The JRX Academy Research + Information Literacy Guide

You already encounter more information in a day than most people used to encounter in a month.

• ◆Books, teachers, family, friends.
• ◆Websites, news, social media, videos, podcasts.
• ◆AI tools and advertisements.
• ◆Government documents, studies, interviews, databases.
• ◆Community experience and your own observation.

The challenge is no longer only: Can I find information? It is increasingly: What should I trust? How much should I trust it? What should I verify?

Access is common now. Judgment is the rare skill.

Strong research begins with a useful question, not a topic.

Weak → stronger

• ◆Weak: Tell me about climate change. Stronger: How has sea-level rise affected coastal communities in Southwest Florida over the last 20 years?
• ◆Weak: Social media. Stronger: How does short-form social media influence how teenagers encounter news?

The move you are learning is: TOPIC → QUESTION → INVESTIGATION.

A topic gives you a pile. A question gives you a direction.

Different investigations need different kinds of questions. Choose the type that fits.

• ◆Descriptive — What is happening?
• ◆Explanatory — Why is it happening?
• ◆Comparative — How are these similar or different?
• ◆Causal — What appears to cause what?
• ◆Evaluative — How effective is something?
• ◆Historical — How did this develop?
• ◆Solution-oriented — What might improve the situation?
• ◆Interpretive — What does this evidence mean?

If your question type and your evidence do not match, the research will feel stuck even when you are working hard.

Before you search, run your question through five checks.

• ◆Is it clear?
• ◆Is it specific enough?
• ◆Can evidence help answer it?
• ◆Is it too broad?
• ◆Does it assume an answer before I research?

Then name the key terms you will need to investigate. Use the Research Question Builder tool below.

Before researching, capture your starting position honestly.

• ◆What do I currently think?
• ◆Why do I think that?
• ◆What evidence do I already have?
• ◆What might change my mind?

Know your starting position so you can notice when the evidence changes it.

Searching is a skill, not a reflex. Search with intention.

• ◆Identify keywords.
• ◆Use synonyms.
• ◆Search exact phrases.
• ◆Add dates.
• ◆Add a location.
• ◆Add an organization or institution.
• ◆Search for the original report.
• ◆Search for opposing perspectives.
• ◆Search for primary sources.

What words are most likely to lead me to the evidence I need?

Your first search may not be your best search.

SEARCH → LOOK AT RESULTS → LEARN NEW TERMS → REFINE → SEARCH AGAIN.

As you understand the topic better, you learn the vocabulary experts use. Those words open doors your first search could not.

Do not assume first result = best result. Search engines rank information using systems that do not always match academic quality.

Inspect every promising result for: source, author, title, date, relevance, organization, evidence, and purpose.

A search engine is not a source

Google or any other search engine helps you locate information. The engine itself is almost never the source. Identify the actual page, organization, author, report, or document — that is what you cite.

Different sources serve different purposes.

• ◆Books, journal articles, reports.
• ◆Government data and datasets.
• ◆Newspapers, magazines, websites, encyclopedias.
• ◆Interviews, speeches, photographs, videos, podcasts.
• ◆Social media posts and AI outputs.

The question is never only what type it is. The question is what that type can and cannot tell you.

A primary source is direct evidence from the person, event, time, or original investigation.

• ◆Diary, letter, interview.
• ◆Photograph, speech.
• ◆Law, court decision, meeting minutes.
• ◆Original survey, original dataset, scientific study.

Ask: What can this source tell me directly? What can it not tell me?

A secondary source analyzes, explains, interprets, or summarizes information from primary and other sources.

• ◆Textbook.
• ◆Biography.
• ◆Historical analysis.
• ◆Many news articles.
• ◆Review articles.
• ◆Documentaries.

Both primary and secondary sources can be useful. Strong research usually uses both and knows the difference.

Encyclopedias, reference guides, and general summaries are useful doorways.

• ◆Orientation.
• ◆Vocabulary.
• ◆Background.
• ◆Discovering better sources.

They may not be sufficient as final evidence for deeper research. Use them to get oriented, then follow the important claims to stronger sources.

Wikipedia is not useless. It is a doorway, not a destination.

Judge a source with more than one question. Nine questions, every time it matters.

• ◆WHO — Who created it?
• ◆WHAT — What exactly are they claiming?
• ◆WHEN — When was it created or updated?
• ◆WHERE — Where was it published?
• ◆WHY — Why was it created?
• ◆EVIDENCE — What supports the claim?
• ◆METHOD — How was the information produced?
• ◆CONTEXT — What might be missing?
• ◆CORROBORATION — Do other strong sources agree?

Ask who wrote or created this, what expertise or experience they have, whether they are clearly identified, and what organization they are connected to.

Then ask whether that relationship could affect the perspective.

Expertise increases relevance. Evidence still matters.

Where something was published gives you real information.

• ◆Academic journal.
• ◆Government agency.
• ◆University.
• ◆Established news organization.
• ◆Advocacy group.
• ◆Company.
• ◆Personal website.
• ◆Anonymous account or social platform.

Publication context provides information. It does not automatically prove truth or falsehood.

Some information changes quickly. Other information is historical.

• ◆When was this published?
• ◆Has the topic changed since?
• ◆Is a newer source needed?
• ◆Is the older source important because it documents the period?

Newer is not automatically better. Older is not automatically outdated. Context decides.

Ask why the source exists.

• ◆Inform.
• ◆Educate.
• ◆Persuade.
• ◆Sell.
• ◆Entertain.
• ◆Advocate.
• ◆Document.
• ◆Recruit.
• ◆Influence.

Purpose does not automatically make a source unreliable. It helps you understand how to read it.

Ask what evidence is actually provided.

• ◆Data.
• ◆Documents.
• ◆Quotations.
• ◆Experiments.
• ◆Observation.
• ◆Interviews.
• ◆Records.
• ◆Photographs.
• ◆References.
• ◆Examples.

Then ask the question most people skip: does the evidence actually support the claim?

A claim is something presented as true or likely true. Name it precisely before you judge it.

• ◆Factual.
• ◆Causal.
• ◆Interpretive.
• ◆Predictive.
• ◆Evaluative.
• ◆Normative.

Different claims require different kinds of evidence. A causal claim needs more than a factual one.

• ◆FACT — a claim that can be checked using evidence.
• ◆OPINION — a personal preference, judgment, or belief.
• ◆INTERPRETATION — an explanation of what evidence may mean.

Interpretation is not the same as opinion. Interpretation should still be judged by the quality of the reasoning and evidence behind it.

Some statements argue what should happen, what ought to be done, what matters, what is fair, good, or harmful.

Evidence can inform value judgments. Values also affect how people evaluate choices. Both are real, and naming which one you are making keeps your reasoning honest.

This connects directly to Law, Leadership, and Read the Field.

Bias is a tendency or perspective that can influence how information is selected, interpreted, or presented. Everyone can have biases.

• ◆What perspective may shape this source?
• ◆What information is emphasized?
• ◆What information is minimized?
• ◆What assumptions appear?
• ◆What interests may be involved?

Bias does not automatically mean false. It means read with awareness.

This part is as important as evaluating anyone else.

• ◆What do I want to be true?
• ◆What do I already believe?
• ◆Am I searching only for sources that agree with me?
• ◆What evidence would challenge my position?

Information literacy includes reading yourself.

Confirmation bias happens when we notice or favor information that supports what we already believe.

Counter it with two questions: What would the strongest disagreement with my current position say? What evidence would change my mind?

When a topic is contested, go looking for the strongest opposing argument — not the weakest version you can find.

• ◆Strongest claim.
• ◆Strongest evidence.
• ◆Strongest reasoning.
• ◆Important limitations.

Steelmanning

To steelman an argument means to represent the strongest reasonable version of it before responding.

Would someone who holds this position recognize my description as fair?

Use this especially for debates, civic issues, ethical questions, policy, and controversial topics. It is CO4 and intellectual humility in practice.

One source can tell you something. Multiple independent strong sources can increase confidence.

• ◆Do other reliable sources support this?
• ◆Are they independent?
• ◆Are they all repeating the same original claim?

Five websites repeating one unsupported statement are not five independent pieces of evidence.

Follow the chain backward wherever you can: article → report → study → dataset.

Ask: what is the original source?

This matters most for statistics, research findings, quotations, legal claims, and public statements.

Snippets are not sources

Do not rely on search-result snippets alone. Open the source and read enough context to verify the claim.

If a quotation matters, verify who said it, where, when, the original context, and the full wording where available.

Do not rely on quote graphics, memes, or unsourced posts as your evidence.

A number arrives looking finished. It usually is not.

• ◆Who collected the data?
• ◆How?
• ◆How many people or cases?
• ◆What population?
• ◆What time period?
• ◆What definitions were used?
• ◆What was excluded?
• ◆Compared with what?

A number can be accurate and still need context.

• ◆Percentage of what?
• ◆What is the starting number?
• ◆What is the comparison group?
• ◆Is a percentage change being confused with percentage points?

This connects to Mathematics + Problem Solving. A 100% increase from 2 cases is not the same story as a 100% increase from 2,000.

• ◆Mean or median?
• ◆What is the spread?
• ◆Are there outliers?
• ◆Could an average hide important differences?

An average describes a group. It does not describe every person in the group.

A graph is an argument made out of shapes. Inspect it before you accept it.

• ◆Axes.
• ◆Scale.
• ◆Labels.
• ◆Units.
• ◆Time period.
• ◆Missing data.
• ◆Visual distortion.

Read the graph before reading the conclusion.

Two things happening together does not automatically mean one caused the other.

• ◆What other variables might matter?
• ◆What evidence supports causation?
• ◆Was this an experiment or an observation?

You do not need advanced statistics to read a study usefully. You need to find its parts.

• ◆Research question.
• ◆Sample.
• ◆Method.
• ◆Variables.
• ◆Results.
• ◆Limitations.
• ◆Conclusion.

Start with the limitations section. Honest researchers tell you where their own work is weak.

Peer review means other knowledgeable people in the field evaluate a scholarly work before publication.

Peer review can strengthen quality control. It does not guarantee that every conclusion is correct.

• ◆Research can be challenged.
• ◆Replicated.
• ◆Revised.
• ◆Updated.

A sample is the group actually studied.

• ◆How large was it?
• ◆How was it selected?
• ◆Does it represent the population the claim is about?

There is no single universal good sample size. How the sample was chosen often matters more than how big it is.

An anecdote is an individual story or experience. Stories can reveal lived experience, possibilities, problems, and meaning.

But one story does not automatically establish how common something is.

Stories give depth. Data can help show pattern. Strong research may need both.

Lived experience

People who experience a system directly can provide important knowledge about conditions, effects, barriers, culture, and implementation.

Lived experience should not be dismissed because it is not a formal study. It also does not automatically answer every broader empirical question. This matters deeply in Community Action.

Before

• ◆Identify purpose.
• ◆Research the person or topic.
• ◆Prepare open questions.
• ◆Ask permission where appropriate.
• ◆Plan recording or notes.

During

• ◆Listen.
• ◆Follow up.
• ◆Avoid interrupting.
• ◆Clarify.
• ◆Distinguish what was actually said from what you assumed.

After

• ◆Organize notes.
• ◆Verify quotations.
• ◆Identify themes.
• ◆Preserve context.

Questions can influence answers. That is not a trick; it is how language works.

• ◆Is the question clear?
• ◆Is it leading?
• ◆Who was asked?
• ◆How were participants selected?
• ◆How many responded?
• ◆What does the survey actually represent?

Observation can be evidence — if you keep it separate from your explanation of it.

• ◆Observation: Seven people left before the meeting ended.
• ◆Interpretation: They were bored.

The interpretation may or may not be correct. Write down what you saw first, then what you think it means.

Know what kind of piece you are reading before you judge it.

• ◆News reporting.
• ◆Analysis.
• ◆Opinion.
• ◆Editorial.
• ◆Commentary.

Each one makes different promises about evidence. Expect the right thing from the right form.

Headlines

Read past the headline. Ask whether the article supports it, whether nuance is missing, whether it overstates, and what the underlying evidence is.

Social platforms can spread useful information, eyewitness evidence, and real expertise — and also misinformation, rumor, propaganda, advertising, and decontextualized clips, at the same speed.

Before sharing: STOP → CHECK → TRACE → VERIFY → DECIDE.

Virality

Likes, views, shares, and comments measure attention. They do not measure truth.

Popular does not mean accurate.

• ◆Misinformation — incorrect or misleading information shared regardless of whether the person intended harm.
• ◆Disinformation — false or misleading information deliberately created or shared to deceive.
• ◆Propaganda — communication designed to shape attitudes or behavior, often through selective or emotionally powerful messaging.

Focus on evaluating the information rather than assuming intent without evidence.

Reading propaganda

• ◆What is the goal?
• ◆Who is the audience?
• ◆What emotions are being activated?
• ◆What information is included?
• ◆What is omitted?
• ◆What evidence is available?

Strong emotion can be completely appropriate. Something may deserve your anger.

But highly emotional content should trigger more awareness, not less.

• ◆Is this making me angry before I have enough information?
• ◆Afraid?
• ◆Excited?
• ◆Vindicated?
• ◆Does that emotion make me more likely to share without checking?

Images

• ◆Where did this image come from?
• ◆When was it taken?
• ◆Where?
• ◆Is the caption accurate?
• ◆Could it be old, edited, generated, or shown without context?

Video

• ◆Is this the full clip?
• ◆What happened before?
• ◆What happened after?
• ◆Who uploaded it?
• ◆Is the date correct?
• ◆Has it been edited?

Deepfakes + synthetic media

AI can create realistic images, voices, video, and text. Do not trust media because it looks or sounds real.

Realistic is not the same as verified.

AI can genuinely help you research.

• ◆Brainstorm research questions.
• ◆Generate keywords.
• ◆Explain vocabulary.
• ◆Summarize concepts.
• ◆Identify possible sources.
• ◆Compare viewpoints.
• ◆Organize notes.
• ◆Create practice questions.

AI can also invent sources, invent quotations, give outdated information, misrepresent research, oversimplify, and sound confident while being wrong.

AI can help you search your thinking. It should not become your evidence automatically.

Before using an important AI-generated claim:

• ◆Can I trace this to a real source?
• ◆Is the source trustworthy?
• ◆Does the source actually say what the AI claims?
• ◆Is the information current enough?
• ◆Can I understand it myself?

AI + citations

Do not include a source simply because AI provided a citation. Open it. Read it. Verify it.

Cite the source you actually used.

Strong information sometimes sits behind library databases, subscriptions, or institutional access.

• ◆Use school resources.
• ◆Use the public library.
• ◆Ask your Academic Specialist.
• ◆Look for legitimate open-access versions.

Ask for access properly. Do not bypass restrictions improperly — that is an integrity question, not a research shortcut.

Organized notes are what separates research from re-reading.

Each important note should preserve:

• ◆Source.
• ◆Key idea.
• ◆Quotation if exact wording matters.
• ◆Page or location where relevant.
• ◆Your own interpretation.
• ◆Possible use.

Confusion later is almost always caused by a note you did not finish now.

Track every source by type, quality, perspective, evidence, usefulness, and status.

• ◆FOUND.
• ◆READ.
• ◆VERIFIED.
• ◆USED.
• ◆REJECTED.

Rejecting a source

Finding a source does not mean you must use it.

• ◆Unsupported claims.
• ◆Wrong topic.
• ◆Outdated information.
• ◆Unclear authorship.
• ◆Misleading methodology.
• ◆Duplicate information.
• ◆A stronger source is available.

Research includes deciding what does not belong.

Weak research reads like a list: Source 1 says… Source 2 says… Source 3 says…

Organize your evidence around questions, themes, claims, patterns, and disagreements instead.

Research becomes stronger when sources begin talking to each other.

Synthesis means combining information from multiple sources to build a larger understanding.

• ◆Where do sources agree?
• ◆Where do they disagree?
• ◆What pattern appears?
• ◆What explanations compete?
• ◆What evidence is strongest?
• ◆What remains uncertain?

Source A + Source B + Source C → my evidence-based understanding.

A conclusion should match the strength of the evidence. Your language should show that.

• ◆The evidence strongly suggests…
• ◆The available evidence indicates…
• ◆The evidence is mixed…
• ◆I found limited evidence…
• ◆I cannot conclude yet…

“I do not know yet” can be an intellectually strong conclusion.

• ◆LOW CONFIDENCE — evidence is limited, weak, old, conflicting, or incomplete.
• ◆MODERATE CONFIDENCE — several useful sources support the conclusion, but important uncertainty remains.
• ◆HIGH CONFIDENCE — multiple strong, relevant, independent sources support the conclusion.

Never imply certainty your research cannot support.

Name what is unsettled instead of smoothing it over.

• ◆What do we know?
• ◆What do we think?
• ◆What remains disputed?
• ◆What is missing?
• ◆What might change the conclusion?

Strong researchers do not hide uncertainty. They describe it accurately.

Citations exist for credit, transparency, verification, academic integrity, and to help readers follow your evidence.

Different fields use different systems — MLA, APA, Chicago, and others. Follow the format your course or project requires.

Paraphrasing

• ◆Understand the source.
• ◆Look away.
• ◆Explain the idea in your own words.
• ◆Compare for accuracy.
• ◆Cite when required.

Changing a few words is not paraphrasing. This connects to Writing + Communication.

Quoting

Quote when exact wording matters. Quote accurately, preserve context, cite, and explain why the quote matters. Do not build research entirely from quotations.

Plagiarism means presenting another person’s words, ideas, or work as your own without appropriate acknowledgment.

Prevent it with systems, not willpower:

• ◆Source tracking.
• ◆Quotation marks as you take notes.
• ◆Real paraphrasing.
• ◆Citation.
• ◆Organized notes.
• ◆Transparent AI use where required.

Do not fabricate data, invent quotations, alter evidence dishonestly, misrepresent participants, or hide evidence simply because it challenges your conclusion.

What does honesty require here?

This is HEART applied to information.

If you research real people or communities, think before you collect.

• ◆Permission.
• ◆Privacy.
• ◆Sensitive information.
• ◆Photographs and recordings.
• ◆Names.
• ◆Minors.
• ◆Public versus private settings.

This connects to Community Action and Digital Life.

Learn with people, not only about people.

• ◆Who has lived experience?
• ◆Who is usually left out of the sources?
• ◆Whose perspective is missing?
• ◆What community knowledge matters?
• ◆How can I represent people accurately and respectfully?

Every field can be investigated with the same set of questions.

• ◆Economics → Prosperity
• ◆Education → Knowledge
• ◆Entertainment → Joy
• ◆Labor → Service
• ◆Law → Justice
• ◆Politics → Truth
• ◆Religion → Peace
• ◆War → Love

Field research questions

• ◆Who has power?
• ◆Who makes decisions?
• ◆What rules exist?
• ◆Where do resources move?
• ◆What information shapes decisions?
• ◆What history matters?
• ◆Who benefits?
• ◆Who carries costs?
• ◆What outcomes are visible?
• ◆What is missing?

Before acting on a Quest, ask what you need to know first.

• ◆Background research.
• ◆Expert input.
• ◆Data.
• ◆Community listening.
• ◆Comparison.
• ◆Legal or safety information.
• ◆Technical information.

Research should improve action, not delay it forever.

Preserve the trail, not only the final answer.

• ◆Research question.
• ◆Keyword strategy.
• ◆Source tracker.
• ◆Notes and annotated sources.
• ◆Synthesis matrix.
• ◆Interview notes and data.
• ◆Drafts and citations.
• ◆Conclusion and reflection.

Learning should leave a trail.

• ◆HUMILITY — be willing to discover that your first belief was incomplete.
• ◆EXCELLENCE — use strong sources and careful reasoning.
• ◆ASSERTIVENESS — ask difficult questions.
• ◆RESPECT — represent people, evidence, and opposing views accurately.
• ◆TRUST — do not fabricate, distort, or hide evidence.

• ◆AWARENESS — what do I know, assume, and still need to learn?
• ◆EXPRESSION — can I clearly state the question and the findings?
• ◆INTENTION & IMPACT — why am I researching this, and how might the conclusions be used?
• ◆ORGANIZATION — how will I manage sources, evidence, and notes?
• ◆UNITY — how do different sources and perspectives fit into a larger understanding?

• ◆IDENTITY — how do my experiences affect what I notice?
• ◆PURPOSE — why does this question matter?
• ◆VALUES — what principles guide how I investigate?
• ◆SYSTEMS — what systems shape the issue?
• ◆ENVIRONMENTS — what context affects the evidence?
• ◆RELATIONSHIPS — who knows something important about this?
• ◆LEGACY — what knowledge am I creating or preserving for others?

Research at this stage is curiosity with a record.

• ◆Curiosity and asking questions.
• ◆Observation.
• ◆Books.
• ◆Trusted adults.
• ◆Pictures.
• ◆Simple source comparison.
• ◆Telling where information came from.

Core questions

• ◆What do you want to know?
• ◆How could we find out?
• ◆Who might know?
• ◆What did you observe?
• ◆Where did this information come from?

• ◆Research questions and keywords.
• ◆Source types, author, and date.
• ◆Evidence and bias.
• ◆Primary and secondary sources.
• ◆Note-taking and citation.
• ◆Comparison and synthesis.
• ◆Responsible AI use.

The shift here is independence: you should increasingly verify things yourself instead of waiting to be told what is true.

Now research connects to consequence.

• ◆Advanced academics and college.
• ◆Trades and certifications.
• ◆Entrepreneurship and employment.
• ◆Journalism and public policy.
• ◆Community action and civic participation.
• ◆Professional decisions and independent research.

Can I find and judge the information required by my next opportunity?

Your Academic Specialist may use this guide with you to name an actual research capability — not a vague impression.

• ◆Build better research questions.
• ◆Improve search strategy.
• ◆Distinguish source types.
• ◆Evaluate evidence.
• ◆Identify bias.
• ◆Compare sources.
• ◆Verify claims.
• ◆Take organized notes.
• ◆Synthesize across sources.
• ◆Cite correctly.
• ◆Verify AI-generated claims.

Not “improve research.” Name the capability.