Episode 245: Research Challenges For Writers

In this week’s episode, we take a look at how research can both help and hinder writers, and offer tips for effective research for fiction.

This coupon code will get you 25% off DRAGONTIARNA: OMNIBUS ONE at my Payhip store:

DRAGONOMNI25

The coupon code is valid through April 14th, 2025. So if you need a new book to read for spring, we’ve got you covered!

00:00:00 Introduction and Writing Updates

Hello, everyone. Welcome to Episode 245 of The Pulp Writer Show. My name is Jonathan Moeller. Today is March 28th, 2025, and today we are looking at some of the challenges of research for writers. Before we get into that, we’ll do Coupon of the Week, an update my current writing and audiobook projects, and then Question of the Week.

First up, Coupon of the Week. This week’s coupon code will get you 25% off the ebook of Dragontiarna: Omnibus One at my Payhip store, and that is DRAGONOMNI25. This coupon code will be valid through April the 14th, 2025. So if you need a new ebook to read for spring, we have got you covered.

Let’s have an update on my current writing projects. I’m currently 70,000 words into Shield of Battle, which I believe will put me on chapter 16 of 24, so I’m about two thirds of the way through the rough draft. I’m still hoping to have it out towards the end of April, if all goes well. I am 7,000 words into Ghost in the Corruption, which will be the sequel to Ghost in the Assembly, and hopefully that will be out sometime after Shield of Battle.

In audiobook news, recording is underway for both Shield of Deception and Ghost in the Assembly. Brad Wills will be recording Shield of Deception and Hollis McCarthy will be recording Ghost in the Assembly. So I am looking forward to both those audiobooks and that’s where I’m at with my current writing and audiobook projects.

00:01:25 Question of the Week

Now it’s time for Question of the Week, which is intended to inspire interesting discussions of enjoyable topics. This week’s question, do you read comics books or graphic novels, Marvel, DC, indie manga, whatever? No wrong answers, obviously, including “I don’t read comics.”

Ryan says: I don’t read comic books, they just don’t appeal to me. I prefer world building through writing as opposed to images, and I think you don’t get the same feel for characters in a comic as you do in a novel.

Justin says: Once upon a time, I did read comics. It’s been a long time since I knew of the mainstream comics interested me, sadly. I have read some manga in the last year, but any associated light novel wins handily. There are a few web comics to keep up with. I have bought books and merch from the Foglios for Girl Genius and Tayler for Schlock Mercenary, but even then, it’s been years since my last purchase.

Juana says: I love Batman. End of story.

John says: I enjoy graphic novels, mainly for the art. Most recent read was The Wizard of Earthsea graphic novel, which is a true work of art published just this month.

Randy says: Marvel/DC stuff, not much anymore. I can sit down and read Peanuts, Pearls Before Swine, etc. collections anytime, probably not the “comics” you meant.

Jenny says: Rat Queens! So good!

Gary says: I don’t read comics.

Bob says: Nope. Used to devour DC and Marvel as a kid. Wish I still had some of them. Probably worth big bucks now.

Tom says: I used to be a Marvel Zombie. Seriously, I have 20-30 long boxes filled with comics. I had to kick the habit though. Nowadays it’s mostly just a few TV show based series. Would love to read some Frostborn graphic novels though!

And finally, Tracy says: I don’t read comics.

For myself, I agree with many of the commenters where my answer is I don’t read comics. It’s not out of snobbery or disdain for the art form. It just doesn’t speak to me or hold my interest. Of course not all art speaks to all people at all times. I was curious about this topic because I see people discussing comic books online all the time, but apparently the industry is in bad shape financially with multiple bankruptcies and closures and so forth. So I was wondering if comics were kind of more of a vintage art form that is less popular with younger generations as the older generations start to die off. But you never know. Things always are on a wheel and come around again.

00:03:36 Main Topic of the Week: Writing Adjacent Activities: Research

So now back to our main topic or to start with our main topic, research challenges for writers. As I mentioned two episodes ago, I’m working on a new podcast series about what I call writing adjacent activities. What do I mean by this? I’m talking about tasks that seem like they’re part of the writing process but really belong in a different category. These tasks are important, but they can also be a pitfall if you spend too much time on them or don’t use that time correctly.

In this series, we will focus on a few of these tasks and how they can benefit or hinder your writing process, even though they seem like good uses of time and may be beneficial. In this episode, we’ll talk about research for fiction writing. How much research is necessary and how does research help? When does it get to the point where it becomes a pitfall instead of an asset? What are some things that work well for me when researching matters for my books?

First of all, why should writers even have to research in order to write a work of fiction? Why can’t we just make up details since the characters and the plot are also made up? Why research?

Research can help provide crucial information for the plot. For example, of a spy novel set in World War II focuses on the Canadians battling the British is inaccurate to the point of farce. Knowing which countries were Axis and which were Allies is an important piece of research that should have been done for that story in advance of writing it. There’s a British TV series called The Goes Wrong Show about a group of inept actors putting on bad plays that’s quite funny, and one of the episodes has them putting on a play that is widely criticized for its lazy historical research, which includes such things as Winston Churchill being a prime minister during the Vietnam War. In the show, of course, this is played for comedy as part of how bad the actors are, but you don’t want to do this in real life.

Research prevents factual errors that can distract readers. Some of the biggest examples of this are military terminology, the British peerage system, and information about weapons like guns. All of these things have very distinct details that avid readers in a certain genre will notice and be upset about if they’re incorrect. You’ll notice that successful thriller writers tend to put a lot of time into researching and lovingly describing various pieces of military hardware in their books.

For a genre like historical romance, the distinction seems unimportant to a modern American, but to a debutante in Regency England, the difference between marrying a baron and a duke is immense and the titles can’t be used interchangeably in a work of historical fiction. For example, the duke and baron would be addressed differently and enter a room in a different order, but more importantly, in a status conscious marriage market like the debutante season, a duke would be a highly sought after potential husband while a baron might be less of a catch, especially if the family is not so wealthy. This detail changes the characters and plots completely.

To return to the firearm examples, for one of the famous errors that sometimes new writers do is a character puts a silencer on a revolver, which doesn’t work because you can’t silence a revolver. Much of the noise comes from the rear of the weapon when it’s fired in addition to the muzzle flash and muzzle noise, so there are little details like that (both for weapons and the British peerage system) that you do need to watch out for.

Research can give you ideas or add depth through details. For example, someone writing a romance novel about two rival managers in a theme park could discover that this particular theme park has an intricate underground system of tunnels that includes storage areas and staff break rooms. The writer realizes this would give good opportunities for the characters to have a conversation or confrontation in a more private place than outside of a busy ride.

What are some good sources for research? Not all research is going to the library and looking at books that haven’t been checked out in 10 years or so. Sometimes research for writing fiction is about checking or learning basic facts like street names, what the word is for cat in Spanish, or what a certain chain store was named in 2008. Making these details up only makes sense if the places and languages are completely fictional. Where more academic and in depth research comes in is when a high level of informational accuracy is required by genre convention, like in thrillers, historical fiction, a legal drama, or a medical thriller.

One of the criticisms of the relatively recent Disney Plus show She Hulk was that although She Hulk’s profession is a lawyer and she spends all of her time doing lawyer things, none of the writers had a background in law and it seemed like their legal advisor was quite hands off in their approach.

They tried to write around it instead, and the results were disappointing to both fans of the source material and new viewers because as I’ve often said before, you don’t need to be totally accurate, but it needs to feel accurate. Anyone watching the show would know that the American legal system works nothing like the way it’s portrayed, not even in the abstract.

One of the additional complaints about the show is that they missed the chance to showcase the character by barely showing them doing any actual work or to only show it as a farce, making She Hulk seem more frivolous and unlikable without her defining trait of being a really good lawyer. Trying to write around factual information is usually not the best solution, and it could hurt the reader’s feeling of immersion or cause them just to feel annoyed.

For genres that require a high level of information accuracy, try starting with the general overview books and then looking at more specific information as needed.

You don’t need to become an expert in every piece of medieval weaponry to write a historical or a fantasy book, but you do need to know the basics in order to have the characters use them in a convincing way.

As I’ve said before, I often talk about how verisimilitude is the goal in writing. You need to know and share just enough to make the reader feel convinced and have the characters be able to act in a believable way in the world there inhabiting.

Often writers are advised to use YouTube for research because it’s free and usually easy to understand. However, YouTubers usually don’t cite their sources and incorrect information often gets reshared this way. That said, it can still be useful. For example, if we go back to our example of the theme park romance novel, the writer could find YouTube footage of what the line looks like for a certain ride without having to go see it in person and determine from the footage if a child could really climb over a railing to escape their parents, for example, if that was one of the plot contrivances the writer wanted to put in the book.

I would strongly recommend you don’t use a LLM program like ChatGPT for research, and if you do, you should cross-reference and double check its answers for accuracy because ChatGPT essentially makes stuff up. Unlike a search engine ChatGPT essentially guesses at its answers instead of retrieving them. For example, if you ask ChatGPT who the spouse of one reality star is, it confidently lists her brother as her husband because the names are very frequently paired and they had the same last name, ChatGPT made a guess and that guess was quite wrong. It’s also important to note that it’s not trained on recent information. It won’t, for example, be able to tell you on what date a movie is going to come out in two weeks because it may not have access to that information yet, and it might instead give you the premiere date for previous films or guess at a date.

How much research is necessary and when is it a pitfall instead of an asset? Too much research can keep you from starting to actually write. It’s a real temptation if you enjoy research to spend months bogged down in every possible source of information. It’s also good to take a step back, look at your book’s outline, and determine what’s truly needed. When you’re writing, you can add a note, “research this” and note about what fact you need to look up and then keep going. It isn’t a great idea to stop writing every time you need to look up a specific fact. Doing that can often lead to research spirals that take too much time and then you lose your writing momentum.

Having researched too much can also drag down the plot with a lot of info dumps. We’ve all encountered books where the writer very clearly put in a lot of research into a very specific topic, so they were going to put all that research into the book, even if it was to the book’s detriment. It’s natural to want to use as much of your research as possible, but in reality, the only research that is good for the reader is what benefits the plot or adds to the feeling of verisimilitude without stopping the plot in its tracks.

What are some things that have worked for me when researching subjects for my books?

Because I write fantasy and science fiction, I tend not to do that much research. Usually it’s if I need to look up a specific fact to increase the verisimilitude. I had to do that quite a bit with Silent Order because that’s science fiction and therefore a bit more fact-based. So I wanted to make sure I had things like the speed of light in kilometers or the amount of kilometers in a light year, for example, make sure that I had those numbers accurate. However, when I’m writing and there’s something I want to look up later, I tend to literally just type “look this up later” and then keep going in the book.

This actually happens quite a bit in the Cloak Games and Cloak Mage series because while that’s set in a fantasy setting, that fantasy setting is a version of our own world. I do need to look things up reasonably frequently, like where this town is located or how long you would take to fly from Chicago to Boston, for example. So very often I will just type “look this up later”, and then in the editing process, I will actually look that up and make sure that I have a good information source, not ChatGPT, and then add that fact into the book as necessary.

One thing I would recommend watching out for is that if the entire plot of the book hinges on a certain fact, like for example, say that you have in your book, the entire plot revolves around the fact that on average it takes about seven to eight hours to drive from Milwaukee to Detroit, it’s a good idea to look it up and make sure that is actually true.

If for example, you, let’s talk hypothetically, if you weren’t familiar with the geography of the United States and you had the plot being that it takes only three hours to drive from Milwaukee to Detroit, your book will not work because anyone remotely familiar with the American Midwest knows that if you are driving from Milwaukee to Detroit around the southern side of Lake Michigan, it takes at least seven hours and depending on traffic conditions, it can easily go much higher very quickly. So if you do have a fact around which the entire plot of your book hinges, it’s a good idea to research that fact first and make sure that’s accurate, so you can avoid the scenario where you write the book and then people are laughing at you because you wrote it only takes three hours to drive from Milwaukee to Detroit.

So to sum up, research in fiction is very different from in the academic world, but that doesn’t mean that’s not important. Like so many things in life, it’s all about balance. You don’t want to go too far down the research rabbit hole to the detriment of finishing your book, but you do need enough information to maintain verisimilitude, but not an excess of detail that will derail the plot or keep you from finishing the book you want, just enough that it makes sense.

An example for that for me would be one of the plot lines in Cloak of Spears which revolves around nuclear fusion. The book sold pretty well and people liked it, but I did get a email from an expert in nuclear fusion saying that the way I had described things is not actually how nuclear fusion works, and the fact of the matter was that thankfully for that book, it didn’t matter because the actual intricacies of how nuclear fusion works is beyond my grasp and frankly beyond the grasp of most people.

So I’d included enough verisimilitude to that the book worked for most people, but it was not enough to fool an actual expert in nuclear physics. So that brings me to a Abraham Lincoln quote I remember where he says, “you can fool some of the people some of the time and the rest of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” And that is true with research and fiction. You’ll want to do just enough to get verisimilitude so that you can fool most of the people, but you can’t always expect to fool everybody. If you are writing about something which has subject matter experts, you may find that you’ll have the subject matter experts writing to you and pointing things out. But what’s important is that you do it well enough to fool most of the general audience, if not the subject matter experts.

So that is it for this week. Thank you for listening to The Pulp Writer Show. I hope you found the show useful. A reminder that you can listen to all the back episodes at https://thepulpwritershow.com. If you enjoyed the podcast, please leave a review on your podcasting platform of choice. Stay safe and stay healthy and see you all next week.