Where Research Begins

1. Research Begins Within: Start with introspection, not external topics.

The research process begins before you know what you are researching.

Traditional research guides often assume you already know your passion or question, focusing instead on outlining, drafting, and citing. This overlooks the most challenging initial step: figuring out what deeply matters to you. The authors learned this the hard way when their students struggled to start, lacking a core question or problem despite having general interests.

Self-Centered Research is a manifesto for starting exactly where you are, maintaining close contact with your instincts, curiosities, and biases. It's an ethic of acknowledging your abilities and limitations, trusting your inner voice even when it feels naive. This mindset presumes that understanding your own concerns is the fastest way to discover a research problem meaningful to both you and the world.

Looking outside yourself for validation or letting others set your agenda is a common trap. Research truly begins with the researcher identifying the problem they carry inside them. This book provides techniques and a philosophy to help you find this internal center, ensuring your project is rooted in something that genuinely matters to you first.

2. Topics Aren't Enough: Move beyond broad subjects to specific questions.

a topic is not a question.

Topics are useful for suggesting a scope of inquiry and providing a sense of identity (e.g., "Soviet history," "environmental history"). However, they are immense, abstract categories that don't tell you what to do or why it matters to you. A topic like "Harlem Renaissance" could lead to studies on urban migration, poetry, or housing markets – vastly different interests.

The "Narrow-Down-Your-Topic Trap" is a common pitfall. Simply making a topic more discrete (e.g., "Soviet economic history in the 1930s") still doesn't provide direction or explain your motivation. You can't narrow your way out of Topic Land because a narrow topic still doesn't tell you the how and why.

Questions force self-reckoning. Unlike topics, questions are sentences that indicate an area of curiosity and suggest how you might satisfy it. They have potential answers and raise more specific, related questions. Every question you ask is a piece of "self-evidence" about your intellectual, emotional, and personal motivations, helping you move from vague interest to a specific, generative inquiry.

3. Listen to Your Gut: Use instincts like excitement and boredom as guides.

whenever your mind takes notice of something— anything— you can be certain that there is a question there, even if you are not sure what that question is.

Self-observation is key. Your instincts, even subtle ones, provide valuable clues about your underlying concerns. When scanning search results or sources, pay attention to what makes you pause, quickens your pulse, or simply catches your eye – however small or seemingly insignificant. This "noticing what you are noticing" reveals potential questions.

Boredom is an active sentiment. Don't dismiss things that bore you. Boredom is not passive disinterest but an active rejection, offering self-evidence about what you don't care about regarding your topic. Understanding your dislikes accelerates the process of figuring out what you do care about. Ask yourself:

• What about this topic bores me?
• Which "obvious" subtopics repel me?
• Why do I feel this aversion?

Generate specific questions. Use your observations of both attraction and repulsion to brainstorm a minimum of twenty specific, fact-focused questions. Avoid grand, abstract questions about "meaning" or "significance" at this stage. Small, precise questions about facts prepare you for bigger questions later and can unexpectedly lead your research in new directions.

4. Educate Your Questions: Use sources to refine what you ask, not just answer it.

primary sources alert you the existence of other primary sources, exposure to which helps you ask more mature questions about your subject.

Research is iterative. You need questions to do research, but you also need research to generate better questions. In the early stage, the goal isn't answering questions, but refining existing ones and generating new, more developed ones by engaging with sources.

Avoid anachronistic keywords. Your initial search terms might use present-day language that wasn't used in the past or other places (e.g., "artificial intelligence" before the 1980s, "African American" before the 1980s). Primary sources reveal the language actually used, providing new keywords for more effective searches. Techniques include:

• Exploring metadata tags in databases
• Looking for self-reflexive sources (like historical dictionaries)
• Tracking your searches and keywords systematically

Stress-test your questions. Refine your questions by running diagnostic tests on their language (punctuation, adjectives, collective nouns, verbs) to ensure they are specific, unprejudiced, and don't presume outcomes. The best questions are clear, precise, jargon-free, rooted in verifiable data, indifferent to the outcome, and clear about the subject.

5. Embrace Your Assumptions: Make biases visible; they fuel inquiry.

Your assumptions are fuel to be consumed.

You are not a blank slate. You approach research with assumptions, which are natural and even good; they are why you found the topic interesting and the questions relevant. Instead of viewing assumptions as shameful obstacles, make them visible and vulnerable. They are the "wind in your sails," helping you notice things and generating questions when your expectations aren't met.

Make assumptions visible. Review your questions and list the assumptions underlying each one. Categorize them:

• Assumptions to work with for now
• Assumptions to discard right away
• Assumptions you are unsure or ambivalent about

Use assumptions productively. Justify your categorization choices. For assumptions to discard, try to rephrase the question so it's not based on weak premises. For ambivalent assumptions, flag them for later review as your research deepens. This process brings invisible influences on your thinking to the surface.

6. Find Your Problem: Identify the core, enduring concern driving your questions.

A problem is a nagging presence within you— one that disturbs, bothers, and unsettles you, but also attracts, compels, and keeps you coming back.

Distinguish problem from curiosity. While you have many curiosities, a problem is an enduring concern that follows you around, generating interconnected questions. It's something that calls out for you to try to solve it, regardless of your specific field or topic.

Connect your questions. Lay out all your specific, factual questions. Ask yourself: What are the shared concerns connecting these questions? Step outside yourself and speculate on the deeper questions linking the small ones. Write down these higher-level questions.

Identify the underlying pattern. Analyze the patterns among your questions. What motivates your search for these particular facts? Which questions are most compelling? This process helps you identify the coherent whole – your Problem. It determines which questions you ask, guides your inquiry, and shapes the story you'll eventually tell.

7. Design a Personal Project: Match your project to your resources and temperament.

Project planning involves self-assessment and visualization.

From problem to project. Having identified your Problem, you must now design a viable project considering your available resources. This involves more than logistics; it requires self-assessment and visualization of the finished product.

Assess material factors. Take stock of practical constraints and personal attributes:

• Time and deadlines
• Funding availability
• Writing speed and work habits
• Family responsibilities
• Access to sources (archives, databases, people)
• Risk tolerance and comfort levels
• Abilities and skill sets (languages, technical skills)
• Human subjects considerations
• Personality (introvert/extrovert, preferred work environment)

Create a decision matrix. List potential factors impacting your project's success. Categorize each as positive/negative and high/medium/low impact. Use this matrix to assess the compatibility between your envisioned project and yourself. Adjust your research questions or project scope accordingly.

Develop a Plan B. Be ready to pivot if your initial plan is unfeasible.

• Scenario 1: Same Problem, Different Case. If the specific case (e.g., Black Lives Matter) is too difficult given constraints, find another case (e.g., Civil Rights Movement communication) that allows you to pursue the same core Problem (e.g., technologically mediated communication during crises).
• Scenario 2: Same Topic, Different Project. If your temperament (e.g., deep introversion) makes a certain type of research (e.g., extensive ethnographic fieldwork) unsuitable, find a different way to approach the topic or Problem that fits your personality better.

Being realistic doesn't mean abandoning your Problem; it means finding the right path for you to pursue it.

8. Discover Your Collective: Find others troubled by your specific problem, across fields.

Problem Collective is a concept for envisioning the various problem-centric intellectual connections and affiliations we can discover and create during the research process.

You're not alone. Other researchers, past and present, are also disturbed by your Problem, regardless of their specific topic or field (history, philosophy, art, engineering, etc.). Finding these kindred spirits – your Problem Collective – provides validation, new questions, vocabulary, perspectives, techniques, and a sense of community.

Distinguish problem from case. Use exercises like "Change One Variable" on your own question to identify which components (time, place, agent, object) are non-negotiable to your interest. This reveals the core Problem that transcends specific cases. For example, your interest might be in "vulnerability" (the Problem) rather than just "child abuse in Seattle" (a case).

Search for your Collective. Use your refined understanding of your Problem to search for secondary sources beyond your immediate topic or field. Read these sources not just for their arguments, but to see if they resonate with your core concern. Pay attention to the language they use to describe their motivations.

Follow the breadcrumbs. Once you find one member of your Collective, explore their footnotes, endnotes, and bibliographies. These sources will lead you to other members, regardless of their topic. Repeat this process, asking: What does this author call my Problem? What vocabulary do they use? This helps you understand how your Problem is articulated and explored by others.

9. Navigate Your Field: Understand the diverse problems within your discipline.

Identify the different Problem Collectives within your Field and you’ll understand better how your Field works, and how to make your Field work for you.

Fields find you. Unlike Problem Collectives, which you discover through shared concerns, fields are often assigned to you (e.g., your department, your degree). Fields are organized by topic and scope, with institutional structures like journals, conferences, and funding bodies. While useful for finding topical resources, they can also create blind spots and encourage conformity.

Fields contain Problem Collectives. View your field not as a collection of subtopics, but as an assortment of researchers belonging to various Problem Collectives. This mindset allows you to leverage the field's resources without getting trapped in narrow topical silos.

Reimagine the literature review. Instead of just summarizing studies on your topic, read your field for their problems. Understand the different agendas and values that members of other collectives bring to your shared topic. Ask: What's their Problem? How might their work, driven by a different problem, inform mine? This approach makes engaging with the literature more dynamic and helps you see your own Problem from new angles.

Engage critically and fairly. When evaluating sources in your field, be skeptical but fair. Focus on the author's concerns and what they were trying to achieve, not just how their work relates to your specific project. This respectful engagement helps you understand the diverse intellectual landscape of your field and identify which parts are most useful to you while remaining centered on your Problem.

10. Write for Your Audience: Translate your problem for both Collective and Field.

Make your Problem their Problem.

Rewrite for your Collective. Your Problem Collective members share your core concern but may know nothing about your specific topic, time period, or field's jargon. Rewrite your research description (like a proposal draft) to eliminate insider language:

• Replace acronyms and shorthand with full names/descriptions.
• Define technical terms or replace them with lay language.
• Explain events and concepts clearly, providing necessary context.
• Remove vague or judgmental adjectives/adverbs.
  The goal is clarity and comprehensibility, allowing fellow Collective members to understand your Problem and offer relevant insights.

Rewrite for your Field. Writing for your field requires a different translation. Field members share your topic but may not share your specific Problem. Engage with the aspects of your topic that are important to them, even if they seem less compelling to you. This demonstrates respect for their agendas and can lead to productive friction.

Engagement transforms you. Seriously engaging with areas of your topic that initially bore you can subtly change your perspective. You might begin to see these issues through the eyes of other Problem Collectives, finding new ways to phrase the problem that suddenly resonate with you. This process helps you:

• Become a more engaged and respectful researcher.
• Discover and embrace new research problems.
• Make your Problem understandable and compelling to a wider audience, disturbing them by showing them what disturbs you.

11. Writing Starts Now: Consolidate all notes early; it's all part of the process.

All of this is writing.

You've been writing all along. The exercises in this book have generated a wealth of material: lists of noticed/boring sources, small questions, assumptions, source analyses, bibliographies, brainstorms, decision matrices, proposal drafts for different audiences, and interview notes. All these notes, reflections, and drafts, however fragmentary, are forms of writing.

Create "Draft 0". Consolidate all your digital and handwritten notes, underlinings, highlights, and marginalia into a single digital file. Don't worry about structure, grammar, or coherence. This is a messy, mechanical act of dumping everything in one place.

• Copy/paste digital notes.
• Transcribe handwritten notes word-for-word.
• Transcribe marked-up passages and bibliographic info.
• Add new thoughts that arise during consolidation ("self-evidence").

Overcome writing inhibitors. Creating a messy Draft 0 helps overcome the fear of judgment (by making the messiest document imaginable) and the fear of the blank page (by filling it instantly with text). It provides raw material to work with.

Move from 0 to 1. Begin the process of sorting, grouping, and editing your Draft 0. Combine related notes, move bibliographic entries, experiment with thematic groupings. Read your draft aloud to experience it as a reader would, noticing where you get bored, lost, or excited. Use this self-observation to refine the structure and language. Writing is an act of externalizing thoughts to see them critically and improve them, draft by draft.

Last updated: May 18, 2025