Chapter 7: Weed Science Research
7.2 What Makes a Good Resource on Research Findings?
When thinking about weed science research in the United States, there are three general sectors that do this type of work: United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), land grant universities and private companies. While each are striving to meet the food, feed, fiber and energy needs of the world, they do differ slightly in their specific objectives. For the USDA, national priorities have been established and funding has been provided for research to address specific needs that have a larger national impact (or potential impact, when researching basic science topics).
At a land grant university, research is focused on meeting the needs of the producers in their state – both addressing basic science, as well as direct field applications. University professors are protected by academic freedom, which means they can research ideas even if doing so could expose flaws in an otherwise generally accepted point of view. For example, when RoundUp Ready soybeans first came out, there was a university that examined whether or not the Round Up Ready soybean yields from those varieties were equal to that of soybean varieties that lacked this gene, but were otherwise genetically the same. It turned out the yields were not equal. There was actually some yield drag discovered in that early RoundUp Ready event. Academic freedom rights allowed the researchers’ jobs to be secure and for them to publish the results for others to see, even though it was somewhat controversial at the time. The drawbacks of that early soybean event were addressed by the companies and later the yields were equivalent.
Research at a private company is focused on addressing the needs of their customers by providing top products, while at the same time maintaining a profit margin for the company so that it can stay in business.
There are other groups, whose intent may be to create fear and controversy, just for the sake of gaining readership and/or selling products.
Therefore, as you read various information you need to keep in mind the unique perspective and immediate objectives of the content author. Here are a few questions to ask when reading information:
- What is the credibility of the information authors? Do they have experience and knowledge in this area?
- What is the motivation of the authors? Are they coming from an unbiased position or are they selling a product? Do they want to help people or create fear?
- What does the author have at stake, if they are wrong? If the consequences are high if the author is wrong (ie harming the reputation of the university or company), then it is more likely the research was of higher quality and the information is presented accurately.
- Has material been reviewed by someone else?
- Of all the available information, peer- reviewed journal articles are the most reliable. University researchers typically share their latest research findings this way. Peer-reviewed articles have gone through an intensive review where at least three other people also working in that research area review the paper, the experimental methods, and data analysis to find any gaps or misdirected conclusions. It is common for papers to be rejected or returned for revision. Papers undergo much scrutiny and quality is expected to be high for publication. Extension publications are often written based on the research findings and can be easier to read. They often have been reviewed as well, to ensure accuracy.
A general guideline when searching the internet for any information is to view a minimum of three different sources. If all three are saying the same basic information, then you can be fairly confident of the message. The gold standard of information is the peer-reviewed literature, which is reported directly from the actual research. It is important to realize that science is in constant motion, discovering new things and asking new questions, but the peer-reviewed articles are an accurate reflection based on the scientific knowledge available at that particular time.
Review and Reflection