Research Project Due 6/30/19

GUIDELINES FOR ANALYTICAL READING

Introduction: We live and work in a world that is absolutely saturated with information. This was true years ago before the widespread availability of information technology; that technology, however, has increased both the amount of, and accessibility to, information dramatically.

Overall, this increase in information is a good thing, in both our personal and professional lives. However, not all information is of the same value to us. Some of what we encounter in print and on the Web is useful, reliable information, while some is not. It the responsibility of you, as the reader, to read in an analytical way in order to determine the value of the information contained in the documents you read.

What is Analytical Reading?

There are many definitions of the word “analyze” and the related words “analysis, analytical,” and so on. For our purposes, analytical reading can be thought of as “reading in such a way as to determine the accuracy, reliability, and value of the information contained in the document.”

Let’s look at an example. Suppose you’re reading an article on emergency management and you come across the following statement:

“There is a well-known correlation between increased disaster preparedness training and decreased casualties during a disaster.”

The average reader would likely accept this statement at face value and continue reading. After all, it seems to make sense and, besides, the author of the article presumably knows what she’s talking about.

The analytical reader, on the other hand, would be more likely to respond to this statement with “Whoa, just a minute here. Has such a correlation actually been demonstrated? Who demonstrated it, and how, and when? And what does the author mean by ‘well-known?’ Well known by whom? Emergency management professionals? The general public?”

As you can see from this example, the analytical reader does not simply accept the contents of a document at face value. Instead, the analytical reader demands that the author demonstrate the accuracy and reliability of the information. The analytical reader also judges how the valuable the information may be in to his or her (the reader’s) specific needs and situation.

Guidelines for Analytical Reading

In order to read in an analytical manner, a reader should focus on three broad characteristics of the document being read:

1. The Author – Who is the author of the document? Does the person have the necessary expertise, education, training, etc. in the subject to be able to speak with authority? Is it somehow to the author’s benefit that the statements in the document are believed and acted upon?

2. The Intention – What is the author’s purpose in writing the document? Is she trying to persuade others to believe and act upon the information, or is her goal just to present the information for the consideration of others?

3. The Argument – How does the author argue the main point(s) of the document? Are the arguments grounded in appropriate logic and reasoning? Are they supported by suitable evidence?

Let’s look at each of these characteristics separately.

The Author: Before reading the document, find out what you can about the author. In some cases this is relatively easy; for example, if you’re reading an academic or professional journal there is often some biographical material about the author attached to the article. If the author is listed only as “Dr. Jane Smith, Professor of Public Administration, University of Central Maryland,” then it may be necessary to look her up online to get a sense of her credentials, her previous research and publications, and so on.

In the case of documents you find through other sources, such as Web searches, it can be more difficult to check on the author; in some instances, the author may not be named at all. You can, however, evaluate the source website. For example, if your search brings you to a document on the FEMA website ( www.fema.gov ), you can probably be confident of the reliability of the document. On the other hand, if your search brings you to a Wikipedia entry on the same topic, then you would do well to be much more skeptical of the accuracy and reliability of the information.

The Intention: People write for various reasons. Scholars write to share the findings of their research with other scholars. Professionals write to engage others in their field in discussions of important topics. Public officials write to gain support for policy actions or initiatives.

Underlying all these reasons is the notion of persuasion. In almost all academic and professional writing the author seeks to persuade his audience to accept the information and, in many cases, to act upon it. This is perfectly normal and understandable. However, the author’s belief in the truth and importance of what he’s writing can sometimes lead him into errors of judgment, especially when it comes to presenting (or failing to present) evidence. For this reason, it’s a good idea to try to determine how “invested” the author is in the argument of the document; specifically, does the author stand to benefit in some way from acceptance of the argument?

The Argument: As you read the document, consider how the author is presenting and supporting the main argument(s). Observe how the author presents evidence to support an assertion or recommendation, and think about how reliable and suitable that evidence is.

Let’s go back to our example from above:

“There is a well-known correlation between increased disaster preparedness training and decreased casualties during a disaster.”

If the author fails to provide the evidence that supposedly supports such a correlation, then you can reject the argument unless you yourself are aware of the evidence. In such a case, the author may well be offering an opinion, rather than a fact.

If the author does provide evidence to support the correlation, then you, as an analytical reader, are obligated to evaluate the evidence yourself. Was there a research study that demonstrated the correlation? If so, who conducted the study? Was it a team of experts from FEMA, or was it a consulting firm that specializes in delivering disaster preparedness training? What disaster was studied? What type of training was conducted prior to the disaster?

Analytical readers also pay careful attention to the underlying logic of an argument. Logic follows certain rules; when authors deviate from those rules (either intentionally or unintentionally) the argument becomes less reliable. Deviations from the rules of logic are called “logical fallacies.” An example of a very common logical fallacy is the so-called “false cause” fallacy: the assumption that one event causes another simply because it occurred first:

“In 2007 the city of Laurel Pines installed 30 new high-intensity streetlamps in its downtown area. This action led to a 17% decrease in the rate of violent crime in the area over the next three years. Therefore, we should also install additional streetlamps in our downtown area in order to lower our crime rate.”

This is an instance of the false cause fallacy. The author did not prove that the installation of the streetlamps was the sole cause of the decreased crime rate. Perhaps, during the same time period, the city hired five new law enforcement officers, or launched a special crackdown on trouble spots in the downtown district. An analytical reader would expect the author to demonstrate, with credible evidence that the first action caused the second.

Conclusion: Analytical reading is not something we’re born knowing how to do. It has to be learned, and it takes time and effort. The time and effort are worth it, though, as we seek to make the best use of the tremendous amount of information we must handle in our personal and professional lives.