4

As Seth Rogers posted as a reply to another discussion:

I would hate to see a bunch of "has there ever been a study about x influencing y" questions- which is already happening. A quick search of the journal databases or even Google scholar can answer most of these.

Should these be classified as 'too easy' questions?

| |
  • If X can be correlated with Y that's a pretty answerable question that might have empirical data backing it up. Even if "easy" that seems like exactly the sort of question we should allow. – Ben Brocka Jan 21 '12 at 2:58
3

A few thoughts:

  • Question titles should avoid asking for research, such requests should be left to the body of the question (as per this meta point)
  • In general, it's implicit that good answers should be grounded in the empirical and theoretical scientific literature and provide citations where relevant.
  • I don't think there should be any general rule such as "we don't allow questions concerned with relationships between two variables". Understanding the strength and whether there is a relationship between two variables (e.g., intelligence and job performance; caffeine and mood; etc.) is the basis of a lot of science.
  • In general, I think there is an issue of scope with many questions. A lot of questions seem a bit too general to yield a deep answer.
  • I'd also like to see more questions that appear grounded in an initial understanding of the literature. I guess a good question often shows some initial work and justifies why an answer has not yet been found. E.g., the person asking the question shows that he or she has done a few searches and has learnt what he or she can and now they are stuck.
| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .