Why is it important to research information efficiently and accurately?

Answer 1

If I were to say "weapons of mass destruction", would that give you an idea? The whole scandal of the Iraq war boils down to poorly researched and inaccurate information that was presented as fact. The consequences have been devastating for all concerned (maybe not devastating enough for Dubya and his poodle TB, but that's just my opinion).

If inaccurate or poorly researched information is used as a basis for action, the results will not be as intended. It may be as simple as getting lost from using an out dated map or a lot more serious. If the research is done inefficiently, a lot of time and effort will be wasted and vital information may not be found until after the time it was needed.

Answer 2

Be careful with that "efficiently" part. If you are too efficient you might lose accuracy. It is better to research redundantly - i.e., less efficiently - and get more accurate information.

If your research topic is political, then frequently your research will first encounter a host of noisy liars whose "information" (i.e., lies) will comprise about 90% of all the relevant material.

The noisy liars exist to fool the public.

When you get past the noisy liars, you will next encounter the more subtle, cleverer, more intellectual-looking liars, who will often occupy "respected" positions of authority.

The elite liars exist to fool researchers like you.

They will offer you the remaining lies, but determining that they are lies can be a very difficult task: their story will usually be consistent, and you must have some primary reference points in your research in order to find its flaws.

For example, perhaps you, yourself, saw some of the events pertaining to your research topic that these elite liars are contradicting. Or maybe you are educated enough in science to recognize that part of the elite liars' lies are in irresolvable conflict with the laws of nature.

About 1 percent of the data available to someone researching a currently controversial political topic will be accurate information. It's a difficult chore, of the "signal processing" sort, to get the wheat from the chaff, or the signal from the noise.

Answer 3

depends on the info

Wikipedia is definitely not 100% accurate, but it's enough for most people's queries.

Often there is no need for 'unwarranted' accuracy and I have a real problem with people who use stupid levels of accuracy

for example {this is an actual question and answer that has been on this site} someone asks you to convert their height from inches to Cm's. they are 68 inches tall and you do the conversion and tell them that they are 172.72 Cm's.

If you think about it, you are giving them their height to an accuracy equivalent to 1/10 mm - when a person combs their hair, their height could change by 10 times that amount.

that is an unwarranted and unnecessary level of accuracy

Answer 4

Would you rather end up with INaccurate information?

Answer 5

So that you get the correct results, unlike this government.

Answer 6

so that you don't take ages to get duff information