OF ARGUMENTS
AND REFERENCES
ALEXIS B. ROMERO, M.A.
UST Journalism Department
The Philippine Star
OUTLINE
Evaluating reference materials
Developing the argument
EVALUATING SOURCES
Uses of sources
Read for a problem
- Read to formulate a problem or a research question
- Look for claims that puzzle you, seem inaccurate or simplistic, or for data that others have ignored
- Skim conclusions to journal articles and look for unresolved issues
Read for an argument
- Research reports rarely original in terms of logic
- Use source to borrow logic of its argument, not its specific substance (i.e. plagiarism)
- Use arguments as models; record larger claims; note the kind of evidence used as support
Read for evidence
- Find data useful as evidence to support a claim
- Report evidence as completely and accurately as possible and cite source fully; locate original source
- You don’t have to agree with the conclusions in a source to use its data
(Sources: Booth et. al., 2003)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Types of sources
Primary Secondary Tertiary
- Materials you write directly about - Materials or references - Books, and articles based
based on primary sources on secondary sources
- The “raw data”
- e.g. press statements, text of - Interpretations of primary - Synthesize and explain
contracts, text of laws, treaties sources or data research in a field usually
- e.g. books, research for a popular audience
reports - Can help in early stage of
research but provide weak
support for new claims
(Sources: Booth et. al., 2003; Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
The Resource Pyramid
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Characteristics of Reliable Sources
The source is published by a reputable press
- University presses, commercial presses with strong reputation (e.g. Sage, Taylor & Francis)
Publisher uses peer reviews for everything it publishes
- Materials reviewed and approved for publication by independent experts in the field
The author is a reputable scholar
- Look for credentials of authors in books and journals; the internet can provide more information
The source is current
- Up-to-date sources discuss new developments but what counts as current depends on the
nature of the field (e.g. computer science vs. philosophy)
(Sources: Booth et. al., 2003)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Looking at Source Citations
1. Author
- What are the author’s credentials (educational background, past writings, area of expertise,
experiences related to the subject matter)?
- Has an authority on the subject mentioned this author? Have you seen his / her name cited
in other sources?
- What is the author’s institutional affiliation? What are the goals of this institution or
organization? Might this group be biased in some way?
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Looking at Source Citations
2. Date of Publication
- When was the source published?
- Is the source current or out-of-date for your topic? (Topics of continuing rapid development
demand more current information)
- Is the source a revision of an earlier version? (If so, it indicates that the material is not only
more current but also valuable enough to revise)
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Looking at Source Citations
3. Publisher / Producer
- Is the publisher reputable?
- If the publisher is an institution or agency, is this group recognized as an authority in
the field?
- Is the publisher likely to be an appropriate one for this kind of information? Or might this
group have a particular bias on the topic (e.g. propaganda material, publicity material)?
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Looking at Source Citations
4. Medium of Publication
- Is the article found in a scholarly journal? A popular magazine? A reputable newspaper?
A disreputable tabloid?
- Might the source be too specialized or too popular to be useful? (Note: It depends on the
nature of the research or the paper you are doing)
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Additional guidelines for online references
Educational or governmental sources rather than commercial ones
- The .com that follows a server name signifies a commercial site; .edu for educational sites;
.gov for government websites; .org for groups
Authored documents rather than non-authored ones
- Choose sites that present author’s credentials or whose authors are affiliated with reputable
institutions or organizations
Documents available in print rather than those available only online
- Publication in more than one medium can indicate more credibility
Recently updated websites
Websites that document their claims
- Have bibliography; provide links to their sources
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Assessing content
1. Intended audience
- Specialized or general audience?
- Is the source too elementary? Too advanced o technical? Just right for your needs? The
author’s tone, style, level of information, and assumptions about the reader will tell you this
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Assessing content
2. Reasoning
- Does the content consist mainly of fact, opinion, or propaganda?
- Is the author’s point of view objective and impartial? Is the language free from
emotion-arousing words and bias?
- If the author presents opinions, do the arguments reflect sound reasoning? Are there faults
in logic such as hasty generalizations or circular reasoning?
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
EVALUATING SOURCES
Assessing content
3. Coverage
- Does the information appear to be well-researched? Does the author cite a number of
sources to validate the evidence presented? Does the author clearly present sources for any
facts offered?
- Is the coverage comprehensive? Can you find some of the same information elsewhere to
cross-check the information given?
- Does the author use a good mix of primary and secondary sources?
- Does the publication update other sources or add new information to other materials
you’ve read?
(Source: Perfecto et al., 2015)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
The need for a tentative argument
- A tentative argument allows you to focus on sources that contribute to your study
- A tentative argument helps provide direction to your research
- To create a tentative argument, you will have to read, view, listen, converse, write,
experiment, and engage your different sources
- Engaging your different sources will help you formulate an informed argument and
look for reasons and evidence to support it.
- Having a tentative argument helps you strategize on questions that you will ask
your informants or the aspects that you will look for in your text
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
Claim
Reason
Evidence
Acknowledgement and response to counterarguments
Warrant
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
The principle that connects the reason and claim is…
WARRANT
I claim that… … because of this reason… … which is based on this evidence…
CLAIM REASON EVIDENCE
Acknowledging these questions, objections, and
alternatives, and responding to them with these arguments…
COUNTERARGUMENT AND RESPONSE
(Sources: Booth et. al., 2003; Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
1. CLAIM
- The answer to your research question; also called a thesis statement
- Usually summarizes the point you hope readers will understand after
reading your paper
- Gives a sense of direction to your study
- Should be sound, specific, and significant
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
1. CLAIM
Sound
- You should have reasons to back your claim
- Should be tested and testable
- Tempered with reason, evidence and rigorous methods
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
1. CLAIM
Specific
- Claim should be grounded on something
- Makes the research substantive
- Avoid vague words (e.g. ‘good,’ ‘immoral,’ ‘happy’)
- Some claims may be too specific and therefore become limiting; becomes an evidence
or a fact rather than a claim
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
1. CLAIM
Too specific:
Watching “TV Patrol” allowed residents of Barangay 531 in Sampaloc,
Manila to become aware of the quarantine pass requirement imposed
by the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging
Infectious Diseases.
Better:
Watching primetime news programs increased the awareness of Metro
Manila residents of the quarantine restrictions imposed by the
government
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
1. CLAIM
Significant
- Say something or show an example that adds new knowledge or shifts some
people’s perspectives
- Should ask readers to at least reconsider their previous understanding of the topic
- You may also specify what the status quo is so your argument can be richly articulated;
you may use orientors like ‘even as’ and ‘although’
- It is not necessary that all research will have original ideas. It’s enough that your
research encourages people to question their original assumptions
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
1. CLAIM
Significant:
Although international groups view Rappler president Maria Ressa as
the face of the besieged Philippine press, journalists in the provinces
who are working for local media outlets are usually the ones who are
more vulnerable to violent threats
Not significant:
The shutdown of ABS-CBN has sparked outrage and has triggered
calls to resist efforts to intimidate and silence the press
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
2. REASON
- Ideas that support a claim, making the claim more than just an assertion or opinion
- Usually answers the question ‘What makes you assert that claim?’
- Can be linked to the claim with the word ‘because’
- General ideas that need to be backed by evidence
- Should be cohesive and coherent i.e. they have to be related to claims and their
logic has to follow a certain structure
- Write reasons that connect with and can flow naturally from each other
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
3. EVIDENCE
- Observations, statistics, interviews, expert opinions, case studies, narratives, interpretations,
or empirical studies that provide the “hard reality” backing your reasons
- Proof that there are clear instances or observations to support your reasons
- Seek different sources of evidence for your research; explore alternative evidence sources as
they may give important nuances to complex problems and solutions
- Consider the nature of your research question when thinking of evidence to support your claim
- Should be credible, precise, and representative
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
3. EVIDENCE
Credible
- Experts / reading material should be
knowledgeable about the subject
- Look for journal articles that have been peer
reviewed rigorously rather than websites that
did not undergo editing or are edited by non
experts (e.g. wikis)
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
3. EVIDENCE
Precise
- Quantify or qualify your sources (e.g. how
much? What were the indicators?)
- Looking for precision in sources can help a
researcher arrive at a stronger and more
persuasive argument
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
3. EVIDENCE
Representative
- Be clear about the scope of your research and
work with a substantial number of informants,
texts or sources (depends on the topic and
evidence available)
- Hard to make compelling arguments if the pieces
of evidence are not diverse or are too few
(Based on Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
3. EVIDENCE
TV violence can have harmful psychological effects on children (claim) because those
exposed to large amounts of it tend to adopt the values of what they see (reason). Their
constant exposure to violent images makes them unable to distinguish fantasy from reality
(reason). Smith (1997) found that children ages 5-9 who watched more than three hours of
violent television a day were 25 percent more likely to say that most of what they saw on
television was “really happening (evidence).”
(Source: Booth et. al., 2003)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
4. COUNTERARGUMENTS
- Acknowledge the different concerns that others will have about your line of argumentation
- As you learn of others’ possible arguments against your claim, refashion your claim with
these comments in the back of your mind; make the conscious effort to change your original claim
- When readers provide alternative reasons, acknowledge the salience of those options and
consider how your research responds to those alternatives (i.e. rebuttal)
- Counterarguments will let your readers know that you acknowledge their thoughts and
skepticism. By doing so, you are strengthening your argument, recognizing the limits of your
present research, and respecting the important contributions of your readers
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
4. COUNTERARGUMENTS
Possible responses
State that your study focused on possibly the most decisive factor in a phenomenon
Show new and more credible data that will back your claim
State that your perspective and that of the other person can be integrated or reconciled
Challenge the reasons cited by those who offered the counterargument
Show that the difference is more of a nuance than a complete opposition (i.e. different ways of looking at things)
Find more sources to make your study more credible
Quantify or qualify your definitions; be clear about the scope of your research and cite data to justify it
Defend the method you used or try to mix your method and the one proposed by your reader
Gather more evidence
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Parts of an Argument
5. WARRANT
- Common-sense generalization about the world that everyone considers as self evident
- Connects the reason and claim to each other
- A lot of studies do not have an explicit warrant but it should be understood because it can
convince readers about the relevance of your reasons to your claim
- Helps clarify the connection between your reasons and your claim
- Example: ‘Batang Quiapo’ has the strongest following among primetime programs because it
ranked number one in the AGB Nielsen ratings.
- Warrant: AGB Nielsen is an established name in entertainment surveys so we can trust its
data on TV ratings
(Source: Booth et. al., 2003; Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Practical tips
Write your research question on a sheet of paper and think
of the sources available for you to answer this question
Search for common themes and answers that the sources
are providing. Make a claim out of the initial answers from
your sources. Make sure the claim is sound, specific and
significant
For each reason, write the methods, data or source that
can give credence to your reasons
Enumerate possible counterarguments and be prepared to
answer them
(Source: Trinidad, 2018)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Packaging your argument
Apply the views of scholars in local setting but be aware
of the contexts in which the arguments were formulated
Expand / contribute your views on existing ideas; Blend
the ideas of scholars with that of other experts
Qualify your argument. Choose concepts of the idea that
are applicable to ground realities
Do not be afraid to disagree. Cite reasons why that idea
or theory is not applicable to your setting
Use your own terms or words but acknowledge the
basis of your views; Do not be afraid to play with words
(e.g. 'Blow up the newsroom;‘ ‘Showbization;’ Dutertization)
DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
Arguments serve as…
Angle of Review of Related Literature – holds everything together, gives focus
Direction provider – leads to problem questions; related ;it as basis actual data
gathering provides concrete proof; from general to specific
Bridge between theory / concepts and realities / empirical data
Reasons for studying – why it deserves to be pursued; reflects
research gaps, realities
THE THINK PIECE
What you will do
- Think of a topic
- Look for references
- Narrow down topic / Find a blankspot
- Look for references again
- Develop argument based on the blankspot
- React to blankspot / topic itself
- Write a coherent, well-argued essay that will serve as a draft related literature
- State research gap future studies can fill (creating a research space or CARS)