This page contains enriched content visible when JavaScript is enabled or by clicking here. Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

University of Portland Clark Library

CST 327: Argumentation and Advocacy: Most Important Counterclaim Research

Search Terms to Try

It can be difficult to find research articles in which the authors support one side of a controversy, because researchers avoid words such as "no effect," "not credible," "pro," etc. You might be successful with phrases frequently used in a research article's "Results" and "Discussion" sections:

  • Causality
  • Correlation*
  • Critique
  • Fail*
  • Insignificant
  • Little effect OR no effect
  • Little evidence Or no evidence
  • Minimal support

What's the Big Picture?

Go big! Obtain the results of multiple studies by adding these terms to your search:

  • Meta Analysis -- Researchers combine the data from multiple studies. Example:

Comstock, G., Scharrer, E., & Powers, J. (2014). The contribution of meta-analysis to the controversy over television violence and aggression. In D. A. Gentile, D. A. Gentile (Eds.). Media violence and children: A complete guide for parents and professionals, 2nd ed. (pp. 381-412). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.

  • Systematic Review -- Researchers screen studies for inclusion in a literature review, and synthesize the studies' findings. Example:

Arriaga, P., Zillmann, D., & Esteves, F. (2016). The promotion of violence by the mainstream media of communication. In J. Vala, J., S. Waldzus, & M. M. Calheiros (Eds.). The social developmental construction of violence and intergroup conflict (pp. 171-195). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. | 503.943.7111 or 800.841.8261 | 5000 N. Willamette Blvd., Portland, OR 97203-5798
© 2020 University of Portland, All Rights Reserved | Icons made by Freepik from