if the article is based in a particular political point of view, is based only on editorials, or in some other way has only examined one side of the issue.
RSS FEEDS
Really Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds are the easiest way to gather current information because simply by signing up for the service, articles relating to your research topic are automati-cally delivered to you via email. RSS is exceptionally helpful for long-term research projects. For example, a debater assigned to update evidence on the economy could enter the search terms once and expect an auto-generated flow of information about the economy. Policy debaters use Google Reader and Yahoo! News Alerts to deliver articles to their inboxes daily.
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS
Every year, members of policy, research, and academic orga-nizations gather at conferences to speak about their research.
Conferences focus on overarching themes, many of which are useful for policy debate. Although some meetings publish their proceedings, many do not. Savvy policy debaters will scan confer-ence programs to find presentations relevant to their arguments and then ask the presenter for a copy of her paper.
GOVERNMENT REPORTS
Government agencies produce an amazing number of reports, some of which are very useful sources of evidence. While the United States does not have a central database for all govern-ment docugovern-ments, a simple Google or Bing search that includes
“government publication” will locate these documents.
PROFESSORS
By the middle of the debate season, many debaters have difficulty thinking creatively about an aspect of the topic. Professors can be excellent resources to break through this slump. They are knowl-edgeable about their subjects, have good research skills, and, since they are not currently involved in competitive debate, they might have a fresh take on the debate topic. Meeting with a professor can produce a better understanding of the topic and win you a few debates. Or, you might have a lesson in how academic professors do not always agree with the arguments debaters made. Either way, professors are usually impressed by the level of research debaters complete and are excited to discuss their own work with interested students.
DEBATE-BASED WEBSITES
A number of websites are dedicated to helping debaters with their research. For example, Cross-X.com and PlanetDebate.
com offer free and useful advice on how to conduct meaningful research. If you are starting a new research project, the Interna-tional Debate Education Association’s Debatabase (http://idebate.
org/debatabase) has an excellent collection of pro and con argu-) has an excellent collection of pro and con argu-ments that are useful for jump-starting a new research project.
DISSERTATIONS, PAST DEBATERS, AND COACHES
After researching a topic for the entire academic year, debaters and their coaches often turn their research into journal articles and dissertations. These publications focus either on debate activities or provide policy analysis of a specific topic from pre-vious resolutions. Although dissertations are not published documents, they often contain the most current scholarship on
a topic. At a minimum, scan the footnotes for sources to expand your own research project. Dissertations written by past debat-ers can be particularly useful because they use the same type of sources that debaters employ to construct their arguments.
Dissertations can be searched by using the ProQuest Digital Dis-sertation Database.
REFERENCE LIBRARIANS
Reference librarians specialize in helping patrons with research.
They know where to find the best resources, how to navigate the library’s databases, and can offer a variety of suggestions on how to conduct your research. Be sure to consult them.
General Research Strategy
STARTING YOUR RESEARCH
Begin your research by creating a list of key words and terms relating to the topic. Next, use a search engine to find two or three introductory articles that provide an overview of the topic.
Use these articles to develop a grasp of the issues surrounding your topic and expand your key word list. As you read, keep a list of issues raised by your introductory articles that would add depth to the body of research. Then, when you have completed your preliminary overview, use this list to collect another, more
specific, set of articles.
The ability to think ahead and predict arguments is what transforms an okay debater into a great debater. While research-ing, attempt to anticipate arguments and find responses. This process begins when you read an article and ask yourself: “How
would I refute this argument?” Then, find evidence that sup-ports your refutation.
KEEPING RESEARCH INTERESTING
Debaters do not always love all of their research assignments.
However, as they continue to participate in debate, they are able to find creative ways to twist a dull topic into an interesting project. For example, many debaters were disenchanted with the 2008–2009 topic of agricultural subsidies. They made their research interesting, however, by finding ways to tie other top-ics to the debate. For example, agricultural subsidies determine what foods are cheaply available to U.S. consumers. This, in turn,
affects health, habits, and general well-being. Subsidies also deter-mine which foods are grown domestically and which must be imported. This, in turn, directly influences international rela-tions and trade. By investigating the complexity of the topic, most debaters found an area that interested them.
Evaluating Evidence
How does a debater sort through a pile of evidence to find the one piece that will win a debate round? Debaters evaluate evidence based on four criteria: date, source, author’s intent, and clarity.
1. Date. As a general rule, evidence should be as current as pos-sible. Using evidence from the day of, or sometimes hours before, a debate round is not uncommon. Only Kritik argu-ments, which address philosophical claims and assumptions, have older evidence. Philosophy classes still talk about Plato, so there’s nothing unusual about using philosophical evidence that is decades, centuries, or millennia old.
2. Source. Finding an unbiased source is impossible—as is