As noted in the Syllabus, the major assignment for the course is to write a proposal for a research project investigating an issue of your choice (related to the course focus) based on a theoretical perspective covered in seminar. I prefer to think of this proposal as the question(s) that you find most interesting, formalized and informed by the coursework.

Research proposals will include:

(1) a selective, focused review of relevant literature including relevant articles from the course reader and from your literature searches,
(2) identification of the theoretical perspective that your team is adopting to investigate the social implications of communication technology, and
(3) clearly stated research questions and/or hypotheses that emerge logically from the literature review and theoretical foundation.

Additional assignments will guide preparation of the term paper, including preliminary steps toward the development of the research proposal (e.g., initial topic proposals, bibliographies, outlines).

Here are some guidelines and suggestions to use in preparing your research papers. Some of these may be very familiar to you, but some may not be so I'm presenting them here to make sure we share the same expectations for what a research paper should be. Please ask if anything is not clear or if you desire elaboration.

Preparation for Writing

1. The literature search

This should be a focused, selective literature search. This means that you don't have to cite or review EVERY article or chapter or book ever written on your topic ... but you should conduct a thorough search to identify a wide body of literature -- and THEN evaluate each for relevance. You are not likely to include in your paper every article or chapter that you find because you should leave out those that do not directly contribute to your framework or argument. Note too that being selective does not mean to exclude research that challenges your approach, because those are relevant to your idea development too. (See the section below on Critique). Don't ignore relevant literature from our reading packet!

2. Evaluating the literature

As you gather relevant resources, read the material to evaluate it for relevance and degree of contribution. Based on that reading, organize the material into major themes so you can be clear on what you have and what you need. Your reading will also help you do understand better the context of your original interest (what we already know, what we don't know) and guide you in revising your direction or general theme. This process should help you define and redefine the scope and focus of your paper.

NOTE: I have suggested a very useful resource in the syllabus (Rubin, R. B., Rubin, A. M., & Piele, L. J. (2000). Communication research: Strategies and sources (5th ed). Belmont: Wadsworth.) that I strongly recommend that you use if you have no prior quality guidance on effective literature searches.

The Writing

1. Strive to synthesize!

This should come after you've searched and evaluated your literature (and gone back to search for more to fill in gaps). As you begin to write, each section should be a synthesis of the relevant literature and research findings. To synthesize means to be able to present summary statements about a related set of findings. This contrasts to merely listing one by one summaries of related papers. Those are not as useful nor as persuasive. Synthesize research findings, don't just present a laundry list of studies' findings.

To illustrate, here is a summary statement followed by references to specific findings from specific studies that support that statement: "The research on long-distance relationships suggests a fairly robust finding: Long-distance partners frequently reported high levels of satisfaction and relational resilience that rivaled or exceeded that found in proximate relationships. For example, respondents in one study of long-distance relationships reported satisfaction levels after separation as high as satisfaction before separation (O'Sullivan, Gurien, & Wiemann, 1993). Stephen (1986) found that couples who were long-distance reported relationships that endured longer than couples in proximate relationships. Etc. etc."

2. Provide a well-documented critique

Throughout your literature search, you should be evaluating what you find. First, valuate the relevance of various studies for inclusion in your paper. Of those papers that you plan to use, evaluate them for coherence, completeness, utility, etc. Are the ideas on track? Helpful? Flawed? Incomplete? Needing updating/extension? Incorporate those ideas you evaluate as useful into your argument. You should include literature that counters, as well as supports, your position or perspective. This evaluation will provide the basis for your literature critique. Note that by "critique" I mean identification of weaknesses AND strengths of the overall literature as well as specific key articles.

In your paper after the synthesis of the literature, you should present the critique of the literature that you just synthesized based on your ongoing evaluation of each piece as well as the overall synthesis. Identify the strengths of the literature and the arguments and findings that they present. Identify the weaknesses as well. When you address ideas or findings that contradict the literature that you have foudn to be the most persuasive, offer reasons why that research or theoretical claim is not persuasive or influential. What are the flaws? In short, include dissenting voices but counterargue against their arguments while identifying those voices that support your position. Also, be sure to provide reasons why the reader should agree with you to discount or dismiss those that you don't agree with and to endorse those ideas you find valid and important.

This critique is essential as it provides the basis for YOUR questions that should be designed to fill in a gap, support a position, answer an unaddressed question, solve a contradiction in the findings, etc. So your questions should emerge directly from your documented and supported critique of the literature relevant to your topic of interest.

3. Propose your research questions

The last section will be your research questions. As I said several times, the value of asking GOOD questions is often overlooked. The questions you ask will have a direct influence on what answers you generate, and finding answers to trivial or uninteresting questions is not much of a contribution. GOOD questions are those that emerge out of what we know (your literature review, synthesis and critique) and point a clear direction toward what we don't know but need to know.

Consistent with the evolving nature of all your papers, be ready to revise your initial questions as you write your literature review. Chances are you will teach yourself something new and clarify the issues more crisply for yourself, which will prompt you to rework the questions. Good! This is not only quite normal but essential to developing good questions. Keep recasting, redefining, rearranging your questions until they begin to take on a stability and are able to withstand any other attempts to improve them.

Also don't assume that the justifications for your proposed research questions are obvious: Provide a clear rationale for why your particular questions are important, relevant, and worth anyone's time to address. Also in this last section address the implications of findings the answers. What might be gained if we did have answers to the questions? How will that knowledge contribute, in your view? Make that explicit and strive to be persuasive.

The Format

Elements

All papers should be typed, double-spaced, 1-inch margins, standard 12 point type, with numbered pages. Subheads can be very useful in alerting readers to your paper's organization, so I recommend restrained use of subheads. Include a title page (try to come up with an accurate AND snappy title) with authors' names and contact information. Include a 300-400 word abstract summarizing the paper after the title page and before the actual paper begins. Of course, include a full list of references, APA style, at the end.

Length

Approximately 25 pages excluding title page, abstract, reference list, and any figures or diagrams. A few more pages is OK, but fewer pages means you haven't been thorough enough.

The Evaluation

Here are the elements I will be using to evaluate the papers. You should be your own first reader/editor. You would be smart to use these criteria to revise and polish your paper before submitting.

Form

1. Organization

- Title page, clear and concise abstract included?
- Clear introduction that succinctly summarizes, previews the paper?
- Well-defined sections of coherent sets of topics in research literature?
- Clear and logical sequence to presentation of material?

2. Writing

- Clean text free from spelling, punctuation errors?
- Proper sentence structure, grammar?
- Coherent paragraph organization?
- APA style followed for in-text citations, reference list?
- Length consistent with assignment guidelines?

Content

1. Topic focus

- Topic selected is relevant to course focus?
- Topic is important, not trivial, in its potential to affect society?

2. Thoroughness

- Relevant literature incorporated? (including course readings when appropriate)
- Effective synthesis of literature presented?
- Both supportive and contradictory literature included?
- Thoughtful and thorough critique of literature presented?
- Convincing rationale for position presented?
- Do the research questions follow logically from the literature critique/synthesis?
- Clear, interesting and relevant research questions posed?

3. Relevance

- Is the contribution the research questions carefully presented and persuasively argued?