The Background Search

 This week, I was asked to respond directly to questions, so I am including them in this post.

Part One: Background Information from a Web Search

 

1.     What is your research topic? This should be a general area of interest at this point. It should NOT be a research question yet.

Spanish Flu: The Corona Virus Pandemic is often compared to the 1918 Pandemic often known as the Spanish Flu

 

2.     Select an unfamiliar Search Engine or Metasearch Engine from the list linked in the lesson and run a search for your topic. DO NOT use Google or Wikipedia for this part of the assignment!

 

Wait!!! There are other ways to search for information???

 

a.       Tell me which search engine or metasearch engine you used.   Bing

b.       What new ideas or information did you find about the topic?   Just browsing brought up actual number comparisons of the Covid-19 Pandemic to the 1918 Spanish Flu; how it began and ended; three plus waves of the pandemic with the second one being the most deadly; infection and mortality (causes, rates, locations); treatments. 

c.       What are some subtopics you read about in your search? World War 1 (During which the Spanish Influenza Pandemic occurred); vaccination development; Covid-19 comparisons; Government fast-tracking flu vaccine in election year.

d.      What possible research questions came up while you were reading? Where did the Spanish Flu originate (some sites suggest Kansas instead of Spain)? How did it originate and spread? Why was it so deadly? How did the Pandemic impact global and/or US economy? How was a vaccination developed? How does Covid-19 compare to the 1918 Influenza Pandemic? How did the US handle the pandemic in 1918 (additionally how the curve was flattened and treated)?

e.       List words that might be used for future searches. Be sure to include and label at least one DISTINCTIVE term, one BROAD term, one NARROW term, and one RELATED term.

DISTINCTIVE: 1918 Influenza Pandemic; H1N1; Flu vaccinations; Covid-19 or Corona Virus.

BROAD: Pandemic, Virus, Influenza; Flu, Vaccinations; pandemic health measures; public health interventions

NARROW:  1918 Influenza Pandemic mortality, 1918 Influenza Pandemic VS Corona Virus Pandemic; Corona Virus Vaccination.

RELATED: National crisis; health crisis; world health crisis.

 

Part Two: Evaluating a Website

 

1.    Search the web, select one website that relates to your topic, and provide the URL.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-cities-flattened-curve-1918-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus/

2.     Identify the website’s domain, including the suffix (.org or .net). What does that tell you about the website?  This is a .com meaning it is a commercial entity in the US. Specifically, this article was published in the National Geographic magazine. Any .com immediately makes me aware that although there may indeed be good information to be found at that cite, I must remember that this is a company that must make money. However, this does not make the cite unreliable. A lateral search of the National Graphic magazine helped me discover that it is considered a secondary source but is considered reliable much like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, or USA Today in that it has a reputation for accuracy and low bias in reporting.

3.       Authority—Scan the page for:

a.       Information about the sponsors and/or authors of the page. Is there an “about us” link? Yes, there is an “about us” link.

b.       Are there any author names, either individual or organizational? There are two authors credited for the article.

c.       What credentials can you find for the author and/or organization? (You may need to search outside of the website.)  Nina Strochlic is a staff writer for National Graphic magazine. She is an Alicia Patterson Foundation fellow, International Women’s Media Foundation fellow and grantee, previously worked for Newsweek and the Daily Beast, and graduated from the University of Oregon. Riley D. Champine is a cartographer working for National Geographic.

4.       Currency

a.       Can you tell if the page has been updated? Is there a “date last updated” or copyright date?  The article was published March 27, 2020. Another version of the article appears in the September issue of the magazine.

b.       Do you consider this page sufficiently current for the topic you are researching? Yes, I consider this to be sufficiently current for a historical topic.

 

5.      Accuracy—Does the page present accurate information? Are information sources documented with footnotes or links? Do the links or citations support the claims made on the page?

There are links to cited information. Five of them refer to other National Geographic articles, but several come from the Journal of the American Medical Association and Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences. I do feel that the information in this article is accurate. 

 

6.      Purpose—Why was the page put on the web? Is the purpose to sell something or convince you of particular point of view? If they are making an argument, do they address conflicting opinions? What biases can you identify? 

        I think this article is arguing that social distancing is an effective means of lowering death-rates (flattening the curve) in a pandemic situation. After pointing out the effectiveness in social distancing measures in the 1918 Flu pandemic, the author does point out that enforcing such measures was difficult then too. However, the article is quite brief and does not dive into whether we should social distance. Merely to point out what statistics say helped in the past.

 

Part Three: Evaluating a Wikipedia Article

1.       After reading the article, answer the following:

a.       What is the title and URL (web address) of this Wikipedia article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

b.       Judging by the introduction and table of contents, is this article well structured? Are any important aspects of the topic missing?  I feel this article looks quite well structured and thorough. It even includes the first wave of the Spanish Flu, which I do not often see in literature.

c.       Do you see any warning messages at the top of the article?  There are no warnings on this article.

d.       Are facts and claims consistently referenced throughout the article?  Yes

e.       Is the article written in a clear, readable manner, with appropriate use of illustrations? The article is well written and appropriately uses illustrations.

f.        In the References list, do you think the number of references is appropriate to the content of the article? What type of sources are cited? In addition to the References or Notes, do you see External Links or Further Reading? There are many references from a wide variety of sources including scholarly journals. There are also external links for further reading included.

 

2.       Got to the article’s “Talk” page and tell:

a.       What WikiProjects (if any) does this article belong to. Medicine, viruses, history, disaster management, death, and globalization.

b.       What rating has it been given on the Quality Scale (note that it may have several different ratings if it is part of several projects). This article was rated as a good article in natural sciences and a level 4 vital article in history.

c.       Based on your evaluation of the article, do you agree with this rating? I can see that there is ongoing revising being done to the article as more accurate information is found, so I do feel that although not quite the BEST of the best, the article has good resources and information for background research.

d.       Is there anything in the discussion on the article’s Talk page that causes concern or piques your interest, such as disputes between editors or comments on inaccuracies? There seems to be some dispute over mortality rates in other countries, however, updates are being made as information is considered.

 

 

3.       Go to the article’s View History page—Does anything concern you about the history for this article?  There are over 500 edits made to this article since 2005. Not surprisingly, many have been made since attention was drawn to the 1918 Flu pandemic by the current pandemic. It just seems that there are a lot of edits being made, which does make me want to really be careful about accepting any information without searching upstream for the source of that information.

 

 

Part Four: Reflect—Write two or three sentences about what you learned this week and how you will apply it to your future research. 

First, I am thrilled to find a good use for Wikipedia! I always felt that it could be a good starting point for my research. I love that it can also be a helpful idea generator in developing research topics. Also, I feel that doing background research will help me with all future research endeavors. I tend to freeze up when figuring out what to research. Just one idea led to many possibilities in this background research lesson.