Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

Search


Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • Observer on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Mike Rich on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • anon on Privacy and Tattletales

    • orly lobel on At CELS, Hoping to Blog

    • harry brooks on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Michael H Schneider on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • flood pictures on Public opinion on same-sex marriage

    • gtownstudent on And Justache For All at GW Law

    • AF on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Maryland Conservatarian on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Daniel S. Goldberg on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

  •  

    Site Meter

The (Mis)use of Research Assistants

posted by Dave Hoffman

library.jpgAs the summer starts to wind toward its inevitable close closing stage midlife crisis eternal twilight I’ve been doing some thinking about how to maximize the use of law student research assistants. This summer, I’ve learned that in one sense, I’m a bad boss: I can’t manage to help my RAs to collect information for me in efficient ways. As my research has moved further in an interdisciplinary direction, I’ve found that the traditional front-line tools of legal research, HeinOnline, WL, and Lexis, complemented by the Web of Science, are incomplete and/or borderline useless. For example, I asked an RA to try to find the research behind Malcolm Gladwell’s observation regarding the relationship between anticipated regret and effort I blogged about here. My suggested search strategy: (1) do a search on WL/LEXIS for regret and effort; and failing that (2) read everything Gladwell had written. Ever. Option 2 took some time, but we finally nailed down the research. [Hint: he talked about the research in question in the New Yorker, and it wasn't found in WL's New Yorker database.]

Now, according to a librarian friend, this entire process could have taken under ten minutes in a fancy-pants humanities database. Nuts.

Tell you what: bragging honors to the first commentator to post the name for the relevant phenomena in the comments below. [Reader L.A. not eligible for bragging rights.]

More disheartening, I’ve learned from another research librarian that there is a general perception that we law-prof types are known to be weak at electronic research that doesn’t involve typing in a search into the ALLCASES database. Why is this? Perhaps it is due to the lack of an academic track in law, which means that we haven’t been tested and trained in research methods (apart from those methods necessary to be a law firm associate.) It might be that there is a connection between this lack of academic training and the length of the literature reviews that launch most law review articles: we have spent so much time finding the darn material, we want to stuff it in come hell or high water. Maybe if we were better at research, law reviews would be shorter?

While we’re on the topic of libraries, I thought I’d highlight this NYT Librarian Award announcement. Know a friendly neighborhood librarian doing good work?


 August 14, 2006 at 1:11 pm   Posted in: Law School (Scholarship)   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (14)

  1. kristine - August 14, 2006 at 2:51 pm

    Having worked as an RA this summer, I suspect that a great deal of trouble could be avoided if all law libraries had a training for RAs. I attended such a training and was introduced to the wonders of JSTOR, FirstSearch, and many other delightful non-legal databases. It helps that my law school is attached to a research university, of course; some law school libraries may not have the same breadth of material available because of a lack of resources.

  2. Bruce Boyden - August 14, 2006 at 2:58 pm

    Inaction inertia. I hesitate to tell you how I found that.

  3. Dave Hoffman - August 14, 2006 at 3:02 pm

    Action inertia is not, I think, the literature that Gladwell was talking about when he said: “Why don’t people work hard when it’s in their best interest to do so?” (What is it, anyway?)

  4. Joe Hodnicki - August 14, 2006 at 3:07 pm

    Would law profs attend research skills workshops if law librarians offered then (or would they just send their RAs)?

  5. Dave Hoffman - August 14, 2006 at 3:12 pm

    Joe, great question. I will admit that TLS has offered advanced research skills workshops for RAs in recent years, and I’ve just sent my RAs (shame on me). OTOH, I don’t think that law librarian workshops are likely to focus on interdiscipinary research, for obvious efficiency reasons.

  6. Bruce Boyden - August 14, 2006 at 3:13 pm

    Judging from my 5-minute Google search, it seems to be the phenomenon of avoiding regret over a missed opportunity by forgoing future opportunities of the same kind.

    Tykocinski, O. E., & Pittman, T. S. (1998). The Consequence of Doing Nothing: Inaction Inertia as Avoidance of Anticipated Counterfactual Regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 607-616.

    Tykocinski, O. E., Pittman, T. S., & Tuttle, E. E. (1995). Inaction Inertia: Foregoing Future Benefits as a Result of an Initial Failure to Act. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 793-803.

  7. Dave Hoffman - August 14, 2006 at 3:22 pm

    But, Bruce, I think that for bragging credit, you need to make the link to Gladwell.

  8. Scott Moss - August 14, 2006 at 3:23 pm

    I did a session with a great law librarian here to beef up my social science research skills. It was very helpful, and I took lots of notes, BUT: like most research skills, these new talents will atrophy unless I use them a lot soon. Some but not all of my articles involve social science research, so I’ve resigned myself to havign to bug that too-nice librarian once a year or so for a refresher.

    So I think it’s correct that we law profs are poor at other research, but I think that’s just a subset of a broader phenomenon: no profs are good at research of a type they don’t do regularly.

  9. Scott Moss - August 14, 2006 at 3:23 pm

    I did a session with a great law librarian here to beef up my social science research skills. It was very helpful, and I took lots of notes, BUT: like most research skills, these new talents will atrophy unless I use them a lot soon. Some but not all of my articles involve social science research, so I’ve resigned myself to havign to bug that too-nice librarian once a year or so for a refresher.

    So I think it’s correct that we law profs are poor at other research, but I think that’s just a subset of a broader phenomenon: no profs are good at research of a type they don’t do regularly.

  10. Jeff Yates - August 14, 2006 at 8:51 pm

    You might try looking at Robert Prentice, “Contracts Based Defenses in Securities Fraud Litigation: A Behavioral Analysis” University of Illinois Law Review (2003). In foonote 166, Prentice cites Gladwell’s “The New-Boy Network” New Yorker, May 29, 2000 at 68, quoting University of Michigan psychologist Richard Nisbitt. The article has some interesting insights on anticipated regret generally. A good lead, if perhaps not the final link.

  11. Jim Milles - August 15, 2006 at 10:02 am

    Regarding Dave’s comment (”I don’t think that law librarian workshops are likely to focus on interdiscipinary research, for obvious efficiency reasons”): this is why I, as a law library director, think law school libraries should start hiring outside of the JD/MLS box. While legal research, and legal research instruction, remain the core of what law school libraries, do, we should have at least one law librarian on staff with a graduate degree in economics or one of the social sciences in lieu of the JD.

  12. Dean C. Rowan - August 15, 2006 at 12:12 pm

    A little perspective here: electronic legal resources are far more “fancy-pants” than most humanities database, and they have been for some time. Lexis and Westlaw are clearly more sophisticated than, say, JSTOR. (Okay, some of those Chadwyck-Healy medieval text facsimile databases are pretty cool.) Anyway, Joe’s question implies the obvious respone: no, professors are not likely to show up for research skills training.

    With respect to Jim’s response to Dave’s comment about interdisciplinary research, I think he misses Dave’s point. Indeed, diversity of expertise on staff can be a good thing for a library, just as it can be on the law school faculty, but I think Dave is getting at the unwieldiness of providing interdisciplinary instruction. Where to start? And then, more urgently, where to end? Perhaps the best way to broach this issue would be for librarians with special non-legal expertise to team teach a course, such as a seminar, with a law professor. Granted, the faculty don’t thereby receive instruction, but the interdisciplinary capabilities of the library are demonstrated to the students.

    Finally, research option 2 is plainly silly. There’s a much easier approach: contact Mr. Gladwell directly. I had a similar query some months ago involving a remark Daniel Dennett had made–about libraries, no less. After a few pointed searches in an appropriate database or two, I just fired off a message to Prof. Dennett. By the end of the day, I had my citation. Research skills involve these kinds of social interactions, which helps to explain why professors are not so motivated to attend “training.” The collegial aspect of academia is itself a valuable research resource.

  13. Dave Hoffman - August 15, 2006 at 1:33 pm

    To respond to several interesting comments.

    First, I think that Bruce and Jeff are still on the wrong track. The new boy network article (link here) is simply Blink: Shorter. It doesn’t get at the problem of why successful, well-incented, folks sometimes put obstacles in the path of their success. No bragging rights so far. (I should add that my research assistant, who is reading this thread, is similarly excluded from the possibility of bragging rights).

    I agree with Dean on what I was trying to say about efficiency and training. Law students have an enormous amount to learn – even in a research assistant training session, devotion to legal resources (which are varied and rich) makes sense from an efficiency point of view.

    As for Dean’s suggestion of contacting Gladwell directly, I should have said that it was our option 3. But option 2 only took about 2 weeks, so we didn’t have to reach out to M.G. Obviously, Dean is right, but the principle is not, I think, scalable.

  14. Amy Wright - August 15, 2006 at 2:32 pm

    I’m a dual-degree law librarian, and I help faculty and research assistants with social science research more frequently than I help them with law-related research these days. My faculty usually comment that, if they delved into these subject areas on a regular basis, they could get the knack of the research, but it’s just not going to happen given their infrequent use of nonlegal databases. I wanted to reassure Scott Moss, who commented that he would have to “bug” the “too-nice librarian” for a refresher on social science research every year. Don’t worry about bugging the librarian for research help! Most of us are thrilled when faculty contact us and ask for research instruction of any kind. It’s our job to make your scholarship as painless as possible, and you shouldn’t hesitate to call on us whenever you (or your RAs) need help.

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress