Research Tasks (Issues)

Research Tasks are under the issues tab above.

Volunteering for Research

You can scan the list of issues and look for the tag "help wanted" or a blank assignment column to know which issues have not been claimed. Click on an issue to see the details for that issue.

To claim an issue, just write a comment like "I'll take it," after you see that no one else has written such a comment. When you write a comment, you will be subscribed to emails showing any activity on the issue.

When I see the comment, as soon as possible I will assign the issue to you. There is no need to wait until I do that to start your research.

Please complete your assignments within one week of claiming the task, or issue.

When you complete your research on an issue, write your results in a comment. There is no need to use the "((" notation, just provide some comments with links. When I see your comment, I will write another comment, or close the issue, or both.

Using Github for Research Tasks

Comments can be used to ask questions, or discuss the issue.

Note: For privacy reasons, please use "jfa.org" to refer our website—not the longer name.

Quality of Sources

• Seek to use the highest quality sources available.

  • UC Santa Cruz provides some questions to ask when evaluating sources.[3]“Evaluate the Quality and Credibility of Your Sources | University Library.” Accessed May 16, 2017. http://library.ucsc.edu/help/research/evaluate-the-quality-and-credibility-of-your-sources

• Do not misrepresent a source.

• You may need more than one source for a statement with more than one clause.

  • For example: "Jane Doe was was not active in any social causes in the first decades of her life (1), but later devoted her life to helping other sentient beings(2).

• Primary sources are preferred for factual data.

  • Example: “Calves are removed from their mothers within 24 hours of birth.”
  • The above statement is not presented as an interpretation, nor as an informed opinion gleaned from a variety of sources, but as a statement of fact.

• For interpretations of highly technical research or other data, secondary sources from objective experts are encouraged over primary sources.

  • One research study rarely provides positive proof, so objective expert testimony can be more meaningful, not to mention more convincing.
  • If an author is not qualified to interpret research or technical data, it is better to rely on objective experts.
  • Appealing to authority, often thought of only in the context of a fallacy, can be a valid technique and is useful for avoiding getting caught up in facts and figures.

• Sources should be credible to the target audience.

  • For credibility with non-vegans, validated sources, to whatever extent possible and where appropriate, should not originate within the animal rights and vegan communities.
    • Relying on experts in the animal rights or veganism movement is discouraged for establishing the veracity of positions widely doubted or not understood by those not in the movement.
    • For example, citing an organization named Animal Rights League, particularly for factual information, is not convincing to those who do not believe in animal rights, no matter how factual the information presented.
      • These organizations include:
        • Any organization that is primarily an animal rights organization, an animal welfare organization, or a vegan organization.
        • Any organization whose name indicates it is an animal rights organization, an animal welfare organization, or a vegan organization.
    • According to a study on belief-revision policies, what one does with the information “depends substantially on her attitude towards the source of information: her assessment of the reliability of the source.”[4]Baltag, A., Rodenhäuser, B., & Smets, S. (2011). Doxastic attitudes as belief-revision policies. (Unpublished manuscript). ILLC, University of Amsterdam. Amsterdam, Netherlands

• Sources friendly to opposing views can often be used to lend credence to a point.

  • Example: “Even the National Dairy Association acknowledges . . .”
  • The USDA, with its abundance of information (and as a friend of animal agriculture), is often a good source.

• If a quality source for a factual statement cannot be found, the statement should not be used. No exceptions.

• Plagiarism is not acceptable.

• When in doubt, credit the source.

  • Using someone’s words without quotation marks is plagiarism even if you cite the source.