Despite expanding the term
porn within Dialog info files, the only relevant term I was able to get was
pornography. I then moved into Academic Search Premier with the truncated term
porn*. Using the subject narrowers, I moved into
Pornography and then even further into
Editorials. The 9 records accumulated here were not fact driven and would not suit the purpose of the client's information need. This is understandable, considering the editorial limiter.
I revised my search so that it contained two truncated terms:
porn* and violen*. I hoped that this would bring about either positive or negative combinations of the two terms. For the most part, it suggested that violence was related to pornographic exposure, but I was able to find some for my client's position that it is not harmful. I narrowed the original results by the subject heading
sex crimes. Once in this subcategory, I altered the subgroup three times. The first time I chose
sexual abuse victims and received three records. Of these three, only one had the potential to be helpful for my client. Even then, it does not convey his argument the strongest. I went back a level and chose
civil rights instead of
sexual abuse victims and found a total of two irrelevant hits. Lastly, I entered the
rape subcategory and found five records. The record I found previously with the subject header
sexual abuse victims was one of them. I also found two sources that are definitely helpful to my client.
I decided to attempt a more advanced searching language, by selecting the terms:
porn* and sexual and (misconduct or deviance). This brought back 28 results. I narrowed them a total of three times to no avail. The narrowing subject terms that seemed relevant were:
pornography, trials and
child sexual abuse. The usage of the terms
deviance and
misconduct brought back mostly records involving child pornography and cases associated with that. While this would help the counterargument to my client's information need, it would not help him outright. Although, it was not a total loss because I found a new word that is fun to say: plethysmograph.
Even though the client's natural language question to answer is whether or not pornography is harmful, using the actual term harmful (or in the case of my actual search, a truncated version of
harm*) did not yield relevant results when combined with
porn*. The initial search brought back a narrowed subject option of
pornography--law and legislation which focused on censorship and the harm that befalls the constitution, instead of harming other human beings. I backtracked to the initial records pool to limit the results to
pornography. Then I went into the
internet subcategory and found several results detailing internet filters in relation to pornography, but nothing relevant.
In my final combination of terms from my search strategy, I combined
porn* and
sexual assault. The first record, while not relevant, mentioned the phrase "rape myth." This phrase has come up a number of times in my search and I think that it will be helpful to pursue further. EBSCOhost has a function that allows me to sift through the references the author cited and I decided to pursue this before continuing with my original search plan. This, however, was unsuccessful, as it brought back many communication journals discussing rape in the prime time, which is not my client's agenda. Further narrowing the subject by the once helpful term
rape, I found an article that was exactly what I was looking for! Alas, I already found it in the first iteration. I decided to look through this article's references as I know that it is a helpful article already. Two of the references seemed to be helpful, but through EBSCO, I was unable to access them. I found them on Google Scholar, but was unable to access them there as well, since Rutgers does not subscribe to a database containing the articles. From Google Scholar, however, I learned that they are available from ERIC, which I can access, thanks to Dialog. I opened DialogWeb to begin the search.
Both articles were written by the same author, so I decided to search for the author instead of the titles or publications. The author's last name did not provide any results. I went back to the Google Scholar results, and found the Eric Document number. This brought back the exact record of what I was looking for. I decided to get the document number for the second article, and this also brought me the citation for the article. Another problem occurred once I displayed the results, as I could not access the body of the article. I was, however, able to read the abstracts and found they did not deal directly with pornography. I still believe these articles would be helpful for the paper and debate the client is required to complete, as it supplements the argument that pornography does not create the desire to perform sexual assault, by outlining what has been shown to be a positive correlation to rape.
I went onto IRIS to see if the journals are available in print format through Rutgers. Fortunately, they both are. I attempted to get them electronically, but since the articles are from the 1980s, that was not as successful. For one of the articles, ScienceDirect allowed me to read the abstract of the article online, but I was not important enough to be able to read the full text. Since both of these articles are available to me through Rutgers, this is not a major concern. However, since this is a hypothetical searching situation at this point I will not actually go through the microfilm and print them out. For the purposes of this assignment, I just need to know that I can.
Even though I have five articles, and the client only needed two, I would like to look into the concept of the
rape myth. I returned to Academic Search Premier and used only those two words as my query. I was able to find articles detailing the rape myth by narrowing the pool further into
attitude (psychology). The results would be beneficial in outlining what the rape myth is, but it may also be detrimental to the client's argument, and therefore, not relevant.
Navigational Links:
Table of ContentsBibliographyNext PostLast Post