8.5.1: Create an Argument with Supporting Evidence

Synthesizing Your Research Findings

Adapted from Christine Photinos

Early in an academic research project you are likely to find yourself making initial comparisons—for example, you may notice that Source A arrives at a conclusion very different from that of Source B—but the task of synthesis will become central to your work when you begin drafting your research paper. Remember, when you synthesize, you're not just compiling information. You're organizing that information around a specific argument or question, and this work—your own intellectual work—is central to research writing. You aren't simply reporting what others have said, but comparing and evaluating what they've said. Below are some questions that highlight the ways synthesizing brings together ideas and generates new knowledge.

How do the sources speak to your specific argument or research question?

Your argument or research question is the main unifying element in your project. Keep this in the forefront of your mind when you write about your sources. Explain how each source supports your central claim or suggests possible answers to your question. For example: Does the source provide essential background information or a definitional foundation for your argument or inquiry? Does it present numerical data that supports one of your points or helps you answer a question you have posed? Does it present a theory that might be applied to some aspect of your project? Does it present a recognized expert’s insights on your topic?

How do the sources speak to each other?

Sometimes you will find explicit dialogue between sources (for example, Source A refutes Source B by name), and sometimes you will need to bring your sources into dialogue (for example, Source A does not mention Source B, but you observe that the two are advancing similar or dissimilar arguments). Explaining interrelationships among sources is at the heart of the task of synthesis, which is the basis of a research paper. Without it, you have merely a report listing source information.

What are the points of agreement? What are the disagreements?

You're unlikely to find your sources in pure positions of “for” vs. “against.” You are more likely to find agreement in some areas and disagreement in other areas. You may also find agreement but for different reasons—such as different underlying values and priorities, or different methods of inquiry. Perhaps the sources each define the problem differently, which would cause them to identify different causes or solutions.

Where are the information gaps?

Do you have a great deal of reliable, accessible information that addresses your question or speaks to your argument or inquiry? Where does the available information lack sources or sufficient studies? Are some questions not answerable without additional primary research—for example, laboratory studies, direct observation, interviews with witnesses or participants?

Synthesis is about pulling together information from a range of sources in order to answer a question or construct an argument. In considering the questions above, you're engaged in synthesis by analyzing the field of available information and in this way generating composite knowledge. It is something you will be called upon to do in a wide variety of academic, professional, and personal contexts.

Example \(\PageIndex{1}\)

Analyzing Sources

Adapted from Jennifer Janechek

How is each of your sources relevant to your thesis and purpose? Most writers find some sources that at first seem connected to their argument, but later prove to have less evidence than others. When you've narrowed down to your most relevant sources, check again to be sure they connect to your thesis, and be sure you make the connection clear to your readers.

Even if the connection is readily visible, authors should still follow up a piece of sourced material with an explanation of its relevance to the author’s point, purpose, and thesis. Such connections (“analysis”) should be made directly following the sourced material. Let’s say that I’m writing a research paper that suggests offshore drilling should be banned. Below is an example of how to incorporate source evidence.

Offshore Drilling Thesis and Evidence

Though some may argue that offshore drilling provides economic advantages and would lessen our dependence on foreign oil, the environmental and economic consequences of an oil spill are so drastic that they far outweigh the advantages.

Following this thesis come body paragraphs relating my main points: (1) the known economic impact of past oil spills, (2) the known environmental impact of past oil spills, (3) the potential impact of oil spills on marine and human life, (4) a comparison between advantages and disadvantages of offshore drilling, and (5) a response to potential counterarguments. My conclusion would then include a proposal to ban offshore drilling.

In my fifth body paragraph I include the following claim (in my topic sentence) and also provide the following support:

Others argue that the US needs to end its dependence on foreign oil from unstable regions necessitates domestic oil production. During an April 2010 speech to the Southern Republican conference, Sarah Palin responded to the ongoing debate about offshore drilling and insists that “relying on foreign regimes to meet our energy needs makes us less secure and makes us more beholden to these countries” (Malcom).

I can’t, as a writer, just stop there, because my reader would not necessarily know the connection between my point and the quote. As such, I must make the connection for my reader.

Such a connection may take the form of explaining what the sourced material is saying (breaking down ideas):

Palin’s assertion implies that the majority of our oil comes from unstable regimes in antidemocratic regions. Although I understand her concerns about providing such regimes with a measure of economic power over the United States, I believe that offshore drilling poses a greater threat to the stability of our economy.

Or, a connection may point the reader back to the thesis:

Though Palin’s argument is representative of a group that views offshore drilling as a necessity, it fails to acknowledge that America’s largest petroleum trading partners are not countries with unstable regimes.

Or, a connection may point the reader back to the paragraph’s main point:

Palin’s argument is representative of a cohort that believes in the importance of domestic oil production.

Or, finally a connection may point the reader to the author’s purpose:

Despite Palin’s (and Republicans’) protests, I argue that offshore drilling presents a more real threat to American security than do foreign regimes.

Thus, depending on where you want to go in the paragraph, you have many options for ways to make connections for your reader. Remember, your reader is not in your brain; and as smart as he or she may be, you still need to make connections that explain the relevance or purpose of included sourced material.

Example \(\PageIndex{1}\)

Connect Your Sources To Make Your Own Argument

• EVC Library Video: Synthesis

LICENSES AND ATTRIBUTIONS

CC LICENSED CONTENT

Information on this page from “Synthesizing Your Research Findings” by Christine Photinos and “Analyzing Evidence” by Jennifer Janechek in Composing Ourselves and Our World was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Elizabeth Burrows, Angela Fowler, Heath Fowler, and Amy Locklear (opens in new window) and shared under license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (opens in new window).