When have I read enough to write? Part I

Using scholarly conversations and intended audience as guides to focus your reading

Photo by Seven Shooter on Unsplash

When I first started writing academic papers in graduate school, I assumed that I was going to be responsible for everything else ever written about my topics. I spent hours and hours combing my library’s databases to make sure I wasn’t missing anything.

One of the first academic pieces I ever published was about postfeminist and postracial discourses of the body in the American TV show Scandal. At first, I thought I had to account for everything written about postfeminism, postrace, and representations of Black women on TV. This felt like an impossible burden because there’s a mountain of scholarly work on each of these topics. I spent an inordinate amount of time reading in order to write my own ideas because I believed I needed to understand every single possible angle before writing.

Speaking with graduate students and other early-career scholars, it’s clear that many of you share this burning question: when do you know if you’ve read enough about your topic to begin writing?

The answer to this question, as with many aspects of the scholarly pursuit, of course, is that it depends. There’s not some saturation point that you magically arrive at one day. Let’s say you are beginning a new research area or just starting out in graduate school. Then you would likely need to read more than someone who’s been working in that area for a while.

Today, I’m offering a few questions you can ask yourself to help you determine if you’ve read enough. For Thursday’s paid subscriber post, I’ll add a few more.

Have you found a scholarly conversation you’re joining?

Using my earlier example about my Scandal paper, it's essential to clarify that I didn't need to cover every single piece of literature on that topic. Instead, my responsibility was to engage with widely recognized works and discussions among scholars I wanted to engage with. Specifically, since my focus was on postfeminism and postrace themes in the show, I honed in on scholarly works that explored these themes in the context of Black women in media.

The paper in question was inspired by one of my advisor's articles, in which she delves into the three areas of scholarship with which I wanted to engage. So, if I could offer advice to my less experienced self, it would be to start by examining the literature she references. Once I identify relevant pieces from her recommendations, I explore further by examining who those authors cite. Instead of trying to cover everything in post-racial discourses, I aim to pinpoint key concepts and scholars whose ideas resonate and interact in ways that are best related to my specific focus.

Have you consulted Google Scholar?

Certain ideas and concepts do have key scholars you need to take into account. For example, if I were writing about postfeminism in the media and did not include names like Gill, McRobbie, or Banet-Weiser, I might be overlooking formative ideas.

Let’s imagine that I had never taken a class that introduced me to these scholars, and I hadn’t read much on this topic before to know that they are important. One of the ways to determine if a particular piece of scholarship is valuable to our collective thinking on a topic is to look at the citation counts on Google Scholar. If I search postfeminism and the media, the first page of results reveals the names Gill, McRobbie, and Banet-Wesier have been cited hundreds and thousands of times. So, I know that many others have used their ideas to inform their own study of the topic.

I would like to point out that this method is not perfect because it can only identify the most frequently cited pieces. There could be excellent articles out there that are relevant to your topic but have not been widely cited. Keep that in mind, but do not let it send you on an endless wild goose chase.

Have you considered your audience?

Not every academic audience will expect to see the same set of literature in your article, chapter, or other academic work. Thinking through the discipline and specific audience of your journal article, for example, will determine what you need to read.

Photo by Melanie Deziel on Unsplash

For example, I am on the board of a journal that focuses on sports media and communication. On numerous occasions, I have reviewed articles that cite media scholarship and examine sports in context but do not cite any scholars in the sports media and communication subfield. In some cases, there is nothing wrong with the analysis or contributions, but the authors fail to consider that the majority of the readers of this journal are in sports media and communication.

If you were sending your piece to another venue, then this might not be a problem. However, failure to cite our colleagues when trying to publish in a sports media journal is analogous to approaching a group of people and simply interjecting whatever you want without regard for what they are already discussing. It’s simply impolite.

Likewise, if I sent a sports media article to a feminist media journal and failed to cite any scholars who examine sports from a feminist perspective, then I would have also misjudged my audience. Thinking about the specific audience you want to engage is an effective way to narrow your approach to your reading.

Stay tuned for Part II

To conclude what I’ve written so far today, an effective strategy to combat the urge to endlessly read is to identify the specific academic conversations you aim to engage with and write for that particular audience. By doing so, you naturally narrow down your reading scope, streamlining your focus and approach.

For Thursday’s post, I’ll add a few more questions to my list to help you determine if you’ve read enough.

Stay tuned!