Explicit textual evidence definition3/11/2024 The same piece of information might be immensely valuable evidence for one research problem and totally irrelevant to another, even though it deals with the same person or event. Whether any piece of information is evidence depends upon the research question we seek to answer. ![]() If it doesn’t, then its very silence attests the likelihood of certain things. ![]() It’s the absence of what should happen under a given set of circumstances. Sherlock Holmes famously spoke of “the sound of the dog not barking.” Nothing could more graphically define negative evidence. Whatever role it plays, it carries no weight until and unless we combine it with other evidence to arrive at an answer or construct an argument for our conclusion. It might seem tangential although we can’t yet say how. It might weaken the direct evidence we want to believe. This indirect evidence might support direct evidence we have found. Much of the information we find does not provide an explicit answer to any problem we have defined, yet it can seem potentially relevant―especially if we are thoughtful researchers who watch for patterns and parallels within all resources that we use. It is then up to us to decide its veracity and its weight. But it specifically states something about our problem. It may not even provide an accurate answer. It may not provide as complete an answer as we would like. It plainly offers an answer to a specific research question. Direct EvidenceĪs the name implies, direct evidence is information that directly addresses the issue at hand. All three basic types can be used alone or in combination to provide “proof” of an identity, a kinship, a circumstance, or any other point critical to our research. At its core, evidence comes in three basic types: direct, indirect, and negative-the latter two being sometimes lumped together under the catchall label circumstantial. How do we do that? Step One: Understand the Various Types of EvidenceĬreating substance from the evidence we perceive, but others may not, requires us to understand the nature of evidence. That’s all it can be―until we make something concrete from it by processing it and molding it into a meaningful and convincing form. ![]() It’s only what we think certain information means. Information is also physical, visible, audible. Sources, by contrast, are physical we can touch them, see them, smell them, hear them. Because it is a mental construct, it rarely gives us the clear and simple answers that we seek.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |