For the AFF, research is all about winning, while for the NEG, it’s all about beating AFF teams.
In general, different groups are isolated and don’t interact often; journalists don’t have the time to peer review and vet everything out; it’s just for getting information out to the public; think tanks want to debate and learn much like academic sources, however, they may still have a goal or bias, while academic sources are the highest quality, but the most scarce.
Most libraries have subscriptions to various databases, which you can access for free; you can also ask for libraries to email you a book they got from another library.1
You generally want one of your strongest sources to be your solvency advocate or person who argues for what you want to do; not only should this anchor your arguments for solvency, but it also solidifies your internal links.
<aside> <img src="/icons/history_blue.svg" alt="/icons/history_blue.svg" width="40px" /> The fastest way to get critical theory arguments to the top is to search with “quotes” for a specific term, then look for which options have the most citations.
</aside>
It makes it much easier to understand where the other team is coming from, as well as what approach you should take to respond. Don’t hesitate to look up their sources online!
<aside> <img src="/icons/search_purple.svg" alt="/icons/search_purple.svg" width="40px" /> Use CTRL + F to find things in articles!
</aside>
Many articles use language from academic articles, however, they don’t understand or spin the meaning of them, resulting in information getting lost in translation. Good teams will counter this through evidence comparison.
Go to your library’s website, find what you’re looking for, and download a chapter or section in PDF form. Don’t click off to the publisher's website since they will request a separate payment.